Wednesday, 26 January 2011

Who Took the "Reason" Out of "Reasonable Doubt"?

We all have the correct notion of “innocent” and “guilty”.

They’re simple concepts, to differentiate between them is as easy as telling black and white apart. .

The “not guilty” one is much more complex. It’s neither “innocent” nor “guilty” as if either were it, it would then render useless the referred terminology.

Very few understand it, or rather, understand what it implies, what exactly it means, and how easily it can be misconstrued, distorted and even brought to be a mockery of itself.  

Because of it we are where we are in the Maddie Affair, and why with things remaining as they are, it’s not unlikely that the justice we all seek will be NOT be found unless we do something about it.

Let’s go back to basics, and understand where all this comes from.

Imagine that Justice is a simple grayscale array going from black to white. Black, meaning guilt, white innocence.

However, as we know, life is never black or white, but grey, in its infinite scale of possibilities
. Because they are the scale’s opposite extremes, neither black nor white really do exist. Before you say that black is black, remember that 99,99% black isn’t 100% black.

It’s in fact just a really, really, REALLY, dark grey, but it just isn’t black. It lacks that 0,01%.

So, if ONLY 100% black is guilt, and 100% black is impossible to obtain, then, apparently, that makes it impossible for society to convict.

However simple logic determines that 99,99% black is as black as black can get, so should REASONABLY be considered as such, assuming that way that guilt has been proven, as that 0,01% margin of white can be disregarded.
  It is that 0,01% that is what is called “reasonable doubt”.

It’s reasonable to consider that a 99.99% black is 100% black.

Now, what about 99,98% black? Or even 99,985% black? Should these percentages be considered black as well? From what percentage does grey end, and black start?

This discussion is of particular relevance when it comes for society to take away one of human being’s most precious possession, FREEDOM.

It’s always preferable to let a guilty man walk than to imprison an innocent one. That's the pillar that upholds all Justice’s principles.

But society MUST ALSO do all in its power to oblige those who don’t abide by its rules to be accountable for their deeds. The obvious reason is that it serves as a POSITIVE example to those who do abide, who constitute the large majority as one has to assume that the rules set by society itself are fair, just, reasonable, necessary and expected.

Nothing is worse for the morale and credibility of a nation than for the law-abiding citizens to witness the incapability their Judicial System to punish appropriate and accordingly those who have not obeyed the set Law.

It’s bad when this incapability results from incapacity, but much, much worse when it is from willingness, as we’ll see.

I’ve written in a previous post that a person does not walk into a court-room innocent and walks out guilty, but that he walks in either guilty or innocent, and walks out convicted or not convicted.

And if he walks in guilty and walks out not convicted, then that is ONLY due to a SINGLE reason: the “reasonable doubt” threshold to convict him was NOT surpassed.

Does that mean he was innocent in the first place? No, and we know it doesn’t.

It was just simply not possible, for various reasons, to reach that 99,99% gradient of black.

Imagine then the iron-clad protection one would be provided with if those with the responsibility to show that 99,99% black is indeed black, were unwilling to do so. It's simply IMPOSSIBLE to find guilt when there’s NO want in finding it.

That would certainly be a scandal, the most evident distortion of Justice both in its nature and in its principles.

Apparently scandalous, yes, but is it really unlikely? As we’ve seen, “reasonable doubt” is a PERSONAL and SUBJECTIVE decision that should guarantee that an innocent is not convicted.

Using the grayscale example, it basically it states for example, that anything, say, as dark as 99,8% black, or darker is to be considered black, anything lighter than that is grey, and grey is “not guilty”. 

It’s a VERY SERIOUS decision to make, as it has associated VERY SERIOUS implications.

One can easily understand that when doubt settles in, we’re not discussing the lighter grey part of the scale, rather about the differences in shade between dark and darker grey

The relevant questions then to be asked are, who is to determine THAT value of gradient, and on what should that particular person base his opinion on?
For that, society has educated a very limited amount its citizens to be able to understand not only the full scope of the concept, but most importantly, the enormous responsibility of its appliance.

They’re called Judges.

A very limited set of people that society has given the power, the authority, as well as the LEGITIMACY, to determine what is and what isn’t “reasonable doubt”, in others words, has given them the power to convict, to take away other citizen's freedom from them.

They’re the only ones that are able to that LEGITIMATELY.

The ordinary citizen, like you and me, able to reason with logic, is able to understand what is reasonable and what is not, but lacks the LEGITIMACY to validate LEGALLY his opinion. This lack of validation DOESN’T mean lack of reason in any ways, or be an impediment to undertake the exercise, it just means that however right the citizen may be, his opinion is LEGALLY USELESS.

Morally right, but with no LEGAL value.

In a perfect society, this citizen’s LEGALLY USELESS opinion should coincide with the Judicial System's LEGITIMATE one. And that is what usually happens.

Courts are the place where Judges apply Justice, according to their education, experience and wisdom. By education, I’m implying that they base their decision on full knowledge of the LAW.

Now, let’s run off-track, because it’s about going awry that this post is all about.

A Judge may, for whatever reasons, decide that black is white or that white is black even if logic shows CLEARLY otherwise.
It’s a WRONG decision but a LEGITIMATE one, and because of that it is to be UPHELD.

What is there to stop making such a blatant wrong decision? Three things: common sense, own conscience and accountability.

If we dismiss the two first, both dismissible, accountability is the ONLY foreseeable obstacle stopping him to determine that hereforth black is white. But he’s ONLY accountable before his fellow colleagues in the Judicial System, other Judges, like himself, in which society relies to have the education, experience and wisdom to overturn a wrong decision, and eventually punish the Judge for abuse of power.

