18 January 2010

“Trial has already caused more damage than the book”




by Carlos Rodrigues Lima

“Three days of court hearings have been enough to cause more damage to the McCann couple’s cause all over the world, than my book during the 14 months that it was in the shops.” This is how Gonçalo Amaral – a former Polícia Judiciária inspector – answers Kate McCann’s latest statements about the development of the trial about the injunction that the couple placed against the book “The Truth of the Lie”.

In the latest update on the “findmadeleine.com” website, Kate McCann considered that “Mr Amaral's book and DVD contains some information from the PJ files but there is a lot in the files which is not in Mr Amaral's book. Hence it is highly selective and therefore biased. Mr Amaral's book contains his opinions rather than fact.” Nonetheless, for the former PJ inspector, who led the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance, in May 2008 [sic], “a book about a criminal process, just like a police report, a dispatch from the Public Ministry or a sentence from a judge, is always a selective exercise, a summary of the process, without being biased because of that”.

Adding: “I wasn’t biased, and the witnesses from the Polícia Judiciária that testified in court weren’t biased.”

In one of the most recent sessions of the trial that opposes Gonçalo Amaral to the McCann couple, members of the PJ that were connected to the investigation, and prosecutor Magalhães e Menezes, from the judicial circle of Portimão, admitted to the possibility that the child is dead – which is to say, stances that meet the thesis that Gonçalo Amaral defended in the book “The Truth of the Lie”, whose sales have been suspended by an order from Lisbon’s Civil Court.

One of the investigation’s most striking episodes were the two English dogs that detected the cadaver and blood odour. “We realise that the behaviour of the dogs was the turning point in the investigation for the PJ”, says Kate McCann, refusing, however, the notion that the diligence may be used as evidence: “To suggestor [sic] use the dogs´ reactions as evidence is simply wrong and abusive”, one can read on the website.

Gonçalo Amaral replies: “Other indications that are part of the process and of my book were excluded from Kate’s analysis. She has the right to evaluate the window’s indications and the dogs’ work in her own way. But the PJ also has the right to evaluate them, and to evaluate them within the set of produced evidence.”

Concerning the present ongoing lawsuit, the former inspector synthesises it in the following way: “Columnist Manuel António Pina wrote that the McCanns’ arguments could be used to burn the entire press on a daily basis. In a democracy, arguments are not burned, they are opposed.”


source: Diário de Notícias, 18.01.2010


84 comments:

  1. Now kate mccann has convinced me, she is stupid. Far away from beeing inteligent.
    A source cloce to the family (like mafia?) keeps repeating how inteligent she is, just more lies. Nothing more, nothing less.

    w_nicht

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kate and Gerry,

    We cannot thank you enough, for helping us to get the truth out into the public domain, something that we have all been trying hard to do for two and a half years.

    ReplyDelete
  3. “Three days of court hearings have been enough to cause more damage to the McCann couple’s cause all over the world"

    Don't you just love this man!He is calm, collected and honest.
    A breath of fresh air.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2010/01/web-cop-to-patrol-internet-for-antipolice-comments.html

    Web Cop to control the internet....Interesting that this is from the Midlands.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.innocent.org.uk/misc/wmidlands.html


    Corruption in the Midlands police force.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Morning

    I listened yesterday to BBC News re the tragic situation in Haiti. They said they will try and get a link, though communication is difficult, with British Fire Service Crews who are there assisting.

    Earlier in the week, a chap from the Fire Service UK was on BBC Radio speaking in respect of the crews who were flying out there in fact he had said that the flight was leaving as he was speaking. He explained how fire officers are trained for such situations, and that some of the guy going out there had assisted in similar situations in the past.

    He went on to speak about the Search and Rescue dogs which they would be taking with them as these animals were invaluable in such circumstances.
    Dogs are trained to find many things, be it drugs, blood, cadaver, or in this instance the search and rescue dogs

    No matter what anyone's opinion in the Madeleine case re the dog’s accuracy, we cannot dismiss or discredit the value of these highly trained animals in any of the above situations. If they were of no value, none of our emergency services or rescue services would train and use them. They are used around the world.

    The issue of the dogs is clearly a thorn in the flesh to the McCann's, more so to Gerry, who reacts like an angry ‘mutt’ whenever this subject is raised. Last week his response to reporters was a prime example. In a previous interview situation, he replied to another reporter, in response to a question re the dogs, by making the rude and ridiculous remark - 'Ask the dogs!'
    Kate's blog was a further reminder, (referring readers to read up on the the Haute de La Garenne case in Jersey) of just how 'problematic' the dogs are to them.

    She tells us that in the past that dogs have been problematic and unreliable. She also tells us that their findings are considered by the police to be 'intelligence' not evidence.

    She further tells us that it is WRONG AND ABUSIVE to suggest using the dogs 'reactions/ alerts' as evidence.

    Have they been used as 'evidence' or is it the case that they have been used as 'intelligence' only?

    The latter I think!
    Kate McCann has acknowledged the "intelligence" these dogs are able to provide.

    By acknowledging the fact that the dogs alerted/reacted at apt 5a and other locations Kate has to accept that in the case of her missing daughter, the dogs therefore ‘found intelligence!

    On one hand she acknowledges their ‘alerts,’ but on the other dismisses the “intelligence” of the dogs by stating that they are unreliable and problematic.

    She may consider that ‘EVIDENCE’ is lacking, but the “INTELLIGENCE” is not!

    To mislead anyone into thinking that the 'intelligence' in this case, is unreliable/problematic, would simply be WRONG AND ABUSIVE.
    The dogs reacted/alerted, this is acknowledged. This is considered by police to be ‘intelligence’ as Kate to helpfully pointed, out to us, therefore cannot be dismissed!
    It follows then that these dogs were not barking up the wrong tree!

    Another thing for sure, they have rattled Gerry McCann they have got him barking and snapping at the heels of any reporter who mentions the 'D' word!

    The speed of which Kate's (?) blog appeared in an attempt to dismiss the INTELLIGENCE and detract Gerry’s little 'dog drama' in Lisbon is quite telling!

    I don't think he is an animal lover!

