19 January 2010

Sandra Felgueiras for RTP: Moita Flores' testimony - video & translated transcript






Sandra Felgueiras, outside Lisbon Civil Court, 13. Jan. 2010 - I would say that during the two hours that lasted his deposition, by videoconference, Moita Flores produced a treaty on freedom, on criminal investigation and on truth. A treaty on freedom because what is at stake, here, is the duality of rights that are part of our Republic’s constitution: on one hand, the right to freedom of expression, expressed by Gonçalo Amaral, and on the other hand, the McCann couple’s right to a reputation and to dignity.

And concerning this conflicting duality, Moita Flores was peremptory: he thinks it is “pathetic” and “an aberration” that in a democracy, someone’s right to write a truth that he says he has reached, is put at stake. And even when judge Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues asked him if he thinks it’s legitimate for an inspector, after retiring, and after having privileged access to information, to write, to publicise it, he [Moita Flores] said “I don’t see why that can’t happen, even because nobody else in Portugal has been dragged through the mud by the British press, like Gonçalo Amaral was, therefore he is in his full right”.

He even said “I don’t know what I would do if I was in his shoes; if anyone had told me or written that my wife is a prostitute and I, a drunk. I know that Gonçalo Amaral is a good policeman, and that is why I came here to testify”. Such were the words of Moita Flores.

Then, why do I mention a treaty on criminal investigation? Because for several times, Isabel Duarte has tried to discredit the book, and therefore, at the same time, the criminal investigation, and she tried to tell Moita Flores, or rather ask him, if he knew the location, the window through which the abduction could have taken place in Praia da Luz. He replied, in his own voice, that he was on location, and that he was absolutely certain that it was materially impossible for an abductor to leave through that window – unless the child was dead.

This is due to there being no possibility for anyone to exit through that window without leaving natural traces, which is to say, without leaving marks, and that is the line that investigators follow. Therefore, in this way, he tried to credit, contradicting the McCanns’thesis that the only possibility was abduction. And he even said that he does not believe that any competent investigator in the world easily accepts that anyone tries to impose a sole thesis on him. And the McCanns came here to try to impose one sole thesis on Portuguese justice, the thesis that they believe in, the abduction thesis. And he says that Gonçalo Amaral could not resign himself to this possibility.

Finally, a thesis about truth. A thesis about truth because Moita Flores came to this court to say that the absolute truth belongs only to God. The truth that belongs to men is a dynamic truth, a truth that is gradually obtained. This because when he was questioned several times about the legitimacy of discussing a thesis that the Public Prosecutor did not reach, he even said: “The Public Ministry had an opinion. That does not mean that there could not be another one”. And Isabel Duarte told him, at the end: “But there are people here who have been absolutely murdered on the public square”. And Moita Flores finalised by saying: “So was Gonçalo Amaral”.

As a conclusion, I would say that it was a demolishing testimony in front of judge Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues, who by the way is the daughter of former Attorney General Cunha Rodrigues; it will be up to her to decide whether or not to keep this injunction in place, which removed the book “Truth of the Lie” from the market in last September.

In this way, Moita Flores joins the choir of former inspectors, and even the joint national director, Luís Neves, who came here yesterday to state again that all of them, together, and including the Public Ministry, shared the thesis that Madeleine was dead, and that the McCann couple was involved in concealment of the cadaver.

They all said, in one voice, that Gonçalo Amaral’s book focuses on everything that is included in the investigation, and that they do not see, in any way, that the contents of the book may be influencing public opinion in the sense of disturbing the search for Madeleine and putting her survival at stake. These are the two main issues that the injunction is based upon, and it was due to these two allegations from the McCann couple’s defence that the judge who previously judged the injunction decided to take the book off the market.

In the afternoon, we will hear José Manuel Anes, currently the vice president of the Security Laboratory, he is a witness that was summoned by editor Guerra & Paz, the editor that published the book “Truth of the Lie”.

As you know, this trial continues tomorrow, but Gerry McCann won’t be attending anymore. He is going to return to the United Kingdom, he says, due to professional reasons. At around 4 p.m. he is expected to leave this court, and at that time, he promises to make a statement to the press.


202 comments:

  1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjDAK2kH3yM

    @ 4.09 in this video which (I think) is the Press/Media interview he gave before going back to the UK I note he says LACK of evdience. Hmm what happened to the usual mantra absolutely no evdience what so ever!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'll be damned! This girl never ceases to amaze me. One day she crucifies Amaral, the next she seems truly excited with Moita Flores' deposition. Well, if myou mean it, welcome back Sandra.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's a bad idea to focus so heavily on the window. It makes it look as if the PJ could only think that the child must have exited that way, when in fcat anything is possible. This is a point which has been made by several police in the UK and which was the point of Duarte's questioning.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As far as I'm concerned, Moita Flores' testimony last week was the most compelling perhaps because he wasn't directly involved with the case! He simply said it as it was. He summed the case up with one sentence: "This case is pathetic". I agree wholeheartedly with him!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Fabulous. I totally missed this last week. Very nice interpretation of Moita Flores' testimony.

    Thank you, Astro (& Joana) for bringing this to the fore. Bjs e força!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pinky announced that the couple was staying for the whole hearing. GM out of the blue shot home was only an excuse because he had known about the deferred hearing dates since a month ago and must have accounted for it. They hadnt counter for media intrusion and for the negativeness to do the round in the UK media. The process files they so desperately wanted to suppress hence the ban was backfiring and turning into their worst nightmare - he was pissed off and shot off. That, and probably he was having words with Kate, so either he'd decided to leave KM in the lurch or Kate told him to bugger off. I dont believe for one moment he went home because of work reason. hen again, mayybe he went home to consult with PInky to control what comes out of the MEdia.

    No matter, they managed to do more damage to their reputation in the 3-day hearing that the book in a year. Serve them right for being arrogant and brazen!

    ReplyDelete
  7. The window is or rather was the cornerstone of the McCann thesis of abduction starting with the story of jemmied shutters and continued by backfilling about curtains billowing etc etc. It has now morphed into being a red herring. Whose red herring?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Perhaps Sandra never believed the McCanns but was told by her bosses to "go easy" on them during her interview just like the UK journalists and newspapers have been told to, but now that so many things are coming out in the Court case that have been said by the PJ and other officials, she now feels happy to repeat it to all and sundry - she has been unshackled.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Moita Flores made some very good points from an objective viewpoint.

    I cant help feeling pinky is going to media control and forbid line feeding from court in the next round? So we may not get to hear the process first hand.

    ReplyDelete
  10. thanks Joana for this very interesting translation and I hope every Brit who visits your blog reads it.

    The window will be their biggest downfall in the arena of public opinion I think. All the Brit public heard at the beginning, thanks to the family and the press, were that the shutters were jemmied and broken. This is clearly not true but the likes of the Brit press have never drawn attention to the 'error'. However, its one of the things people mention if you ask Joe Public why they believe in abduction.

    It's only a matter of time before they hear the truth...

    ReplyDelete
  11. For goodness sake bring on the dogs. If only their handler would turn up and give testimony.

    Those wonderful animals who have NEVER been wrong and who are indicating that Madeleine is dead.

    How would the McCanns' lawyer explain that away? The way she explained away Mr Smith by simply dismissing them?

    The indications and findings of blood and death scent discovered by the dogs needs to be reinforced over and over, because the people in the UK especially trust them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Shu 4

    Absolutely! To quote a friend : Moita Flores is GA"s trump card.
    Neat,clear,concise,honest...and we have the eternal and shameful opposite represented by the mccann man who was so SHOCKED and chocking from ANGER that he left the very same day....did he find himself directly in epicentre of a powerful tide? What gerry did was to leave in a true moment of panic. No more no less.
    To show he has balls he gave a "press conference" instead of going to go and change his pants...

    I find it difficult to think a judge would not read and see through such testimonies coming from very profesionally experienced men.
    It would be a blow to the Portuguese Constitution and the rights of her citizens.Extremely bad news imo to overlook morality, honesty and honour in a court of justice.....where ever the court is....of course an english court is an other matter altogether: no children,no dogs....

    Gerry, is there something you havent grabbed yet? Ask Mr.Moita Flores to explain it to you again.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sorry if this is in the wrong thread, but with respect to the party scheduled on 27 Jan, aren't the Fund Accounts for March 2008 due to be published in the same week - like last year on 28 Jan?

    ReplyDelete
  14. "the McCann couple’s right to a reputation and to dignity."

    Their reputation and dignity would be easily restored if they were to ask for the investigation to be re-opened, attend the reconstruction, answer Police questions and provide all requested information such as Credit Card details.

    The book did not take these things away, they did that by themselves, so banning the opinion of one man, is simply spitting in the wind. Unless that judge in Portugal, is going to issue an edict telling us all what to think!.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Zodiac 1
    Very interesting listening. Gerry is sudenly highly articulate, clear, precise and concise in what he is saying. What a contrast with the transcripts of the interviews with the erm, you know,stublings and hesitations.
    Almost as if when he is in charge of the script it flows, but when he is having to think on his feet,....

    ReplyDelete
  16. It continues (and continues!) to amaze me that none of this gets into the UK press...and that the fact that it doesnt get into the UK press doesnt seem to bother anyone - though of course we know that the UK media has been silenced by a prerogative power (a secret one - 'in the public interest'!) - a 'd' notice I beleive it is known as.

    But why?!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think this is one of the best reports by a TV journalist that I have seen in a very long time (and not just with reference to this case). Four and a half minutes of excellent summary including quotes from the witnesses.

