Insane's Plea to Temporary Insanity

To our usual readers, Insane is not a strange name.

This character has become as familiar as the barking the next door's neighbour’s dog, that just calls for attention, in the middle of the night. Useless and irritating.

To the new readers, let us tell you who Insane has told us about who s/he is. Insane -we know now- s/he's not pro McCann, even says s/he runs an Anti blog.

One that's highly supersecret, so much so that the simple fact that you’ve just read a single word here has automatically banned you from there.

Sorry, too late, you're banned from there. If only if you could return what you’ve just read…

However, this, we imagine, should bring Insane some problems. You see, according to Insane's own rules, s/he's certainly being continuously kicked out of his/her own blog, by him/herself, for the fact of having been here.

We know, for certain, that Insane does come here, so Insane is totally unacceptable in Insane's blog. Rules are rules.

Once kicked out of that blog, it means that Insane has to go through all that bothersome process of registering, having to verify if him/herself, Insane, to be as trustworthy as Insane demands (and intelligence worthy as well) for one to be accepted there and so receive the respective authorized super-secure and super-secret password.

Multiply this by the times Insane has to do the above described for every single time s/he comes to this blog (that is basically every time a new post or comment is published) and you can start to grasp the living hell Insane is going through (we know that Insane’s life is far from pleasant, but that has nothing to with this blog).

We also know from Insane that Insane believes that Gerry McCann and David Payne are paedophiles (sorry readers, this is from an unpublished comment from this character which we intend to use later on).

Insane ABSOLUTELY believes in Mrs Fenn, Carpenter and ALL of the Ocean Club Staff. All are "credible" witnesses irrelevant the contradictions between their statements.

And don't you dare say otherwise, says Insane.  

Insane also believes in a certain Priest, which we’ve been, up to this point, unable to identify exactly to whom is Insane referring to.

In a comment made on Feb 19th, Insane states: "In the course of developing your theories, you have turned your insanity upon practically everyone. You have called them all liars - the witnesses in the Tapas bar, other holidaymakers, priests, Mrs Fenn.".

On the following day, Feb 2oth, is more precise, reducing the number of priests to just one: "In the past year or so, I have witnessed her accuse of lying, without any rhyme or reason, numerous witnesses without ever providing one credible reason for accusing them. This list includes a priest, other holidaymakers, staff from Mark Warners, an elderly neighbour - totally ridiculous."

So this blog is supposed to have said that a Priest has lied.

A reader has politely asked Insane if the Priest in question was Rev. Heal.

We’re still waiting for Insane to tell us which Priest is s/he referring to.  

Insane also believes FULLY in the Tapas Watersports on May 3rd and the T9 Tapas dinners, all through that fateful week.  

Insane does say s/he has his/her own theory, and although refusing to share it, at least with us, we’ve been able to deduce that s/he believes that the McCanns did do it.

What exactly they've done, is, as per Insane's will, to remain a secret known only to a very carefully selected few.  

Insane justifies the "McCanns did do it" statement with the unquestionable and sound argument of “we all know they did it”, and that should suffice to quench the curiosity and reasoning of the rest of us common mortals, because, Insane not only to seems to KNOW what others KNOW at a certain point in time and place, as s/he's ABSOLUTELY SURE how everybody is to THINK.  

Insane does reminds me of a certain Professor that I had in College that during one of his lectures modestly stated that ".. I once attended a Conference where out all those hundreds present there, there were no more than ten people who really understood about what was going on, but geniuses, real geniuses, there were only three of us...".

I did say "modestly" because, after all, this Professor did accept to share the stage with two others...

But the way Insane speaks about the McCanns & Co brings us to the last trait of his personality we wish, for now, to call your attention upon.

S/he accuses them of the most infamous things, insults them with the most outrageous adjectives, showing a total lack of fear from being sued by them, completely disregarding the example set by the huge sums of money that the Tabloids were forced to pay up.

But, on the contrary, s/he has an obsession of suing the authors, commentators and even you readers of THIS blog, saying that s/he represents the happy lawyers of MANY people.

We can only suppose, that these MANY people are those that laugh alongside him/her, somewhere in some dark corner of the internet, or not, about what is written in this blog.

It must be in real far, far away corner of the net, because we haven't heard one little echo of what is claimed.