    I do think one day the dogs will bite back!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  7. In my opinion the McCanns are unique as far as parents with missing children are concerned. Instead of being grateful for any help in looking for their child, after they left her and her siblings alone, (so are without doubt completely to blame for her disappearance, even though they blame some phantom abductor),have chosen to concentrate on the one man, the main detective who was on the case from the very beginning, and vent their bile and guilty consciences on him. Did they really want a detective on the case who would only believe their version of events, or did they want someone who would look at all the evidence and work with that, as any detective worth his salt would do. I think their reaction to Goncalo's findings is simply to try and assuage their own guilt. When are the media going to wake up to the fact that they are going for the jugular and are doing it not only for money, but also to make themselves feel less guilty for allowing Madeleine to disappear in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, of course the trial has caused more damage to the McCanns than the book, but then they don't seem to worry about that as long as they can get on the media stage (any publicity is good publicity as far as they are concerned) and rake in as much blood money as they can. Whose blood it is they don't seem too bothered! This time it's Goncalo, but when they've finished with him, who will be the next fall guy?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Google "Goncalo Amaral" and the first entry on page 1 is the book, in English, pdf format ready to download chapter by chapter.
    Yes. They really are very, very stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  10. # 2 I second that. Thank you, Kate & Gerry for showing the world how stupid you are. One thing is for sure: you have many questioning the intellect of doctors now.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Now we know why Gerry did not let Kate go alone to an interview. When she is alone she ruin their arguments with her posts. SHE HAD A VERY BLASED POST, talking only about what is convenient. The problem, is by not deliberately mention the rest, she said everything.
    Anyone noticed what Kate said about the stars dinner? " IF OUR SITUATION REMAIN UNCHANGED..." What that means? She expect charges and being "arguida" again? or she expects Maddie soon at home?

    ReplyDelete
  12. The trouble with liars is that they can never stick to their story... when confronted with contrary evidence, they have to backtrack...

    see Gerald's latest blog to see the amount of backtracking starting with pretending that his wife wrote it...

    McCann's you are now so near to losing everything through your own greed, selfishness & stupidity

    ReplyDelete
  13. No.6 A Miller, I agree. Service dogs are dedicated and wish for nothing more than to do that for which they are trained.

    Most people who have dogs can understand their desire to be of assistance and their incredible intelligence. Dogs like Eddie and Keela have their inbred abilities to scent and find used to help mankind. Dogs live in the moment, have no ulterior motive and if treated with kindness would do anything for their humans.

    Their sense of smell and hearing is far more sensitive than ours, there are stories of dogs alerting their owners to disease before any noticeable symptoms. In the evenings my dogs know when there is a hedgehog in the garden even though the television may be on and other noises, when they go out they immediately put their noses to the ground and track it, of course if they find anything it is only ever a ball of spikes!

    The video of those two dogs is deeply disturbing from the perspective of what happened to Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  14. One blogger (I cannot remember which blog it was) nominated the McCann couple for the "Nobel Prize of Stupidity". How true!

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  15. My Amaral has been clever in that his publishers say they contacted the police about the unofficial translations of the book on the internet, but nothing else has been done to stop them. They could have sent solicitors letters to the websites asking for their removal. As far as we know this has not been done, so now that hearing has provided the publicity about the book, the English translations are there for anyone who cares to read them. If anyone official asks , the publishers made a complaint to the police, they are investigiating. Not their fault!!! Mr Amaral is getting his message through loud & clear!!!

    ReplyDelete
  16. The process that McCanns are running now, is a BOMB. What kind of bomb? The exploding kind!

    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  17. If my child had vanished on holiday, Goncalo Amaral strikes me as the sort of policeman that I would be glad to have in charge - calm, logical, experienced. Why would you work against him, making him your enemy? Unless he was beginning to uncover things you didn't want uncovered. If they can acknowledge that the dogs work can be indicative, logic says they would also consider that, if Maddie had really been abducted, the dogs could be signalling that the abductor killed their little girl before removing her from the apartment - but they can't even remotely acknowledge that possibility, because it would lead to too many uncomfortable questions about the dogs also signalling their hire car, not to mention bringing the fund to a close. I think they have manoeuvered themselves into a very tight corner and are not winning supporters any more, rather increasing the numbers of those who doubt their story.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hello @ 11

    In the past the McCann's have been blasted for organising events, Fund Raisers/Awareness Campaigns whatever, many months in advance. One such time I believe Gerry said referring to one such event, that it would not be for the 1st Anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance but it was to be held close to.

    The public blasted him for this, as how could he know that his daughter would still be missing many months ahead.

    As we all know the McCann's do have monitors reading the blogs and many of the comments they make are in response to what bloggers have said.

    I would imagine Kate's remark -'if our situation remains unchanged' was in response to the angry reaction of the public re their organised events, to 'cover her backside' so that this upcoming event did not create the same backlash.

    I do not think that most of what they say or do comes from the heart. Initially they make some cold and unfeeling remark, when attention is brought to it, you can be sure that they will respond to it in their own unique way in a later blog, interview or whatever.

    It is a bit like the move - half the money raised this time around will be given to two charities both re missing persons.

    I have spoken of this many times on the blog as to why they never help others when they have so much.

    What would have been rather nice, is, if ALL proceeds from this event was given to missing persons charities for them to distribute and use in the best possible way to help as many families as possible. If they raise £100,000 as they expect to, that means still that one child Madeleine has £50,000 added to the pot which currently stands at £400,000.00. The other two charities receiving £25,000.00, not to be sniffed at, but when you consider how far the charities will have to spread this for all that has to be done within the scope of their organisation, it is a drop in the ocean. Also the Fund for Madeleine I believe does not have charity status.

    It would be beneficial to more people if all monies raised in any of these ventures were given to the missing persons charities. Madeleiene would still benefit in the same way as all other missing persons would.

    Bear in mind also, the McCann's have already stated that the £500,000.00 which they had left in the pot before Christmas 2009 (now £400,000.00) would be gone by springtime. If they know this, then this sum of money has been accounted for, 'spent' in other words.

    £500,000.00 in a matter of months is a vast sum of money. Their rate of expenditure then would appear to be in the region of £1/2m
    quarterly. Whoa!

    If they are going to ONLY receive £50,000.00 being their half share of this upcoming Charity event, that rather leaves them in a pickle,

    £50,000 (the half share) will hardly meet the costs of the PI's salary, not to mention

    Duarte's fees
    Carter Ruck
    Accountancy Fees
    Salaries for John McCann and whomever else is in paid employment.
    Stock for the tacky online shop.
    Clarence's fees (though he is part time at the moment)
    Administrative fees.

    Heating/Lighting expenses.

    Is rental of a premise involved? Where does the administrators of the Fund work from?

    Blog monitoring fees.

    Travel expenses and all else under this umbrella.

    The shop if it has unsold stock, will be running at a loss.

    Their accounts I believe do not have to be completely transparent, that is they are able to make available for the public to view part of, but not all.

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  19. The article yesterday stated that there will be wealthy persons at this charity event, who are willing to back them.

    Now whether that means 'back' this event, or back them by making huge donations to their Fund.