    Her role is to report and interview - I don't think it is her role to take sides. I am happy that she seems to be an extremely competent reporter and that she brings clear information to the public.

    Fernis, I am also, sometimes, a little perplexed about what angle she is taking on things. But I appreciate her work. I have just listened to the video of Gerry 'not going to comment' on the question 'Did you know Robert Murat?' That sounded awfully like Sandra posing that question.

    ReplyDelete
  18. A lot of posters seem to be under the impression that this is a trial of the McCann`s guilt and suggesting there is much more evidence that could have been shown. But it is not. It is merely a hearing of Goncalo Amaral`s witnesses defending that what he wrote was in accordance with the police conclusions.

    A trial on the McCann`s guilt can only occur if they are charged with a crime. I don`t know how that would happen unless there is an agreement between European countries. They would have to be arrested and charged and then subpoenad to attend a trial - how could that ever happen unless the uk police force co-operate?
    Louise

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  19. "At around 4 p.m. he is expected to leave this court, and at that time, he promises to make a statement to the press."

    Gerry Mccann also promised to make a statement in a libel court case. Funny how he keeps his promise to speak to the press, but breaks his promise to speak in court.

    Unless of course he intends to speak in February. anyone know the answer to that question?

    ReplyDelete
  20. i think Sandra Felgueiras tries to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds

    ReplyDelete
  21. http://publico.clix.pt/Media/portugal-condenado-no-tribunal-de-direitos-do-homem-por-entrave-a-liberdade-de-expressao_1418610

    ReplyDelete
  22. I agree that someone will be on the telephone to skys news editor forbidding any live feed twiterrings in future. Possibly one of the Murdochs who, in turn, will be taking their instructions from His Royal Pinkness

    ReplyDelete
  23. Message to Anon 3:

    If there is any truth in the statement (published elsewhere) that the back door was (usually) left open to facilitate the checks then I think the reason why Moita-Floes (and Amaral) keeps bringing up the window scenario is because it strongly contradicts the McCann's testimony. On the other hand one possible reason the McCann's painted such scenario could have been to hide the other (...) There are, no doubt, other angles to the investigation.

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sandra was standing right in front of Mccann when he 'Spat' into her face 'Let me finish' when she tried to ask a question...I told you she would learn the hard way..Sandra has seen a side to Mccanns that she had not seen before..That was the real Gerry Mccann.

    I can see Sky kept to the minimum of reporting all we had were one liners..Martin Brunt did not mention that Moita Flores mentioned that GAs wife had been called a prostitute...In Spain you call a woman a 'Puta' and the husband will smash your head in if not more...this is a very very bad word to use.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Post 20..the Mccanns who appear to think they are still running the show..agreed to take the stand after GA .I would imagine this will be in the future sometime..they have agreed in court I doubt they will be allowed to change their minds. They are no longer in the tapas bar.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Louise 19...you are correct..But the Mccanns felt on trial as McCann had to remind the press himself that they were not on trial but Amarls book..priceless.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I dont understand the fuss over this reporter, surely its her job to report and not to have a biased view, isnt that what we all complain about with the uk press slant.

    ReplyDelete
  28. jjp @18 - I agree with your assessment of Sandra's competence as a reporter/interviewer. It's a journalist's job to ensure they don't take sides but try to get to the truth. I've quoted the following before, I think, but it bears repeating. From a site (sorry, don't have link) explaining the duties of a journalist:

    'It is the accounts and opinions of persons on the varying sides of the issue at hand that allow the final piece of writing to be accurate and objective. It is the journalist’s duty to remain detached from the matter at hand enough so as to not take a side and end up with a biased piece of writing. At the same time, though, the journalist must strive to obtain the truth as it stands and acknowledging that people do not always speak honestly to reporters, they must ask strategic questions to the appropriate relevant individuals so as to allow the truth to unravel itself.'

    I think during interviews or when reporting proceedings this is what Sandra tries to do, regardless of her own opinions about the case. If we had a single British journalist who could report proceedings fairly or ask hard questions during interviews there might be hope for the British media. As it is, we have none, and so the media in the UK are seen as hopeless, finished, out of touch, cowardly, moronic ... and all the rest. Oh, and xenophobic too, of course.

    Good for Sandra, a fine piece of reporting.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Gerry was shocked with the way things were going, that is why he left earlier and he asked Isabel Duarte, Kate and Fiona to catch the bullets for him. And they did.
    he does not like to lose, but who does?

    Does he realise the loser is Madeleine who lost the most precious thing she had, her own life?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yes I agree this looks more like a D Notice than a mere civil injunction. If the D Notice was to do with international terrorism then I think the Portuguese would have fallen in line with the UK and somehow stopped Amaral.
    The D Notice could be to do with terrorism peculiar to the UK, Irish dissidents being the obvious one, but again you'd think that the PT authorities would have sympathised and tried to silence the likes of Amaral and Flores.
    That only really leaves the British Royal Family. I can more easily imagine the Portuguese not being too bothered about that. But given, for example, the Fergie topless photos and Prince Harry's spot of bother when he used a racist comment on a video, it seems that D Notices don't protect all royals from adverse press coverage. No, it would have to be someone even higher up the pecking order than Prince Harry, I guess someone in the T9 could be privy to something but hey, this is just speculation.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Speaking about Amaral's book, I remember a case of a CIA agent, an American, who left his job and who wrote a book about it.
    I forgot his name, something like Philip Agee, he wrote and published that book after having going to live in England.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I would not be surprised if judge Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues lifted the ban since Senor Amaral has a right to a reputation and to dignity and if the law of his country cannot protect his rights, who can ?

    Of course, the Mccann couple have the same rights but in sueing Amaral they just forgot how bad this policeman has been treated by the british press.

    This would also be a smart move. Let me explain. If team MC want to go further on they have to attack what's in the book and this time prove their innocence for real.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Is that video A Minute for Madeleine working, in the sense that people are going to the police?

    I believe if Amaral wins this case, people who know about what happened to Madeleine will have the courage to come forward.

    I hope judge Maria Gabriela will start making a little snow ball.

    Somebody has to start it and I hope it will be her.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Has anyone noticed that just after the dog found the cadaver scent, the McCann approach was that there was a perfectly innocent explanation for it, namely Kate's recent proximity to dead bodies. Now, however, the dog is "incredibly unreliable". This suggests to me that Kate was lying about her explanation since how could an unreliable dog reliably detect Kate's "body odour"?

    ReplyDelete
  35. This might not be a trial of the McCanns, but it is an opportunity for Sr Amaral to back up the statements in his book which do not look very good for the abduction fairy story told by the McCanns, for which there is no evidence.

    It has been like a breath of fresh air, that hopefully will end up breathing life back into finding the truth of what happened to Madeleine.

    For all we know there may be somebody out there who has important information they didn't even know they had, having been brainwashed into believing the abduction theory for two and a half years, and thinking it could not be relevant.

    ReplyDelete
  36. It's possible a D Notice (if there is one) exists to protect the legitimacy of a future trial. If everything were out in the open, it could prove prejudicial

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anon 31 - I think if all this supression was because of D Notices or Super Injunctions, there would be no reporting allowed at all, but as it is, reporting is allowed but only in the McCanns favour. So it cannot be a super injunction granted so as not to influence a court case. As for D Notices, I think the same applies - no information can be reported at all. IMO it reeks of editors being the puppets of a Master Puppeteer, but who is it and what is being hidden?
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  38. Prediction for February 10th.

    McCanns no show due to ..........

    ReplyDelete
  39. Yes, 34, people who know what happened need an impuls.
    They need the Portuguese judge's help and support.

    If the judge is courageous and honest, they will come foward.

    I wonder if people in Portugal understands what "a snow ball effect"

    means.

    Have they got much snow in that country?

    ReplyDelete
  40. 35, YOU ARE GREAT!!!!!!!

    That is true!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And didn't Gerry say the blood was coming from Maddie's nose and probably from her knee because she was falling down on the plane stairs?

    An Kate brought the cuddle cat to the mortuarium?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Post 3. I think the reason that the window claim is significant, apart from being stated as the entry/exit point, is that the front door was locked, and the patio door area locked/unlocked was easily visible from the Tapas Bar and surround in the minute time available.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @ Anonymous 3
    The window is one of the hot points of the MCCs' so-called reconstruction. KMC or her mentor says now the open window might be a red herring, failing to imagine how an open window could be a RH, but the "open window" remains a stated fact !

    ReplyDelete
  43. @ Anonymous 36
    In this quote of your post, experiment changing "abduction" with "death" and see what happens...

    For all we know there may be somebody out there who has important information they didn't even know they had, having been brainwashed into believing the abduction theory for two and a half years, and thinking it could not be relevant.

    ReplyDelete
  44. @ Anonymous 35

    Right ! I wrote a post with the same remark some time back. Nobody reacted !

    ReplyDelete
  45. stuff breaking on the internet now if you poke around
    1) Clarrie has jumped ship: a combination of his advice for them not to go to Lisbon being ignored and wanting to stand as a Conservative MP
    2) Two lawsuits heading towards the McCanns related to Madeleine's ward of court status

    interesting times

    ReplyDelete
  46. jan58 @#28 wrote:-

    I dont understand the fuss over this reporter, surely its her job to report and not to have a biased view, isnt that what we all complain about with the uk press slant.
    19/01/2010 17:47

    -----------------------------

    Exactly!

    IMO, Sandra Felgueiras is an excellent reporter and interviewer. She certainly gets up Gerry McCann's nose! After his outburst, he exaggeratedly turned his head away (as we've seen many times before) and treated her like something he'd trodden in.

