Tuesday, 3 January 2012

Textusa Is Giving Up On The Maddie Affair

You read it right.

We’re giving up on the Maddie Affair.

We’re totally aware that we’ve just shocked White Hats and caused Black Hatted sheer joy and grinning.

Is Textusa going to shut down? No. Such thought hasn’t crossed our minds.

Have we changed our minds about what happened on May 3rd? No. Not even a tiny weenie bit.

We’re just giving up on the Maddie Affair because we’ve realistically, after a very careful and attentive analysis of the case in question, come to the conclusion that Humanity (at least the part you and me belong to) is never to know the truth about it.

What made us reach such conclusion? The Leveson Inquiry

It was not about the content of the hearings themselves, as we were able to witness, it was the expected shambolic and shameful farce. Hardly surprising.

Nor was it the reason for its existence. We do understand why it was created, although “Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press” is as reasonable as Count Dracula naming some Transylvanian judge to inquire about “The Advantages of Ketchup over Blood Consumption”.

What has enlightened us is the simple fact that it was created. Let me try and explain what I mean.

It started with the blatant, evident involvement of the UK’s Government, Diplomacy and Police in covering up what really was at stake with Maddie dying the way, where and when she did. But at least, they were “discreet”, using the tabloids to voice out idiotic lies. Nothing “Official”, except the CEOP during the Jim Gamble days, but that doesn't really count.

We, then, thought they were “saving” themselves to pounce on the couple when the time was right and circumstances convenient. Whenever and wherever that would be.

But our dreams were brought to reality with the innocuous phone hacking hearings, where Murdoch, Brooks and a pie were the highlights of the spectacle. Mind you, it was innocuous in terms of results, that is, because, let’s be very clear, nothing could be more serious than hacking other people’s phones.

We did, however get to realize two things. The first is that apparently you either have to have very short memory span to be rich or you have to have the ability to delegate all you can and then some more so that end up knowing very little; and the second is that, also apparently, the tabloids tailored stories to conveniences, and this “concept” fitted the tabloid attitude toward the Maddie Affair like a glove.

Unfortunately, history will probably only register the pie, and Murdoch’s wife prompt reaction, if it registers anything of it at all.

But we still kept a glimmer of hope alive, especially because these hearings involved the Maddie Affair very marginally.

But then came the Leveson Inquiry.

Questions had already been raised as to whether Leveson should have been appointed, after it was revealed that he had attended evening events at the home of Matthew Freud, husband of Murdoch's daughter Elisabeth. Was there potential here for a possible conflict of interests?

In the matter of the publication of Kate's diary, Colin Myler, former News of the World editor said he had been given repeated assurances from his head of news, Ian Edmonson, that Clarence Mitchell supported publication; a claim which Mitchell denied.

Who to believe? Mmm... A difficult choice between Myler, the editor of the discredited newspaper or Mitchell, former deputy of Andy Coulson in the run up to the last election (a former editor of the discredited newspaper and since arrested in connection with the phone hacking scandal)

Mitchell is also a former employee of Freud Communications. Leveson appears to have sided with Mitchell's version of events. We know who we would prefer to believe, but then we don't have a conflict of interest to consider.

Imagine Society being made up of layers, one on top of the other, as indeed it is. Now imagine how many of the top layers are required to set up things such as “Phone Hacking Hearings” and “Levenson Inquiry”. Their existence, together with what is perceived to be their attitude and effectiveness, could make one seriously think that both the Judicial and the Legislative Pillars of UK are “in the know” about what happened on May 3rd, 2007, in PdL.

That would, in turn, mean that there would be too many and too powerful people, financially, judicially and politically, in Britain that would have allowed themselves to get involved in the Maddie Affair.

Like having Nobility and Clergy taking side against their own people just because… who knows? Let’s just hope that Britain and Portugal haven’t become Nations where the “powerful” are nothing but puppets-on-a-string to the powerful, which we’ll keep believing they haven’t.

So, jumping from supposition to supposition and conjecture to conjecture, it’s seems to us that, realistically, never will truth be known via any of the British or Portuguese “Official Institutions”.

Let us now explain what we like to call the “hamburger decision”.