But let’s get to what has brought us here, and that is the extraordinary comment left, and published, by our friend, Insane, made on Feb 27th:  

"Morning, brain donors. I see you have all had your daily allocation of paranoia pills. 

Here's a question for you - how come the police in Portugal didn't cotton on to any of this, eh? 

They were actually there, took statements from the Tapas bar workers and many holidaymakers - yet they seem to have believed them, when they said the McCanns dined in the Tapas. 

After all, they also had the reservation sheets and access to the bills for additional drinks which had been rung through - but you prefer to believe Textusa's version based on her claims about the table in a restaurant she has never seen, and a load of half-baked claptrap about the restaurant not being open for business at all. 

Now she has turned her rabid attentions to the choice of clothing Fiona Payne adopted for a visit to the beach with her children. They look like perfectly normal holiday clothes to me, but then I am still in possession of my marbles. 

So what Textusa is really telling you, her merry bunch of thickos, is that the PJ and Sr Amaral got it all wrong. 

They went to that restaurant, spoke to all the staff and took their statements, and never once realised that they were being had.  

Then they did the same with the holidaymakers - and were had by all of them. And of course don't forget that Mrs Fenn must have taken them for a load of idiots too, if Textusa is to be believed. 

Now she is telling you that the PJ are too thick to realise that although the tapas group were dressed for a stroll on the beach with the kids, Fiona seems to have turned up dressed for the Hunt Ball, or perhaps a night at the opera. 

Perhaps they didn't realise because, to them, a summer skirt and top seems perfectly appropriate garb for the beach. 

I see Textusa has already had to backtrack on this once - believe me, she will cling on like a drowning woman to a piece of flotsam to the remaining shreds of her lunatic theory 

Oh incidentally - did Textusa mention that prior to the statements being taken from the tapas workers, the PJ had actually gone to the restaurant the day after Madeleine's disappearance, and taken a brief statement from the staff who were there, contacted by phone the ones who weren't?

Their versions of events did not change between then and when they gave their formal statements.

But were Textusa to be correct, they had all been contacted, as had all the holidaymakers and all leant on to give the same version of events. Namely that they observed the McCanns and their friends dining at the Tapas. 

Well isn't that amazing?  

Not even 24 hours had gone by, and already Mark Warners were involved in a huge cover up, and had all the workers and guests singing from the same hymn sheet. And the police never realised.

Now can you understand how utterly ridiculous Textusa's claims are?  

Not only do they require the swiftly organised co-operation of a large number of workers, who would all go on to sing from the same hymn sheet, but also the complete agreement of every holidaymaker who had dined there too - amazingly organised overnight by the MW staff. 

When they weren't out all night searching for Maddy, of course. 

And all to help a group of people to whom they had no previous connection (Awaits usual thicko response - ''how do you know they weren't connected?'')

Oh, and a police force who were too thick to get it 

Because if you can't, it really does illustrate why I refer to you all as brain donors."

A dog bites, not because it has teeth. He bites for a reason, the teeth being only the tools nature has provided for him to express whatever he wishes to convey.

He may bite out of fear, he may bite out of rage, or he may not even bite, just by an ostentation of teeth, by gnarling. A threat that puts together sound and sight.

Understand why he’s biting, and you’ll understand the purpose with which the dog is using his teeth.

A dog may bite, as I said, due to fear or for self-preservation, or he may bite to assure that you don’t tread on ground his keeper doesn’t want you step on.

This is usually well highlighted with a “beware of the dog” sign, and the breed of the animal is usually a menacing one. The dog then bites not to protect himself, but to protect something, or someone, from you or your curiosity.

You, not wanting to be bitten, back off, thus assuring that that something, or someone, remains untouched. 

There’s a saying that a barking dog doesn’t bite. I’m afraid to say that my experience dictates that not to be true, but the intent of the saying is to explain that the barking is the last loud resort that a “dog” has to threaten you with something when he has nothing else to threaten with, beside the threat itself.

Insane’s comment has two interesting things about it. One is that it reveals who s/he’s “barking” for, and the other is that s/he may be barking not only for others as for Insane’s own sake also.

Let’s start with the first. Insane asks: “ did Textusa mention that prior to the statements being taken from the tapas workers, the PJ had actually gone to the restaurant the day after Madeleine's disappearance, and taken a brief statement from the staff who were there, contacted by phone the ones who weren't?”