    Sadly, a male British reporter, asking a puerile question threw Gerry McCann a lifeline and allowed him to ignore |Ms Felgueiras's pertinent follow-up questions.

    Shock horror! A WOMAN, up front and unafraid, who dared to stand up to bully-boy McCann and asked him awkward questions.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Anon 39

    McCanns no show due to................

    early retirement to Canada?

    ReplyDelete
  48. @ Anonymous 24

    Who can believe they used to leave doors unlocked ?
    And if they suddenly, on that evening, decided to leave the patio door unlocked from inside, then why did GMC enter the flat the longest way (around 21h) ?
    I really think that KMC should have long ago (when she was told no breaking occurred) suggested that she might have opened the window to get some fresh air as she was into growing panic.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Estive no tribunal e de facto a Sandra resume muito bem. Falta acrescentar que Moita Flores iria mais longe na acusação e que é sua opinião que os pais deveriam ter sido acusados de negligência por abandonarem crianças tão pequenas num apartamento e num pais estrangeiro. Aliás não compreende porque isso não aconteceu!

    Relativamente ao rapto, Moita Flores disse que era óbvio para a Polícia Técnica que um raptor jamais poderia transpôr aquela janela com uma criança ao colo. Na verdade, a polícia foi bondosa com os McCann devido à trágica dimensão do momento que viviam. Repito, a polícia foi bondosa.

    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  50. Annonymous 48

    No thank you... as a Canadian mum of three beautiful girls who when we go on holiday with we guard them with our lives... and make sure we bring them all back.... I can say wholeheartedly ... YOU ARE NOT WELCOME!! Having followed this case from the beginning... (posting occasionally) I am appalled at the McCanns lying behaviour. I would hope that having an investigation in another country that is currently closed and that you were made 'arguido' in but have never been 'cleared or exonerated' of any wrong doing (and could potentially be re-openend with charges pending) would get the attention of immigration authorities... At such a time I'm sure I along with many other Canadians would give them such a message...Thank you to Joana and Goncalo and McCann files for contiuing to report the 'truth'... Hoping 2010 brings peace to a little girl.. Madeline.

    ReplyDelete
  51. One more odd thing is that the abductor who left no trace must obviously have been wearing gloves but Jane Tanner's bundleman wasn't!
    Also, if he didn't go through the window, as even Kate has suggested, then he must have shut the door after him while carrying Madeleine. Now it couldn't have been so that people couldn't see he had been in the apartment since he left the window open! So why did he shut the door?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anon 46 - Interesting stuff, thank you.

    Clarence Mitchell has well and truly tarnished his reputation and its a bit late to consider even applying to be a MP. Who the hell would trust him now?

    Anyone got any details of the ward of court business. Anyway, why was Maddie made a ward of court?
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  53. the McCann's are well and truly stuffed...
    they could never use the story that maybe the abductor killed Madeleine in 5A because it would have taken too long for the cadaver scent to form
    so they have to rubbish the dogs - even though (as someone pointed out earlier) they acknowledged them by saying Kate had been in contact with dead bodies in her line of work

    they are already backtracking on the window this week, after conveniently dropping the jemmied shutters story

    they are unraveling slowly but surely

    ReplyDelete
  54. http://hypocriteandliar.wordpress.com/

    Another court case looming.

    ReplyDelete
  55. They are backtracking very fast...they agree the twins were sedated by the 'Abductor' they seem to now agree the window was a 'red Herring'..they could have also now agreed that the abductor killed Madeleine in the flat and took her body for what ever reason....However, no matter which way they turn it they cannot explain the cadaver found in the car...a car they hired the day before they went to Rome. A car they did not even need.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Himself 39
    Canada? na...Chile rather.The ideal country for them init? :D

    ReplyDelete
  57. several days ago i wrote that there would be no february 10 but i should have said as far as G & K were concerned.They know every word they would utter would be analysed not just in court but on the internet..every hesitation every um and err.. their body language watched together with their reactions and facial expressions when they are separated and no longer able to grip hands or thighs..not to mention that liars forget what they have said before.Their problem is that there are problems both ways as a no show with a tame excuse would be reported in the press..they are damned if they do and damned if they dont

    ReplyDelete
  58. Wey hey !! John Hirst is applying for a Death Certificate for Madeleine McCann.

    Quote -

    The correct legal position, in my view, is that Madeleine can be declared dead and a death certificate issued. Therefore, I am applying for this. There are two ways the authorities can respond, simply issue the death certificate and be done with it, or order an inquest with a coroner and jury. Obviously, I would prefer the latter.

    Unquote

    Link :-
    http://hypocriteandliar.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/see-you-in-court-mr-and-mrs-mccann/

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  59. i remember at the end of one episode of Columbo, turning to the camera he said "he was a smart guy probably smarter than us but he didnt realize that he was doing it once and we are doing it all the time"

    ReplyDelete
  60. Maddie was made a Ward of Court in 2007, but I don't think the news about this came out until the following year. Said to have been applied for by the McC's?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Thank you again Astro (and Joana) for making this interview accessible to all – even though I’m portuguese I do not always have the possibility to follow the news. Thanks “minhas queridas”

    To make it simple:

    1. This is indeed a very good report about Moita Flores’ testimony – this is the sort of approach that I would appreciate to see every news person do;
    2. Sandra Felgueiras has, in fact, revealed to be a very good journalist.
    3. Once she was interviewed about how she felt personally about the McCann and she answered that she felt sympathy if not empathy with their pain. Nevertheless, she never allowed those feelings to interfere with her professional performance;
    4. I have watched all her reporting about this case as I have watched others, and never was she but objective.
    5. About Moita Flores’s testimony – the real important matter under discussion here – I am very confident on his analysis (even if doesn’t make any effect on the judge’s decision) because he is a very intelligent man and never takes a stand over a matter that he doesn’t know and / or believe on.
    The fact that the judge is young doesn’t mean that she is not capable of making the right decisions – remember that, against the protest of the plaintiff’s lawyer about the admission of the PJ files into the process, she ruled in favor. For me that was one of the biggest defeats in this case.

    NOTE ASIDE:
    A.Miller, I believe I’ve read you on the Brunt’s blog/forum some time ago, referring to the “adult McCanns” some very poignant observations – I used to go there just to read your posts and the feather's ruffling it used to cause among some Mcfanatics over there. Keep writing, you are a pleasure for the mind.

    Dear British friends don’t ever feel ashamed of your nationality; on the contrary, you should feel proud because you are not like the McCann. In Portugal we do not, at least not me and my close ones, confound the British people with some bad apples that always tend to spare a bad stench over the basket. For those of you that have come to Portugal after this incident, I’m sure you were well received as we always do to every person that visits our country (of course, we also have bad apples and there may be less respectful people).

    Love from Lisbon
    LUZ

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mitchell's standing as candidate has been around as a story for quite a while. Don't think the Tories would touch him with a bargepole now. Can you imagine the protests in the electioneering?

    ReplyDelete
  63. The shock to the McCann of the public hearing is now over. There is still people to hear in this pre-trial gathering of information.

    Therefore - being shocked at what is going to be revealed will not have the average in the final hour. Since Amaral cards (evidence) are now laid on the table for all to see.

    For all the pros and cons - so far the McCanns have got what they desired, the book off the shelves and remains off the shelves. To their adoring British public, they have the upperhand.

    This is going to tick on for ages to come. Lined up there is the CEOP platform - again this gives official approval of the McCanns, the ''charity'' bash with the celebs - further approval by the establishment.

    Why this country (UK) don't look at the wider agenda, if only to ask the question why is this still rattling on.

    But then we await with the greatest of interest publication of the second audit, although it will not reflect the current state of the FundLtd.

    But more important than the money - with all the appeals from the McCanns - CEOP viral message, what exactly is the outcomes ?

    Meadow

    ReplyDelete
  64. Anon 61

    Do you know what month Madeleine was made a ward of court?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Anon 65 I'll have to look back on some notes to find this, but as I remember, it was quite soon after the disappearance.I'll post asap on this.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anon 65 Found it! May 17th 2007 -Justice Hogg's full statement on this states parents made application. It was when they were in dispute with Leicester Police and were trying to force them to release police files to them. Google-In the matter of Madeleine MCCann -wardship-to read for yourself. Hope this helps.

    ReplyDelete
  67. @ Anonymous 52
    Leaving the door open to offer another red herring ?
    Two red herrings, that would have been smart !

    ReplyDelete
  68. I think they said M. was make a ward of court beginning of July.
    I don't understand how, since she's a ward of court, they can involve her in suing GA without Mrs Justice H.(?)'s permission.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Reading some posts, I feel like posting "my" Brod...
    Here again you have it ! Things aren't either black or white. Please stop judging these parents, nobody would like to be in their shoes.
    It's 'monitoring' that allows other outlets to publish the sort of thing that we're protesting about! It's just that we have here a splendid 'monitor' with a fairer and more scrupulous outlook. If I weren't convinced of the 'rationality' I wouldn't be such an avid follower. But although it's cheering for us to know that there are so many other people thinking the same, I very much doubt that the McCanns could care less, or at least so long as they can go on as they are. They're pathological cases, and the pathology consists in their being completely impervious to any opinions contrary to their own ideas of themselves. We can have no hopes of changing them, but we may have hopes of convincing more people that they are being hoodwinked if we sound as consistently reasonable and objective as possible.

    Brod

    ReplyDelete
  70. @ 52, That's a great point actually, something that no-one has seemed to have picked up on.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Might it be that Madeleine was already a ward of court before she went to Portugal?

    The McCanns would not tell us if she had been.

    ReplyDelete
  72. 70 aacg - agree, we have to stay objective and reasonable or be labelled as nuts.