    Either way, they will never be short of a penny or a pound.

    To plead poverty in the press when there is £400,000.00 in the pot is rather crass by anyone's standards.

    For the parents of all other missing children they must look on and ask, why it is so that one set of parents receive so much publicity and attention from these wealthy celebrities when their child doesn't.

    Of course it is up to the individual how they spend their cash, but it won't stop parents desperate to find their child, left wondering why.

    To some it may seem a "nice" gesture that some of the monies raised will go to two charities, for others it will seem like they are being thrown a crumb from the McCann table albeit an expensive crumb at £150.00 for the meal ticket.

    Sadly, money seems to be at the route of this entire case, not Madeleine. But then they do say it is the route of all evil!

    As the writer the Independent article stated, if these libel cases continue distracting from the issue of a missing child - we will soon be saying- Madeleine who?

    It would appear it has already started.

    It quite saddened me to read that the McCann's need this evening to relieve the stress of the Court case last week.

    Madeleine needed them to do a reconstruction, answer and co-operate with the police authority investigating her disappearance. She needed them to do this in the hope that it may find her, and release her from her suffering and pain at the hands of the paedophiles who her parents think she is with.

    They do say a heinous crime has been committed. That a terible person has their child. They therefore cannot deny that their child has been harmed. Yet they constantly tell us. They have no proof that she has been.

    Why then tell us that a heinous crime has been committed at the hands of an evil abductor

    They cannot have it both ways. But as we know, that is exactly what they want.

    They want the public to search, to give money, but be quiet, shut up, ask no questions, accept what they tell you.

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  20. the mccanns are boxing out of their weight. Amaral is a clever dude, he will have planned well ahead..someone mentioned some brown envelopes...hehe we shall see

    Thanks Joana as always

    ReplyDelete
  21. this has been like watching an episode of Peter Falk's Columbo...

    the guilty always give themselves away in the end - no matter how smart they think they've been

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kate’s Blog - Reconstruction:

    She acknowledges that in Portugal it is NOT unusual for there being no reconstruction arranged in early stages.
    So no problem there then! What happened (or didn’t) was usual practice. Business as usual.

    She states:

    ‘Some key witnesses (including some of our friends) declined to attend the planned reconstruction as they were not convinced of the aims and usefulness of it. In particular, as the reconstruction was not to be shown to the media (and hence the general public), they did not feel it would help to find Madeleine. Had the intention been to show it to the general public, it may have 'jogged' memories and encouraged people to come forward with information. It should be added that other key witnesses were not invited to attend.’

    ---
    A few things here:

    Firstly keep in mind that Kate has stated that she and Gerry would have attended the reconstruction. As arguido she said they would. Gerry too on the steps of the Lisbon Court stated that he and Kate would have attended a reconstruction. He was, by stating this refuting any suggestion that they were not willing to attend. He clearly was very keen to let the public know that they were willing to do so.

    Their friends however we are told, were NOT convinced of the aims and usefulness of a reconstruction.

    For key witnesses, friends of the child’s mummy and daddy to not be ‘convinced’ of the AIM of a reconstruction or the USEFULNESS rather beggars belief.

    The rest of the world could see and understand both the aim and the usefulness but the friends of the parents could not, and the parents accepted this?
    Can you really imagine your friends refusing to assist in the reconstruction of events pertaining to your missing child and you just accept it? Hell no! They would no longer be your friends. You would do all within the law that was at your disposal to make sure they got their butts to where they should be!

    Which takes me back to my first point – If Kate and Gerry were willing to attend and SAW the usefulness aim of this reconstruction, it would seem to me that they would have CONVINCED their friends of this.

    Or, is it the case that they were prepared to go back simply because as arguido they were legally required to.
    It was very convenient that their friends refused allowing for them then to slip through the net.

    The McCann’s must truly believe the public are gullible.
    To make the excuse that a reconstruction would not have been shown to the public is frankly a pathetic and poor excuse.

    The McCann’s had a Fund £m’s at their disposal they could have publicised Madeleine disappearance as (we know they did with press campaigns, holding press conferences re bundleman etc, they did Panorama etc) much as they wished. Jogged memories in this way!

    So that is, in my opinion a feeble excuse for not doing all in their power to help their child

    Now Kate McCann speaks of ‘KEY’ witnesses declining to attend. Their friends were included in this group.

    So who were the other ‘KEY’ witnesses who declined?

    Funnily enough no mention of whom, they are! Jez Wilkins perhaps, or does he, come under the umbrella of “friends?”

    Who else would be considered a key witness? And what reason would these other key witnesses have stated for declining? Surely not the same reason as the tapas group – that they wanted, the proceedings televised, broadcast to the world, couldn’t see the aim or the usefulness?

    So many people,. 'key' witnesses all unwilling to help little Madeleine?

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  23. From the post that Ironside recommended...
    Assistant Chief Constable Gordon Scobbie told Police Review yesterday: “There will be someone on the web chatting about West Midlands Police right now, about whether they have had bad service or if they have heard a rumour about guns and gangs.”

    He added: “A lot of chatter is ill-informed. We need to be much smarter about identifying these conversations so we can join in and influence what people think.”

    It's the last line that bothers me. People who want to influence what people think are always trying to get attention diverted from bad things they need to hide.

    If I was very gullible, I'd be happy because they would start by influencing the British media against unfounded racist attacks on Amaral.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Kate further tells us that other KEY witnesses were not invited! I think we all know her implication here! (a dig at the Portugues police.)

    Now why would this bother her exactly, when none of her friends were going to attend anyway? And the fact that they did not, doesn't appear to have bothered her and Gerry in anyway as these people (the Paynes) are still their best buddies despite them refusing to help their daughter!

    And when did it become within the McCann’s power, to decide which witnesses were ‘key’ and which were not?

    Funnily enough I imagined that was for the investigating police authority to decide!

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  25. Funnier still, Fiona Payne in her interview with Leicester police stated that they weren’t keen to go back for the following reasons:

    1485 “How do you feel about attending that re-enactment?”

    Reply( “Well I’ve made my feelings clear in a letter, erm, already. Erm, my feelings are, I would do ABSOLUTELY anything if I felt it was going to help bring, find Madeleine or find who took her.

    Erm, my reservations are, at this point, how doing the re-enactment is going to achieve that or advance the search in any way.

    ----

    Her reservation is she is not sure how the re-enactment will achieve finding Madeleine bringing her back?

    One thing for sure, by NOT doing it, Fiona was never going to find out was she?

    she continues:
    ‘And, obviously, there is a lot of apprehensions about doing it, just in terms of the media and they way we’ve been treated, the way the media would react to us doing the re-enactment, how they’d sort of physically actually manage to do a re-enactment without massive media intrusion, ‘’

    -----

    Now maybe I'm confused here. She is worried about massive media intrusion during a re-enactment?

