28 January 2010

Mark William-Thomas on the McCanns



Twitter: http://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas


previously: Madeleine 'abducted outside McCanns' holiday flat'

Published on 1 May 2009

Madeleine McCann was probably abducted after walking out of her holiday apartment in search of her parents, according to an expert on her disappearance.

Madeleine McCann was probably abducted after walking out of her holiday apartment in search of her parents, according to an expert on her disappearance.

Criminologist Mark Williams-Thomas said it was unlikely an abductor entered apartment 5a at the Ocean Club in Praia Da Luz, Portugal.

The former detective said Madeleine was probably snatched by an opportunistic paedophile as she looked for her parents as they ate with friends at a nearby tapas bar.

He said publicly-available evidence leads him to believe the three-year-old arranged her toys on her bed and left through the unlocked patio door.

Mr Williams-Thomas said the case bears striking similarities to the murder of Sarah Payne who was snatched in West Sussex nine years ago.

He said: "Is it unreasonable to presume that Madeleine woke up and then went in search of her parents at a restaurant within a holiday complex that she had grown familiar with over the course of her holiday?

"Neatly tucking up her toys, she slipped out of the apartment through an insecure patio door.

"This seems all the more credible given what we know happened to eight-year-old Sarah Payne who was abducted in July 2000, even though she was only out of sight of her family for a matter of seconds."

Mr Williams-Thomas made his comments after reviewing more than 10,000 documents amassed by Portuguese police during their investigation.

He said an abductor would not have arranged the toys on the bed as he would have wanted to escape as quickly as possible.

The expert said a paedophile may have also chosen to take one of the younger and more defenceless twins, Sean and Amelie, who were sleeping nearby.

Gerry McCann has revealed Madeleine asked her parents during the holiday why they had not come when the twins had been crying.

Mr Williams-Thomas said: "Based on the evidence provided from within the case files it is more likely that she was abducted after she had left the apartment. A number of factors suggest that this is the likely scenario."




114 comments:

  1. Watched MWT on GMTV this morning and was fairly pleased to hear what he had to say.

    He was very careful in his choice of words but he appeared not to be taking the same line as many of the media/legal/crime pundits who fawn over the McCanns. I trust he didn't receive an invite to the 'grand event'??

    Overall, his message seemed to be that the case needs a fresh impetus and that an independent review of the files would be a good start. He quite clearly calls on the McCanns to do 'all they can' to assist and provide any information which may help revitalise the investigation (which I thought was a very telling remark).

    His comments were not at all sympathetic, given that the McCanns were making today 'all about Madeleine'.

    I think Mark Williams-Thomas is still on the fence but his feet are dangling on our side!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Did he take Madeleine with him to open the window and shutters.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And his explanation for the findings of the dogs is? Or are we expected to overlook them.

    Another idiot so called expert. Where do these people come from?

    ReplyDelete
  4. What would do a passer-by (not necessarily a paedophile, even oportunistic) who sees a little girl at the bottom of stairs leading to her place ? Would he just pass his way ?
    I wouldn't, I would try to speak to the little girl. Imagine the passer-by does speak and approaches the girl ? He speaks a foreign language, she doesn't understand, she get's scared and starts screaming. And then ? Another fairy tale ?

    ReplyDelete
  5. In Search of her parents in a holiday complex she had become familiar with?Then surely she would have been familiar with the resturaunt her parents dined at every night and would have haerd them all talking and enjoying themselves (after many bottles of wine)and headed straight to them as the restuarant was well light up and only a stones throw away from the apartment?
    If the tapas 9 checked on the kids as regularly that night as they said they did the so called abductor must have been impulsive and extremely extremely very very lucky that Madeleine just happened to walk out of the apartment at the precise time he was standing outside.
    Where does Jane Tanners multi featured abductor fit into this theory?
    Are the dogs to be both totally dismissed in this case?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am minded to cut Mark Williams-Thomas some slack for the time being. His early comments in Luz 2007 were hasty and ill-conceived but the TV companies pay him to say something often when there is nothing to say.

    His latest TV appearance (above) does appear to show a slight softening of attitude (openly suggesting a case review and asking the McCanns to be more co-operative, for instance - something they will strongly resist) so for me I say let's see what he says over the next few weeks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think we are expected to believe there were no dogs.

    They were a figment of the imagination.

    Strange how these so called experts believe they need no mention or explanation for them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. He is not taking into account the inteligence of the dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anyone that chooses to ignore blood and cadavar dogs alerting in their apartment and car cannot be taken seriously.
    Another clown.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jesus Christ, this man has read the case files and thats what he has come up with!, thick. stupid or just dare not say what he really thinks and tows the line.
    If he's a criminologist then no wonder the country's in the state it is.
    MWT...More Worthless Trash

    ReplyDelete
  11. It is incredible how they want us to believe that they have Private Investigators in the field...
    Disgusting...
    Didn't they pocket enough already??
    If you want money, go back to work McCanns, and be happy for being still free.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What is this man talking about? he has obviously been very selective in his reading of the case files. And how many toys were arranged neatly on the bed? As far as I am aware there was cuddlecat and a pink blanket. It would be normal behaviour for a distressed 3 year old - who has woken up in the dark to find neither of her parents were there - to carry both the soft toy and comfort blanket with her when she went in search of them. This theory of his is just nonsense, even without the evidence of the findings of the dogs.
    Judy

    ReplyDelete
  13. we who want justice for madeleine have been saying this for the last 3 years jesus wept and this mark williams-thomas is an expert,god help us all, perhaps he would do better if he read the official files first before making comments

    ReplyDelete
  14. MWT was an advisor paid by the McCanns earlier in the case. This must have partly destroyed his career.

    Perhaps he is trying to regain, albeit badly, some credibility. He is a tosser.

    ReplyDelete
  15. At least the interviewer asked a pertinent question, i.e. "After all this time, if someone had some knowledge of where Madeleine is, wouldn't they have been in contact by now" - or words to that effect. As usual, MWT skirted round that question! However, saying he would like to see some co-operation between the PJ's and the McCann team was more positive. Take note Kate, Gerry, and your silent tapas pals!

