Tuesday, 6 April 2010

Textusa Is A Liar

Yes, I confess I lied.

No, not a mistake, but an intentional lie.

A mistake on my part happened when I implied in the previous post on this subject that the Smiths were British.

I put all the Anglo-Saxon Islands into a single amalgamated entity. I was disrespectful of individualities and of nationalities. Do sincerely apologise for that.

But now time is for confession, not for justification.

You see, I knew I had a pretty good hand, but tried to pass it as lame.

I lied. Intentionally and willfully. And kept on doing so through the flop, the river and the turn.

For those who don’t know, I’m speaking poker here.

 I did suspected that I was up against players with too much to lose.

Only if they had the 4 aces in their hand and another 3 up their sleeves would they come forward and bet. And, even so, carefully, because they’ve already played all the aces they had a long, long time ago.

But I tried a reaction anyhow. Basically nobody came forward, and those that did, well, shouldn’t have.

They only made a fool of themselves.

That confirmed one of two things: either they’re afraid of my game, or they don’t have a game at all. I suspect to be both.

But that would be arrogant on my part, and arrogance here has all been taken up by the McCanns.

So, in practical terms, what did I lie about?

About where the “Luz Stroller” was seen, that’s what.

To call him an “abductor”, as we already know, is a bit far-fetched, completely fictional, although we know how he wished we would call him that.

To link him with the Smiths would be setting a bond that no respectable family, as I have that Irish family for, deserves.

Back to the lie. I told you that the “Luz Stroller” had been seen in the exact spot where I showed you in this picture.

Well, the “Luz Stroller” was not seen in ONE location but in THREE.

Also he wasn’t seen by Smith alone. In effect he was seen by Smith, Smith and Smith. At least according to their statements to the PJ. As per picture:

I remind you that the party was of party of NINE (FOUR adults and FIVE children: the father (retired, 58) his wife (age unknown), his son (23) and daughter-in-law (age unknown), a who was feeling ill, and their two children, 13 and 6 (ie, Mr Smith's grandchildren), his daughter (12), two additional grandchildren, 10 and 4, of another daughter back in Ireland:

From the locations of the sightings, and by the people who reported them, we can deduce that the party was broken up into three groups:

- 2 Adults - Son (23) and daughter-in-law (age unknown), in the front, setting up the pace, as she was feeling ill, and the husband was worried about her condition.

- 2 Adults and 2 Children - Father (58), wife (age unknown), two grandchildren (6 and 4), following the front party, grandparents taking care of their grandchildren, probably walking as fast as a 4-year old would allow.

- 3 Youngters, (13, 12 and 10) probably staying back and playing games with each other on their last night together in the Algarve.

I didn’t tell you also that most of the path taken by the Smiths is a stairway. Quite a steep one at that. It’s not clear in aerial the view:

So we have TWO very important elements which slowed the Smiths down, unquestionably: a person feeling ill and steep stairs.

One could throw in a THIRD one, very probable, and that is the speed with which a four-year old walks when taken by the hand, which due to the distance, slope and ages involved was the most likely way that that toddler went on his way.

The fact that the youngsters were the last group that was behind, indicates that with all their youth and energy they went up and down those stairs, as many times as they could before they were reprimanded by the adults.

And with the associated noise. Not of the reprimand, of course, but of all the joyful playing. Back to the “Luz Stroller”. What exactly is he facing when he sees himself confronted with the Smiths?

The family slowly walking uphill, in his direction.

He, in turn, is walking downhill, so is reinforced the idea that if he wanted to avoid this contact, he had plenty of time and opportunity to do so.

To those who still think that he was caught off-guard at THAT particular moment, just remember that it was the same man who was able to be move undetected in the same apartment with the abductee’s father, and had only a 5 minute window of opportunity, to get out, with the child, and was able to do so.

Quite an agile fellow, we all recognize. If he existed, that is.

We know that he WANTED to be seen.

But his behavior, AFTER being seen, tells us much, much more. Very important information, in fact. Let’s see how he acts, after he has been seen twice: by Smith Son, first; and Smith Father, next.