From this deduces that in less than 24 hours, the day after Madeleine’s disappearance, ALL the workers and ALL the guests were on the same hymn sheet, as per the following: "Not even 24 hours had gone by, and already Mark Warners were involved in a huge cover up, and had all the workers and guests singing from the same hymn sheet"

And in the following paragraph Insane confirms that the above said was amazingly organised overnight by the MW staff: "Not only do they require the swiftly organised co-operation of a large number of workers, who would all go on to sing from the same hymn sheet, but also the complete agreement of every holidaymaker who had dined there too - amazingly organised overnight by the MW staff"

I quote again the following: “had all the workers” and “co-operation of a large number of workers” together with “had all the workers and guests” and “every holidaymaker”.

ALL workers and guests "who would all go on to sing from the same hymn sheet". Organized overnight.

Which means, from the night of May 3rd to May 4th.

Really amazing indeed.

But let’s see who was heard, by the PJ, from the guests and staff, on May 4th.

 On that day, May 4th, I can only see two External Diligences:

External Diligence #1: 
   
KIDS CLUB STAFF interviewed 4 May 2007 by Inspector M.Pinho 
Today we, I and my colleague L.Madeira, spoke with Mrs Silvia Maria Correia Ramos Batista., director of maintenance and services for the company "GREENTROUST", which manages the "OCEAN CLUB" company, contactable by mobile phone 964.... 
Through her, we contacted Donna Louise Rafferty Hill (contactable by mobile phone number 964...) manager of the creche staff for the "MARK WARNER" company, responsible for Madeleine and the twins for several periods each day after the McCann family arrived in Portugal. 
The latter advised us that all these employees are English nationals and that they came to work in Portugal from March/April until November; that there are 13 people who work in the creche, their names and telephone numbers being as follows: [NOTE: Phone numbers withheld] 
 - Pauline Francis M. 
- Emma Louise W. 
- Sarah Elizabeth W. 
- Susan bernadette O. 
- Leanne Danielle W. 
- Shinead Maria V. 
- Jacqueline Mary W. 
- Kirsty Louise M. 
- Lynne R.F. 
- Catriona Treasa Sisile B. 
- Stacey P. 
- Lyndsay Jayne J. 
- Amy Ellen T.  

External Diligence #2:  

REPORT OF EXTERNAL WORK [Investigation Activity] 
Date: 2007/05/04 
Location: Praia da Luz 
Entity that determined the activity: superiorly determined 
Funcionario [employee] that executed it: Miguel P*** and Duarte F****, 
Inspector Description and outcome of the investigation: 
- On this date, we went to the Tapas restaurant, owned by the Ocean Club, located in Praia da Luz (Lagos), where we spoke with various employees of the restaurant, who were on duty there last night. 
- The subject of conversation was the disappearance of little Madeline MCCAN, especially the behavior of the elements of the group that dined at that restaurant yesterday, which was partly made up of the parents of the missing child, as well as if [whether or not] they had seen an individual suspect, with a blonde "rastas" [hairstyle] in camouflage pants.

 These were those that were heard in this External Diligence #2:

- JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS (Phone No "91 768 ####) - bartender:

- SVETLANA STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant: - MIGUEL SALCEDAS COELHO (BI No 1426####, telephone 91920####) - cook

- JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (residing at Rua Ilha Terceira, no. 15, Lagos, Telephone No 91 277 ####) - table employee [waiter].  
- JOELSON FABIO SOARES SANTOS LUCIO (telephone No 96948#### - was contacted in another restaurant of the [Mark Warner] group, situated in the same locality) - pantry boy 
- RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA (as he was on his day off, he was contacted by telephone No 91 397####) - table employee. 
- MARIA MANUELA ANTONIO JOSE, given that she was not in service yesterday [neither] during the dinner [nor] when the disappearance of the child occurred, she was not interviewed.

As can be seen, from External Diligence #1, TWO (2) OC Staff (Mrs Silvia Maria Correia Ramos Batista and Donna Louise Rafferty Hill) were contacted.

None, on May 4th, spoke about seeing any of the T9 at Tapas on the night before. 

All the 13 others mentioned, had their statements taken on later dates.