    ReplyDelete
  16. These people just keep coming with their weird theories. And for some reason they refuse to mention Eddie and Keela's findings, the DNA, the window, the locked/unlocked door and the lies of the Tapas band. What the fuck do they really want? Exposure? Is this the only way to get exposure? Give us a break and instead of giving us this crap JUST READ THE DAMN FILES and write then something sensible. JERK!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hello Humpty Bumpty (6) I agree with you're post. I saw Mark Williams-Thomas on GMTV, a week or so, after the news of Madeleine's disappearance. He said he flew over to PDL to offer the McCanns his services and they were refused.

    He then went on to talk about the shutter and this was the first time I'd heard the shutter being discused. He said that the McCanns told the police the shutter was jemmied and when it was found to be intact, they admitted leaving their apartment unsecured.

    The police then asked the McCanns if Madeleine had walked out of their apartment and gone to look for them. Kate McCann said it wasn't possible, because once their children were asleep, they never woke up.

    Mark Williams-Thomas, gave me the impression that the McCanns weren't his favourite people, until I heard him speaking not to long ago he seemed to change his stance about them.

    After hearing him speak yesterday on GMTV, I thought good on him,for talking about these worthless searches and for telling the McCanns to cooperate with the Portuguese police.

    I doubt if the McCanns will listen to him, they have too much to lose if they tell all to the police. They know that by cooperating with the police its a ticket to the cells. For a very long time.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Do you think it is possible there are two sets of case files?

    One the official version, and the other the McCann version, minus the dogs and anything that might be detrimental to them?

    Do the McCanns then send their version of the case files to certain 'experts' to read and ask them to comment, and that is how we get idiotic rantings like this.

    I am beginning to think this has to be what is happening, or what to make of this 'expert' and no mention or explanation for the findings of the dogs, I have no idea.

    ReplyDelete
  19. His Twitter comments yesterday were very sceptical of the McCanns' "investigators" but he seems very careful what he says... probably another who has his own ideas about what happened but doesn't want to upset cCarter Ruck. Note Hewlett mentioned again... they're setting him up as the patsy

    ReplyDelete
  20. Besides, everybody agrees that the case should be re-opened. But this possibility lies only with the McCanns. It only takes a phone call, either to file a missing child case with the British police, or ask the Portuguese Judiciária to re-open the investigations. The suggestion (in the vídeo) of an independent body investigating is ridiculous, after the thousands of hours spent on the case by the PJ and of having arrived to a conclusion. Kate answers the 48 questions, and a re-construction takes place, that's all it takes. In fact,I would ask Mr. Mark Williams-Thomas to suggest the McCanns to do exactly that. No credible and independent police force in the world would accept such a suggestion.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Presumably they would reopen the case if relevant new information came in.

    This might happen if the Gasper statements get out to the public at large, and other people have more information regarding this matter.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Will the UK police also make available their files to an independent expert? Or would that expose their tactics as was claimed recently.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hi Fernis, I got the impression that when Mark Williams-Thomas asked the McCanns to cooperate with the Portuguese police, he meant that Kate McCann should also answer the 48 questions.

    You're right though he should have said exactly what he meant, those 48 questions were vital to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.

    I don't have much time for Mark Williams-Thomas, but I would admire him if he did manage to persuade the McCanns to to what is right by Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  24. If MWT and others of his kind rely on being paid by the media for their views on TV they will never spill the beans about what they know about the case simply because the media would not ask them back for fear of legal action. That's why they are worthless entities. Now if Sky News etc were anything like a worthwhile TV News Channel they would invite the Portuguese Public Prosecutor to speak. That's all it would take to blow this case wide open to the public eye, but Sky etc are not independent enough to do that and neither are the BBC obviously. At least we know that we cannot trust the News organisations to tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I have to say that I dont think Madeleine was anducted, but this is at least a plausible theory which is a good starting point and Mark is to be applauded for daring to step outside the McCanns theory - which is clearly designed to put them in the clear regarding negligence. If Madeleine did wander off, then they were clearly negligent - however its worth parking that whilst the theory is investigated (and Mark is right, they can co-operate with investigators - real ones!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dont knock Mark, he is taking a good approach which the McCanns will find hard to resist without looking as if they arent serious about investigating - which of course we know is true.

    They will not listen to him, as Kate insists that Madeleine couldnt have got out of bed - maybe they sedated her...as they used a star chart at home to keep her from bothering thm , it seems to me VERY likely that she wandered. Personally I think she fell down the stairs...but Marks theory is definately worth considering as it breaks the nonsense position that anyone abducted her from the apartment - and of course all the lies the McCanns have told to support this daft idea will be exposed. Well done Mark!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Probably the reason Kate insists that Maddie didn't wander off is because there was no door left unlocked at all for her to go out of! I would say that's why she insisted it was a window abduction, but then back tracked when that theory wasn't accepted by either police force.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Kathybelle,

    I also got that impression, but we are playing a game where half words are not enough anymore. This people who have access to the media should have the courage to tell them what they should do, not going around the issue leaving suggestions they know very well will never materialize.

    ReplyDelete
  29. There is no way they left any doors open, who would leave a door open which leads to steps onto a road, remember this was an end apartment on the corner of two roads. G McTwat said he entered the front door with his key when checking the kids, which meant walking past the steps to the back entrance. They only added the open door scenario when the shutter/window story was proved false. Does anyone really believe that they would go out and leave not only three small children alone in an unsecured apartment, but also run the risk of having their personal belongings stolen? Just smoke and mirrors. The reason they keep saying the usual 'responsible parenting' shite etc is because they think because the kids were in a LOCKED apartment and being checked at some point in the evening they were not neglectful (in their view anyway). When they had to cobble together the unlocked patio door theory it was the lesser of two evils.
    As for MWT he is right in respect of reviewing the case - which is common practice in high profile cases and the need for the McIdiots to co-operate with the authorities.
    Liz

    ReplyDelete
  30. ... and what about the dogs? Do they count for nothing? Or the missing blanket photographed by the first police on the scene? This is just another so-called expert trying for some fame. I worked this case both as interpreter and journalist, both for the police and then later the press. This man is spooky. First he tried to convince the TV crew I worked with that I had no idea about anything (as I was outshining him) then later tried to convince me to hand him all my 12 months+ of notes, bulletins and news feed, freely, to 'help him write a book' on the case! Just another in a long line of losers. Don't you think maybe the McCanns decided to change tactics and present someone who 'appears' unbiased or even slightly against their spin? Don't fall for it guys. You've kept your collective brain up to now. The truth will come. I can't say when, but it will, of that I am utterly convinced.

