"Textusa,
Notice how the employees, who, as you say, are UNABLE to quantify exactly the number of guests around a table, but they can be quite precise on who was missing:
Svetlana a KITCHEN ASSISTANT says “one individual, purportedly the father of the victim, left the dinner table” and then says “a woman who she believes to be his wife also left the table”. She doesn’t know how many people were at the table, but she’s able to notice exactly who was missing from it. She either paid attention to the table or she didn’t.
Also, how does she know, less than 24 hours after, WHO, out of all those men was the father of the victim? I Imagine the PJ showed her a pic of Maddie, but how can she make any sort of connection between Maddie and any of the men as her father? And how does she make a connection that Gerry and Kate are married if, as they say, they sat apart from one another at dinner?
On the same note Joaquim, notices that two men leave the table. How, once again, did he know it was two men, and not two women, or a couple, supposing that he’s saying this by having noticed two empty chairs.
Remember that he also has a vague idea about how many people were in the group. Ricardo is even more precise in the description of the person who has left the table for 15 minutes! He also says that the parents were there. How does he know that? It’s not said anywhere that the PJ walked around with pictures of the whole group.
He doesn’t know the parents of that child, but says he knows that they were present in a table that he cannot be more precise about it than saying it was a group of 8/9?
It’s EVIDENT these people are lying. And they’re not lying to defend themselves. It’ EVIDENT they’re saying to the PJ what they’ve been told to say.
As you say Textusa, things were supposed to be solved quickly and nobody would even notice their statements. But unfortunately for them, things remain unsolved today
Good job Tex et al!"
Thank you, dear reader, for such an enlightened comment.
What fascinates me the most about these statements is absolute arrogance that one may have to have to even think that they favor, in any way, the confirmation of the T9’s presence “as usual” for dinner at Tapas.
As you show, the evidence of prearrangement is such that one would hope that there would be some sort of minimum decency in keeping these statements “hidden” amongst the so many others.
Like they’ve done with some statements, of capital importance that little or nothing is heard of about them from their mouths… and that we'll soon highlight here.
But no, in this case, they’ve practically rubbed in our faces what was, in fact, evidence against themselves, and doing it as if it was the biggest trump they were playing.
That demonstrates either desperation or arrogance, most likely both.
But, so that these FOUR hymn singers don’t feel alone, let me remind you of a famous duo that also sang the same lyrics once:
Svetlana a KITCHEN ASSISTANT says “one individual, purportedly the father of the victim, left the dinner table” and then says “a woman who she believes to be his wife also left the table”. She doesn’t know how many people were at the table, but she’s able to notice exactly who was missing from it. She either paid attention to the table or she didn’t.
Also, how does she know, less than 24 hours after, WHO, out of all those men was the father of the victim? I Imagine the PJ showed her a pic of Maddie, but how can she make any sort of connection between Maddie and any of the men as her father? And how does she make a connection that Gerry and Kate are married if, as they say, they sat apart from one another at dinner?
On the same note Joaquim, notices that two men leave the table. How, once again, did he know it was two men, and not two women, or a couple, supposing that he’s saying this by having noticed two empty chairs.
Remember that he also has a vague idea about how many people were in the group. Ricardo is even more precise in the description of the person who has left the table for 15 minutes! He also says that the parents were there. How does he know that? It’s not said anywhere that the PJ walked around with pictures of the whole group.
He doesn’t know the parents of that child, but says he knows that they were present in a table that he cannot be more precise about it than saying it was a group of 8/9?
It’s EVIDENT these people are lying. And they’re not lying to defend themselves. It’ EVIDENT they’re saying to the PJ what they’ve been told to say.
As you say Textusa, things were supposed to be solved quickly and nobody would even notice their statements. But unfortunately for them, things remain unsolved today
Good job Tex et al!"
Thank you, dear reader, for such an enlightened comment.
What fascinates me the most about these statements is absolute arrogance that one may have to have to even think that they favor, in any way, the confirmation of the T9’s presence “as usual” for dinner at Tapas.