    Maybe we are nuts, to have stuck to this for so long?!

    ReplyDelete
  73. Whoops, I for(got to put " ". Brod's message starts at "Its 'monitoring'...

    ReplyDelete
  74. The PJ/judiciary let the McCanns go back to the UK - fact

    leave their jurisdiction - set them free

    Portugal may bleat/wail and gnash teeth as much as they like now

    this is the moment they (PT)cocked up

    and short of blaming the BIG conspirancy in the sky there is nowt more to be said

    Portugal let the fishies they were SO sure of catching slip out of their nets

    Live with it fools, PT blew the search for truth..and of course the McCanns obliged



    woof woof indeed

    ReplyDelete
  75. @ Anonymous 65 and 67
    Actually the MCs asked for M. being made a ward of Court on the 17th of May 2007, but M. became one only one year later, on the 2nd of April 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  76. :)] Message to Anons: aacg and 42.

    42's point is interesting (assuming it is factual). The info I had was this (again not sure if it is factual):

    (quote/unquote) " Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, spokesman for the investigation, has confided in British former Chief Inspector Albert Kirby that neither the windows nor their shutters had been tampered with. Gerry and Kate McCann would have used the patio doors as they checked on their daughter and her twin siblings during their meal near the Mark Warner holiday complex swimming pool and it is these doors that were left unsecured. The McCanns and all their friends on the holiday left their patio doors open throughout the evenings for fear of fire. Mr. Kirby told The Mail on Sunday: (...) The window shutters are not an issue. Their mechanism makes them almost impossible to open. The door was left unlocked. They did that every night." (Source: Paulo Reis at: http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2009/12/broken-shutters-persistent-campaign-of.html).

    Draw your own inferences...

    Another possibility (leaving the accidental death/cover up scenario aside) is that the Mc's lied to hide their security "faux pas" from the investigators. I understand that under Portuguese law it is (may have been) a crime for parents or in loco parentis to leave children alone and unattended (and possibly medicated). I am merely speculating. In order to have an informed opinion and play Sherlock Holmes with this case one needs access to the 20.000 page PJ dossier (not to mention the unwritten inferences made by the detectives). It is complicated. To judge from the contradictions the Mc's are not telling the full truth and evidently their friends declarations have been orchestrated (evidence available).

    The irony is, if they had taken the risk to tell the truth (assuming they were lying)then it would have made more sense for someone to sneak in and abscond the child via the patio door. I think.

    We have to thread carefully for we do not know exactly what the data was telling Amaral and his team and what they made of it. "Truth of a Lie" is merely an abbreviated version of the case for public consumption. Amaral seems to resort to Occam's Razor logic and go for the high probability hypothesis.

    One thing is for sure. He is entitled to his opinion and we are entitled to hear it. The McCann's can write their own best seller to try and deconstruct Amaral's version of possible events if they wish but...stealing Amaral proceedings from the book (and not only) is not a gentleman's way, much less a doctor's.

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  77. to 62

    quote:
    2. Sandra Felgueiras has, in fact, revealed to be a very good journalist.
    unquote

    make your mind up pal, is she only allowed to report the flavour of the day as long as it suits your agenda of the day ?

    I sometimes wonder whether any posters on here have real jobs..in the real world on here

    ReplyDelete
  78. To all the people that work so hard in this case ,and to the people of Portugal ,may I say thankyou ,and send my blessings , Being here in England I would be deaf and blind to the truth , I m ashamed of my country that I was once so proud to be born in ,, All the time everyday I think of dear little Madeleine and fall asleep wondering if she suffered ,thankyou for letting me say this to you ,may God Bless you all Pepper29142

    ReplyDelete
  79. 'Please stop judging these parents' says Brod.

    When they stop their brainwashing tactics, and get out of our faces with their threats to Carter Ruck us, then I may consider it.

    ReplyDelete
  80. To posting #65. Ward of Court. Approx.one month after Madeleine vanished,the McCanns appointed a Barrister in England to represent them in Court and have the child made a Ward of that Court.They were still in Portugal during this process.This was kept very quiet for about a year,when the McCanns took legal action against the Leicestershire Police for access to their files,they used the legal lever of Madeleine's Wardship to do so ! That was the first time that we heard about the Wardship. The Barrister who acted for them on that occasion was Tim Scott Q.C. of the International Family Law Group. I'm not certain if he was the person who dealt with the Wardship hearing. The McCanns only achieved a partial success over access to the information held by the Police. The Wardship Judge was Mrs.Justice Hogg. I hope that this assists ?

    ReplyDelete
  81. One of the things I find odd in the Dianafication of this story is the way that Kate McCann has been used as a pinup, the beautiful and camera-ready after-dinner mint thin grieving mother (the perfect weight loss diet, achieve size zero by losing your child) to sell papers...and the pictures have removed the large mole over her eyebrow...blemishes have been photoshopped away.

    ReplyDelete
  82. trouble is...verbose poetry like Blacksmith's are taken as gospel, though that is nowt more than the meanderings of an unemployed ex-local hack..

    straight questions fall by the wayside..and that is truth-seeking ?

    give us a break

    you need to believe Madeleine died in 5a..with involvement of her parents..fair enough...your gig

    but for every narrative-and that's all it is

    there's a counter-narrative

    ReplyDelete
  83. Anon 67

    I thought they were not in dispute with LP until much later than that, after they returned to UK.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Oh and why I wait for all these comments to be disapproved

    WOC WOC WOC

    EX CAMERA-in the full bright glare of the public-unheard of hitherto

    no, I thought NO ONE could answer this

    IMHO the child did NOT perish in the OC and Gerry & Kate have a very good idea who spirited her away..

    hence campaign
    hence daily update of funds raised
    hence publicising of the campaign's contact details

    go figure

    woof woof never came into it..after all Grime disappeared completely after being challenged...Jersey was an abject failure

    but Grime pocketed good money for said failure

    I do not need to join the dots, do I ?

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anon #32
    Philip Agee did write a book "Inside the Company: CIA Diary", but he didn't live in London.
    He went to live in Cuba in the 70s and died in Cuba 2 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Anon 73

    But how do you actually know this?

    Was it something the McCanns themselves said, or was it from an independent source and nothing to do with the McCanns?

    Also, does anybody know why the McCanns were asked about Madeleine, and the suggestion that she was going to be adopted, albeit by a close relative?

    ReplyDelete
  87. @ Anonymous 73
    Sometimes I wonder...

    ReplyDelete
  88. this ain't my place..I just butterfly around..but do not close your minds please or have your opinions hijacked by the 1 in 10 posters who set 'the tone'

    we are no further to closure than in early May 2007

    everything's poss.

    Amaral's earring does not matter
    Kate's highlights don't matter

    Madeleine matters..and that is all that/who matters

    ReplyDelete
  89. @ Anonymous 82
    Do you mean that Kate could be a sort of avatar of Diana in the collective unconscious ?

    ReplyDelete
  90. @ Anonymous 80
    I'm sorry, Brod didn't say this, I did.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Anon #82
    Correct! I hadn't noticed the photoshopping.
    The mole is over her right eyebrow, many pictures show her LEFT profile.
    If the pic is from the right or front, there is usually a bit of hair covering the mole.
    If the whole forehead is seen, well... there you are, mole gone:

    http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/PxxFVLbvj__/Madeleine+Mccann+Parents+Attend+International/fGXEQ7lDcB_

    Do photographers get instructions as if she was Barbra Streisand (who only wants her left side photographed)?
    Another facet of the Streisand effect, perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  92. respect to the gatekeepers of this blog..for having the guts to show an unorthodox point of view

    BTW..personal attacks are wasted on me..vent your frustrations if you must..unless they are well thought out..I shan't bother replying

    been there..done that

    ReplyDelete
  93. Don't think you would be capable of joining the dots on a colouring book.
    Not worth much more of a reply really.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Antonio Cardoso..he will just not go away will he ?

    ReplyDelete
  95. I just wrote something and it went wrong with posting.

    I hope Judge Maria Gabriela's sentence, a positive one, will encourage eventual witnesses that still fear going to the police.

    Madaleine needs green light, in order to get justice.

    If the judge agrees with freedom of expression and if she sees Amaral and the PJ are right, she will certaily realise that green light from an authority is necessary.

    Her sentence will be of great support to eventual witnesses, who want to come forward and who are still fearing doing it because they don't get any support in the UK.

    Portugal and Maddeleine's spirit will support them.


    Those witnesses need a strong stimulation.

    ReplyDelete
  96. 86, Gosh, Cuba in the 70ties?

    Anyhow better than Russia with that climat.

    ReplyDelete
  97. @ ac
    "The McCanns and all their friends on the holiday left their patio doors open throughout the evenings for fear of fire"
    I hadn't yet read that. Only 3x2 Tapas had a patio door (the 3 Paynes were upstairs). Their children were toddlers more or less, in case of fire the babies would have burnt in their cots, door locked or not.

    They may have discussed leaving the patio door unlocked, but AS GMC USED THE FRONT DOOR, I don't think they ever did. I think that KMC opened the window because the abductor had to have a way to get in (and of course an abductor doesn't bother to close neither windows, nor doors behind him), she didn't think that it was easier to open the patio door as the way the abductor had used.
    Later when the expert was categorical about the shutters being intact, they had to find another way for the abductor to get in. This is when the story of the unlocked patio door emerged.
    To corroborate it, MO "started" to enter into the flat (a thing he never had done before...).

    ReplyDelete
  98. Jesus, Joseph, Mary and the wee donkey

    sometimes I despair..