But what if, the collective Judicial System decides to embark on a farce? Or, if his decision to determine that black is white is but a part of a bigger scheme of things?

And to involve the whole Judicial System, the scheme really has to be BIG. Or BIG interests at stake to make it be that ENORMOUS.

So, if the Judicial System decides that black is white do start to get used to seeing brides walking down the aisles dressed in virginal black.

This whole Judicial System, in turn, is ONLY accountable to society, and society, as an entity, has no forum, other than the electoral one (and in some Countries not even that) to express its discontentment.

That’s why in dictatorial States, Justice is completely arbitrary, but one expects, in the so-called civilized world, like Portugal and the UK, for it not to be so.

Unfortunately, the Maddie Affair has proved otherwise. We can see that the PJ Files relay facts, or as I’ve said before, facts that people say to have happened, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they did.

Upon closely studying the evidence presented before him in by PJ Files, the Portuguese PGR, has concluded LEGITIMATELY that there was not enough evidence to prosecute the McCanns, and until further evidence is produced, the case was to be archived.

The Judicial System includes the prosecution. These have the capability, in “light-grey” cases, to deduce what is “reasonable doubt” to avoid overburdening needlessly the Courts. In this instance, the PGR did LEGITIMATELY decide to archive the process.

If a Court verdict of “Not Guilty” is NOT a declaration of innocence but just of lack of capability to convict (although that lack of capability may be the result of the Judge’s total conviction of the accused's innocence), the archiving of a process is even further from that.

But mind you, is as equally far from declaring a suspect guilty.

It means that the Prosecutor faced with the evidence presented before him, LEGITIMATELY decided that it the case at hand lay clearly on the lighter end of the grayscale of guilt, so no further action was required.

If anything new is to arise, then a new decision will be taken.

Do notice my insistence on LEGITIMATELY, which is far from being RIGHTFULLY. Let me say it straight that, in my opinion, the PGR’s decision is him looking at a really, really dark object and publicly declaring it as bleach white.

A LEGITIMATE decision, but taken with intentional wrong interpretation of the contents PJ Files.

And when you don’t want to see, you just WON'T SEE. And if you've compromised yourself into NOT SEEING, then it's impossible for you to ever correct your forged lack of sight. It's voluntary blindness, or even worse, voluntary distortion of whatever is meant not to be seen.

Then you will be able to see a million curves where millions of others see only a straight line, because it is indeed straight, and you will even be able to see the mathematically impossible beginning and end of a line that constitutes a circumference.

Blogs, like this one, have PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt that the phrase “not enough evidence” is as hypocritical as saying that it's the Sun that goes around Earth and not the other way around, which may I remind you was the official LEGITIMATE version of the 24-hour cycle during a long, long time.   

The abduction of Maddie is absurd and was forged by the parents, by the family and by the missing child’s parents’ friends and acquaintances. Plus the blogs have PROVED that evidence points towards the girl’s death, making it also a crime, of horrendous ethical proportions, the setting up of the Fund.

This blog in particular, has PROVED the existence of, apparently, new facts.

That there was NO NEGLIGENCE, that the McStroller was no other than Dr. Gerry McCann, who was also proved to be a LIAR, that there was direct involvement of other OC Guests and some PdL Residents, and that this group’s watersports activities on May 3rd and the dinners at the Tapas Bar were simple fiction.

You’ve read it here, and you’ve seen how well we've justified all our statements, albeit the permanent and continuous threats of legal action against the blog, and even to its readers.

These facts have been here PROVED, and yes, they point towards a TOTALLY different version on which, apparently, the PGR’s based his decision upon.

That means that there IS, after all, EXISTING evidence for the McCanns to be prosecuted.

But is that really so? No, and let me tell you why.

All these “new” facts simply aren’t… new. They’re ALL in the PJ Files.

We’ve just limited ourselves in putting them together the way we thought they should be. But, they’re all in there, and "there" is where the PGR based his decision to archive.

So although we've said here that black is black because it’s black, the PGR has said, LEGITIMATELY, that all appeared to him to be white.

And when we showed here that something was as straight as a laser beam, the PGR has said, LEGITIMATELY, that to him it had more curves than a Formula 1 track.

With the same reasoning, whatever we here demonstrated to be a circumference, the PGR has said, LEGITIMATELY, that for him it just isn’t.

And he has the LEGITIMACY and we don’t.

Plus, as time as shown, he’s not alone in this highly selective way of looking onto things. It seems that the Judicial Systems of both Portugal and UK are not very keen in questioning his eyesight abilities, much less his judgmental ones.

Maybe because he's a mere instrument of their will?

To sum, whatever we may here say, and we WILL continue to say, apparently will never make him change his mind.

The McCannleaks, proved that. It really seems that absolutely nothing can be said that will change the PGR’s mind. What did he say about that? That the "leaked" facts were analyzed in due time so they didn’t constitute any new evidence.

It’s as almost as if he had read this post before I even wrote it.

So, should we give up? No. This reality was present when we started and that didn't make us stop starting, and we're still here, and you will continue to find us right here.

 Let’s rewind a bit here. Remember I said that there were three things that could stop someone from saying that black was white: common sense, own conscience and accountability.

Unfortunately, as we’ve seen, on one side accountability is something is that is not to be feared by the decider, and on the other, one’s own conscience tends to take on a submissive role when other interests, own or other's, arise, or seemed to have arisen.