    But they said they were happy to do one if it was to be televised broadcast to the world in the hope of jogging memories!

    Would the massive media intrusion not happen if the re-enactment was done for the purpose of being broadcast?

    Doesn't make sense!

    Fiona continues:

    I mean, we all know that we’re telling the truth of our actions on the night and if doing a re-enactment were going to be for the purpose of trying to find holes or, you know, in our movements and statements and try and rubbish our statements, then we know that’s not going to help find Madeleine, because we know, we were there, and we know we’re telling the truth, so I wouldn’t be happy to do it if that was the reason for doing it. I’d just like to be convinced how it’s going to move the investigation on really, erm, to find Madeleine”.

    ----

    Ah, now we are getting to the REAL reason.

    She's happy for Madeleine to languish in a lair being brutalised by her captors (?) until SHE Fiona is convinced her statement will not be 'rubbished' or a she gets some sort of guarantee it will further help find Madeleine.
    Doh! How many times Fiona? Unless you do it, you will NEVER know if it brings Madeleine back, that aside, it would certainly go some way to understanding EXACTLY what happened the sequence of events and timings. ALL HELPFUL TO THE PROCESS


    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  26. Fiona's statement becomes more intriguing and revealing:

    1485 “Yeah”.

    Reply (Fiona)
    “And, at the moment really, we’ve got NO reason to TRUST the motives of doing a re-enactment when Kate and Gerry are still aguido and, if they’re aguido, I think we’ve ALL got to be IMPLICATED, because I just don’t SEE how Kate and Gerry could have done anything that’s been suggested WITHOUT US ALL BEING IN ON IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST IMPOSSIBLE."

    --

    Whao! And I thought we'd got to the real reason a paragraph or so ago! This statement is mind blowing!

    Why is it so impossible? The alleged abductor managed to get in and out of the apartment, through unlocked doors opening windows drugging children making his escape without Fiona being aware or IMPLICATED!

    Even when Fiona was told J. Tanner of the abductor she stayed schtum, was that in case she may be implicated?

    Are we still to believe that the McCann's were happy to go do an reconstruction? Or that they tried to convince the Payne's it was useful and had an aim?

    Do we believe that work committments prevented the others from attending?

    Or was it ONLY Fiona who felt they would ALL be implicated?
    1485 “Is that it?”

    Reply “So, you know, that’s a big stumbling block really”.

    1485 “So, at this present moment, you are saying you wouldn’t?”

    Reply “No, I mean, we haven’t really had any, been given any information about how it’s going to be used and that’s the information that I think we would all need if we were going to do it and, ‘obviously, there’s no point one of us doing it without everybody doing it. So, I think, you know, as far as I’m concerned, I’d only do it if everybody else was doing it, otherwise it’s pointless.’

    ----
    After all that, she has said about doing anything possible, not doing it in case she was implicated in some way, not trusting the motive behind a reconstruction. She now states:

    "So, I think, you know, as far as I’m concerned, I’d only do it if everybody else was doing it, otherwise it’s pointless."

    --

    Despite or her fears and reservations, she WILL do it if everyone else does.

    She stated this, safe in the knowledge that not a one of them was prepared to stop foot on Portuguese soil at that time.

    She continues:
    ‘And I still don’t see, erm, I think, emotionally, it would be hideous to go back and have to do an re-enactment, I really do, and I don’t see how, erm, emotions couldn’t affect the way it was done, because it would just be horrific, I mean, imagine, you know, Jane having to relive that, Kate having relive that, any of us having to relive that, you, you couldn’t do it without it being an emotional thing.’

    ----

    ~Well yes it would be an emotional 'thing' a wee girl is with nasty men doing nasty things to her. So for a bunch of grown-ups to put their emotions and perceived suffering before that of the child is beyond belief!

    You could not make this up if you tried.

    1485 “Yeah”.


    Reply

    “Erm, so I just, I just don’t see, I mean, in my eyes, doing it, it would be beneficial if actors and actresses did it because they don’t have that emotion and you can still direct them to exactly what you were doing and where you went and your movements. So, so I still don’t, we still haven’t had an answer to that really, that side of it”.

    ---

    And actors and actresses wouldn't be implicated in any way, would have no fear setting foot in Portugal.

    There was only ONE 'side' to it which Fiona appears to have deliberately body swerved, only ONE person who mattered, only ONE right thing to do, and these NINE PERSONS failed to!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  27. On your featured video today Kate said she was non functioning and didn't search.

    But she had the presence of mind to make it a top priority hours after M went missing to stop her shopping delivery being taken from her house in Rothley.

    Loss of her shopping more important than the loss of her child.

    More McCann lies

    ReplyDelete
  28. Celebs can ask Kate the 48 unanswered questions at the bash on the 27th.
    All the stuff beinf thrown at Mr Amaral makes me more certain they are hiding a lot, otherwise they would tell us thier version of the GASPAR STATEMENTS.

    ReplyDelete
  29. THE PARTY?
    HELD IN THE MIDST OF HAITI
    AND ON
    HOLOCAUSE MEMORIAL DAY
    EXCELLENT TASTE GUYS

    ReplyDelete
  30. spot on Mr Amaral.made me think of this about the mccanns, the first 2 lines of frank sinatra's song came to mind.


    And now, the end is near,
    And so I face the final curtain.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "Money will be raised through ticket sales and a charity auction. Half the profits, expected to exceed £100,000, will go to Madeleine’s Fund, which currently stands at about £400,000, with the other half split between two other charities."

    OTHER charities?

    ReplyDelete
  32. A. Miller

    You are warned, you must be already in Gerry's hate list! You are too clever and making a lot of damaging waves! As the possessors of the only truth, they don't like to be contradicted and discredited.
    I'm just happy that they are becoming more ridiculous by the day, and their despair only generates more an more silly actions and explanations. As the things are at the moment, they only manage to have the support of a few lunatics and of a couple of journalists of dubious intelligence. They have no escape.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Seriously. anyone in their right mind would not give to the fund when they have almost depleted what they already had. Does anyone really believe that the 'celebrity event' will bring in more money to their coffers, when Haiti is crying out for help? I know where my donation is destined for.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Is It true anyone Robert Murrat is going to sue Tanner, Its long overdue he should have done it long ago. When is Mr Amaral coming to the UK would love to see the great man himself.