    IT'S NOT ABOUT LOCKS ya'll

    ReplyDelete
  99. Forgetting...
    This is probably why KMC was so categorical first (when she thought the shutter story would work) that M. didn't wander off : all issues were locked.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Hi,

    Was listening to the interview Sandra Felgueiras held with the McCann's back in November 2009.

    When speaking of the book Gerry states:

    "I can't speak for people who have read the book, but obviously it doesn't stand up to critical appraisal"


    ---

    I think he has just hit the nail on the head - It is NOT for Gerry to speak for anyone who has read the book and that is EXACTLY what he is doing in his legal action agains Sr Amaral. He is saying that persons reading it will believe Madeleine is dead and will not look for her. Furthermore he is imposing on otheres, HIS opinion that the book does not stand up to critical appraisal!

    I thought he could not speak for those who have read the book?

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  101. 99 - What do you mean it's not about locks? It's a lot about locks. Would you really leave your children in unlocked premises? As someone has already pointed out the fire issue is bogus. As doctors, they would know a child can die in seconds from fume inhalation and the little children in cots would not be able to get out anyway.

    We need to remind ourselves time and time again, that the locks issue is vital and points to their lack of veracity.

    ReplyDelete
  102. @ A Miller
    My understanding is a bit different. He's saying that, though he can't represent the people who have read the book (= have been manipulated), the book obviously (= that's a fact) doesn't stand up to critical appraisal.
    GMC doesn't need to read a book to know it doesn't stand up to critical appraisal ! Good for him because he doesn't understand Portuguese anyway (or did he read the AE web translation ?)

    ReplyDelete
  103. 103, don't bother giving the troll the time of day, just ignore anything posted.

    ReplyDelete
  104. anon ≠100, yes, they must have thought the jemmied shutter story would run. Interesting to notice the various people who this story had been told to and who subsequently told the media:

    Gerry phoned his sister Trish. She said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken." (Daily Mirror)

    Kate telephoned Jon Corner. He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'
    "They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage." (Daily Telegraph)

    Jon Corner again: "Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing It looks as though someone had gone straight past the twins to get to her." (Daily Mirror)

    Jon Corner yet again: ""She just told me that Maddy had been abducted, that the shutters of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
    "Maddy was asleep in the room with Sean and Amelie and whoever has taken her has gone straight past the sleeping twins, left them completely alone and snatched Maddy." (Liverpool Daily Post)

    Another friend, Jill Renwick: "Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."
    "The shutters had been broken open
    and they've gone into the room and taken her." (on GMTV)

    All quotes taken from here -

    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id31.html

    But the shutters hadn't been touched.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Anon recommended:
    http://publico.clix.pt/Media/portugal-condenado-no-tribunal-de-direitos-do-homem-por-entrave-a-liberdade-de-expressao_1418610

    This ruling is encouraging.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Forgetting also...
    The trick of the children bedroom door being more ajar as they had left it doesn't match with MO getting inside the flat and having a glance on the twins, since pushing the door would have allowed him to see M. as well.
    This (open bedroom door) trick emerged after G's tennis partner said they had met at the bottom of the stairs. The abductor stopped being able to get in through the patio door around that time. So he had to enter earlier and to be hidden somewhere in the flat, waiting for G to get out.
    How the door, ajar though the window is open, slams shut at KMC's face when she touches it remains a mystery that a reconstitution would certainly have solved.

    ReplyDelete
  107. However the doors and windows really were, how do they explain the blood and cadaver scent in the apartment and in the car?

    Their hire car was the only one picked out by the dogs, and the dogs don't have an agenda.

    Neither is it plausable that evidence was planted by the investigators, Portuguese and UK.

    If they were bent like that, surely they would have chosen Murat. He would have been a much easier target.

    Nah, the child was dead before she was taken from the apartment. The dogs have never been wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  108. You are right A Miller.

    So what's his problem? He has just cancelled out the effect it would have.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Yes, Dimsie (but there's no Anonymous 100...)
    Remarkable, isn't it ?
    This smashing, forcing open, breaking, jimmying etc. of the shutters had such a powerful psychological effect. It meant violence and rape.
    One could hear at the same moment that the children were alone in the flat without being shocked, because the intrusion was like the ones who haunted our bad dreams when we were young.

    ReplyDelete
  110. they have nowhere to go now...
    so begins the meltdown
    if they show up in lisbon in february they will face a nightmare.
    if they renege they will face a nightmare...
    the paint is very wet in their corner...
    all that is going on now is bluster...
    i say all the time...follow the money...
    the money report is due soon
    we must be really ready for that!
    happily we have many people waiting with open eyes to explain the truth to us.
    the mccanns cannot say the same.
    i am so happy that you all work so hard for truth.
    thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Good point aacg, the psychological effect it would have of what kind of person had taken the child.

    The forcing of the shutters was a good story to feed to the media, though it turned out not to be true.

    It would not be corrected until later, so it had the immediate effect it was meant to have, which was to convince people Madeleine had been abducted.

    The spin had already started, even then.

    ReplyDelete
  112. aacg ≠111 - apologies for calling you anonymous in my earlier post. I'm so used to nearly everyone being anon that I didn't notice you weren't. I wouldn't make much of a detective, that's for sure! lol

    Agree with what you say about the tale of the forced open shutters, believable as part of a story of a dangerous intruder with terrible designs on a child. I wonder how the people who carried this particular detail to the media feel now about the 'mistake'?

    ReplyDelete
  113. Citando William Shakespeare:


    os McCanns perderam uma boa hora de terem ficado quietos.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Dimsie,
    Yes, indeed ! If some people could see your listing above they would be shuttered and certainly start thinking twice !
    This is what we'd like the media to do for us, it would save us time !

    ReplyDelete
  115. Off topic, Alla Kournelova, mother of Anna, arrested for child neglect. Left her five year old alone, and child fell from second story building.
    When will people learn. Do not know if this has been posted.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Anna Kournikova's mom arrested for child neglect

    PALM BEACH, FL--The half brother of tennis star Anna Kournikova is hospitalized after authorities say 5-year-old Allan Kournikova was left home alone and reportedly jumped out of a second story window.

    Palm Beach Police are investigating the incident at 211 Seabreeze Avenue.

    Neighbors say the house belongs to Alla Kournikova, Anna and Allan's mother.

    The 5-year-old stated he jumped from a second story window after neighbors say he was left home alone.

    The child landed on some rocks and then walked to the sidewalk. Neighbors found him crying, screaming and bleeding.

    They called 911 and he was taken to a local hospital.

    Allan was just featured in an article about his golfing talent. In the article his mother said she wants him to be occupied and he has a lot of energy.

    Allan was alone at the time of the incident while his mother ran errands.

    The child suffered brusing to his feet and lower back as a result of the fall from the second floor, according to a police report.

    The mother was charged with a third degree felony for neglect of a child and was booked into the Palm Beach County Jail.

    http://www.wptv.com/mostpopular/story/anna-kournikova-alla-allan-jumps-home-alone-wptv/3PmiUCh-T0WPxwlX2PDUVw.cspx

    ReplyDelete
  117. I think that the shutters were due to be jemmied maybe by Gerry but he got waylaid by Wilkins on the road outside. The fact that the shutters were not smashed was not passed on to Kate. She pushed the shutters open to test them leaving her prints there. Unsure of what to do she carried on with the plan hoping the shutters were damaged from the outside. Once it was established the shutters were fine it was too late to withdraw the statements already made to family, Sky TV and uncle Tom Cobbley.
    On the face of it if the shutters were seen to be damaged and signs of entry/exit were there maybe the PJ would have been more inclined to go with the abduction theory.
    So the grand plan was doomed to faliure from the start thanks to the unknowing Jez Wilkins.

    ReplyDelete
  118. 119 My thoughts exactly! jez Wilkins got in the way - big time.

    ReplyDelete
  119. aacg @ 70

    I would add that their pathology is so contagious that, even if the McCanns would ever be found guilty in a court of law of all their deeds, there would be some media and people in Britain who would still believe that the McCanns had been framed by the Portuguese police. That's how contagious Gerald McCann's pathology is.

    ReplyDelete
  120. No 78 has to be read in a Glaswegian accent, doesn't it 'pal'.

    ReplyDelete
  121. If there had been a Police report on the 4th that there were signs of forced entry..Broken shutter from the outside..Then I do not think we would all be here today...the Mccanns would have been believed.......But to smash a shutter would have created noise not easy to force a metal shutter up from the outside either.There was also no disturbance on the window ledge...very important..
    xxxxxxxx
    There was a report of a young child claimed to have been abducted from his home just a couple of days ago...

    The Police did not believe the story that was being told...they are now looking for the childs body.
    xxxxxxxx
    Anyway the window is no more, as Kate has been kind enough to tell us that the window is now a 'Red herring'

    ReplyDelete
  122. Why no mention of the Jan.27th celebs party on the Kensington Roof Gardens website, nor on those of the two other charities benefiting: Missing Children Europe and Missing People?

    ReplyDelete
  123. 78 What about you then, do you have 'a job' and do you measure a persons worth by their employment status?

    I think those who criticise other peoples posts should at least admit who they are and not post anonymously - or not post at all.

    ReplyDelete
  124. I've never heard of anything so plainly ridiculous as the window being opened as a red herring.

    All an abductor would have wanted was to get away swiftly and secretly, hoping that the parents and police would assume the child went outside looking for her parents and got lost, thus concentrating the search in the vicinity of the apartment.

    Why on earth would an abductor open a window to draw attention to the fact that an intruder had been in the room? He would have known this would result in a full-scale abduction alert, the last thing he'd have wanted.