None on May 4th.

From External Diligence #2, SEVEN (7) Tapas Workers spoke to the PJ. Of these, ONE (1) MARIA MANUELA ANTONIO JOSE, was not interviewed, which resulted in SIX (6) brief statements taken during this diligence.

Of note, of these SIX (6), only ONE (1) (RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA) was contacted by phone

From neither External Diligence was any guest/holidaymaker contacted on May 4th.

The first one we know that had a statement taken was Jez Wilkins and that was on May 7th.

So according to Insane, ALL of the “large number” consists of EIGHT (8) MW Workers (later, surprisingly, we would find out the MW had almost as many restaurants working as had personnel) and ALL guests/holidaymakers at the MW Ocean Club at PdL that were interviewed less than 24 hours were ZERO (0).

If this enormous group of people of EIGHT (8) (please do your math, 8 + 0 = 8), was able to be organized "to sing from the same hymn sheet", and that would be, once again according to our friend, an unbelievable human achievement.

An impossible one!

But of the of EIGHT (8) MW Workers, TWO (2), from External Diligence #1, didn’t speak, on May 4th, about the Tapas being at Tapas, so we in REALITY we ONLY have SIX (6) MW Workers made "to sing from the same hymn sheet".

Insane, maintains that it remains an impossible task, after all, it, according to him/her, involves ALL MW Staff and ALL holidaymakers.

Especially taking into account that that hymn sheet must have been really full of complex and detailed information that these SIX (6) people had to memorize...

Let’s see what they had to say:  

JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS says “He did not notice if from the group of British citizens (in number 8 or 9) that yesterday dined in restaurant (which was partly made up of the parents of the missing [child]), someone left [absented themself] during such dinner”

SVETLANA STARIKOVA VITORINO says “yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table”  

JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA says “Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.”  

RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA says “Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at that restaurant yesterday, like they usually did, which was partly made up of the parents of the missing (he did not know them) he noticed that absent from the table, for about 15 minutes, [was] a man (tall, little more than thirty years of age, normal physical stature, white complexion and hair color light brown);”  

MIGUEL SALCEDAS COELHO says “He did not know the missing or her parents, he knew only that they were part of a group of British citizens who usually dined there”  

JOELSON FABIO SOARES SANTOS LUCIO says “As he works in the pantry, he never goes to the area where are the tables, so he saw nothing”

"Credible" Jeronimo, Svetlana, Joaquim and Ricardo do seem to sing the exact same tune, to the point that although none of them is able to be precise, after serving them for the 5 straight nights before, and having the number “9” quite explicit on the reservation sheets, about the exact number of guests: "in number 8 or 9" (Jeronimo) / "in number 8 or 9" (Svetlana) / "group of 8/9 British citizens" (Joaquim) / "group of 8/9 British citizens" (Ricardo), but are ALL able to be very PRECISE and EXACT on the margin of error: 8 or 9!

It must be due to this amazing mathematical coincidence that their "credibility" comes from...

I’ve seen dress rehearsals less synchronized, I must say.

For me, these FOUR are, IN FACT, and using Insane's own words, singing from the EXACT same hymn sheet, when they say what they said to the PJ.

And none of the four was the "Maestro". They all try to appear be nonchalant about "those guests" in particular... as if, "yeah... I have a vague idea about that group, but there so many other people and other things to do that I really didn't notice them...", a typical attitude from someone who's afraid of getting too involved in the issue at hand.

They're being defensive, just providing most uncompromising and most vague information possible about events they know they didn't witness.

Their job was only to make sure that the PJ heard them say that yes, the whole (the vague 8/9) group was there at Tapas and that some of them stood up and left to come back a little later.

That is as hard to coordinate as it is to make ants march one behind the other.

About the other two MW workers heard on these two early diligences, one is vague, although in-tune as he clearly states “part of a group of British citizens who usually dined there”, the other sees nothing.

This is the amazing, humanly impossible task that, for Insane, proves that MW or its guests were NOT involved: to have FOUR (4) people say they saw the same group dine "as usual" and that some of them left temporarily the table that they were supposed to be having the meal at.  

Insane’s “barking” is clearly set to protect the MW and the holidaymakers.