    ReplyDelete
  35. @34,cant see that happening,imo mr murat knows a lot more than is know

    ReplyDelete
  36. Watching the McCanns is like watching a tiger caught in a net...the more it thrashes around trying to escape, the more tangled up and trapped it becomes.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Living in France we are free to watch whatever TV or read newspapers without censorship unlike the UK.

    So I watch G McCann clearly state on TV "there is no evidence to implicate us in her death".

    The McCanns therefore know M is dead. Then last week I see the McCanns sueing Mr Amaral for stating M is dead and asking for money to look for a live Madeleine.

    Even in France we know about the ineptitude of your Leicestershire Police and while you do not wish to have a paedophile squad, surely you have a fraud squad?.

    How are the McCanns allowed to rob British pensioners and school children for donations when they clearly state they had no part in her death. Has this statement been given to the PJ?.

    If they did this in France our Gendarmes would have charged them months ago; fraud; deception; child neglect at least.

    The fraud is by a British based company not a charity by the way, with British Directors - the MCanns and their cronies - on British people, so why are the British Police not investigating this in the UK.

    TRULY PUZZLED!!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thank you A. Miller, as always a well thought out and logical response.
    The timelines would have caused them major issues and they knew they were never going to do it and were just looking for a credible excuse not to.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Post 6. Well said A Miller. Indeed Kate even admits that the dogs are valuable intelligence. There is no doubt that Emergency Services would never be allowed to make use of these dogs if they were in any way unreliable. The have to be reliable because Rescue teams have to find casualties and indeed cadavers very quickly to save lives and to avoid the disease that corpses bring. Nice try Kate but no banana, sorry!

    ReplyDelete
  40. :| MD's or "minor deities" in common parlance, have a tendency to display what Michel Foucault calls the "clinical gaze". That makes them more unpopular than dentists. So much for the Mc's poker faced genes. As evidence, it means nothing.

    What the Mc's seem unable to grasp, is the fact that for any investigator worth his salt, every suspect IS guilty until proved innocent. It is not like it happens in a court of law where everyone is innocent until proved guilty. No Sir.

    The Mc's may well be innocent, the problem is that they have not been proved so beyond a shadow of a doubt. For a start they refused to cooperate with the investigators. That was not intelligent. It suggested either they were guilty or so full of crap that they would not trust the Portuguese criminal system or perhaps they thought they might be charged for leaving their children alone. That would have been bad for their egos and their reputation. The ideology thought the same and came to their rescue. Watch Clarence's word-stunts.

    Now the Mc's say they are innocent - not because the facts say so but because they say so. The Chief Investigator's on the other hand says they may not be innocent because the data is pointing in other directions. He outlines his theses. His book is a thesis, not a verdict. Dr. Amaral is telling his readers what he thinks very much in the way the Mc's are telling us another ("doctored") version of events.

    If I were in the Mc's position and so full of self-righteousness I would write my own book deconstructing Dr. Amaral thesis but they, being a different species, opted for a different approach, namely to try and reduce the Chief Investigator to the level of a criminal while they would get away with all his assets. ;)) Good thinking, hein?

    The question is: Is the Portuguese justice system as gullible and backward as the Mc's think?

    Whatever the outcome Amaral has already promised to take the issue all the way to the European courts. The Mc's no doubt are thinking the same and are already topping up their coffers with a "star studded" dinner - one reason those sympathetic with Dr. Amaral's plight should be donating at least one buck to his defence fund...

    AC

    ReplyDelete
  41. http://thentherewere4-mccannunravelled.blogspot.com/


    A nice article from TTW4

    ReplyDelete
  42. A Miller

    Thanks for bringing that out.

    The more their statements are analysed the more you see the truth emerging.

    How could anybody who is a true friend have refused to go back and do that reconstruction?

    I find it hard to believe that if the McCanns had really wanted them to go back they would have said no.

    But we mustn't forget that Kate McCann herself refused to answer all those questions, so what do the McCanns expect us to conclude, other than unhelpfulness all round on the part of these people.

    Even Murat and Mr Smith, who were strangers to Madeleine, were willing to go back and do a reconstruction.

    It is disgraceful really when a little girl is missing to refuse to do everything possible to help find her.

    That means doing what the police ask and not thinking you can try to discredit them by ridicule in order to convince people that you can do better.

    So far, the McCanns with all the money they have had, and with all their so called investigators, have still not found Madeleine.

    Yes, well, much could be said about that, but will leave it for now.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Post 25. exactly.
    Fiona continues:

    "...I mean, we all know that we’re telling the truth of our actions on the night and if doing a re-enactment were going to be for the purpose of trying to find holes or, you know, in our movements and statements and try and rubbish our statements, then we know that’s not going to help find Madeleine, because we know, we were there, and we know we’re telling the truth, so I wouldn’t be happy to do it if that was the reason for doing it. I’d just like to be convinced how it’s going to move the investigation on really, erm, to find Madeleine”.

    The point is that if Fiona Payna is honest as she says, then why and how can the reconstruction find anything wrong with the T9 statements? The reconstruction could only prove them innocent of any deception and thus help the investigation to find the child. So why is Fiona Payne et al so concerned, why are they so afraid? Does she believe that there are discrepancies in T9 statements?

    ReplyDelete
  44. The McCanns have chosen to put their hands in a box full of wasps and they are complaining now.

    They could have dismissed Amaral's theories(and facts) as being rubish like Gerry's paternity's doubts were dismissed as rubish and they were rubish.
    We all believe Madaleine was Gerry's daughter.

    And if they complain about Amaral's book, why don't they write one themselves?

    And why did they not talk about attorney Magalhaes e Meneses on their documentary?

    ReplyDelete
  45. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/117670/Madeleine-McCann-Celeb-party-in-cash-bid


    THE STAR...show their dislike for the Mccanns.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Do you think GA is invited at their fund raising venue? =))
    Ah!...before I forgot: NO dogs,NO children allowed
    Dogs might start barking like mad at the mccann woman and children might go in hysterics at the sight of her ever so lovin hubby.....

    I am SICK of them.
    I am SICK to see their indignant murky faces and to hear them spouting lies from their mouths that look like drain pipes
    yuck...yuck...yuck

    ReplyDelete
  47. The McCanns said they were looking for closure...

    I think the end for them maybe in sight =))

    ReplyDelete
  48. :)] Anon 40 this reading might interest you:

    "1. Cadaver dogs are known as valuable forensic tools in crime scene investigations. Scientific research attempting to verify their value is largely lacking, specifically for scents associated with the early postmortem interval. The aim of our investigation was the comparative evaluation of the reliability, accuracy, and specificity of three cadaver dogs belonging to the Hamburg State Police in the detection of scents during the early postmortem interval.