    ReplyDelete
  31. no-one, but no-one, is allowed to say that Madeleine is probably dead, without committing professional suicide

    the influence of the McCanns and their backers would see that Mark Williams-Thomas never appeared again on TV if he did - and that goes for all the other media commentators

    all comments which appear in the media must be read with this in mind

    ReplyDelete
  32. I do not trust MWT or anyone else involved in this game...Hewlett was slipped into this GMTV slot...PIs still want to speak to him....MWT also slips in info kept back in files about paedophiles..How big is this cover up?we will see if they pin all this on Hewlett and claim that Hewlett told them where she is buried...

    ReplyDelete
  33. hahaha mark thomas should grow a back spine, as for cutting him some slack then you surely are deluded, this parasite is only acting for his own gain.

    What the spinless gutter press and MWT need to do is to start printing the truth surrounding all the CADAVER evidence and the PAEDOPHILIC actions by payne towards Madeleine on a previous holiday,not going over the same ol' shit over and over, we all know that Madeleine was never taken through the window, because there was never an abduction...


    church+priest+fridge+madeleine+hirecar= ????

    ReplyDelete
  34. Ironside - I love your posts and read them wherever i see them.
    I don't trust MWT either but agree on the two points i mentioned earlier. The only problem when Hewlett meets his maker is the Mcs will have to close the fund or change it to a charity. If they want to get away with it they will have to close it and fade into obscurity, somehow i don't believe Mr McTwat being the narcissistic runt he is will be able to let go. I do believe there is a massive coverup and he's sure to have been told to STFU, if he doesn't he might well end up like David Kelly as others have pointed out.
    Liz

    ReplyDelete
  35. I do not agree with MWT that the case should be reviewed. This is a Portuguese criminal case. Do the Portuguese review cases? The paid PI's supposedly reviewed the case and look at the carp coming from these so called super duper ex policemen that is expected to be believed! The case can easily be re-opened at the request of the parents of the missing child. MWT must know that if he does not then he is a numpty imo! So why all this carp about independent reviews? The court hearing in Lisbon has revealed exactly what the PJ thesis is. Hopefully new leads/evidence will be found by the right people to re-open this case. MWT also mentions that files have been held back. He implies it is just the ones that contain the identity of offenders. Well how would he know that? Has he seen the files that have not been released? MWT has no right to imply this. That comment by him imo is just as wrong as Gamble/CEOP implying that MBM is presumed abducted. The case is not archived by the country that retains primacy in the investigation as presumed abducted or presumed abducted by padeophiles. I take anything MWT says regarding this case with a mountain of salt. Imo there are many Liars for Hire therefore independent reviews are just exactly what they are independent they mean nothing they are not offical. The article by MWT is a load of BS imo. The GMTV video is just a subliminal paedophile and Hewlitt article!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Liz 34 Good morning and thank you.

    If I may, I will tell you my thoughts as though I were Hewlett. A known paedophile with terminal cancer. I have a young wife and young children. I am made an offer that is hard to refuse...X amount of money for my wife and children to live a life I could never give them. I am dying ,when I am dead who cares what is said. I agree to a death bed confession.
    Now I have thought of the publicity and Hewletts face being splashed all over the Newspapers and the effect this would have on his children. I have no idea how deep this cover up goes or the reasons behind it..People are given new identities and new lives...the Bulger case..Maxine Carr to quote but two examples.

    I am concerned that Edgar is claiming Madeleine is in rural area just outside PDL. I believe this is very possible. If Madeleine is found to be buried there. Can you imagine the funeral for Madeleine MccCann??..Can you imagine the mass turn around of public opinion?

    We will be back to the year 2007..The Mccanns will be splashed over every newspaper and magazines...there will be books about them, never giving up the search for their child...There will be a movie (this was already discussed two years ago)...They will certainly win their case against GA hands down..

    Liz they will no longer need the fund, they will be wealthy beyond their wildest dreams..Not only that but their reputation that is so important to them will be returned in a blaze of glory.

    Now if I were Hewlett and I was made such an offer and the amount would have to be very high. What would my answer be...Liz I would say yes.

    I also think it possible that a deal has already been dealt.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Yet again the haunting video of Maddie in her fancy dress outfit ,she is scared of whoever was doing the video ,How can ANYONE with any sense of decency speak out for them ? and yet again the Patsy is brought to the surface !! shame on you Mc Canns ....Does this man not realise the last people who want new things to come out ,is Kate and Gerry

    ReplyDelete
  38. Re: Anon 30
    It is interesting to hear from someone who came into direct contact with the investigation.
    Since that tragic night many people have been hired and dropped by team Mccann, many have come into contact with the Tapas 9 and Praia da Luz for different reasons and will have their views and suspicions on this mystery.
    It's a pity they do not all share them on this blog and/or with the PJ so that this mystery can be solved.

    ReplyDelete
  39. None of us would be debating what happened to Madeleine if the McCann's had just been straightforward about her disappearance in the first place. If they had come clean immediately and said to Police they were eating nearby and for that reason they have to admit they do not have the first clue what could have happened (which is a fact) the Police would have sealed the apartment off as a crime scene immediately and the investigation would have routinely considered ALL scenarios.

    However, the McCann's went on the defensive immediately because they knew full well that by admitting not knowing what had happened the veil of suspicion would surely fall upon them and their friends to some degree or another.

    If the door was unlocked then their truthful explanation immediately would be, "we don't know, we were not here, but the door was unlocked" and this would have put them in less of a bad light, but would still make them culpable to accusations of neglect, something they were afraid of being accused of.