    Have criminals now taken to leaving clues so as to give the police a better chance of catching them? Is this some new EU directive, in the constant drive towards fairness and equality? :)

    ReplyDelete
  125. Fatal Vision by Joe McGiniss has been mentioned on this site. Read it years ago. Dr Jeffrey MacDonald, narcissistic personality; greatest supporter his father-in-law until McDonald's publicity seeking TV appearances made him suspicious. His father-in-law proved to be his downfall, some 10 years later. Sentenced for murdering his wife and 2 small daughters. I'm not suggesting that Gerry Mcann murdered anyone, but McDonalds's faked break-in by intruders story and his explanations for what happened have parallels. McGinniss concludes "With them, and with the dozens of others who have been affected by this tragedy, I share the awareness that it will never be over for any of us as long as our own lives continue"

    ReplyDelete
  126. I have just also realised another 'Red herring' of Kates...The BEAD..that was so lovingly removed from her hair...Never could understand the reason for this...it has just hit me...the bead that Madeleine has in her hair in the very suspicious last photo...the photo that took 3 weeks to release...Mind games...it makes you connect the two.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Anon 124...I think this is the date for the Halligen hearing...I would imagine then there will be a blitz of 'Hey its Party time' to cover up any news from this...

    ReplyDelete
  128. We then will have of course the Press filled with the trash that will be coming out of Mccanns mouth from the CEOP meeting on the 26th...

    ReplyDelete
  129. :)] @ aacg from ac

    Good point aacg assuming your source is accurate. I was not aware of the location of the others in the building .

    Further "googling" reveals that Paulo Reis is quoting verbatim from a "Daily Mail" article published on 13 May 2007 and entitled "Madeleine's Parents' Left Patio Doors Unlocked". The article ends as follows: "Mr Kirby believes Portuguese police will solve the case of the missing toddler within days. He said: "I am impressed by the investigation. I have a feeling we will have a result by the end of the next week."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-454466/Madeleines-parents-left-patio-doors-unlocked.html

    You are correct about the Mc's reversal: “Interestingly, Clarence Mitchell's statement about the McCanns reversal of their 'break in' story, came one week after "Dispatches" aired the documentary 'Searching For Madeleine' on 18 October 2007. In that documentary, it was effectively proved that there was no way anybody could break into the apartment and leave no forensic trace or damage to the lightweight aluminum shutters, which are covered with a fine coating of polyurethane paint which marks extremely easily.”(Source: Paulo Reis' blog URL quoted in 77). This seems a verbatim transcript from Prof. David Barclay. To read the original in context follow the link: http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2009/12/broken-shutters-persistent-campaign-of.html

    I stand however by my opinion namely that the Mc's window shutters scenario was (possibly) meant to divert the investigators attention to their pecadillo or "faux pas". Their subsequent "red herring" theory of the shutters may have been a creative detour, indeed.

    I found the Nottage's reflexions particularly relevant to what we were discussing:

    http://madeleinefoundation.org.uk/PDFs/Problems%20with%20the%20abduction%20scenario.pdf

    :p Self-correction: The number of pages in the released PJ dossier rounds 30,000 not 20,000.

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  130. regarding the shutters and Gerald being interrupted - if his failure to damage the shutters was not communicated to Kate, I have to ask 'why not' - if Gerald went back to the Tapas bar he would have told her. But what if he did not go back to the bar and therefore did not have the opportunity to tell her before she played her part.

    Was he, perhaps, otherwise engaged? Who are the witnesses that have put Gerald in the bar at the time he was also seen carrying a child?

    Were the witnesses 'mistaken' or were they a part of the game?

    Does anyone know who it was that put Gerald back in the bar?

    ReplyDelete
  131. 108 -

    I can't recall the exact configuration but if you look where MO says he was standing when he checked on the kids, in his nervous "reconstruction" for the McCann TV mockumentary he was well away from the doorway. And yet in his evidence to the Police he claims he could see the children were breathing. This despite the fact they were in semi darkness, sleeping in cots with mesh sides and he was standing well away from the door (so he wouldn't get an angle where he could see them breathing).

    Credible? I don't think so.

    But again this just points out how SOFT the rogatory interviews - conducted by UK police - were. Any proper copper would say "What - you could see them breathing? Wasn't it dark? Weren't they inside the cots?" There's no follow up in the interviews. In fact all the interviews should have been conducted overs several interviews. There should have been a part 1, followed by thorough analysis of the statements and then further interviewing.

    ReplyDelete
  132. It only makes sense to fit roller shutters to windows which open inwards (or in the case of the apartment, slide open) since otherwise it would be impossible to open the window and ventilate the room with the shutter down, or close the shutter with the window open.

    In the UK, windows open outwards whereas continental windows open inwards. That is why this type of roller shutter is not fitted to UK windows and why, unlike people from the continent, people from the UK are not familiar with these shutters. McCann simply did not realise that the shutter cannot be jemmied and opened from the outside without destroying it.

    As soon as I read that friends and members of the family were saying that McCann had told them that the shutter had been jemmied and opened from the outside therefore, I knew that somebody was lying; that the story was completely wrong. I imagine that everyone on the continent had the same reaction.

    It's a classic example of the kind of elementary mistake which can be made when concocting a story.

    ReplyDelete
  133. If the window was a Red Herring Kate, then whose was it, was it your Red Herring Kate? She is unconciously telling us the truth sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Interesting that Brunt and more pertinantly Mark Williams Thomas (a supposed 'expert'!) does not challenge these stories or go through the interviews etc in detail.

    Either they dont have the wit or they have been told to leave it alone - or they fear the McCanns legal machine.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Post 133 They were allowed to refer to their own previous statements, to remind themselves what they had said and also the statements of the OTHER group members. When did that become standard police procedure?

    ReplyDelete
  136. Post130: should read 133, sorry. Trying to fit this in between writing lesson plans, helping elderly mother, babysitting grandchildren and doing some research. One blogger seemed to think we had nothing else to do except blog!

    ReplyDelete
  137. Please please everyone, read Dr. Martin Roberts excellent article on www.mccannfiles.com. Its under Latest News. Its entitled 'A Tanner in the Works' and completely blows Jane Tanner away and exposes her for what she is.

    ReplyDelete
  138. anon ≠78, while not wishing to take attention away from the matter in hand, I thought perhaps I should inform you that I do have a job. It's part-time and I work from home, so have no problems going online at various times of the day to keep informed of what's going on. Maybe you should ponder the fact that people don't spend all their waking hours working, but pass their time reading books and magazines, watching tv, visiting friends, tending their children, eating out, playing sport, etc. And, of course, going online to chat in forums, buy and sell on ebay, look up information, read the latest news, etc.

    I think if you were more aware of the lives of those who want to get truth and justice for Madeleine, you'd know that many of us now use the time we formerly spent watching tv, etc. in doing whatever we can to learn about the case and passing on what we've learnt to others, in the hope that eventually the case will be reopened, will be solved and justice will follow. Is that such a bad thing to do? Would it be better if we read the complete works of Shakespeare/the latest Jackie Collins/the Sun? Or if we learnt cordon bleu cookery or deep fried everything in the kitchen? Or bought stuff we probably don't need or sold something for a pittance on ebay? Don't you think that the time we have at our disposal is better used in trying to help get to the truth in the sad case of a missing child?

    I don't know the other posters here personally, though I see names I already know from various forums, people who I know have had an interest in the case for some time, just like myself. But every single person who comes here to read the facts, not the biased, xenophobic drivel churned out by the British press, and those who take the time and trouble to leave a comment - those people are doing something they can be proud of. They're saying they won't let this case of a missing child be hijacked by those with a vested interest in saying she was abducted, when the facts seem to point towards a very different scenario indeed. They want truth and they want answers, not spin and lies. They want the case reopened and a reconstruction carried out, so that it can be established once and for all which theory/theories are plausible and which are not. They want the case to be solved and they want justice to follow.

    If you have a problem with people spending their free time like this, then I wonder why that is?

    ReplyDelete
  139. Is it possible for the FBI investigators, who are appearing at the CEOP conference with Gerry, to be briefed about the Madeleine case? Preferably by a Portugese Police Man or Criminologist?

    ReplyDelete
  140. Off topic but very annoying to the McCanns.

    Gerald and Kate, today do not listen to the news from BBC. It will make you nervous.

    Sniffer dogs hired out to parents to check for drugs

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8469634.stm

    ReplyDelete
  141. 85 An interesting hypothesis. A gigantic fraud? So Madeleine not dead?

    If this were the case, the UK authorities ought to be investigating - or are you saying that the McCanns are innocent victims of a kidnap and ransom demand?

    Gerald made himself out to be a nasty bit of work for what reason I wonder? Or is it that he just is a nasty bit of work, who has been singled out for that reason as the victim of an abduction and hostage situation?

    I guess bad things happen to bad people as well, dont they?

    I'd go along with this but for one thing, Amaral. He would have been aware - or he would have been informed when he started getting vocal about the UK interference.

    For that reason, I'm afraid your dots dont join up into anything other than a 'herrings rouge'. Unless you can explain why they didnt make Amaral aware?

    ReplyDelete
  142. It is not only the Gaspars who warned the police about Payne.
    Yvonne Warren Martin recognised him the day after the crime and went to the PJ, telling that she knew him from her work, as witness or as criminal, she could not remember it well.

    Her work has to do with abused children, in England.
    This means that from day 2 or 3 the PJ knew that Maddie's case could be a result of a (sexual?) crime against children.

    By now, Yvonne Warren Martin must have found out where exactly she knows Payne from.

    I found out that the Gaspar's statements are no longer on Gerry McCann's blogs.