We’re left with common sense. The only way to win this battle is to beat them by shame, by brazenly exposing their lack of moral, ethical and intellectual honesty. By continuously exposing their arrogance.

By showing that whoever says “that if the PJ had to prosecute the McCanns they would have done that a long time ago”, is saying it in a deliberate malignant manner, using ignorance with much pretence as the McCanns have used negligence.

By showing the Judicial Systems, time and time again, that with power comes responsibility, and NOT, as they think it does, the freedom to act as they please.

By showing how EVIDENT is the EVIDENCE against the McCanns, we can hope that they will one day concede and backdown just a little. To hope to tame the “animal” is naïve, but we can certainly show him that there are boundaries that HAVE to be respected.

That’s why we fight this fight.

It’s much, much bigger than the McCanns, it’s about citizenship.

It’s about stopping today future hunting grounds that they, the “nobility”, may use and you, the “peasants”, may not.

Our goal is to prove that when it’s said that there’s NO EVIDENCE in the PJ FILES to prosecute the McCanns, although it’s a LEGITIMATELY absolutely right statement, it is ALSO, more importantly, not only a morally, ethically and intellectually ABSOLUTELY WRONG one to make.

It is as well a blatant and arrogant attempt to certify us, citizens, as a herd made up of thought-incapable morons.

There was a day when the LEGITIMATE Judicial System said that the Earth was flat, wasn’t there?

They even burned people at the stake who dared deny that then, didn't they?


  1. Belo texto ( lido, claro, com o meu não inglês ) e que vem ao encontro do " meu estado depressivo " perante

    estas " legitimidades" tão estranhas.

    Tantos casos à luz do dia e tantas farsas; tantas mentiras e tanto descaramento da parte daqueles que se acham no direito de fazer e decidir apenas o que entendem. Estou tão farta do que se passa.. aqui e lá e..... lá..... e mais além.....por todo o lado.

    Onde estamos ?

    Não e não ! Este não pode ser o meu País. Não deveria ser assim. Nem aqui e nem em lado nenhum.



    Your post deserves to be published in a serious newspaper.

    Look what is going on with Casa Pia... A joke is the only classification we can give to the portuguese judicial System and the PGR.
    Bibi gave an interview to "Focus", to a journalist who just for coincidental accident wrote a book about Carlos cruz with Carlos Cruz ex-wife as a partner( was this just a coincidence?)and on that interview, Bibi claim that he lies, the other arguidos are all innocent, the boys were forced by PJ(torture) to incriminate the arguidos and the boys are all mental ill, specially Francisco (who BTW is the pillar of the accusation against Carlos Cruz).
    It's me or seems that the all case smells allot Carlos Cruz?
    What have done the PGR few hours after the interview? He tell the Media that he will call the Prosecutor Mr. Albeo to discuss the revelations of Bibi. Is that normal? He assumed the interview as revelations when any impartial PGR will be cautious and asking many questions so simple as that: If he lie before, why he lie? What make him changing his mind? why have he played with justice during so many years? Was Bibi under any pressure? Is he menthal unstable?
    That PGR is a convennient joke.
    On top of that, we have the quickly reaction of Carlos Cruz lawyer asking the investigation to be reopenned. The charade going to the beginning, the boys discredit, PJ accused and discredit, the portuguese people having to support again the salaries of the judges and the price of the all court case. The same portuguese who had their salaries reduced to pay the crisis created by all this incompetent powerful people.
    What was the reaction of the Minister of Justice? "NIM", as the portuguese use to say. The silence is his most convennient reaction, after all many politics have to save their skins from Casa Pia. Bibi interview was that fresh air they are all waiting for many years. And again will show up Marinho Pinto with his ridiculous accusations against PJ and his protection of Leonor Cipriano.
    Nothing surprises me anymore in Portugal. And I really feel sorry for all the perpetrators, criminals, abusers, etc, that end up in prison. They have born under the bad moon, not because their ADN print on them some evil attitude but because they were not able to hire the lawyers connected with system and the politics. It is really a shame when 99% of black become 100% for some people and an innuendo of very light gray or dark white for people well connected. Justice is really the paradoxe of a huge injustice.
    And the big loosers are the victims and us, because nothing protect us from being the next victims of that well connected perpetrators.
    Madeleine was just another victim of the portuguese and UK corrupt judicial system. And are they asking the public to come and vote on each election... Voting for what and for who? For that clowns without skills to entertain anybody...

    It was because of that, that is growing in the new generation the idea that Salazar could not be so bad.

  3. One has to ask how many people and organisations the PGR had to pacify?

    In the McCann case the dismissal of LOGIC defies LOGIC. Jaw-dropping doesn't say enough when we have to witness what is going on and have no voice as an individual. Blogs like this can bring individuals together so the sum of the parts is greater as one collective voice.

    My faith is justice was weak before this case, now it seems justice in the UK and Portugal appears completely down to luck. The lucky wealthy, famous or in positions of power can obtain their desired outcome in the legal system and can avoid prosecution by the means available to them and I wouldn't rule of blackmail.

    As we have embarked on a mission to see justice done we can only carry on voicing our opinions and reminding those abusing the system of the facts we can see in the PJ files to achieve our goal.

  4. Caro(a) Textusa,

    Este seu último texto é muito interessante, como aliás tinha prometido em comentários passados.

    Veio-me à memória um livro que li no passado que falava de Insegurança Nacional.

    A terceira lei de Newton diz o seguinte: "A uma determinada acção corresponde sempre uma reacção, de igual intensidade e direcção, mas de sentido oposto".