    However, by first saying everywhere was secured and locked and the place had been broken into via the shutters, they were immediately throwing up a red herring. They have continually thrown up more red herrings ever since and have deliberately turned the investigation upside down and inside out and have managed to baffle even the best of experts.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Suddenly the famous patio doors are 'unsecure' - a wonderful new development for all concerned, the square wonderfully circled! It is now in a half-state between open and shut, very convenient indeed.
    Now, regarding the 'woke and wandered' theory. Isn't there a supermarket directly opposite the 5A flat?
    There must have been other people about between 9 to 10 pm. A small girl, barefoot and dressed in pink pyjamas would be noticed immediately.
    The other theory 'fell down the stairs and died/seriously injured' well, the dogs would have alerted to that.
    No, it's back to the drawing board for the journalists, unfortunately and reading THE FILES would be a great help.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Williams-Thomas knows perfectly well what happened to Madeleine, he just does not want to be next in the long line of people the McCanns have sued, so he is careful about what he says. I was left with no doubt after watching this piece that he believes the McCanns are guilty, but unless the 'real' police get involved again, without fear of being sued, then the truth won't come out.

    The longer it gets from the actual crime, the harder it must be, if Madeleine's remains are ever found, to examine them and find the cause of death. Human remains deteriorate like everything else unless they are frozen or mummified.

    I believe Williams-Thomas knows what happened here.

    ReplyDelete
  42. It may indeed be right that the reason Kate is certain that Madeleine didnt wake up and wander off by herself - leaving the apartment under her own steam - is that the doors were in fact locked. There must have been a reason for claiming 'jemmied' windows (what an odd term this is for Doctors to use - I wonder who used it first?). Anyway, back on topic, the star chart proves that Madeleine did have a problem staying in bed at night, so it seems highly likely that she did awake and did go in search of her parents. So did she awake, groggy from sedation which had been applied by the parents...and fall down the steps (hence the area at the foot of the steps where the dogs signalled?). Did the McCanns find her there? Of course the Mark Williams Thomas theory kills Tanners sighting - and also requires all of the Tapas 9 to have been lying about various issues. Why would they lie if the worst the McCanns had done is not checked sufficiently well? More likely i think that Madeleine did leave but fell down the steps - her body would have contained sedatives - all of the T9 may have been involved in their use for their own children, all would have damaged their careers. This could have been enough for them to bind to the conspiracy and necessitated the disposal of little Madeleines corpse.

    ReplyDelete
  43. 40 - I'm sure they did alert to a patch of ground at the foott of the steps (I'm sure I read that somewhere).

    Of course, she may have fallen off the back of the sofa as she tried to look out of the window? I'm convinced that there is some issue regarding use of sedatives....some reason why the body could not suffer a post mortem.

    Why were all these Doctors there anyway, most that I know wouldnt spend holidays with fellow medics. Was this 'holiday' some kind of freebie from a drugs company and a seminar event or similar too?

    ReplyDelete
  44. LJC 39. Good post. But have you considered that there may have been a body to deal with, a body with traces of sedatives or other signs of abuse?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Pin your colours to Mark, even if you dont agree witht he abductor part of his theory, at least he wants a proper investigation and not just a wild finger pointing man hunt!

    At least this firmly nails the McCanns as responsible for neglect - as had they locked the door and had they not left the children, there is no doubt she would be alive and with her family today (also not much of a life, but at least a life!).

    ReplyDelete
  46. Zodiac at 35

    Agree with you 100%. The investigation belongs to the Portugues police and as I said before too, the suggestion given by Mr. Mark Williams Thomas is a complete nonsense.

    Anonymous @ 42

    There are probably 3 (three) reasons why Madleine didn't wander off:

    1st. The doors were locked.
    2nd. She was heavily sedated
    3rd. Madeleine was dead before they went to Tapas Bar.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Nobody except The McCanns knows what happened in their apartment that night and if Madeleine is alive or dead.

    Different scenarios are plausible. Sometimes, looking at Gerry McCann happy face and smiled Kate on the picture dated 9th May 2007, they don't look like parents who just lost their child, and I think, perhaps, Maddie is alive and The McCanns are hiding her and just organised this scam to make money.

    Then, I look at the evidence with cadaverine smell in the apartment, Kate and Madeleine clothes, the toy and in the car - and understand that probability that she is dead and her partners are involved in that, is very-very high.

    I personally don’t believe in paedophile version - if it would be true, Madeleine's body would be found within days or weeks after her disappearance.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ironside, i get where your coming from, my problem is, when the PIs went to interview him and he refused, they found out on their way to airport that he had changed his mind, now instead of rushing back to see him, they shot back to the UK. The other problems i have with your theory is a)if Ms body does turn up, can they be sure that any forensics won't lead back to them and not Hewlett, ie evidence in hair of long term drugs, flesh may vanish but hair takes longer, what if the body has mummified which can happen in certain environments and it shows signs of long term abuse b) would he really want his family to be known as the wife/son/daughter of the paedophile that killed little Maddie, no amount of money for my family would allow me to subject them to something like that, and no matter how hard they tried to hide the press would surely find them, Let's not forget that M wasnt the age of his shall we say particular tastes and also the PJ had already investigated him and ruled him out. If you take Hewlett out of the picture we are all (some of us anyway) expecting that one day Ms body will be found anyway. I suspect however that there is no way of finding the body or else Mr Mc was bluffing when saying find the body and prove we did it. I do hope your theory is wrong, because i for one could not bare the thought of those really responsible getting away with it, and them continuing to blacken decent people like Sr Amaral and the people of Portugal.
    Liz

    ReplyDelete
  49. As far as I'm concerned, Mark Williams-Thomas is nothing but a rent-a-mouth! Whoever pays the piper dictates the tune where he's concerned! Has he revealed yet who paid for his trip to PdL in the days following Maddie's disappearance where he "observed" the PJ at work then slagged them off on his return to the UK?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Fernis at 46.

    I still suggest Mark is right in trying to publically suggest the case is reviewed - the McCanns must be squirming!

    Anyway, regaridng your assertions, you might have slipped into McCann mode (not listening or allowing other ideas!).

    1. We do not know if the door was locked or not, so both scenarios must be considered.
    2, More likely she was sedated, but not heavily enough to keep her in her bed (or what are you suggesting, she was murdered? Where did the blood come from?).
    3. Maybe, but again - maybe not!

    In short, please dont try to assert things in the McCannesque manner! Indeed, we cannot reject abduction simply because the McCanns insist upon it and we dont like them!

    A good investigator considers all possibilities and elements of every chain of events can exist in other chains of events.