Basically it is what one chooses to do when one is presented with a hamburger to eat. Those who seek to know what is in fact in the the hamburger are naïve fools. It’s not that important to know what it contains, in comparison to the fact that one should understand why is one eating it.

You see, once one understands the why, then one may not only eat it, however unpleasant it may taste, but go and ask for seconds, and thirds... or, for the exact same reason never put one of these things to one’s mouth, no matter how much one enjoyed junk food until then…

That’s the “hamburger decision”.

UK’s Basic Pillars seem to have understood the all the facts, at least that’s how it appears to us, and also seem to have made their decision on whether to eat, or not, the “hamburger” in front of them.

It’s our opinion that this apparent decision had got nothing to do with either taste or content, but with a conscientious decision of convenience. But that’s just an opinion, and worth what it’s worth.

And that’s why we’ve decided to give up on the Maddie Affair.

But we’ve also said that we weren’t going to give up, right? We’ve understood why they’ve made their “hamburger decision”: it seems they chose to know the facts and keep them from you and me. Is it possible that a stage is now being set up to, in February, using the Amaral Trial in Lisbon, to get the case “re-opened”?

By the way, we do think it is... And, surprise, surprise, "discover" that the parents & friends are indeed guilty of negligence and manslaughter?

The charges may even describe truthfully what happened precisely at the time of death, namely, we might even get to know who, if David Payne or Kate McCann, was the one that struck the irate, but unfortunately fatal, blow. They will also tell us how Tanner and the others lied out of pure friendship, and that there was no abductor to begin with.

But that is as far the system will allow the truth to go. Not an inch further.

And let’s be honest, that will be enough to quench the general public’s curiosity on the issue. The parents confirmed neglectors and liars, the friends just as honest and responsible, all or some behind bars, and the end of the Fund.

That, for us also, would have been enough sometime ago. Until we understood that negligence was as fictional as the abduction.

Evidently, what the group, and by group we don’t mean only the “T9”, was in PdL for, and what were the circumstances and involvements that really surrounded the hours, days, weeks, months and years that followed the moment Maddie died, are NOT to be included in the said staging, if it does happen.

If it does happen we believe that in its possible conclusions, they will certainly leave out many things that they think you may NOT know, things the system will never acknowledge or allow it ever to happen.

So, keeping in mind that we think that those, on which we should rely to tell us the truth, won’t, we shall continue to disclose what we’ve been able to find out about these events.

We’ve may given up on the Maddie Affair, as in per Official Institutions, but rest assured that we won’t give up on what happened on May 3rd 2007, in PdL.

Because, as we’ve always said and maintain, the crime one must fight for to never to happen again, is not that the death of that girl, but the tremendous crime that followed her demise. The ripples of guilt go much beyond the circles made by the couple, and their seven friends…

Happy 2012, and may you all receive all you deserve!


  1. Unfortunately that don't surprise me, since we have seen blogs been shut down or going from a very busy activity into a very intermittent posts. Tony B was hardly persecuted by team McCann and I believe Joana Morais was also intimidated by Carter Ruck to be quite. Pamalam also announced an off line at the beginning of 2012. Then no surprise that blog follows the same way. That means, in a pratical way, the mccann's are winning their battle regardind Internet, in a moment when finnaly a light of hope is trying to shine in Portugal. It is very sad, but it is your decision and we have to respect it.
    In Portugal, papers (CM) are reporting for 9 Feb. a court case demanded by GA against Marcos Aragao Correia, where MAC is being accused of defamation in the case of Leonor Cipriano. He starts already playing is game using the media and counting with his friends at the top chairs in justice to try to discredit and frame GA. Nothing new. I believe that time he will be eaten by all his strategies. Pinto Monteiro is almost out of his chair with the stamp of being the most shameful and incompetent Attorney General Portugal had in 35 years of democracy. A death character who needs a lot of fresh air and intelligence if he wants to end his time with some dignity. I believe Maddie case will be reopen and the Truth will raise the surface. If there will be real consequences for the Mccann's with them and some of their friends arrested, we don't know. Portugal will trow that ball into UK terrain making the conviction and the guilt very clear. The time is very different in Portugal, then what was in 2007. It is very different in Uk as well. In 2007, Gordon Brown was a master piece in Europe and Portugal had an absolute need of being a " porreiro pa" with who has an hearing voice at the EU. Now, Cameron becomes a small Pierrot, overtook by Merkel and Sarkozy who are driving Europe and not loving what comes from the the " Royaume of His Majesty". Cameron is being isolated by his counterparts. A good time for Portugal to show the world that they manage to solve a case that was prevented by UK to be investigated in the proper time. (cont)