    A política de segurança nacional é muito diferente da física, mas trata-se de um domínio em que os princípios da lógica e da razão também parecem ser úteis e relevantes. E, nas relações internacionais, parece aplicar-se algo que se assemelha muito à terceira lei de Newton. Quando uma nação tenta dominar outras, há uma "reacção" em sentido contrário.

    Ora, como não sentimos - grosso modo - que houvesse uma qualquer reacção alérgica à imposição da tese de rapto cozinhada em Inglaterra, admito que alguém de cá tenha contribuído, e muito, para esse cozinhado. Não só com ingredientes menores (a montagem de uma verdadeira busca no terreno com meios pagos com os meus impostos) mas também com uma bela peça de caça (lei-se um inspector da polícia ou mais - o futuro dirá) para satisfazer a fome de vingança dos acusados que se sentem intocáveis.

    Quando nos lança um repto para nos mantermos firmes nas nossas convicções e na participação no blogue e na busca da verdade parece-me que está a dizer que não nos compete apenas reconhecer estes desafios como no caso M.M. e enfrentá-los mas também mostrar que estamos à altura dos nossos ideiais mais elevados.

    É bonito o conceito de dignidade humana mas à semelhança do Cristianismo parece estar um bocadinho fora de moda para muitos. Por certo não para si ou para mim e outros mas para os que têm o poder de transformar o preto em branco.

    Mas a verdade é que a democracia corre perigo neste momento devido a mudanças sem precendentes no ambiente em que as ideias ou vivem e se difundem ou morrem. Tudo isto se passa na esfera pública ou no mercado das ideias. Já não é simplesmente possível ignorar a estranheza do nosso discurso público e sei que não somos os únicos a pensar que alguma coisa correu muito mal em Maio de 2007. Pensei que a cobertura que foi dada ao caso dos Mccann fosse apenas um excesso lamentável. Agora tenho a certeza que se trata de mais uma tendência para as obsessões em série que de vez em quando tomam conta dos media. Enquanto estivémos todos concentrados neste lamentável caso, a elite que nos governa a vários níveis, esteve a tomar silenciosamente decisões - umas catastróficas e erradas - sobre a liberdade e a barbaridade, a justiça e a equidade. E por isso tão evidente neste caso, os prevaricadores estão bem de saúde e de Fundo e os bons passam as "passas do Algarve". Nem a propósito...

    Não confunda o meu discurso com cinismo mas apenas com algum pessimismo. Mas ainda há esperança: a internet é um meio de comunicação poderosíssimo (que o diga Julian Assange) e um grande motivo de esperança quanto à vitalidade da democracia no futuro. Pode ser que os programas de televisão e as pseudo-notícias que tanto favoreceram os McCann no passado enquanto deixavam Gonçalo Amaral no escuro dos bastidores, venham a ser conhecidos como uma transição da era da palavra impressa para a era da internet e talvez possamos ter conteúdos mais rigorosos e fidedignos.

    Pode ser que possamos fazer recuar o ataque à razão e reestabelecer o seu primado salvaguardando o nosso futuro e o dos outros.



  5. Texusa

    The awful thing is I don't see it changing at all - ever - we will continue to discuss, expose and despair!

    Common sense went out the door a long time ago - it matters not how many times we expose the lies, discrepancies and the continual changing statements from all those involved in the disappearance of Madeleine - those responsible will continue to be supported, courted and reported by the press and the media.

    Even if we had one witness who came forward with irrefutable evidence - how long would he/she survive do you think ?

    It's all very well to have such 'protection from prosecution' - we will just have to be satisfied that those who are responsible for Madeleine's disappearance answer to a different Judge.


  6. Excelentes comentários em resposta ao Seu post ( in portuguese ).

    Só há aqui, num dos comentários, uma recusa minha em aceitar que o senhor das botas não era tão mau assim.

    Por favor: jamais pensem assim ! Jamais!

    O que se passa é degradante, realmente, e assistimos a tudo isto impotentes. Mas passar por aquela época altamente tenebrosa, por favor. Jamais.

  7. Took the liberty to translate Alexandra’s comment into English:

    “Dear Textusa,

    This last text of yours is very interesting, as you had promised in past comments.

    It reminded me of a book I read in the past that spoke about National Insecurity.

    The third law of Newton says the following: "To a certain action there’s always an equal, in intensity and direction, reaction, but of opposing values".

    The national security policy is very different from physics, but it’s an area in which the principles of logic and reason also seem to be relevant and useful. And in international relations, it seems to be applicable something very similar to Newton's third law. When a nation tries to dominate others, there is a "reaction" in the opposite direction.

    As we did not feel – saying this in a rough manner – that there was any allergic reaction to the imposition of the kidnapping theory cooked up in England, I admit that someone here has contributed, and much so, to this broil. Not only with minor ingredients (the setting of a real search on the ground with means paid by my taxes) but also with a beautiful piece of game (read as a police inspector or more – time will tell) to satisfy the hunger for revenge of the accused who feel untouchable.

    When you launch us a challenge to remain firm in our convictions and involvement in the blog and the pursuit of truth seems to me that you’re saying that we should not only recognize these challenges as in MM case and confront them but that we should also show that we are up standard on our highest ideals.

    É bonito o conceito de dignidade humana mas à semelhança do Cristianismo parece estar um bocadinho fora de moda para muitos. Por certo não para si ou para mim e outros mas para os que têm o poder de transformar o preto em branco.

    The concept of human dignity is beautiful but like the one of Christianity it seems to be a bit out of fashion for many. Surely not for you or me and others but for those who have the power to turn black into white.