    But Mrs. Martin's is still available.

    Go and read it before it disappears, people!

    ReplyDelete
  143. A few people have mentioned Mark Williams Thomas recently.

    He was a paid advisor in the McCanns employ, so could not be trusted anyway. I suspect from his silence of late he is trying to distance himself from them.

    It is truly shocking how many "so-called" professional people have made money from this case.

    Those who have criticised Goncalo Amaral for making money from this in the past should remember that he had no choice but to resign from his job, thus losing any income, so that he could pursue this case. He was forbidden from speaking out whilst in the employ of the PJ.

    ReplyDelete
  144. @144

    No - they're still there:

    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm

    ReplyDelete
  145. Who suggested they should get a spokesperson. Good idea!

    ReplyDelete
  146. :)] Here is an interesting follow-up to the shutters' episode.

    An article by Dr. Roberts aptly entitled (with capital letters and no smiles)"A TANNER IN THE WORKS" has just popped-up in "Mccann Files"...

    ;)) Here: http://mccannfiles.com/id232.html

    ac

    ReplyDelete
  147. My weakness is that I have always shied away from the paedophiliac elements in this case.
    HOWEVER, I have always been disturbed by the strangely adult permed hair of the 3year old Madeleine, shown in photos before the fateful holiday.
    It makes an uncomfortable contrast between the innocent childlike face and the tarted-up effect. For whose benefit? It brings Jo Jo Benet(spelling?)to mind. I cannot believe that a young child would choose such an extreme styling. Any parent would surely not encourage this form of sophisticated styling for such a young child.Bizarre.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Message for 144

    The Gaspars' statement is at: http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic50.html

    ReplyDelete
  149. Kate McCann says the window had been opened and the abductor must have taken Maddie through there. Bearing in mind the height of the window from the ground and the smallness of the window it would, to anyone with an iota of common sense, be seen as impossible, especially with a child of 4 years old.

    Now they say the patio door was left unlocked so the abductor could have taken her from there. If that is so, why did Kate make up the story of the open window in the first place? I suppose she didn't want anyone to think they would be negligent enough to leave a door unlocked.

    Their inconsistencies are coming home to roost!

    ReplyDelete
  150. @149 I concur. It was Jon Benet Ramsay if I remember correctly. Similarities in many aspects.

    ReplyDelete
  151. @ Fernis
    Yes, but they don't mind imo. The main point troubling them is the twins wondering within some years what really happened. This is why they want a total redemption. I can understand that very well. I even feel compassion for them on that topic. They might choose atonement if things get really bad for them. Mr Kennedy would make financial compensations, as he was (first abused then stubborn and conceited) part of the "plot"...

    ReplyDelete
  152. @ Anonymous 149
    I don't think it was perm, just rolls for an hairstyle that will last for a few hours in some carnaval.
    Dubious taste,imo, but if I find KMC extremely beautiful, I don't have the same opinion concerning her taste, generally speaking.

    ReplyDelete
  153. If McCann abandons Tanner, should she go down, he takes a massive risk - might she not blow the gaff?

    Its true that he deliberately contradicted her timing by writing on his blog that he looked down on Madeleine at 9:10 PM - the time that Tanner said she was seeing the abductor (which just doesnt work, as she said she saw him at this time talking to Jez).

    Liar Liar, the pair of them!

    I hope she goes down against Murat - she's the weak link for Gerald.

    ReplyDelete
  154. @ T4Two
    Windows, in the UK, mainly slide up and down, don't they ?

    ReplyDelete
  155. Dimsie # 140 - Well said in response to 78!

    It does make one wonder why comments like 78's are regulary posted in forums and blogs given that the McCanns are in Lisbon trying to gag a book that they say is stopping people giving up their valueable time to look for their mysteriously disappeared child. Maybe it is not the time that people are not donating that is irking them. Maybe it is just the money that is not being donated that is their real problem! Well I never donated to their fund (when it first started) because I did not believe them. I did not allow my child, who was saving for a special toy, to donate her money either and explained my reasons why to her. GA's book has nothing to do with me not giving my valuable time to the McCanns or giving them my money either! However I do give up my personal time to support those who are helping find justice for this child who imo has no voice and I also give up my personal time and a little of my personal money to support Gonçalo Amaral. His thesis supports all the thoughts I had about the McCanns. Thoughts I had before I even knew Gonçalo Amaral even existed! Perhaps the McC's need a reality check that maybe people do not give because they do not believe them. Perhaps what they have been given by the public is all they were ever going to get anyway and perhaps they should be thankful for that! Especially as they seem to have only spent 13.3% of the public money on searching. Now how is only spending 13.3% not a hindrance on the search for their child they claim has been abducted by paedophiles? Maybe if they need more money, they should sell their house. Instead of thinking they can take other peoples homes and cash!

    ReplyDelete
  156. In a hypothetical world, it seems clear that the McCanns have been 'economical with the truth' at the very least. Could this be explained by a desire to avoid any possible charges of neglect or abandonment?
    Such behaviour would almost be understandable as a rushed judgement to try and preserve ones remaining family.
    The trouble is, even if you discard everything they and their friends have ever said or done as part of an effort to avoid possible charges of neglect and you give them a huge benefit of the doubt about a possible abduction....it still leaves us with the multiple dog indications.
    Unlike Gerry I find the scientific evidence that I've read of their usefulness as indicia to be persuasive. In such a hypothetical senario it's unexplainable.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Dimsie,
    Thank you for your answer to Anonymous 78 !

    ReplyDelete
  158. Murat suing Tanner? Shouldn't the owner of the Burgau flat be suing them both for leaving hairs lying around?

    ReplyDelete
  159. @ Anonymous 158
    Charges of neglect were the first motive for pretending an abduction had occurred. In this ALL of Tapas were concerned (except the 3 Paynes, but they were the trip organizers). Hence their strong solidarity.
    Rather soon after, imo, the Tapas were overwhelmed : no possible return point without breaking a solidarity that their staying in a foreign country strengthened. This imo was one of the disastrous effects of the media circus.

    ReplyDelete
  160. @ Anonymous 132
    You wrote :
    "...what if he (G) did not go back to the bar and therefore did not have the opportunity to tell her (K) before she played her part.
    Was he, perhaps, otherwise engaged? Who are the witnesses that have put Gerald in the bar at the time he was also seen carrying a child?
    The last question is a very interesting one. As I have no access to The DVD, I'd like one who has to have a look. Is there positive statements (apart from the T7) ? Or just negative ones (Nobody noticed nothing) ?
    Respecting the fact GMC, too busy, could not have come back at all, but the question is When did M. die ?
    I find it hard to believe she died around 21:15 and was found so by her father (who spoke to Jes in fact before checking the kids). How could she have time to leave a cadaver odour ? When and how would GMC alert KMC ? If she died alone, this was before imo. At lunch time ?

    ReplyDelete
  161. 158, Well said, my thoughts also.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Post 149- There is also a photo of a very young Madeleine in a red dress, wearing what appears to be carefully applied make-up.

    ReplyDelete
  163. 132 I think the timing is 'all over the place' - I'm not convinced that Madeleine was alive at all on that day (3rd) as their behaviour seems eratic all day (from what I've read in the last three years). It would take time to work out their plan - I dont see how it could have been planned that night - in my view the only explanation is that Madeleine was dead from the night before.

    ReplyDelete
  164. 158 - I used to think that it was a simple case of self defence. I still think its self defence but not 'simple'.

    By altering timings and the nature of their 'listening' service and claiming seeing an abductor, they had a huge impact on the police search in the critical hours - no parent would want to divert the police at that time. In short, they would have had to know their actions would not increase the danger to Madeleine - so they would have had to know what had become of her. The alternate - that they deliberately put her at risk to protect themselves is unthinkable and if it were so, they would deserve the most severe punishment.

    The comment allegedly made by Gerald regarding the risk to Madeleine by publicising her eye defect is the most cold hearted, dreadful thing I've heard out of the whole case, the idea of someone doing something to her eye as a result of a parents direct action surely would prevent any normal parent from taking the action without it beign absolutely necessary - which it was not. Perhaps this is because he is a 'doctor' of a sort, so cold to that kind of thing?

    Or maybe it was simply because the truth of the matter was worse and also because he knew nothing more could harm Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  165. So we are to disbelieve the T9 about some things they told to the police, but believe them about others? And we are expected to sympathise with them, even if some of their lies might have hampered the search for Madeleine?

    ReplyDelete
  166. @ Anonymous 167
    Yes, they're humans, just like us.

    ReplyDelete
  167. @ Anonymous 166
    "By altering timings and the nature of their 'listening' service and claiming seeing an abductor, they had a huge impact on the police search in the critical hours"

    Yes, but the crucial impact on the media was even bigger.

    ReplyDelete
  168. 169 I think you missed the point I was making in my post - their behaviour tells us that either they knew where Madeleine was or they were more concerned with protecting themselves than finding her. I believe its the former, as surely not all of the T9 could have been so cold.

    ReplyDelete
  169. aacg, if (and I say 'if') they know M is dead then IMO it would be unforgiveable and positively INHUMAN for them then to release to the public computer generated images of what she might look like today. I'd call that sick in the head.

    ReplyDelete
  170. aacg

    How you go on about Kate's 'beauty'. Sounds like she has dazzled you.

    Now you have her being 'extremely' beautiful, not just beautiful like before.

    Have you fallen for her or something?

    This is crazy. Is there a sick bag around?

    ReplyDelete
  171. I don't believe that Gerry saw Madeleine at 9.05pm.