  2. Cont: The Leveson Enquiry was made for UK internal consumption but due to Mccann's circus becomes world known and again exposed the darkest side of UK. Cameron will be forced to close Mccann's Fund and deal with portuguese court decision with intelligence if he don't want to become a joke as a PM. When the victim of a crime is a fragile child with 3 years old, who died accidental or not in a foreign country, there is no reasonable excuse to protect the criminal(s). No any power can hide or erase that reality.
    The silence of the Mccann's tells it all and I believe Gordon Brown had regretted millions of times the day he sent to Portugal Mitchell to be the spoke Person of the Mccann's. The money Maddie represents was an evil temptation for a men who knows too much about the secrets of who walks in the corridor power. Holding that knowledge was Mitchell main power and was what really helped the Mccann's to walk free until now. If up to Leveson Enquiry, the public had only suspicions about the way Mitchell played with a crime involving a child, after hearing the journalists at the Enquiry we become aware of how all the business was organized to discredit PJ and protect the main suspects. Meetings with editors to follow a strategy. That leads me to another suspicion: how many meetings with Levesons judges before the enquiry started? The opinion of the judge about the reports regarding the Mccann's being "fluff" becomes the best answer for my suspicion. And that discredited the all Enquiry and insults all the real victims of the phone hackers.
    As I said before, we have to respect your decision Textusa, even because we don't know how many pressures you received from the BH and perhaps from Carter Ruck to stop looking for the truth. I believe you come very close to what happen to that poor girl on that fatidic May. My wishes, is that this is not a give up, is a break. In Feb, may you will be back with your intelligence and clever eye to help that child to achieve justice. She, and all the children deserve it.

  3. Lord Leveson appears to be guilty of the same practices as those of the press, into which he is inquiring.

    On 21 December, he said to a journalist "That's not quite how it's reported, is it, Mr Hipwell? It's reported in the article as a positive assertion, not just as a rumour."

    On 23 November, he said to Gerry McCann:

    "In your case, of course, nobody, and in particular nobody with children, could fail to appreciate the terrible impact of your daughter's abduction on you and your family"

    'Abduction' is also a 'positive assertion', given that no investigating authority has made any conclusion that Madeleine McCann was abducted.

  4. Feliz ano novo, T. para ti e família, um beijinho com amizade, J.

    ps. Bom artigo, e concordo plenamente com as camadas da 'cebola', mas nós já sabíamos que era assim - infelizmente a justiça que for feita nunca chegará para repor as imensas injustiças que aconteceram ao longo destes últimos quatro anos. Continua, é sempre bom ler-te ;)

  5. Ah dear Textusa.

    There is something much bigger than the guilt of the guilty.
    Something so putrid and disgusting that the British had no choice but to do everything to stop it coming to light.

    Welcome back after the break.
    Let us continue on the path of the truth.

  6. Happy 2012 Tex.

    But there is always hope, there are far too many people involved in this case for it to simply 'go away' and those guilty remain unpunished.

    The parents of Stephen Lawrence and their team have fought for justice for their son for 18 years and finally a court of law has found the main suspects guilty of his murder. Through sheer perserverance and determination believing in the British justice system the truth was sought.
    Maybe the Maddie case will take years, there are the twins to consider as they grow older they will start their own research, new players replace old players, the fraudulent fund, conflicting statements, so much still to be resolved, eventually justice will be found. As regards LEVESON and the acceptance of the 'abductor' story speaks volumes.

    Many people want to know the truth and it will come out when we least expect it, those guilty persons involved in the Maddie case who have willingly lied for their own gratification must live with their lies for the rest of their lives, in a sense they are already 'serving time'.