    But the truth is that democracy is now in danger due to unprecedented changes in the environment in which ideas either live and spread or die. All this happens in public or in the marketplace of ideas. It is no longer possible to simply ignore the strangeness of what has been said publicly and I know that we're not the only ones to think that something went seriously wrong in May 2007. I thought the media coverage given to the case of McCann was just an unfortunate excess. Now I am sure that it’s more of a trend for serial obsessions that occasionally take over the media. While we were all concentrated in this unfortunate case, the elite that governs us on different levels, has been quietly taking decisions – some catastrophic and wrong – about freedom and barbarity, justice and equity. And because of that as is so evident in this case, the culprits are in good shape, both in health and Fund and the good guys are going through a tough time. It’s seems like it was asked for…

    Do not mistake my speech for cynicism, but only with some pessimism. But there’s hope: the internet is a very powerful means of communication (Julian Assange should say so) and a great reason for hope on the vitality of democracy in the future. It may be that the television programs and the pseudo-news which both so much favored the McCanns in the past while leaving Gonçalo Amaral in the darkness of the backstage, come to be known as a transition from the printed word to the Internet era and maybe we can then have more accurate and reliable content.

    It can be that we may make the attack go back to reason, re-establishing it as the primal rule to safeguard our future and that of others.



  8. Alexandra,

    Allow me to bow before such eloquence and righteousness. Your comment flatters this blog, its authors and its readers.

    Yes, you’re absolutely right when you say that today’s citizens value little, or take for granted, all others have sacrificed for them to be able to be what they are today. Human ungratefulness is trait as common as is envy. We all suffer from it, only some of us try the best they can to coerce it back into insignificance, but they do pop their heads from time to time.

    And YES, we must restore REASON as the primal value. If we’re not ruled by reason, then, logic is unforgiving, we’re by the unreasonable. And when society tends to unbalance in that direction, it’s a citizen’s duty and honour to rebel against it.

    Thank you

  9. Angelique,

    All the "irrefutable evidence" you need is IN the PJ Files.

    The Black Hats will continue to intetionally continue to distort the meaning of its contents, but daylight is what daylight is, no matter how tight you pull down the shutters.

    The "system" doesn't want to read what is there. It doesn't want us to read it either, so we have to show it that yes, we can read, and yes, we can see how they shamelessly lie.

    Hope is what makes things greater than life itself. To lose it is to live a life which the only achievement that can look back upon at the moment of death, is to have not died. And that, is a waste of life.

    The odds may seem today enormous against us, but it is the adversity that provides all the sweet taste that victory has.

  10. Textusa

    Thank you for the translation of Alexandra's comment. A very insightful post.

    I do continue to hope that your "daylight" will, at some point, wash away the covering of the eyes of those who hold the responsibility to seek out the Truth. But you can't show people what they do not want to see.

    It would, indeed, be sweet to know that each and everyone of us who believe in justice will attain it - it's so long coming, that is all. I am afraid that time itself will bury the truth deeper and deeper till it cannot be seen even with daylight. And those who should be fighting with us too, have no taste for it.

    As long as it takes then - let's travel this road.

  11. Por favor nao me interpretem mal. Nao disse que o tempo de Salazar era bom ou que deveria voltar.
    O que quis dizer e que devido a total falha da democracia portuguesa, nao admira que esteja a crescer na nova geracao, a ideia de que Salazar pode nao ter sido tao mau. Basta lermos os comentarios das pessoas nos jornais e olharmos para a personalidade do Sec. mais votada.
    E um facto que esta democracia nos envergonha e se este foi o objectivo do 25 de Abril entao temos de admitir que falhou redondamente.
    A investigacao criminal baseia-se em ciencias exactas como a matematica e a Biologia. Na matematica ensinaram-nos a arredondar numeros de tal modo que maior de 0,5 e 1 o que transforma mais de 50% de genes de um determinado ADN em 100% de probabilidades desse ADN pertencer a uma dada e unica pessoa. O ADN presente numa amostra de sangue recolhida no 5A mostrou 15 alelos em 17 do ADN de Madeleine. A matematica e a Biologia mostram-nos que se dissermos que este ADN e de Madeleine, nao andaremos longe da verdade. Mesmo nas amostras contaminadas ha informacao que nao pode contornar a exactidao da Biologia e da matematica, a nao ser que um olhar desviado a ignore ou manipule. E quando o olhar esta desviado, mais de 50% de probabilidades transformam-se num branco acinzentado quando deveriam ser de um cinzento quase preto.
    Se e verdade que vale mais um criminoso em liberdade do que um inocente na prisao, tambem e bem verdade que apodrecem nas prisoes portuguesas e inglesas muitos reclusos para quem as probabilidades ditaram um branco acinzentado enquanto outros de cinzento intenso se passeiam livremente e ainda tem esse maravilhoso dom de multiplicar os Euros na sua conta bancaria encenando o papel de vitimas.

  12. Nothing stays the same forever.... eventually this case will be solved there are too many unanswered questions for it to just go away. The turning point will be mccanns book this will bring them back into the public spotlight and they will receive a very different response from the public than the sympathetic original response. People now know they were lied to, and cheated and made fools of in the name of greed and corruption.People will not tolerate being made to look foolish and consistently being lied to especially now we all know differently.
    Black and White is a brilliant article Tex.

  13. The turning points will be:

    a trial AGAIN against a good Man;

    a trial R. Murat / Jane T


    the McBook .

    And McStories and more McStories.........