He is at a corner. He’s hearing noises coming from the stairs, or, most likely, has probably seen the youngsters on top of the stairs.

Let’s go into absurdity territory here, and imagine that he is THE abductor.

He has been seen, so all that is left for him to do is to minimize the effects.

These witnesses will only hear about this, worst case, in the next couple of hours, after the parents realize that the little daughter is gone, and alert the authorities and a search is started.

Most probably, only during the day after will the searching begin.

He must keep witnesses to a minimum.

He must avoid face contact, so as to hamper their description of him.

Two groups have already seen him and nothing can be done about that.

He MUST avoid any further witnesses, so, instinctively he WOULD HAVE to turn right, and act as natural as he possibly could so as to avoid drawing any further attention upon his person:

But what does the “Luz Stroller” do?

He walks straight towards the stairs, where he knows he will confront further witnesses.

Why does he do that?

Well there are two reasons.

The first, most obvious, is that he wants not only wants to be seen he wants to be seen heading for the sea. THAT specific direction. If he had turned right, who knows where the witness, and the Police would think he was heading towards?

For the second reason one must remember that he had NO way of knowing that he was going to encounter the Smiths.

That was fate, not planning. So when he left from where he left with the intent of being seen walking towards the sea holding a sleeping child dressed exactly like Maddie, he had to head to where he knew there would be SOMEONE to see him.

Where there would be some sort of movement in at that late evening hour in that quiet little town in the Algarve: KELLY'S BAR.

If the Smiths wouldn’t have come along, he would’ve waited outside that bar, and on the first opportunity he would make himself be seen, “walking by”, in the direction of the sea.

But fate offered the Smiths to him.

But he had set his sights for KELLY'S BAR, so that’s where he was heading for.

As I’ve demonstrated, the space where all the THREE Smiths encounters took place was too small to allow any improvisation or quick thinking.

He just acted as he planned to act.

By the way, things DID go exactly as he planned them.

But as they say, do be very careful for what you wish for, for it might just come true.

This was just the one of these cases. Next episode: Proving that the “Luz Stroller” is Dr. Gerald McCann.


  1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=Dey0baAlRrE&eurl=http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/MADELEINE_LINKS.htm

    The McCann Infantile Memory

  2. Timeline (afaik)
    Statements of Staff on duty
    Helder Luis, Receptionist states Maddie disappeared at around 9.30pm.
    Chef Arlindo Peleja’s states he heard clamour at 21.20 pm and was told a child had disappeared.
    Barman Jeronimo Rodrigues Salcedas, made two statements. On 6 May 2007 he places DW at the table at 10.20 to 10.30pm and GM searching the bush round the pool area. Second one taken on 23/4/08 his timeline was moved forward to 9.30 to 10pm with the parallel happenings.

    Statements of UK visitors
    Stephen Carpenter’s statement (to LP) states: - he and wife left Tapas Bar at 9.15pm and on way back to apt heard Madeliene been shouted for. They also said when they left at 9.15pm, the T9 group was still at dinning table, thought not aware whether all nine were there.

    Thanks to 3As

  3. Helo,Text!

    A very nice day to You,Ironside and seguidores(followers).

    Oh,I like very much when You put thought´s Your.

    (bad english,mine, I know that).

    I wil read later because in this moment I must do others things.



  4. http://www.the3arguidos.info/topic100.html

    Family Smith Witness statements...including photographs.

    Many thanks to Bren of the 3As...

  5. Four months after his initial statement Mr Smith contacted the police to say he had seen Madeleine's parents arriving back in Britain on BBC News, and the way Mr McCann carried one of the couple's twins reminded him of the man he had seen in Portugal.

    When detectives replayed video footage of the couple's arrival at East Midlands airport, the witness said he was 60-80% sure that the man he passed was Gerry McCann.

    But this was later dismissed by prosecutors because at the time of the reported sighting, shortly before 2200, Gerry McCann was sitting in the Ocean Club's tapas bar with other members of his party.

    The ONLY witnesses he was at that table are from the group.