As you show, the evidence of prearrangement is such that one would hope that there would be some sort of minimum decency in keeping these statements “hidden” amongst the so many others.
Like they’ve done with some statements, of capital importance that little or nothing is heard of about them from their mouths… and that we'll soon highlight here.
But no, in this case, they’ve practically rubbed in our faces what was, in fact, evidence against themselves, and doing it as if it was the biggest trump they were playing.
That demonstrates either desperation or arrogance, most likely both.
But, so that these FOUR hymn singers don’t feel alone, let me remind you of a famous duo that also sang the same lyrics once:
How strange the kitchen assistant was hanging around the restaurant and at precisely the time the 'father' left the table. Surely she she should have been helping the poor cook who had 27 meals to get on the table in less than one hour.
ReplyDeleteShe must have been hoping for a tip if she was back in the restaurant before 10pm when the 'mother' left.
No wonder she lost her job, nothing to do with shipping her out of OC before she had to qualify her statement.
Analysing OC club and Tapas statements it becomes appartment they are full of lies, so why is nothing done about all this.
ReplyDeleteThe mccanns have not stopped at the concealement of Madeleines body, now they are asking for handbags to sell, new book which they have received a huge advance on, the Sun is serialising their book, it does not stop, its all about money, money, money. They have spent the original fund money not on searching for their daughter as they would have us believe, but paying expensive lawyers to convince the public of their innocence.
Is there not a decent journalist that could enlighten the public to the worldwide fraud and print the facts in a national newspaper. Yesterday Kate was on the front page of the Express saying what a hard decision it was to write the book!!! journalism has become a joke.
Sorry, to be making fun of such a tragic subject, but it seems that 04May was a very musical day: we had 4 hymn singers and the famous duo singing from the same lyrics. What the McCanns did was to give us all a lot of music!!!
ReplyDeleteA bit off topic but it seems John Stalker and Snr Amaral have something in common, maybe they have the right sheet music?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/magazine/2011/0312/1224291627718.html
Poor girl and poor police who have to deal with those Parrots.
ReplyDeleteThey claim Kyle Minogue gave them a bag which they pretend to use to fool another innocent who is going to buy it( or already buyed it). Why using the name of an Australian singer? Why no British singers joint the Circus and the money Parade? Is it true that Kyle Minogue got involved on that shame or they are using and abusing her name like they have done with Brian Adams?
ReplyDeleteSomebody has to let the singer know that if she helped them, she must do a proper homework before engaging such charities, because for the official investigation, THE PARENTS REMAIN THE FIRST SUSPECTS ON THE GIRL DISAPPEARENCE AND ACCORDING TO THE POLICE SHE DIED 4 YEARS AGO-THEN NOTHING TO SEARCH, NOTHING TO GRAB MONEY AND FOOL PEOPLE.
If kyle Minogue help them, it is a pleasure for me and my family to have another Vip banned from my shoping list. Not a single coin on her pocket to buy any CD.
Keep going Mccann's... destroying the reputation of any name you touch.
How many other missing childs, Kyle Minogue helped? Why they don't came on the news? Why Angelina Jolie, who Mitchell and the mccann's claimed 3 years ago, she will join Kate on her pain, never show up, never let her name to be connected with that circus? Somebody foolish Kyle Minogue if she really gave a bag and she must look around and fire who advise her to involve her name in a crime against a child.
For years the Mccanns have lied, it has become a way of life to them, when they are alone they must wonder if their conversations are being recorded, they will spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders and stuck with each other what an existance.
ReplyDeleteWhen the book comes out it may prompt somebody to come forward and tell the truth about what really happened, too many people are involved for it to stay a secret forever.
I'm not sure where to post this, there is nowhere very relevant, but I wanted to share it. In The Spectator of 26/2/2011 (a right-wing English magazine, in case Portuguese friends are not famiiliar with it) I read the following gem in an article by Rory Sutherland about the financial costs of taking children to hotels: "Parents can't really leave children under 12 unsupervised in a hotel room (unless they are doctors)....." This is the first time I have ever seen a negative comment about the MCs in the British press, and very cheering it was too.
ReplyDelete