  14. This is a well written piece Tex, it reminds of a game we played a black background for example with the word 'WHITE' written on it and a white background with the word 'BLACK' written on it, we then ask people to name the colour and of course they read the word not noticing the background colour white or black and get it wrong, but you can only trick people once because they become wary and pay more attention to detail... and this is what will happen once the mcfairytale book has been published people cannot be fooled a second time !!

  15. I agree with what you say Tex about black and white - Looking back over the past three years and what is fact and what is not fact all seem to merge into one and create a ‘grey’ picture. Set the timeline from when the dogs became involved they detected cadaver in the car and the apartment and on Kate mccanns clothing, ignoring any lame excuses the mccanns gave for cadaver being present.
    Before the dogs we definitely had deleted phone messages and inconsistencies within the statements of the tapas group and also Kate and Gerry’s very uncomfortable body language and the setting up of the fund, refusing to answer 48 police questions. These are hard facts.

    The paedophile liar, mrs fenn, gaspers, martin and smiths statements, egg head man and numerous sitings of Madeleine – all the above are very questionable and this is possibly the area of which PGR felt uneasy. After reading these statements I do not believe any of them but they have damaged and unsettled this case which was their sole purpose.

    After the dogs...the mccanns were duly arrested and made suspects along with Murat they had previously stated they would never leave Portugal without Madeleine, but fled to UK. These again are hard facts.
    I’ve put my post into three sections top is black, or white middle definitely grey and the penultimate paragraph black or white. Read the black and white sections they are the facts they prove the mccanns guilt the grey area is the involvement of expensive lawyers, friends and manipulation of the media but none of the grey area is actual fact it is all hearsay and speculation (Gaspars, Fenn etc)
    The Portuguese PGR read only what he wanted to read.
    The mccanns are bringing out a new book soon attempting to blame everyone else for what happened to Madeleine perhaps he should read that, then look at the police files and do the rightful thing, get the case re-opened legitimately

    the mccanns are suspects in their daughter’s disappearance not celebrities at a book signing.

  16. The PGR knows very well who have done what. I believe, he knows exactly how everything went on, on May 3, and the cover up happened under his umbrella.
    What went out of his control was our reaction- the public that not let the case to fade without been solved or at least without a good and logical explanation.
    If we got our voice heard trough the right channels, his position will be exposed and questionned by some people with power out of UK and Portugal or even out of Europe. That is the only way to get the case reopenned and solved. Find that channel is not easy and by keeping themselves always in the news, the Mccann's set a strategy to intimidate that possible channels and make people step back. This is why we see connected with them and their stories, freelancer poor journalists or old and decadent VIPs with "suspicious and 'Mccann's made' comments". The serious journalists still walking aside out of the BIG CASE OF OUR DAYS, I hope waiting for the moment that the PGR and the government in Portugal become so weak and unpopular that the BIG LIE GET HIS TIME TO BE EXPOSED. Is never late Mccann's, and you cannot sleep on your behaviour or your millionaire Fund. You will see your remain childs growing up and come to the Internet to understand and share the truth with anonymous people. They will add the missing pieces of the jigsaw and they will find the truth. The truth that you hide for many years. Your book will be the last drop on your karma, signed by your hands and told to the world trough your own voice. No excuses to blame others about what you wrote in the book. Your kids will be the firsts to question your words and your behaviour, and you will need to be very intelligent to give good and unquestionnable answers to them, on a daily base. What a condemnation... Unless you keep sedating them like what I believe hapenned on the night of May 3.
    What makes me strongly believe on Mccann's guilt was not what the investigation delivered to the public eyes, was the behaviour of the Mccann's during this 4 years. Innocent people did not travel around the world to publicise an abduction, special after delivering to the media the idea of Madeleine captive in a cellar near PDL. They travel to Lisbon to prosecute a police and did not move a feather to search where is that cellar. If any doubt was inside my mind, it flew away that day when I saw Kate and Gerry with their ridiculous portuguese lawyer, outside the court. Under one of the most worse weather days in Lisbon, their lawyer claimed to the world the horrendous childs photos she have seen in Portimao pj office. Madeleine was not recovered since that day... but what is amazing is that no any of the suposed abused childs spotted on the pictures was recovered. The Mccann's are a shame not only for their own childs but also for all innocent parents that experienced for one moment the real pain of having their childs missing, abducted or abused under the hands of perverted people.
    The PGR knows the dimension of their lies. He is part of the cover-up gang. After their Lisbon appearence we got that prove. If they still walking free is because they have the support of people who have power to frame them but those people let the charade go on.
    We cannot excuse the behaviour of the PGR with the idea that he did not got strong and ennough evidences to charge the Mccann's. The investigation still not done. How can he got evidences or dismiss what is already available without investigating the pass of the Mccann's, the fluxe of their money and bank acc, their medical records, their phone calls and messages on the days before and after May 3? without searching their properties in UK and all the properties they have been in Portugal?
    A serious crime happened to Madeleine. Only a serious crime can explain the behaviour of the PGR.

  17. I do not think that the PJ looks at all these facts any different than us. GA himself said that both, PJ and UK police agreed that the girl died in the appartment and her parents must have conceiled the body and faked an aduction. But with the evidence present every court had to find them not guilty. Unless something else will be found before a court (aka, witnesses stop lying and tell the truth for a change). In order to find more evidence or leads it had been necessary to put all of the T9 and some others under surveillance. For months, maybe years. This is simply not in the power of the PJ since all suspects live in the UK. Obviously the UK police does not want/cannot cooperate in this case.
    A strange thing was also that questions of the McCanns were put to the T7 by the UK police. Imagine you were a witness and the main suspects can use the police to put questions to you... I consider this to be like a threat.