    All the best Tex xxx

  7. Their strength may be to be able to influence, but ours is passion.

    They may be too powerful, but we're too passionate!

    Well done, girls! Keep it up!

  8. Anon, Jan 4, 2012 12:38:00 AM & Jan 4, 2012 12:41:00 AM

    Thank you for such a heartfelt comment!
    We got to know your feelings if we are ever to choose to abandon ship.
    Please rest assured that we won't.

  9. It does seem that many people are beginning to see the light shining on LI and are wondering if their suspicions are correct. Many have already stated they believe it to be a whitewashing exercise ahead of the February hearings. The common factor is L himself. His hobnobbing with Freuds/Murdochs should have excluded him from the proceedings in the first place. He is not only out of his depth but useless in this situation. His credibility is zero. I think if he was the judge at any hearing I had to attend I wouldn’t be the slightest intimidated by his manner although I may be about the power he holds in the ‘name’ of justice. I also would be saying ‘the right things’ to cover my back just like the journalists reading the apology to the Mcs off a crib card. I wonder who handed those cards out before the witnesses appeared?????? It’s too obvious people like Pilditch know exactly what happened in PdL and now it’s all about changing history to suit the desired conclusion. Making things fit retrospectively.

    All he needs in any case is a result/a conclusion and it can be engineered at this inquiry. It appears only one side have to suffer the questioning to break them down to move the public perception towards thinking all journalists are scum. Next move is to give those in positions of power greater cover by silencing the journalists who are able to winkle out real information.
    Far from gaining freedom of speech this inquiry is working towards the opposite.
    Where is the balance? No journalists who have been pro Mc, no politicians YET...... No criticism of journalists who have slagged off the PJ, Amaral and the whole of Portugal

  10. It's mever too late Anon at 8.23.My prediction is SY will come yo the conclusion M did was injured/died in the apartment and they will then be looking for a killler. A woeldwide hunt wi;; begin amd the public will be told to let SY get on with the job.

    I wonder what the journalists would be allowed to say if that happens?


  11. Is anyone else beginning to wonder if the £3.5M allocated to SY for the review is to pay for the Leveson inquiry?

  12. I have no confidence that the Leveson Inquiry will get to the truth of anything, as the Core Participants can make whatever accusations they please with little or no come back. For instance, unbelievable though it is, Leveson has failed to call Ian Edmondson and Clarence Mitchell to give evidence regarding the diary debacle. It is clear Leveson is not impartial and the inquiry has turned into just another platform for the McCanns. It's also very worrying that Leveson's modus operandi appears to be a simultaneous attempt to exonerate the McCanns and discredit the police investigation. Going against the Portuguese proscecutors official statement and without any authority to do so (and probably little if any knowledge of the case) Leveson has declared Madeleine Mccann 'abducted' - this doesn't leave me with much faith in this country's institutions at all - in fact it's pretty shocking when you consider this case is about a missing three-year-old.
    I don't think we've heard the last of the McCanns at the Inquiry either as Leveson has called the Express editors to give evidence. Apparently the editors were on holiday before xmas but Leveson has insisted they appear in the new year. So watch out for another McCann fest... leading all the way up to the libel trial.

  13. Anon at Jan 4, 2012 12:38:00 AM

    I don’t think Textusa and any other blog has to have any worries about CR, they have absolutely no jurisdiction over the blog as it’s on a US server.

    The first part of the inquiry dealt with that and it was explained by experts that if bloggers are threatened with UK law it just proves their ignorance of how blogs work. It’s just that, an empty threat.

    If you look at the blog server as a huge library and all the bloggers are anonymous people who visit, write some words on some paper then put it on a shelf and walk out.

    The owner of the blog/library would have to be contacted and warned to remove offending material but if the blog/library owner didn’t think it was then he doesn’t have to do anything.

    He can be asked to identify those people who are leaving written notes but where the heck would he start and why would he want to anyway?

    It’s a needle in a haystack job. Why do you think Textusa is never mentioned by the likes of Mcs and CR? There is nothing they can do so they would rather not mention it at all than draw attention to it.

    We shouldn’t be intimidated by them as we are some of the few who they cannot bully into silence.