    Carpet squares were used as an odor transporting media after they had been contaminated with the scent of two recently deceased bodies (bodies are all less than 3 hours old). The contamination occurred for 2 min as well as 10 min without any direct contact between the carpet and the corpse. Comparative searches by the dogs were performed over a time period of 65 days (10 min contamination) and 35 days (2 min contamination).

    The results of this study indicate that the well-trained cadaver dog is an outstanding tool for crime scene investigation displaying excellent sensitivity (75-100), specificity (91-100), and having a positive predictive value (90-100), negative predictive value (90-100) as well as accuracy (92-100)." (quote/unquote).

    Reference:
    Cadaver dogs–a study on detection of contaminated carpet squares.
    Oesterhelweg L, Kröber S, Rottmann K, Willhöft J, Braun C, Thies N, Püschel K, Silkenath J, Gehl A.
    Institute of Legal Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg, Germany. See: http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2008/12/cadaver-dogs-how-reliable-are-they-at-detecting-death/


    :-/ The Mc's have argued that as doctors they are often in contact with cadavers and that the dogs might have picked on that. A fair point but it does not explain why the dogs picked it up in specific locations that could have been used to hide a body or clothing pertaining to the body...corner, bottom shelf; behind the sofa, etc. watch the videos...

    Still, it is important to note that just because the Mc's lived in that apartment, the scent had to trace back to Madeleine's but we are already dealing with lower and lower quotients of probability and Dr. Amaral's argument obeys the long time-tested principle of Occam's Razor. The Mc's got away on the Judge's mathematical assumption that the probability of them being innocent was greater than zero. It always is, even in the case of a serial killer, say.

    Absolute certainty is a must in court work. In criminal investigation you deal with high probabilities not infinitesimal ones.

    In summary: The Mc's cannot prove they are innocent beyond the shadow of a doubt (they wish). Amaral cannot prove they are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, but Amaral has the right to express his expert opinion. The Mc's should follow his example and do the same. Express their lay opinion in a book. Why they have not done so and opted to "alleviate" Dr. Amaral of all his assets makes me wonder what sort of persons they really are. Machiavellian, would you say? ;))

    "Waiter! This gin and tonic seems to have been spiked with speed!"

    AC

    ReplyDelete
  49. 44 - yes indeed there are chasms in their story!

    Since when has it been down to those taking part to decide if re-enactments are 'worth it' anyway?

    Quite clearly they wanted to take part in a teelvised whitewash - like the half hearted effort in the 'documentary' - which clearly was intended only to place images in the minds of those more naive members of the public.

    Im not sure what these criminals are actually responsible for apart from the fraud and creating a fantasy for self defence against neglect - I hope nothing worse - but innocent victims they are not.

    ReplyDelete
  50. ask justin timberlake(he-he):what goes around..goes around...goes around....


    Claudia from Germany

    ReplyDelete
  51. #45 - remember they were planning a film adn who would play them in it!
    Saw this and wondered why they were bothering with the 1000 nights party when JKR could just put her hand in her pocket-
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243937/J-K-Rowling-stumps-2-5million-magical-party-venue.html

    ReplyDelete
  52. Quite right Sr Amaral, they have done more damage to themselves than any book or documentary ever could. What shocks me the most is just how thick they are, calamity Ks blog is just the usual backfilling, someone mentions reconstruction so they then make a comment etc etc. As for the dogs, they are unbelievable, she's like the kid with chocolate all over her face saying 'I didnt eat the chocolate', and really not a good move to point towards the dogs and Jersey, let me see Katie, what do Jersey and Maddie have in common, oh yes i remember now, paedophilia, what a thick bitch. Thank God neither of them are my doctors.

    ReplyDelete
  53. This man brings tears to my eyes. My huge respect for Gonçalo Amaral increases with every word he utters.

    He saw Team McCann's tactics and dirty tricks coming, way before they tried them out (via Lift Consulting and I. Duarte). He rose above their vicious onslaught and forged on, with truth on his side. Always one step ahead of them, no matter how hard they tried to trip him up from behind.

    Gonçalo Amaral - such a clever, intelligent, intuitive man!

    To all those in the PJ, not least of all Alipio Ribeiro, who gave this man of integrity no support - it's your loss! Remember the old saying "You don't know what you've got 'til it's gone."? I hope you're already finding out what you've lost and you're thoroughly ashamed of yourselves!

    I believe Gonçalo Amaral will make a brilliant, ethical lawyer.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I googled Goncalo Amaral and found the French translation of Goncalo's book. What an amazing read it is. I have only read three chapters so far but will be reading a couple of chapters a day, as time allows. It should be read by all those media idiots who try to paint Goncalo as some sardine munching idiot. His reporting could show all of them a thing or two.

    One of the paragraphs struck me as very odd, and one I hadn't heard about before.

    It is the revelation that the police asked the McCanns to accompany them to see a CCTV camera's picture showing a little girl on the motorway between Lagos and the Spanish border. Kate appeared annoyed at having to go with them . The PJ's were naturally astonished at her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back!

    Now isn't that revealing. Any other mother wouldn't have been able to see the picture of the little girl quick enough, but not this ice queen!

    ReplyDelete
  55. I would love to be able to believe that Madeleine might be alive, and had really been taken by somebody instead of having died.

    Not that her life would have been much worth living if that had happened.

    But after going over and over how that could have happened, I still cannot get over the evidence of the dogs in both the apartment and the hire car of the McCanns.

    Nowhere else and to nobody else do they indicate.

    If the dogs were wrong, it would really be a first.

    They have never been wrong, and they have no axe to grind with the McCanns.

    The McCanns are flogging a dead horse trying to make people believe only that Madeleine was abducted, because most people know the dogs are wonderful, clever dogs.

    Why the UK police are not defending their work is the big mystery.

    The McCanns are trying to discredit their invaluable work.

    This should be addressed publicly by the police to stop them spreading lies about these marvellous, hardworking, dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I was under the impression that it was the Portuguese AG who intervened to have the case shelved after somebody from UK had a word in the ear with him.

    Not that there was not enough evidence to proceed.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I think and hope the Mc`s have opened more peoples eyes to what REALLY happened in PDL,I hope this means the end is on its way

    ReplyDelete
  58. http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message968159/pg1

    an American site where they seem a little bewildered about whole thing - Spanish police anyone?!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Jo 47, I know how you feel! I cringe when I see their hideous smirking faces...I wish they'd just shut up and get out of my life!!! Trouble is, for some of us, we will never get away from them as they seek to build careers on their crime.

    ReplyDelete
  60. In the to-day Independent
    "The Daily Express gave the story (Haiti) greater prominence but, inevitably, preferred to splash on the ongoing "agony" of the parents of Madeleine McCann, an agony to which the paper has contributed with its obsessive coverage."