  18. What a load of complete horseshit.

    You my dear and this blog have proven nothing. All you have served to do is make the ''Anti'' lobby look like a laughing stock, with your ridiculous McStroller assertions, your nonsensical claims that the McCanns and their friends never ate at the Tapas bar, and that everyone, the tapas bar staff and Mrs Fenn included, is lying.

    You don't even understand the concept of reasonable doubt, or who indeed decides that the doubt is reasonable. In a jury trial, it's up to them. The whole point which clearly escapes you is that there is not enough evidence to show, beyond reasonable doubt, what happened to Madeleine McCann, hence no charges, no trial.

    Maybe one day there will be, but if there is, it will not be thanks to your ridiculous ''theories'' and nonsensical flights of fancy

  19. Anon
    Jan 30, 2011 12:45:00 PM

    First, let me tell you that your fixation, as I’ve said before, with horse manure is quite fascinating. It is the ONLY interesting thing about you. It makes one wonder if the fox hunting thing is really about the furry animal, or just an excuse for you to have horses' behinds always near around those stiff upper noses…

    Second, do not call me dear. It sounds as repulsive as it is coming from someone as hypocritical as you.

    Third, I must criticize the fact it took you so long to muster up an answer. You kids have to be faster, otherwise whoever pays your salary won’t be happy at all, and I just don’t want to contribute to the increase of the already serious problem of unemployment. Tell that to whoever is coordinating you.

    Fourth, you seem (we, you and I, know it's intentional, don't we?) to overlook that in my post I didn’t go into the proceedings inside a Court room. Even in a Jury Trial, there’s that person that’s sitting right in the middle of one end of Court, which you call… a Judge. You know the character. The one that likes to handle the hammer. The Judge, in case you didn’t know, and I know you do, is the ULTIMATE responsible for ALL the proceedings inside his Court. Including that cinematic moment when the member that presides the Jury stands up and says whatever he has to say. Not before, mind you, having handed over a piece of paper to the Judge with the aforementioned decision. To people like you, it might be to spare the Judge’s sense of suspense before everybody else’s, but let me tell that it’s not because of that.

    And according to you, pray do tell, from your matured sense of knowledge, where was the Jury on the decision to make Maddie a WOC, to archive the process or to stop GA’s book from being published in the UK.

    I don’t remember there being one, in any if these decisions, but then again it could be all due to my gullible failing old mind having wrongly convinced itself by some “forum or blog myth” that there wasn’t any Juries, when in fact, there was.

    Fifth, your attempt to go into areas not covered by the post you criticize shows once again that you do not lack in ignorance but do compensate with maliciousness. But if you want to take the level of this discussion up a notch, please feel free, as you’ve understood by the quality of the comments, the readers this blog are more than able to follow us.

    Sixth, your latest tactic is so predictable that I hesitate to qualify it between childish and desperate. I’ll go for both. But you are playing your biggest trumps aren’t you? We here still have so much to say that I suggest that you do control the expenditure of your efforts.

    Seventh, do thank the stars that May I doesn’t like any sort of foul language, otherwise I would stoop down to your level, and, even on your own turf, put you over the knee and give that naughty bottom of yours the spanking it certainly is asking for.

  20. Anon at 12.45

    Please tell us what you know to explain your statement:-

    "your ridiculous McStroller assertions, your nonsensical claims that the McCanns and their friends never ate at the Tapas bar, and that everyone, the tapas bar staff and Mrs Fenn included, is lying".

    Now can you tell us what really happened if it's not what Textusa asserts?

    I, and I suppose the rest of us here, would like to know your version of events. Maybe you were even there at the time Madeleine disappeared? Why has this caused you to become so angry?

    Would you like to discuss this or just start muck slinging?

  21. Anon Jan 30, 12:45

    Calm down. You look too desperate to be only a Pro. If you were just a Pro you will not come here so many times to see what is going on. I'm an Anti and I don't waste my time looking on the "Mccsheet" available on blogs that support a fantasist abduction.
    If you believe that what we discuss here is ridiculous why you don't carry on with your little life and ignore us? What make you so angry and so desperate? Mccann's have to pay me to go to there blogs to insult them or their posters. That make a huge difference between you and us. You have no manners and you failed completly to show us a single evidence to support the abduction theory ( that yes, is a theory).
    What you know about May 3, 2007, early evening? From what I read, coming directly from the Tapas 9 mouths and some witnesses, I believe the dinner never hapenned. Because they cannot change the pace of the time and no matter how close the Mccann's tried to put the Tapas and the flat 5A, there was no time for an abduction to happen. The Spider Man, the Superman, the Invisible man, the most rapid man in the world will be not able to do what the Mccann's wanted the world to believe. You know that. Is that
    the reason why you are so angry and so worried?
    There is a good pill to cure your worries and calm your soul, the telephone. Why don't you make a call to PJ and tell exactly what you know. As you say, we know nothing but we know that from what we know we can assure "almost all the characters inside Madeleine saga were telling lies".

  22. Well said Tex - looks like you are rattling the cages of the pro mccann types - They cannot stand the truth. They know the abduction is nothing more than a fairy story told by two accomplished liars.
    Keep up the good work we love reading your blogs they are absolutely brilliant.