    It’s different for TB because he has identified himself and CR are using various devices to get him under UK law. Even JM who has identified herself is not their target.

    With Pat Brown all they could do was get Amazon to withdraw her book.

  14. I'm very glad to see justice done for Stephen Lawrence. It's never too late.
    (As she's not one to miss a photo opportunity, I half expected to see Kate McCann popping up beside Mrs Lawrence)

  15. Interesting set of questions that Leveson has put to a blogger at http://order-order.com/2011/12/21/leveson-questions-guido/ :
    (1) Who you are and a brief summary of your career history;
    (2) What material your website “Guido Fawkes” publishes, and Why;
    (3) The Inquiry wishes to understand the extent to which your website is based in the UK. Where are your servers located? Do you consider the UK courts to have jurisdiction over the Way in which your website is operated in the UK, and how far does this jurisdiction extend?
    (4) How you source stories (there is no need to name individuals) and Where you consider the responsibility for checking sources of information to lie, with you, or with the person who has provided you with the information;
    (5) To what extent to which you are aware of the sources of the information which make up the central stories featured on your blog;
    (6) The extent to which you consider that ethics can and should play a role in the blogosphere, and what you consider ‘ethics’ to mean in this context;
    (7) Do you have any policy which relates to complaints about articles or web pages which are libellous, defamatory or considered to be an invasion of privacy? If not, do you have any relevant practices? Do you ever remove availability to such pages on that basis? The Inquiry would be grateful for some examples of this (anonymised if necessary). Copies of any policies should also be provided.
    (8) How do you consider yourself to be regulated?
    (9) The Inquiry would also welcome your views on the extent to which the content of Websites, and the manner in which you operate, can be regulated by a domestic system of regulation.
    (10) Anything else which you consider will assist the Chairman to arrive at considered conclusions on any aspect of the Terms of Reference, set out above.

    Now, if only he had the same determination in getting answers with the journalists he “questions”…

  16. So by asking these questions is Leveson admitting he has no knowledge of something he is making accusations about? Making judhgenments without knowing what he's questioning?
    The inquiry putting the cart before the horse? Hoping bloggers will feed him the information to implicate themselves? The questions read as though they were wrirten either when his mind was on something else or he got a 5 year old to think up some questions for him too use.
    Who is this man Leveson and who chose him and why? Was he democratically elected? I'm guessing not!

  17. Formerly Known as 'Justice'4 Jan 2012, 13:23:00

    'What took you so long', would sound right if all of this fuss wasn't but a catchy headline ...

    Many people have realised that this case has become a joke ever since the McCanns were allowed to go back to the UK and seized GA's book. Particulary in Portugal where people and have turn their backs to the story - as we say here - we've already donated to this collection.

    What we know for sure is that Madeleine will never be found alive. Case closed.
    What will happen to the McCanns, I agree with you - probably nothing, in terms of judicial punishment. But I have a feeling they will get their tuppence worth from the twins, once they can think for themselves and get the story right...

    It can't hurt to keep campaigning for the truth, though. And we're all with you in that goal.
    Have a good year.

  18. Leveson unsavory connections with the Freud/Murdoch clan...the McCanns invited several times to meals at one of the Freuds holiday house in Luz ("the best risotto" Kate has ever had, so she boasted in her book!), it all STINKS!!!

  19. Poor Madeleine ,her champions are getting fewer and fewer

  20. Anon 2:15

    I think you're missing the point on this post. Textusa is not stopping championing her, is she? If you're talking about other blogs, Pamalam has "suspended". Who else?

  21. Guardian G2 The Revolution goes Viral
    " Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure, you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation."

  22. Predictions do come true. Leveson can't say he wasn't warned. Is this sheer arrogance or just a quest for a salary? Either choice he made to take the inquiry chair is wrong.


  23. May I suggest that you leave this post while the LI lasts? It’s due to resume soon and now the public will be watching and listening with sharper senses. The whitewash word is being used by all and I have yet to ONE person saying the inquiry is fair and impartial. I hope the clown gets the message he’s not funny.... not big or clever, time to beat a hasty retreat before the last shred of credibility he has is the latest joke.

  24. Dear Text!

    Couple of weeks ago I bowed out myself, vowing never to click into any one of the McCs connections.