If we throw in this pot our good friend Mrs Fenn (she's in the comment) and Robert Murat (previously viciously defended), it's evident that this character will react violently whenever the discussion goes anywhere off or about anyone outside the T9 circle.

That's why s/he so ADAMANT to say that no one PdL knew any of the T9, and so had no reason to help, and much less, lie for them.

It's like the T9 had the plague, and everyone around PdL avoided them.

The possibility of these people striking friendship with any local or with other guests during their stay is regarded as completely ludicrous.

But about the T9, as we've already said on this post, you can insult them, and do speak freely about their guilt and their lack of conscience. basically foul-mouth them. No justification required. Apparently for Insane, that brings no libel issues whatsoever.

Why? Because the T9 are expendable. Have been so from the start.

Once the "abductor story" started not to stick (basically when Smith didn't come forward when he should have), they were supposed to take the blame, the WHOLE blame, and no one but them were to be blamed.

That's why when the plan went "Smithless" it became acceptable for McStroller to be Gerry McCann, but ONLY IF he was disposing Maddie's body.

What Insane doesn’t like for us to us to say is that the McStroller was Gerry McCann but walking around with Tanner’s daughter to be seen holding a blonde girl in pyjamas.

This should be indifferent to Insane, as it’s about one of the "foul" T9, but it isn’t. And it isn't because then the blame will fall "outside" the T9.

It’s IMPERATIVE that THAT man be either “the abductor” (which is nonsense) or Gerry McCann DISPOSING of Maddie’s body. He simply cannot be anyone else, or, if Gerry, be doing anything else.

ANY OTHER scenario means that Maddie’s body HAD have been removed from 5A with the help of someone other than the T9 from PdL/MW, and that simply is NOT acceptable.

Do you now understand why some people are so much against the fact that McStroller is not DISPOSING any body? To the point of overreaction? And why they keep saying that the Rua da Escola Primária is a darkly lit alley, when even the McCann Mockumentary shows otherwise?

I'll give a clue... it's NOT to protect any of the T9.

The same reason why Mrs Fenn MUST be a credible witness, and the same reason the MW workers MUST be credible witnesses and the same reason all holidaymakers MUST be credible witnesses.

So, when Insane says that this blog's agenda is the McCanns agenda, although absurd on the terms implied, s/he is totally not out of reason.

You see, what Insane would love to see us do, would be to isolate the McCanns & Co from all those who willingly "helped" them, by lying for them so as to protect all that was there to be protected, and we certainly are not talking about the McCanns.

As we refuse to disconnect anyone that we feel was involved, we're unwillingly helping the McCanns keep a tie with all others.

In Insane's world this is very, very unpleasant.

Insane's people had one big opportunity to break away from the T9, but instead opted to continue the farce. It was a path they chose to follow. That is a topic for a future post.

Now, and to finish, there are two other things about Insane’s comment that needs to be noticed. The first is when it is said “taken a brief statement from the staff who were there, contacted by phone the ones who weren't?”

To be able to make this remark, is to have an exceptional knowledge of the files, as, as far as we could see, only one employee is contacted by phone, RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA, one of the hymn singers.

By stating such in the plural form, Insane might be making some sort of confusion between the numerous phone calls that were made that night, with the single one that was made by the PJ…

The second thing is when it is said “After all, they (PJ) also had the reservation sheets and access to the bills for additional drinks which had been rung through”

For someone who apparently knows so profoundly well the files, seems now not to know that there are “no bills for additional drinks” in the files, nor, are there any information on how they “had been rung through”, as that would be an extremely valuable piece of information, if for nothing else, there were T9 credit cards in PdL.

To say that both the phone calls and the payments exists but are NOT on file, is to assume knowing inside information, only available to those who ran the investigation or to those who were there witnessing the events as they happened.

These two facts, to me seems that Insane, like Sidmouth, is not only a “dog” “barking” to protect others, but, probably to protect himself/herself too, because, to me, it seems that this character falls very much under the same category as Sidmouth: that of people that were there that week.

Oh, Insane, just two last things.

First, if you notice, I’ve reserved a spot on one of the blogs columns to place the link to your blog, so that people may go and see what it is you exactly defend that happened that night. Send it in, and I’ll post it.

Second, thank you for you comment (unpublished) on the Gaspars Statements.

We’ll certainly be using it one of these days.