  6. I have just found this post under an article when the Mccanns went to PDL to do their Version of a construction. Well Kate stayed at home and the actress who played her part was so unbelievable that she ended up on the cutting room florr.


    I take it this 'full reconstruction' will include Mr Martin Smith and his family, who saw a man carrying a 'sleeping' little blond girl down towards the beach at 9.50 pm on the night Maddie was reported missing.

    This sighting must be crucial, but, strangely, the McCanns have never mentioned it so far. They should put out a world-wide appeal to find that man.


    That is a very GOOD POINT. Why have the Mccanns not put out a world wide appeal for this man to come forward???

  7. Hello Textusa. On 30th March I posted about the Smith family being Irish, not British. I post again today about the 'Anglo-Saxon Islands' of which Ireland is not. Kind regards, G. IRL

  8. Anon,

    I can't seem to get anything right with you... or past you.

    Please DO correct me, so that I can in turn, correct the text.

    You, unwaringly, have been a GREAT help as you'll see in the next post about these sightings.

    Thank you for your corrections.

  9. G.IRL....I think Tex and I need to both go back to school...She to learn about all things Irish and I to learn how to spell peoples names...LOL

    On a more serious note..I think this would be the look McCann had the night he was seen by Mr.Smith..'.A tanned face with hair cut short and a little longer on top.'


  10. Love the name 'Luz Stroller'....It is so Gerryish.

  11. The son of Martin Smith..Peter Daniel Smith..


    • The description of this individual is as follows: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 metres. He was around 35, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. He had a normal complexion, in good form. He had short hair, brown in colour.

  12. http://www.the3arguidos.info/post26530.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+the3arguidos%2FvCkh+%28The+New+3A%27s%29&utm_content=Twitter#p26530

    Proof of where everyone was the afternoon of May 3rd...All present except the Mccanns and their children.

    Thanks to Bren and Pamalam.

  13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdPdc5-7VEg

    A lovely tribute to Charlotte Porter and also for Madeleine may you both R.I.P.

  14. http://twitpic.com/1c6fe2

    Gerrys blog told many things , mainly about himself. How amongst all those faces the Pope recognised Gerry Mccann. Gerry would like us to believe Madeleine is alive with an evil man but still has time to write in his blog what he will be wearing the following day.

  15. http://mariacpois.blogspot.com/2010/04/paulette_07.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    Maddies Mexico...

    I think lessons have been learnt from the Mccanns and the Police are not so quick to believe these abductions from home...the Mccanns had good contacts...But I hope we never ,ever see another couple be allowed to abuse the death of their child again and live from her corpse.

  16. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/07/casey.anthony.letters/index.html

    Another day and another mum who sedated her young daughter so she may go out for the night.

    A comment made by the mum' If I was fat and ugly, no one would take notice'

    Kate Healy


    'If I weighed more and had larger breasts I would get more sympathy'

    In both cases a young child has died, the fault of both mothers and yet all they think about is their image.

  17. http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.com/search/label/Amaral%20The%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20Chapter%2020

    Chapter 20 of Dr.Amarals book...The Smiths..

    Translation thanks to Anna

  18. http://www.the3arguidos.info/post26671.html#p26671?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    Where the dogs ALERTED

  19. http://www.the3arguidos.info/post26672.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+the3arguidos%2FvCkh+%28The+New+3A%27s%29&utm_content=Twitter#p26672

    It was clear although PJ suspected the Mccanns they worked their BUTTS OFF to also follow the abduction line.

  20. Am I missing something? Why would GM deliberately allow himself to be spotted by passers-by {the Smiths), in order to perpetuate a n abduction myth, and later say absolutely nothing at all about the sighting? What would be the point?

    1. Witness reports of an abductor who is very obviously *not* Gerry McCann are good news for the McCann camp. Witness reports that the abductor looked like or actually was Gerry McCann are very *bad* news for the McCann camp. Everything worked well for the McCann camp until the Smith family's evidence made Gerry an abduction suspect, at which point it suited them to stop promoting the abduction theory. Allegedly.


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.