    Some days later I got up again, precisely because apparently there once was a small child which vanished into thin air, a child which one might have taken for a walk, holding its tiny hand; having a laugh with, looking at the Muppet show with;
    but this god-send small human being has disappeared without a trace, and tracing it is of the essence.

    She lived among us , she disappeared, and she is entitled to us finding out what happened.

    Once committed, we ought to persevere, having come so far.

    So, dear Text: we'll have no more of this nonsense, and you'll continue alongside all of us, bringing down the murderers of Madeleine Beth McCann.

    See you in Lisboa around february 12th!


  25. At this stage of the game those who murdered this child and those that went out of their way to protect them, must share equal culpability and accountability.
    As far as I am concerned Clarence Mitchell must get equal time.
    And whoever covered for him likewise.

  26. Portia, please read the post again as I think you might have misread what Textusa is saying. It will put your mind at rest.

  27. I found this post interesting Tex.

    You know there is a lot of things that we will not know about through official channels. Reasons are sometimes simpler than we thought. But until we reach them we never know. And when we got it we might say (this was the reason?)

    Yet there is something that is out of control of any human being, whoever he is, or a pressure group: is life itself, that part of it we cannot control, which takes place sometimes in the most unpredictable way... Seems naive, is not! It happens often.

    The possibility of developing this process begins when you choose not do the right thing. The error starts here. Then you can chew on that error, try to control it, but there's always a chance of that thing empowering itself and surprise you the way you never thought it will.

    It is especially difficult when these issues are depending on the description of others, who now took our side for any convenience, but tomorrow who knows what other decisions may have to take.

    There should be no reason to oblige to this hell but why all this then? Another question that remains unanswered for now...

    Such as cancer, you can use the control of the information broadcasted as a therapeutic process to control the spread of the evil to other vital organs (avoiding court keeping freedom). But if the thing is bad (this case seemed to strain) you can never control the branches of evil that seems to have discovered the ideal environment to develop... slowly... creating focus of infection here and there (stress caused by police, new clues, disturbing evidence...) wearing you down the immune system (resistance to fear of being caught and exposed) and of course making your life a hell, despite marketing campaigns.

    Regardless of all that might happen on this case, there is something we must not overlook: when the day ends and the curtains cames down and the stage light go out we have no choice but to live with ourselves! It seems a minor thing but... this can be very painful for some...

    I wish you a New Year full of LIGHT and much more protected from darkness and obsessions that for unknown reasons it's solution is beyond our possibilities. This does not mean that we are no longer angry, mean that we shook the sandals and left to other lands (always curious to know the truth one day).

    The way to the truth is mysterious but achievable. One has to follow the right track. The truth is lying in a secret place somewhere out there and more than one holds the key... that the trouble of controlling the thing... you know what I mean?


  28. What an enigmatic comment A.!

  29. Bom dia!

    Acerca de A. :

    Por acaso também concordo acerca do comentário de A. É enigmático,sim.

    Mas, sobre tudo considero que se vale mais de generalidades sem apontar para algum dado objectivo. Falar de tomada de decisões erradas é uma situação que nos acontece a todos em qualquer momento.

    Mas, para mim, há mais um aspecto a considerar : acaba com uma interrogação
    ( pergunta a Text/Sisters).

    Costuma ser uma técnica de quem quer saber mais, não dando dados.

    É a técnica das psicoterapias:

    repetir a última frase do " paciente" transformando-a em pergunta, de modo a que este responda.

    Assinando com A. é por de mais generalista.

    Pode ser A. de A non.

    E A. (s) há muitos em qualquer nacionalidade.

    Portanto, o dito A. quer sacar algum dado ou resposta através deste blog.

    xxs to Text and Kind Regards to all Sisters.

  30. With google translator:
    Good day!

    About A. :

    By chance I also agree about the comment from A. It is puzzling, yes.

    But think about everything that is worth more than generalities without pointing to any particular purpose. Speaking of poor decision-making is a situation that happens to us all at any time.

    But for me, there is another aspect to consider: ends with a question mark
    (Question text / Sisters).

    Usually it is a technique of those who want to know more, not giving data.