    ReplyDelete
  61. Following on from A Miller, I would urge anyone who has not already done so to read the email exchanges between the Tapas7, Stuart Prior from Leicestershire police, and officers from the PJ. They are all contained within the case files.

    To provide some background, Clarrie was at the time spinning away about the reconstruction, telling us how frail Kate was, and how impossible it would be for her (Kate had recently returned from several foreign trips, and looked as robust as ever)They clearly did not want to return.

    The correspondence is extremely revealing

    Basically, the Tapas 7 wanted several reassurances before they would agree to go, and also sought repeated clarification.

    They wanted to know exactly what the PJ wanted to find out, and why exactly they wanted to do a reconstruction - they repeatedly questioned how it was to be used, and why it wouldn't be aired to the public

    They pretty much demanded that the McCann's status as arguidos was lifted before they would go

    Every time an answer came back, they had a fresh objection

    When the reply from Portugal suggested that they could be compelled to return if necessary, one had the impression that there was a mass, and co-ordinated, soiling of underwear.

    Eventually, after pissing around for weeks, they all decided that they would not attend - as they 'could not see the value' of it.

    The people who the PJ wanted back were the Tapas 7, the McCanns, and Jeremy Wilkins. They specifically asked them not to bring their children. I do not recall any mention in the correspondence of other 'key' witnesses whom the McCanns thought should return.

    It really is worth reading the emails. I think one can discern a growing frustration, especially from the PJ, at the manipulation, stalling and time-wasting which was employed by the Tapas 7. It was pointed out to them at one point that it was for the police to decide the value of any investigation - not the witnesses. That shook them up.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Anon @59

    The spanish police does NOT believe at all in the abduction fairy tale.
    The mccas were shot out of Spain via M3 when they started harrassing the Cortes Family

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anonymous No31, may have hit the nail on the head. I read through before posting to see if anyone had spotted it.

    The reason the "Fund" was unable to be given charitable status was that it didn't help anyone other than them. Surprise!

    Aren't the accounts due soon? In which case, maybe the status could be reviewed. If given charitable status, there would be salaried positions up for grabs. K. McCann always said that she wanted to be an ambassador for missing children.
    The sky's the limit. A charity in the name of Madeleine, (hope stevo and Bennett own "The Madeleleine Foundation" title, as that would have been perfect.The eye as the logo.
    A Damehood later for services to charity?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hi John again,

    re comment 49 - maybe cadaver smell was detected on Gerry and kate because they were / are doctors and come into contact with dead bodies regularly.

    There were 4 other doctors with them - Fiona and David Payne, Russel O'Brian and Matthew Oldfield - no detection on them!

    It would not have been very hard to verify Kate's assertion that in the week before her holiday she came into contact with 6 deceased.

    I totally agree with the comment previously re Fiona's reluctance to reconstruct - it could only prove their innocence - if there were irregularities - obviously those would have been found.

    No one seriously believes the mccanns - but many are prepared to go along with them for an easy life and the 1 billion to one chance that Maddie may be found and the one trillion to one chance that Maddie may be found alive.

    (I predict a maddie look alike will be found in about 15 years time by the current investigators - eye surgery etc - Morrocan tan, slight accent etc - certainly after long enough that she would not concievably recognie the two people that previously abandoned her)

    enough now, surely, ed.

    ReplyDelete
  65. So 62 why didnt they compel them back? Why did the PJ lose their bottle?

    ReplyDelete
  66. 65 - a locum who works part time is highly unlikely to be in contact with any cadavers at all.

    ReplyDelete
  67. "3 jours de procès ont causé plus de dommages dans le monde aux McCann que les 7 mois où mon livre a été en vente"

    C'est tout à fait vrai en France. Alors que la présentation de l'ouverture de l'audience avait un ton de sympathie pour eux et de légère réprobation pour Amaral, le reportage final des journalistes était critique à leur égard et à l'égard de la Grande Bretagne qui a choisi de ne pas diffuser son documentaire et d'interdire son livre. Il leur a suffi d'écouter les témoignages des policiers du Portugal, pour lesquels on a du respect en France, au contraire des médias britanniques,pour comprendre enfin que si toute une police accuse quelqu'un, ce n'est pas pour le plaisir ou par incompétence, comme Clarence Mitchell avait tenté de le faire croire dans ses communiqués aux agences de presse.En Angleterre, la xénophobie a été orchestrée pour déformer la vérité.

    Comme le disait le journaliste en ouverture du reportage ; "Sale temps pour les McCann..."


    Voltaire

    ReplyDelete
  68. Attempting to discredit the dogs is the MOST stupid thing to do - beyond stupid, actually. The dogs have no agenda, nothing but doing what they've done time and again and always correctly. If they find cadaver odour and blood, then cadaver odour and blood are there to be found. It's just the same with exposive-detecting dogs, they can only find explosives that are there, they don't pretend they've found them.

    Kate McCann IMO made a bad mistake by attempting to discredit the dogs, just as Gerry did by saying in an interview a while back that these dogs are unreliable. The simple fact is they're not and saying it, no matter how often, won't make it so. I have to say that trying to discredit sniffer dogs in a country that has had many recent and current tv programmes about the reliability of these dogs seems akin to going on a suicide mission.

    Maybe there's a place for Clarence in the Team after all? Since the McCanns started speaking on their own behalf they seem to be digging themselves into one hole after another, whether it's dogs or the open window or the reopening of the case or whatever ... some strange remarks being made, IMO. I bet GA feels vindicated, as he watches their increasingly desperate attempts to explain simple things in very contrived and frankly nonsensical ways.

    ReplyDelete
  69. ≠66, no one believes the PJ lost their bottle, only that the political interference so long noted in this case stopped them from trying to force the Tapas 9 back for a reconstruction.

    They could all offer to go back now and do the reconstruction but they haven't done so as far as I know. If they've forgotten their movements of that evening they only have to refer to their signed statements to refresh their memory. Kate McCann could use the opportunity afforded to answer the questions she declined to answer last time. In other words they could cooperate fully with the police at long last, nearly three years after Madeleine disappeared.

    ReplyDelete
  70. They keep telling us that it was 'normal' to be under suspicion and that the PJ had every right to investigate them.
    They then questioned the motive and worth of attending a reconstruction and what it would achieve?

    The very simple answer is, that a reconstruction could have corroborated their stories, cleared up any 'misunderstandings' and helped clear them and their freinds of any involvement. Doing so would have allowed the investigation to concentrate on the increased likelyhood of an abduction. That they didn't attend, merely confirmed the suspicions against them as a group and ultimately killed the investigation into their daughters disappearance.