    Attacking MWT is, in my view, a mistake at this point - his basic idea is that the McCanns should co-operate and the investigation should be reviewed. I agree with both of these ideas!

    ReplyDelete
  51. I wonder if any prints were found on the gate at the bottom of the steps? Was this unlocked, was it latched? Could madeleine have opened it?

    ReplyDelete
  52. How dare he say she wandered off !
    She didn't. Kate said so, and that is enough proof for anyone !
    Alternative theories indeed ! The presumption of the man !

    ReplyDelete
  53. I agree with Ironside, why would the McPrivate Eyes go secretly to PDL if not to have another go at Hewlett? And yes, every man has his price, it could be the only way out of the Amaral litigation.
    The only problem with the plan would be actually getting the money to the Hewlett family, money leaves traces and also visible signs if a poor family becomes suddenly wealthy. It would just take one good investigative journo to lift the lid, if there are any good ones left that is.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anon 53, i wasn't aware Hewlett was in PDL, last i heard he was in Germany, do you have a link to that info, many thanks.
    Liz

    ReplyDelete
  55. Next time someone says 'Mothers wouldnt hurt their children' we now, sadly, have a case in the UK (where else!) involving a killer mother, a car boot, bags and dead children.

    Also this is no council estate, but a professsional woman!

    It seems increasingly to be career women who have children late and cant cope who have children which are at risk.

    On the positive side, its good to see that the McCanns have not had it their own way after their attempt to position themselves as 'stars' and therefore respectable and not capable of being fraudsters and criminals.

    The question is, did Kate McCann lose her temper in Portugal and are we giving her too much benefit of the doubt by not daring to imagine the worst?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Off topic, but more fraud in the UK!

    UK Climate change centre trying to manipulate the idea that man is causing climate change!

    Government still claims its true.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Fiona Donnison....apparently (not proven yet) murdered her two little kids (2 and 3 years old) and one of the locals said 'Shame no one was there with her'...thinking she was a one off I watched further...but they were all saying it! Once again the well off put the parent first!

    What is it with the UK - no wonder they all feel sorry for Kate McCann!

    ReplyDelete
  58. ShuBob 32, That is a very realistic prospect, he admits it on his death bed, they recover the remains and no-one is any the wiser and they're away scott free and case solved.
    I hope your wrong but you seem to be right more often than not.
    Just does not bear thinking about....the perfect cover-up!.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Sorry Ironside, I put ShuBob 32 by mistake

    ReplyDelete
  60. Hi everyone..it is only a theory but it would tie up all loose ends for the McCanns.

    There was a case in the States where a body was found..This area had already been thoroughly searched by police and cadaver dogs... The body was placed there after searches had had been completed .(sometime later)The reason ?someone was ready for her body to be found. This was a girl who had had an affair with a politician..a well known politician. People do strange things for even stranger reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Imo Hewlett is also selfish to the point of being egotistical (like someone else we know). Is it likely he will want his family to benefit when he is no longer around to enjoy the spoils? I don't think so myself.

    However, if a deal has been struck, we could all start praying to God that he gets cured of his terminal cancer.....

    ReplyDelete
  62. The perfect crime is the one which has 'a solution'.

    Madeleine was abducted by Hewitt after wandering out of the apartment.

    No one will need to investigate anymore. Everyone (well, maybe not everyone!) will sympathise with the McCanns...

    But how will they (the T9) explain the way they presented the event?

    Hewitt will have to have entered the apartment.

    Mark Williams Thomas is not going to be joining Team McCann!

    ReplyDelete
  63. The McCanns PI back in Portugal is very suspicious - surely the authorities are keeping an eye on these mavericks?

    They may have been harrassing witnesses, placing or collecting evidence...moving a body?

    In what other case would the suspects, even if not charged and 'released' through lack of permissable evidence, be allowed to employ 'agents' in this way?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Anon. #30,

    If you indeed have worked on this case then maybe your documents will be of good use/interest to the one person that is putting himself on the line of fire to help little Madeleine get justice, and that person is Mr. Gonçalo Amaral. Get in contact with him or his legal team, every little bit of information helps!

    ReplyDelete
  65. I dont think the body will ever be found. I believe the Doctors McCann and their chums would easily be capable of completely destroying a body.

    Kate probabaly baulked at that one (hence 'they've taken her'). I think the body was taken in the Renault to Huelva and dissolved in the acid beds.

    So the body will not feature, but I do think Hewitt is being set up as 'the abductor'. I couldnt care less about him, but hate the McCanns getting away with it. But I guess we all have to accept, they are not going to be punished for their crime and will continue to benefit from their 'celebrity'...grrrrrrrr!

    ReplyDelete
  66. I read somewhere that one of the workers of the Tapas Bar/Ocean Club said that he had heard someone calling for "Maddie, Maddie" and searching the grounds as early as 9:15/9:30pm, long before the alarm was raised by Kate, soon after 10pm. She could indeed have wandered off, and they found her absent from the apartm. during Gerry's or Oldfield's check. Maybe they found her injured on the flower bed at the bottom of the stairs( but for this, they had to get into 5A through the front door, otherwise whoever entered via the patio doors would have seen her immediately), or in one of those holes that were dug all over Luz due to repair works. Maybe she was rushed to the apartm., mortally injured,(a broken neck or head trauma) and died there, after failed ressuscitation attempts(Rachel Oldfield mentioned that word didn't she? "They were all doctors, they would know how to ressuscitate a child"(!))

    Another thing that I've always though strange was Dianne Webster's comment about all the commotion after Kate's raising the alarm in the Tapas, she said something like : "oh, I thought they were at their silly games again!" What on earth made har say something like that? And why? What kind of silly games did they use to indulge in...?

    ReplyDelete
  67. To me the Hewlett theory is not going to work and that is for one main reason only,
    The body is never going to be found, they made sure of that.
    Gerry MaCann says find the body and prove we killed her,, to me that says the body will never be found.