  23. The rats are loosing the plot since we smell the cheese.
    Keep your brilliant work Textusa. I can see that the amount of people reading your posts and our comments is increasing day after day and coming from different countries. The Mccann's and their gang are scared. The Fund + book will be not enough to keep the salary of their lawyers for many years. We will be here until the mirror crack down, looking for the truth, looking for justice for a little girl that came to our lives trough her parents hands, without been invited. They cannot use her to fool us and ask our donations, then discharge her and our effort to know the truth, just because now we don't believe anymore any word coming from their mouths. The all atmosphere surrounding them is infected with lies. And a lie did not survive without money to feed it.
    The book will be a sale disaster. They got the feeling trough the very anti comments made by the public in all newspapers around the world. To minimize that they sell the rights to the most ridiculous and low quality UK paper-The Sun. The Sun is trying to recover part of the money he wrongly pay when was sued by the Mccann's and the Tapas 7. It is a businness, like what that case was since the biginning.
    What is amazing is that the top publicised book will end up in low quality daily, or weekly, markets. Used by the stall sellers, as a paper to wrap some goods and please their clients. I don't believe staller or client, waste a second of their time reading the lies Kate pilled on her book.
    In middle time Mccann's gang is worried with what could be recorded from their phone calls. Another sign dismissing their innocence. Any judge will look at that with great interest. Mitchell is worried as well. God knows why?!! If the "evil" Vodafone and her sisters stored the calls of the gang and by an accident they end up inside the hands of the Wikileaks or other independent organization, the world will be knowing the dimension of the lies and the cover-up. A big avalanche will start... No good time for you Tapas 9 in 2011.

  24. Anon at 5.18 I agree I think they are worried about the prospect of their deleted phone messages being retrieved, they thought once they were deleted they were gone for good, but now they know different, and with the Wikileaks scandal more information about madeleine will come out.
    As for their book that will end up in the 'bargain bucket' at Poundland.
    Great site Tex, Astro et al.

  25. Part I

    From Kate and Payne AnuStatement:

    "While the children were eating and looking at some books" (or were already in bed...?), "Kate had a shower which lasted around 5 minutes” (was she expecting someone?) “After showering, at around 6:30/6:40 p.m.” (or even later I say...) “and while she was getting dry, she heard somebody knocking at the balcony door. She wrapped herself in a towel and went to see who was at the balcony door. This door was closed but not locked as Gerry had left through this door. She saw that it was David Payne, because he called out and had opened the door slightly. David was at the apartment for around 30 seconds, he didn't even actually enter the flat, he remained at the balcony door. According to her he then left for the tennis courts where Gerry was. The time was around 6:30-6:40 p.m. 'After David left, Kate dressed.”

    How long did Kate said that Payne spend in/out her apartment? 30 seconds? Really? I’m asking this because Payne said that he and Kate they chatted about the timings and everything and looked at the photographs. They must saw the photographs very quickly because Kate put David Payne outside the apartment for 30 seconds, whereas Payne places himself inside ('I went into their apartment through the patio doors') for 3 - 5 minutes.

    If you have to came in to came out I guess they had to check the photos as fast as they can because time flies...
    When one considers that 30 seconds would be just long enough for Payne pop up or see one or two photos it hardly represents an opportunity to chat about the timings and know... And they don’t seem to agree over the door. She saw that it was Payne, because he called out and had opened the door slightly but Payne said door was already opened.

  26. Part II

    From Kate and Payne AnuStatement:

    Kate, it should be recalled, had David Payne outside the apartment for 30 seconds, whereas Payne places himself inside ('I went into their apartment through the patio doors') for 3 - 5 minutes as he mentioned to see the 3 kids in their white pijamas, all in front the immediate area to the patio doors and even for a very short time he had plenty enough to notice children all looked extremely happy, there was no signs of any problems in the relationship that Kate had got with any of the three children (what a remarkable comment!). None of the children had been told off, none of the children looked like they were in trouble for anything, they were still all talking" (specially the twins with 2 years old they use to have eloquent speeches) "and playing around”. Suddenly Payne give us an Extra information “ just struck me how well they all looked." We’re more familiar with the use of struck, strik.en, striking, strike in sentences related to i.e. hit sharply as with the hand, the fist or a weapon, to inflict (a blow), to collide with or crash into, to cause to come into violent or forceful contact, to damage, to destroy... what was David talking about? Was his brain betrayed him in the middle on his long repeated and justified AnuStatement...?

    Then police has asked him if he remembers what Kate was wearing? I think police should ask him what Kate was not wearing instead... but then he said "I can't, no." And the man was telling the truth! according to her own she answered his knock at the Patio door draped in a bath towel. And she did not dress until 'After David left.' No matter how long his visit was 30 seconds, 3 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour and something it take the time enough for something really big STRUCK HIM! And life would not be the same since then.

  27. The mccanns have been able to pay for expensive lawyers to convince us of their innocence but when the facts of the case are analysed it becomes clear the mccanns are involved. There are only three suspects Murat and the mccanns, Murat was made a suspect based on Jane Tanners statement and some journalist being suspicious of him whereas the mccanns were made suspects because of cadaver found in their apartment and on Kates clothes and inconsistencies in their statements and their constant lying.
    The PGR should re-open the case and examine all the evidence.
    One thing that bothers me is why are there no photographs of Maddie doing all the activities that the creche children did, like going on the boat trip - did she ever go on that boat trip?
    I also agree with your Stroller theory Tex, I think it was Gerry and that afternoon they were busy planning the abduction theory that is why they were not at the Paradiso with their friends on the last day of their holiday.
    Their book will be a flop but it is another attempt to make money.


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.