    They had nothing to fear from a reconstruction if they were telling truth (even if they thought they were being stitched up by the PJ).
    This, to me anyway, is evidence in it's own right and certainly not the behaviour of a couple desperate to find their child or clear their names and reputation.

    ReplyDelete
  71. in answer to this :
    ''Anonymous said... 66

    So 62 why didnt they compel them back? Why did the PJ lose their bottle?''

    I don't regard this as a case of the PJ 'losing their bottle'

    The Tapas 7 had apparently taken legal advice, and I'm sure could have fought and obstructed any attempt to make them co-operate.

    At the end of the day, this was a British child, daughter of their very close friends, lost in a foreign country whilst on holiday. As a group, they supposedly pledged to leave no stone unturned in their attempts to get her back.

    The investigation took immense resources and manpower from the PJ, involved huge and concerted effort from the local community who tried to find the child, and earned the resort the kind of publicity which generally doesn't ensure 100% occupancy.

    If I was working for the PJ I think I might well take the view that if the people closest to the child couldn't be arsed to co-operate with the inquiry, then I wouldn't be bothered breaking my balls to try to persuade them otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Before I go, just to point out to the poster from France.

    How do you know your Media isn't being controlled and censored?

    That is the whole point. Doh !

    ReplyDelete
  73. 62 is quite right. The only ones who could hae been compelled to come back were the arguidos but not the others. To understand you have to go back a bit urther as the PJ wanted to do a reconstruction eralier but was not able to (as seen from the files) because of demands from the McCs for the event to be public and filmed etc and you can see their legl advisors in any of their comments They later were made arguidos and had the legal right not to say anything (in difference to being only witnesses as they were before). When the reconstruction question came up again, they quite rightly said ok, no problem, but of course their friends declined politely - same as the McCS did before and again you can see the lawjer's influence imo. Everyting else is just spinning stories...
    They may be completely innocent, but I would spend my money on finding the chid rather tan spending it on trying to shut up anybody with a different opinion from theirs....

    ReplyDelete
  74. They have to spend a lot of money trying to shut people up though Anon 74, because if they don't, the truth of the findings of the investigation will come out and people wont be sending any more money.

    If only there was no Fund, and no money sent them, would they have actually dipped into their own pockets and spent money on their 'search'? They could downsize their house for a start, and sell their other assets.

    Would their family have dipped into their pockets as well for the search?

    That would have been very telling. It would speak volumes.

    ReplyDelete
  75. In reply to post 73

    In France we can read the Gaspar statements and buy The Truth of the Lie freely, without threat of legal action. Not like the UK. What are the McCanns trying to hide?

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anon #38
    If there is no censorship in France, could you explain why Gonçalo Amaral's documentary, which was to be shown by M6 last October, was censored?
    I sent 4 emails -in French- to M6 to ask who had bullied them. All I received were 4 auto-responses that they would reply to me shortly. They did not.
    Je parle et écris français probablement mieux que le personnel de M6, pas d'erreur de communication de ma part.

    ReplyDelete
  77. regarding Murrat do we think he is involved or just a patsy he has really been quiet makes me think he has been woosh wooshed.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I think Murat nearly ended up the fall guy for this.

    It is very questionable that all those friends of the McCanns said they saw him that night, yet the people who worked there, and knew him, said he wasn't there.

    When it was proved he wasn't there after all, the McCanns' pals did a quick U turn.

    Meanwhile Murat had been put through hell being accused of so many things. Do they care? Do they care at all? Did any of them ever apologise?

    Jane Tanner has changed her mind so many times about the supposed 'bundleman' person, that it should be pointed out that nothing she said can be credible.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Murat says this whole thing has ruined his life, and I don't doubt that. He has been put through hell.

    Meanwhile, the person or persons responsible don't give a damn.

    They are cowardly rats at best, evil psychopaths at worst, willing to use anybody to further their own ends. Totally insensitive to the feelings of others. All they really care about is what they want.

    It is for all the innocents who have been caught up in this that we should reserve our sympathy, not for those who refuse to tell the truth and take the consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  80. @ Anonymous 38 et 77
    Moi aussi j'ai envoyé des courriels et n'ai reçu que des réponses aussi absurdes que robotiques. Mais finalement je crois que ce n'était ni M6 ni le documentaire de GA. Il y a donc eu à plusieurs reprises des intimidations qui ONT MARCHÉ ! Amazon.fr s'est écrasé aussi, ne vend plus que le livre en allemand..., c'est tout dire...
    Mais l'éditeur, à qui j'ai demandé s'il avait reçu des menaces de Carter Ruck, dit qu'il vend toujours.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Some people simply don't recognise themselves for what they really are.

    They slice their way through life not giving a damn for anybody but themselves, and using anybody, and anything, they need to.

    People without a conscience or concern for anybody but themselves.

    All that matters to them is getting what they want.

    Very dangerous people really.

    But they wont recognise themselves in that description, because they are only into blaming everybody else if things don't go right for them.

    They can't see that they cause mayhem for themselves and others caught up with them.

    Like children who have never developed emotional maturity, and never will.

    ReplyDelete
  82. A few things occur to me:

    If you replace the word "Madeleine" with "money", and "stone" with "wallet", then so much makes sense:

    For instance:

    The Money Fund, leaving no wallet unturned.

    We will do whatever it takes to find money.

    We are doing this to continue the search for Money.

    etc.

    Also, a few new words, phrases or definitions have entered the English language or need to be re-defined, perhaps we should inform the Oxford English dictionary.

    whoosh-clunk; defintion: an impossible event in an impossibly short period of time

    truth; definition: lie

    lie; definition: truth

    defamation; definition: stating the truth about a persons character

    slander; definition: speaking the truth about a person or persons

    libel; definition: the truth presented in written form

    no evidence; definition: there is no evidence only if you read and believe the gutter British press

    also, black = white, red = green, day = night, we will = we wont, etc. etc.

    You cannot believe a single word that they speak, so believe nothing, not a single word that comes from their and their co-conspirators mouths.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I had not realised "the book" was available online in English until I read about this trial so I printed a copy off for myself and one for my sister and we are both telling as many people as we can to do the same and spread the word. The McCanns have been too clever and have opened a can of worms.
    What have they actually done to look for their child? They never physically searched and they have relied on others to produce the cash. Poor Madeleine to be born to such parents.
    Thanks to all of you for keeping us up to date with what is going on, I have had a lot of catching up to do not having followed the case for quite a few months but it was all here waiting for me!
    Thank you all again.

    ReplyDelete