    ReplyDelete
  68. The sayings of Gerry:

    “It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary; it will be sooner than that.”
    “Ask the dogs!”
    “...there’s no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there’s no evidence to implicate us in her death....”
    “...there’s no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there’s no evidence to implicate us in her disappearance....”
    “....that is what we are here debating - the conclusions of the process versus the conclusions of the book.”
    “We are not denying the existence of the dogs or anything else....”
    “It is vital to note that alerts by such dogs are classified as intelligence rather than evidence.”
    “The question, of course, is who is looking for Madeleine and who has been looking for Madeleine over the last two years, and that is us and our investigators.”
    It's evidence we're interested in. There is no evidence that Madeleine is dead....”
    “We strongly believe she’s still out there”
    “We felt completely safe. If we had had any inkling that it was unsafe we wouldn’t have done it.”
    “We can’t change it. You know, what we have done is we discovered Madeleine err was taken and we have done everything there....you know....”
    “We’ve tried to focus on what we can change...”
    “We were dining 50 yards away.”
    “The younger the child at the time of abduction the less likelihood of serious harm... (speaking about information from NCMEC)”
    “Until there is concrete evidence to the contrary we believe that Madeleine is safe and being looked after...”
    “We have played no part in the disappearance of our lovely daughter Madeleine.”
    “Everything in the fullness of time will come to light, what’s in the file...what the facts are....the clear thing at the moment is that there is no evidence that Madeleine has been seriously harmed...“ (Natasha Kaplinsky interview)
    (When asked about using sedatives) “You know we’re not going to comment or anything...but you know there is absolutely no way we used any sedative drugs or anything like that (looks very guilty, touches ear, looks down, flickers eyelids) and we will, we’ve cooperated fully with the police, we’ll answer any queries, um any tests that they want to do....”
    “And [the twins] slept very soundly ‘til we moved them out of the cots into the other apartment, which does make you wonder about whether there’s any substance issues to keep them asleep.”
    “The use of dogs has proved problematic and unreliable in previous cases.”
    “I'd like to remind everyone that it's the book that's on trial and not Kate and I.”
    “Find the body and prove we killed her!”
    “We feel guilty because we were not there at that moment...”
    “We are VERY responsible parents and I don’t think that what we actually were doing was in any way irresponsible.”
    “Mr. Amaral's central thesis has no evidence whatsoever to support it.”
    “A thesis without evidence is meaningless.”
    April 2008” ‘we have had no direct dialogue with the Portuguese police”

    ReplyDelete
  69. no 69 - 'It was a good marketing ploy'

    I am sure we could go on for pages playing this game. If it wasn't such a tragic subject we were discussing then ripping apart the ramblings of Gerry would be enormously entertaining.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Anon#67

    I placed on this blog once before that I had read in the files that the chef of the Tapas saw the empty table (apart from Diane Webster) at 21:20. Another witness walking either into the grounds of the Ocean Club or leaving them heard the calling "Maddie, Maddie' at the same time. This means that they discovered something serious earlier, about 21:15 (Gerry discovered it after chatting to Jez, say), they all went up to the apartment to help resuscitate. They failed, she was dead.

    Someone had a contact in PDL of another apartment where they could store the body temporarily. Cellphones were used, hence deleted calls. Gerry took the body to the apartment near the beach at 21h55, he had to move fast. He was recognized by the whole Smith family. The rest of them returned to the Tapas, after making the timeline. He returned to the Tapas, later making the excuse that he used the toilet for a while.

    At 22h00 Kate went to the apartment to fake the abduction. She was still in anguish that the sedative had killed her daughter, like an anaesthetic might in an operation if something went wrong. She used the words, "We've let her down", just as an anaesthetist would say to another doctor/s.

    She then used the words "They've taken her", what did she know what to say? It was the first time she had ever faked an abduction.

    All the doctors thought it better for all concerned that they cover up. Gerry and Kate would suffer a lot anyway having lost their daughter. Gerry, being a forceful character, has to go to the ends of the earth to find his daughter. They can never give up. He is an A-type personality. If something like a fake abduction is done, it is done perfectly and to the best of his ability.

    And who wants to go to jail? The fact of the matter is that they are using all the funds to protect themselves from jail. They had a close shave when they were made arguidos. So they fight as hard as they can. Everyone has too much to lose now. Would you rather have your child suffering from the loss of a child on the outside looking after their twins, or on the inside, and you have to look after the twins. A grandmother would rather have the former. No-one wants the responsibility of having them inside, and no-one wants the loss of reputation. So no-one will speak out. Some people will be thinking that such a terrible thing has happened to them - losing their daughter – that’s enough suffering - what difference will prison make?

    ReplyDelete
  71. @ Anonymous 12
    I agree : a little girl who doesn't get out of bed to go to the bathroom takes her comfort blanket and her teddy bear, or at least one of them.
    Interesting would be to know who has another experience.
    This detail is a weak point in the "wandering off" hypothesis.

    ReplyDelete
  72. @ Anonymous 68
    I agree, I always thought so. And I think interest hasn't been sufficient on the way that body was totally destroyed.
    The main argument of the PR for lifting the arguido status was that although death was the most likely, the Ms would hardly likely be able, without serious help, to conceal so well the body that it hasn't been found.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Madeleine may indeed be buried somewhere in or around PDL, but if they reopen this case I hope one of the first things they do is get a search warrant and go around to the McCanns place and search their property using the dogs.

    Just like they did with the Murat's property, although nothing was found.

    Even if a body has been moved elsewhere the dogs will still alert to where it has been.

    Sometimes I think everybody has been lead by the nose, Kate's dream and all. All distractions from what was really going on.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Anon 67

    How can you be so stupid.READ the posts,namely 69

    ReplyDelete
  75. I believe her body may have been destroyed near to the barn where they found the towel and fibres from the hire car.

    ReplyDelete
  76. @ Patrixjude
    You wrote
    "I placed on this blog once before that I had read in the files that the chef of the Tapas saw the empty table (apart from Diane Webster) at 21:20."
    Do you mean in the PJ files ? Who is that Tapas "chef" ? Do you have his exact statement ?

    ReplyDelete
  77. @ Anonymous 47
    "looking at Gerry McCann happy face and smiled Kate on the picture dated 9th May 2007, they don't look like parents who just lost their child"
    One thing is to loose a child because the child died : you grieve
    Another is to loose a child because the child vanished : not only you CAN'T grieve, but the most unbearable haunts your imagination.
    What I always found amazing in the MC's case, is K's tendency to imagine M adopted by people dreaming of a blond blue eyed child, people too primary to see that her UK family is the best for her.