    It is the technique of psychotherapy:

    repeat the last sentence of the "patient" transforming it into question, so that it responds.

    Signing with A. is a more generalist.

    A. It can be A non.

    And A. (s) there are many in every nationality.

    Therefore, the said A. want to grab some data or response through this blog.

  31. Leveson's either a knave or a fool. The latter if the Mcs have influenced what he believes. A knave if he knows the truth and pretends otherwise.

  32. A. Well, when the McCanns were named arguidos. It's not something you could ignore. It's not something where you could just present a story that was based on a comment from the McCanns' official spokesperson.

    Q. LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Did you do any work to find out precisely what that meant in Portuguese law?

    A. Yes, a lot of work, yeah. We spoke to lawyers in Portugal, and it was explained to me that there were subtle differences between arguidos and suspects. There's no legal equivalent.

    Q. LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: They're merely entitled to have legal representation and have other advantages, isn't that right? That's what Dr McCann told us, I think. I remove the word "merely" from what I just said.

    A. No, we were given a completely different version by the lawyers in Portugal. We were told that effectively an arguido is a suspect. It gives the police an opportunity to put much tougher questions than they could to a witness, and they were allowed legal representation and I think the McCanns themselves were given some very, very tough questions from the Portuguese police.

    I think Pilditch should name the Portuguese lawyers who told him that Police can ask “tougher” questions than to a witness.
    It’s been explained to deaf ears what an arguido is: a citizen considered, by Justice, to may having committed a crime. In other words, the legal system is warning him, in HIS DEFENSE, that he’s being considered OFFICIALLY a suspect. A person has to sign a notification to that effect, where it’s explained ALL the rights one has due to this status. One is, unlike the WITNESSES, to be heard by the Police in the presence of a lawyer.
    How much more ridiculous can this become?

  33. A very good article from Dr. Martin Roberts at Mccannfiles, " Washed up". It shows the inconsistencies delivered by a desperate Kate, while describing her movements on May 3. No surprise they run away from a reconstruction.
    Anybody remembers how was the weather in PDL on May 3, 2007? I could be confused but I think I read somewhere that the weather was terrible that week and May 3 was a cloudy day. If so, no any chance of having a cotton pyjama washed at late morning, dry by the afternoon, no matter if was a late afternoon.
    Only who don't know the Algarve can believe another lie delivered by Kate. It happen to me in sunny July and august having to wait a day and night to have a cotton cloth dried. Only swimming suits and light shirts dry quickly. The Winnie the pooh pajamas presented by Mccann's to the press, looks thick cotton. No any chance to have it ready for the night of May 3.

  34. Reading the article I noticed this.

    They washed the children and had breakfast at the apartment between 08:00 and 08:30 a.m .... During breakfast .... She noticed a stain .... on Madeleine's pyjama top, which she washed a little later that same morning.

    Why would the children be washed BEFORE breakfast? If they were washed wouldn't that be when they are dressed?
    The stain was noticed DURING breakfast so what were the children wearing during breakfast? Kate implies she was looking at Maddie dressed in pyjamas not a washed and dressed child like the first sentence indicates.

    If Maddie was not wearing the pyjamas then Kate would not be at the breakfast table to find the stained pyjamas.

    The whole thing doesn't make sense. I tend to go woth the theory Kate was trying to make a case for the 'abductor' being in the apartment the previous night and sedating the children with chloroform which can leave a brown stain.

  35. Exactly, anon 10:44. That is exactly my feeling. When they discovered, the police was not buying the abduction and there is no evidences to bake it, they start fabricating the evidences. The brown stain falls on the same pile as the Maddie crying on the previous night and the conversation Kate claimed , she had near the pool where she highlighted to the OC worker the fact they are leaving the kids unattended when they went for dinners. She is trying to force evidences. The abductor who had a key and entered the flat knowing the kids were alone and the parents away for dinner. The abductor, who enter the flat on the previous night and scared Madeleine, that's why she cried. The abductor who used a chemical to sedate the 3 children.
    She is really perverted. Now look in to another detail that kills all the strategies of that mother: the abductor, who appears to be a very well informed and organized person, manage to commit such major erros- be in the flat when Gerry went there( according to Gerry words) and carry the girl when a friend of the parents was outside the flat, in the street( Jane Tanner with her egg man). The guy was so slim and so powerful that he was not spotted by JW or GM and took less then a blink to carry the child in a uncomfortable position and descend the all street. What a joke that mother become and the Leveson judges who aligned with her lies.