    I think he came up with that story about looking down on her in the bedroom so it would tie in with Bundleman sighting supposedly a few minutes later.

    With hindsight, it was a stupid thing to say because there would not have been time for the cadaver scent to build up if he really had seen Madeleine in bed, and then Bundleman had taken her a few minutes later.

    It actually discredits the Bundleman sighting at that time.

    But then, he was not to know then that the UK dogs would be brought in.

    ReplyDelete
  172. @ Anonymous 170 = Anonymous 166 = ??????????

    I'm not Anonymous, by the way, please don't turn communication more complex than it is, although numbering turned things easier.
    I only mentioned a detail in your point ! Without the media the case would have been somehow resolved imo.
    I think they knew Madeleine had no need anymore and that the only reasonable thing was to protect theirs families. This is what you call a pragmatic attitude. Adopting that above law position reveals imo an old Britanny rules the world complex.

    ReplyDelete
  173. I'd like to correct something someone said here earlier, I have it on the best authority that Mark Williams Thomas has never been paid a penny by the McCann's, or anyone connected to the McCann's , ie the fund or backers.

    That kind of false information doesnt help anyone - the truth is the truth and it should not be warped in support of or when criticising the McCanns or anybody associated with the case.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Like others here I have been following this sad case from the very beginning. Several aspects have bothered me because of a situation that I had knowledge of, many,many years ago, a child that was in my child's daycare had MAJOR behavioral problems, totally out of control, she would cry for her 'Daddy' for hours at a time. Fast forward many years later, it was found that her parents were into "swinging" AND the 'P' word. Because her parents were socially well off, nothing was ever done about this. Society turns a blind eye to this taboo subject, and is in denial of anything that even comes close to it, however it does happen, and in all social circles. I am not implying that this is the case with the McC's but it is out there, and we, as parents should be aware of this.

    ReplyDelete
  175. A bit off topic but I've just come across an article on Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns written by John Mair who produced ‘Missing Madeleine McCann: The perfect PR’ in Coventry University on 18 October 2007 and ‘The media and the McCanns’ at the LSE on
    30 January 2008.

    http://www.communicationethics.net/journal/v5n1-2/v5n1-2_feat1.pdf

    This bit is news to me but I believe it has come directly from Clarence Mitchell himself:

    ...............................
    "Back in May 2007, he saw from London that they were being overwhelmed and pleaded with his Central Office of Information bosses to be allowed to go to the Algarve to offer his services. He was."
    ...............................

    Now this is interesting because I've been under the impression that it was the Foreign Office who instigated Clarence Mitchell's move to support the McCanns in Portugal. What Mair is saying is that it was Clarence Mitchell himself who made the suggestion and put himself forward for the job!

    Curiouser and curiouser!

    ReplyDelete
  176. ShuBob

    Just because Clarence said that doesn't mean it's true.

    Don't forget the PJ said 'he lies with every tooth in his head'.

    ReplyDelete
  177. @ Anonymous 172
    KMC is extremely beautiful, though she has no glamour. I passed her without recognizing her but thinking "a beauty", then something made me turn my head and my eyes met and recognize immediately GMC. I deduced.
    I mentioned her beauty because you don't see that on pictures, she's not photogenical ! I think it helps understand why the media adore this couple. Imagine Gerry and Fiona as parents : nobody would be interested.

    ReplyDelete
  178. @ Anonymous 171
    No, I think it's understandable. This doesn't mean I approve ! I don't of course.
    I think they had the infantile reaction of "people without stories". It happens, we all know that. Especially when people are far from home. Thinking that through lots of artefacts you can transform a little part of Portugal into a British resort is ridiculous. The illusion remains as far as nothing unexpected happens. But something as bad as unexpected happened and they realized they weren't home and, like little children, they got scared.

    ReplyDelete
  179. By the way I got a reply from Eilis O'Hanlon. Very nice. She says that no, she

    ReplyDelete
  180. Sorry, Joana, manipulation error !
    I received a reply from Eilis O'Hanlon. She says that she "can't recall any member of the gardai being attacked in the British press".
    I'll try to determine what makes her judge so badly GA.

    ReplyDelete
  181. @ post #178, of course you're right about Clarence Mitchell but I think his lies need to be documented and challenged when the opportunity arises. If he's telling the truth on this occasion, then that adds an oddity to an already odd situation. Clarence has said on many occasions that he was sent out by the FO to help the McCanns. At no point did he say it was his idea to go out there to assist them. This may help explain why he eventually left the government.

    ReplyDelete
  182. aacg

    May I suggest you may need specs, or even new specs.

    Either that, or you are easily pleased.

    Not convinced.

    ReplyDelete
  183. @ Anonymous 184
    My specs (lenses) are brand new ! Everything's in the brain anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  184. aacg

    Quite!


    At least you are giving me a good laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  185. @ Anonymous 186

    I'm glad : there's nothing like laughing !

    ReplyDelete
  186. aacg i was anon 82 who mentioned Kate's mole.
    Yes Kate McCann is very beautiful...I haven't seen her in real life. Her beauty and that of Madeleine has been central to why this case has become so famous.
    I understand that people don't like her and find it difficult to see her physical beauty here but as a photographer, it's undeniable.
    Her beauty may also be one of the causes of the difficulties she had in bringing up so many young children...she's used to being the centre of attention....? She is certainly vain.

    ReplyDelete
  187. aacg, going by what you say about Kate's looks, do you think they cottoned on pretty fast that this was something that would gain them favourable media coverage and that's why Kate took such care with her hair, make-up, clothes and jewellery almost from day one? It was said she had her hair highlighted only 3 days or so after Madeleine disappeared; I don't know how people know this but suppose they're going by photos of her where newly highlighted hair would be noticeable.

    I'm not interested in her pristine appearance per se, but only in whether they were quick to realise the advantages to be had in a good-looking woman centre-stage in the abduction tale. (I'm taking your word for it that Kate is beautiful in real life, as it really doesn't come through in photos, but then it's said a good-looking person always takes a bad photo. Too true - I don't look good at all in photos ... :)

    ReplyDelete
  188. Dimsie,
    Neither do I...
    Yes I do believe Kate is conscious of her beauty and took advantage of it in building the victim project. I read somewhere she told her mum that the media were tough with her because she had good looks.
    Some Anonymous ones suggested that she kept frail on purpose !
    This proves the physical aspect is really important.

    ReplyDelete
  189. Out of serendipity I found this
    "He bent down to put something in his rucksack and SOME DIRTY ANIMAL had the wallet out of his back pocket. WE don't care about the money, but WE do care about getting the pictures of Madeleine back."
    Who's speaking ?

    ReplyDelete
  190. Both the Mccanns at the beginning were a good looking couple..Who can forget Kates haunting face as she said 'Please do not hurt her, please do not harm her'..her features were soft and gentle..

    The bone structure yes is good...but the stress now shows...With Gerry his mouth has become small and twisted the nose to mouth lines more etched..Kate has aged more in two years than I have seen a woman age in ten...Now ,we could all say that anyone who has lost a child would age and show signs of ravage...But this is not what I see on the faces of the Mccanns...I see lines of hatred that they are not believed and of course stress that one day there may be also proof of what really happened to Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  191. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1577580/Divers-search-lake-for-Madeleine-McCann.html

    What is the reason and who is paying for the involvement of Marcos Aragao...What role does he have in all of this...the Mccanns did not threaten to sue someone who suggested such a terrible thing had happened to their daughter...In fact all Mitchell seemed interested in was that the arguida status be lifted.

    ReplyDelete
  192. aacg #191, I think it was again the "once upon a time" very vocal Philomena McCann, very silent and very absent lately...

    ReplyDelete
  193. I too found it weird that the mother of a supposedly very much loved child who had just vanished, probably in the hands of paedos, could manage to look so composed, reasonably well dressed, stylled and made-up,put on jewelry, etc. Only someone very much focused on self-appearance would be able to do it, IMO, of course.
    I believe that the change in hairstyle(highlights) was made immediately after their escape to England, during her stay in Portugal, the hair grew a bit long, I bet she was desperate to go to the salon, but did not dare to do it in Portugal, far too evident and bound to be criticized.
    Even recently, her mother told the media that she almost never left the house, EXCEPT for going to the hairdressers! NOT even to take the twins to school, but for the haidressers...

    ReplyDelete
  194. I read the transcript first and only last night was I finally able to listen to Sandra Felgueira's report. I must say that listening to her has much more impact and is much more gratifying. You can se that Moita Flores' testimony must have gotten to her. I have to say: Very good.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  195. aacg at 191

    Philomena perhaps?

    It sounds to me like something she would say.

    ReplyDelete
  196. To anon 195:

    Kate McCann did go to the hairdresser in PDL to get her highlights done not too long after Maddie disappeared. People were talking about it here in the Algarve and found it to be very strange behaviour.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  197. Thanks Caroline, I had not heard of that before.
    I bet there is a lot more information on other weird behavior from the McCanns that was noticed by the locals. Unfortunately, people have stayed silent (except from some ex-Ocean Club workers who, anonimously, have disclosed some details of the lavish seafood and wine meals they ordered for them and their visitors, courtesy of the resort's management and their relatives coming to support them with swimming suites in their luggage), too afraid of being entangled with this business, all the harassment and possible legal threaths.

    ReplyDelete
  198. Well you'd age alot in a situation like that whether your child had died by accident or been abducted. Either way it's not a happy situation is it?
    They must feel terrible. Even if they are guilty they must feel terrible. There is no worse pain than losing a child.
    With the information out about David Payne I feel this will end very badly...there cannot be a good outcome. People die, commit suicide under this kind of pressure.

    ReplyDelete