    ReplyDelete
  78. @ Anonymous 42
    The dogs didn't signal the area at the bottom of the steps, but a flower bed I don't think you can see from the street and neither from the bottom of the steps.
    Curiously the dogs marked a place on the terrace exactly on top of the flowerbed. She might have been found, dead, on the flowerbed, then deposited from there on the terrace, the finder not wanting to be seen with her.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I have thought about Hewlett a lot and his role in all of this. I asked my good friend Textusa ....for thoughts..

    http://textusa.blogspot.com/2010/01/first-response-to-ironside.html

    ReplyDelete
  80. Hi aacg...I have thought long and hard about the flower bed...just under the window...I have thought did McCann place her there when he saw Jez walking up the street..did Jez come upon McCann just as he was about to remove Maddie from the apartment?

    The very first report in the newspaper Tanner placed the 'abductor' near the window...Did Tanner see McCann .Madeleine held just the way she described...? She would then of course have also seen McCann talking to Jez...Just thinking out loud.

    ReplyDelete
  81. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV4Ck61Favg&feature=related

    aacg to follow my post...The reason I say this is because McCann says here in this video ..The abductor was almost caught...Sandra asks by whom...McCann blinks and he is thinking something..only for a split second.Watch his face...he thens says 'By Jane'

    Did Tanner see Madeleine in Mccanns arms before he placed her in the flower bed to talk to Jez?..

    ReplyDelete
  82. I don't think they would have taken the chance of burying Maddie around Praia de Luz, or anywhere that dogs could track her down.

    The most likely explanation is that she was dropped from a craft far out at sea. Gerry challenged one reporter to find the body remember. At the bottom of the ocean she would never be found. This could have been arranged quite easily via Gerry's mobile phone.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Anon 79

    More like the cleaning cloth was wrung out there.

    ReplyDelete
  84. "She had those eyes, those eyes that never closed" What did Kate mean by that statement? Maybe MWT can suggest an answer.
    Children who have comfort blankets trail them everywhere, no matter how bedraggled and make a huge fuss if it goes missing. They most certainly wouldn't wander off without it. Does MWT have children?

    ReplyDelete
  85. M could be buried on private land near PDL- less likely to be found by accident.

    ReplyDelete
  86. "He said an abductor would not have arranged the toys on the bed as he would have wanted to escape as quickly as possible." YES...AND A GIRL WHICH WAKE-UP IN PANIC, SEARCHING FOR HER PARENTS will not ARRANGE THE TOYS IN THE BED TO.

    But.... GUILTY PARENTS, to save their skins and foolish the police, will do and change everything in the crime scene, trying to fit the place into their stories. BUT, AS ALWAYS, THEY MAKE MISTAKES, INCONSISTENCES WHICH LEAD THE POLICE INTO THE TRUE STORY....

    ReplyDelete
  87. Who put cuddlecat on the high shelf, as alleged by Kate, then who took it down again and arranged it on the bed?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Going back to the cuddlycat, they said that someone(abducter? placed the cuddlycat on the top drawers? (sorry about my mistakes0), but if it was the case that she was taken then why would this person take time and thought in putting the cuddly thing away? normal reaction would be ""who cares about this thing, i'm taking the girl quick befoure some one comes back!!""
    This is just one of many examples of their really bad story.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Anon. @ 67

    I have always assumed that Dianne Webster´s remark abour "their silly games" was referring to the children. I have a grandson who is constantly hiding to give me a fright. If he went missing my first reaction would be just like hers.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Anon 88 and 89 the abductor was very thoughtful he remade the bed as well as cleaning the apartment, but also stopped long enough to plant a few red herrings by opening the window and shutter and getting Ks marigold gloves turning them inside out and planting ks fingerprint on the shutter, oh and he hid behind the door when McTwat came in to check his kids and take a dump, he was able to do this as he was suffering from severe anorexia. He also took McTwats tennis bag just to piss him off, he knew he wouldnt mind losing a kid but knew he wouldnt like having to carry his own tennis racket, 'after all he's a doctor dont you know'
    Liz

    ReplyDelete
  91. Hi Ironside !
    Removing M at JT's sight and be disturbed by Jez leaves even less time for M to die.
    I thought GM, looking for M out of bed (and groggy as he knows she must be because of sedatives), discovered her, inanimate, around 9:10 and, hearing J's footsteps and pram, lifted her on the terrace, then got out through the gate and spoke to Jez to make sure Jez wouldn't witness M being in the patio instead of her bed. Then picking up the body and out of the darkness, he realized M was dead and in panic put her behind the sofa. Then went to the bathroom (this detail he curiously insisted in telling, as if it had some importance) to reflect. Then decided it was better to deposit her in his bedroom.

    But how KM learnt what happened ?

    ReplyDelete
  92. @ Anonymous 86
    In the second half of July two elements indicate that they (or at least KM) wanted the body to be discovered (call of Krugel and dream) in such a bad state they knew an autopsy wouldn't reveal nothing. At that time they weren't, or didn't suspect they were, suspected. The abductor would have been charged with the murder, they could have started to grieve, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  93. 81/82 On Justice for Maddie and The Twins site, April 2008,the Sun Online was said to have run a story that JT had retracted her statement about a man walking past.She had apparently told police when first asked that the person she saw "looked like the child's father" An ambiguous comment; possibly meaning the person she saw she assumed to be the father- of the child who was being carried on outstretched arms, but as she later goes on to confirm the details of the pyjamas and firmly links this sighting to Madeleine, the person then could only be Gerry McCann.
    A solicitor for one of the Tapas pairs also went on to complain about political pressure in the case being prejudicial to his clients.
    If you read JT's statement, she didn't seem to be too fond of GM, but her story may have been to protect her partner, O'Brien, who was in danger of being suspected, as the last person to go to M's room.
    Her sighting doesn't quite fit in with the smooth running of the time-lines and seems like they had to incorporate it in a hurry; hence GM and Wilkins not seeing her- a very unlikely scenario, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Just have read about Fiona Donnison, 43, who killed her 2 kids - 2y.o.girl and 3y.o. boy. She gave them sedative and put he bodies into her car boot (sounds familiar, isn,t it?)