  36. Anon @ 11.51. Further to your comments article goes on to say about the fluids found in the car (which K lied about at the inquiry and committed perjury.

    "But the McCanns say the fluids probably came from Madeleine's unwashed pyjamas and sandals which were carried in the boot when the family was moving apartments."

    UNWASHED pyjamas carried in the car! But wasn't Maddie supposed to have been 'abducted' wearing her pyjamas?

    That's the trouble with lying you have to explain them with more lies.

  37. One lie buys another lie. From lie to lie, the couple ruin their defense in any impartial court. The only reason they still free and able to debit more lies, is because other people are involved on the main behavior that took them to PDL AND THIS PEOPLE ARE PROTECTING THEM BY PREVENTING THE CASE TO REACH A PROPER COURT. If the case reach a court with independent judges, Carter-ruck methods will be exposed and the lawyers from that office, ridicularized. The Portuguese lawyers already lost the credibility. The only one that remains with some dignity is Pinto de Abreu, who manage to get out of the circus at the right time. Wonder he never appears in TV to make comments on Mccann's case. He knows, PJ was right, the girl is dead and the evidences are strong enough to make the parents arguidos ( suspects). Kate is so stupid that immortalized that on her book. She act like a child when is caught in a lie. Try to cover it with some more lies.

  38. Quite a mysterious posting by A. It seems like the person who wrote those words has a personal insight into what happened and it appears she is teasing us; I'm assuming it's a woman.

    Said person believes that in retrospect the reason that they decided to cover up the tragedy does not seem to be much of a reason now, certainly it does not justify the turmoil that was unleashed into their lives. This person describes life as being unpredictable, which is true, for example who would expect to lose their child forever while on vacation. I fully agree with this person when she states that our lives are further complicated when we choose not to do what is right, in this case failing to tell authorities how Madeleine died. I can imagine the fear that a couple would live with knowing that the people that sided with their story, their lie, did so only for convenience and may in the future go against them when it's no longer in their best interests. According to this person the couple wants to walk away from the limelight but can't, possibly because there are people taking advantage of the predicament they put themselves in. They thought they could conceal the truth, their cancer, by controlling the information fed to the media but they did not imagine that there would be an insidious and relentless search for the truth. A search that has further aggravated their way of life. Apparently the hardest part of all this for the couple in question is when they are alone and faced with their true images not those false images reflected back to them by the people they have duped. The truth is always at risk of spreading especially when more than one person knows it.

    I'm also available for Palm Readings.

  39. I apologize for ruining the mysterious interpretation given to my comment! Certainly I believe Tex has a more clear idea about what I wrote. In fact I have a personal insight about of what has happened on May 2007 except using my intuition about the most important data and first reactions in the early days (after that special timing information was already intoxicated).

    And I'm not coming here to "grab some data" because you know as much or as little as me. What I meant - and it was eventually confirmed by Textusa two posts later - is that the thesis that will persist officially (SY and other official sources) will be ABDUCTION! Again, truth is out of our reach! There are two fronts "laundering evidence": strategical broadcasted information released by media with high coverage (to reinforce the message frequency "abduction, abduction, abduction...") plus a respected source "the police is investigating abduction not the parents".

    The other front is nature itself - it's action is a well known "lifting" produced by erosion agents - especially devastated it's action over sensitive evidence.

    Time seems to be the most important agent that contains itself two contradictory aspects: on one hand, destroying possible evidence that could be valuable to unravel the mystery. On the other hand, acts like a data corridor, where one can exposed a set of available information (recorded data, behaviors and reactions) to be evaluated and analyzed with great care and deep knowledge.

    Time allow us to put "things in perspective" and asks things like: " why there is not one single clue about the whereabouts of the most advertised girl on planet earth.... Should we start looking for evidence on Mars instead of someone's backyard?



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.