    I had doubts before regarding sedative but now I believe that Amaral's theory with sedative is very plausible perhaps as well as the rest...

    ReplyDelete
  95. Anon 94

    Jane Tanner went back twice to the apartment that night. The second time at about 9.45pm.

    It would have been possible for her at the later time to have caught a fleeting glance of the back of the man carrying the child, and that would tie in with the Smith sighting.

    Then, in her mind she has confused this with the earlier sighting of Gerry McCanns and Wilkins. She does appear to be highly suggestible with her changing so many times of what she actually did see.

    ReplyDelete
  96. @ Anonymous 94 and 96
    "He seemed to be (or looked like ?) the child's father" is ambiguous indeed. Nothing in the vague description she made indicates that the carrier is probably the carried child's father. On the contrary the way he carries indicates that the man is not accustomed to carry children. So why did she say that ? To justify the fact she didn't immediately react : nothing special about the sighting ? Is her unconscious speaking (she doesn't admit it but found the carrier looked like GM)
    The probability JT passed transparently by one known person that night and saw an unknown person that the known one didn't see is rather unlikely. But two known persons !
    I think JT didn't make up totally that sighting, she changed the hour (unconsciously or not) because she (unconsciously or not) recognized GM's way of walking and feared for the group (at that time she believed in the abduction) in case the police somehow would erroneously suspect the Ms.
    She may have later understood that M had died but thought she couldn't go backwards without heavy consequences she had no courage to assume. Why would she tell the truth after all ? Isn't it better for the twins to think an abductor stole their sister ? Are the Ms criminals ? Are criminals those who lie to protect their family ? Etc.

    ReplyDelete
  97. @77
    On one of the earlier blogs I placed exactly where i found it in the files. It is in the files. I will have to go back and search for it again, sorry, i did not record it elsewhere. it is in the section on interviews with Tapas restaurant staff and interview with one of the restaurant guests that had left the restaurant and were on their way home, i think.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Does someone know if this, stated by David J. Smith on the 16 of December 2007, is true : "Leicestershire police have apparently paid for all the forensic tests being carried out in the case by the FSS – they are the client in the case, not the Portuguese."

    ReplyDelete
  99. What was Gerry wearing at the Tapas that night?

    Was it a dark coloured top and light coloured trousers? Both JT and Mr Smith have similar coloured clothing descriptions of the man they describe.

    There was what looked like a pair of light coloured trousers in a heap on the bed when the police photos were taken that night, though Gerry was then wearing jeans.

    No photos available of that meal at the Tapas, yet at least one of them had a camera with them that night.

    The same with Madeleine's last day. Where are the photos of the children in the boat trip? No parents there to wave them off and take a snap?

    If only there was some independent evidence in the form of photos to answer these questions.

    ReplyDelete
  100. It was not only Maddie's body that couldn't be allowed to be found. Remember that McTwat had to travel to the UK in order to collect a pillow case with her saliva traces on to give a sample of her DNA to the police, as there was no toothbrush or hairbrush of hers in the apartment. They used their extensive medical knowledge to work out that traces of sedative could be identified in saliva on her toothbrush or hair caught in the hairbrush, so disposed of them. What kind of bizarre scenario is that, where a child on holiday has no toothbrush or hairbrush? It also gave McTwat an opportunity to collect the last photo from Rothley Towers - you know, the one that was taken by the pool in PDL on Maddie's last day. They couldn't really have done more to prove their guilt unless they had shouted from their balcony "We dunnit", but still the British government has made all us Brits look like a laughing stock by insisting that they couldn't be questioned or charged. I am in despair.

    ReplyDelete
  101. People

    Concerns THIS:Maddie died before 5,30 pm may third

    ReplyDelete
  102. And Amaral Knows it ,BUT...

    ReplyDelete
  103. The nursery witness is no credible

    ReplyDelete
  104. Patrixjude,
    I'm sorry, but you do have the DVD, haven't you, I think this is a very important point. I've found to-day an old comment suggesting this Tapas restaurant chef had given the more likely true testimony about the checking processes on that night. Is it the same guy ? And what did he say exactly ?

    ReplyDelete
  105. @ Anonymous 102
    Why "in despair" ? Give the MCs just 1/100 chance to be saying the truth and you'll feel more relax !

    ReplyDelete
  106. Halligen has been vilified so much by the UK media that no matter what he has to say now, if it is anti McCann, would not be believed.

    Rather like the nasty work that was done on Sr Amaral.

    So who feeds the stories to them?

    Yet it is full steam ahead for Clarence Mitchell, who 'lies through every tooth in his head' says the PJ, and those he speaks on behalf of, the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  107. A long time ago, I read that PJ (forensics) discovered that M never laid on her own bed at all during the evening of her "abduction". I think I will have read this in one of UK newspapers therefore can't verify it but I have always felt this fact to be significant. So, either she was sedated/asleep somewhere else or she died earlier as some posters are saying.

    ReplyDelete
  108. @ Ironside
    Yes, it is bizarre that "abductor almost caught by JT". Had she been at the corner 10 seconds earlier she would have recognized Madeleine and caught the abudctor by the neck ?

    ReplyDelete
  109. Anon 109

    That's interesting as I had the same feeling when looked at the picture of Madeleine's bed.
    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23526385-maddy-police-were-no-poirots-mock-their-own-prosecutors.do

    I was not sure if it's the picture from the PJ case as I also saw the other picture and the same bed looked messy.

    If it is how M's bed looked at the night of 3rd May 2007, then she obviously didn't sleep there - it's visible the bed was just "prepared" for a child to go to bed.

    ReplyDelete
  110. MWT has cut me off, I asked too many pertinant questions!

    ReplyDelete
  111. Always missing in this case is SOUND, the sound of anything

    Think about it

    Sounds directs the eyes, alerts the brain, signals awareness

    A totally soundless evening

    As for MWT - now the great exposer of the Saville scandal, or was he? Or indeed with his policing background probably had long known of hints regarding this man, just waited his moment

    Perhaps MWT is waiting his moment again, plus or minus a bit of reading!!

    ReplyDelete
  112. And here we are in May 2014 with rent-a-mouth singing from a blurring hymn sheet if tweeting is believing.

    ReplyDelete