Saturday, 25 February 2012

A FOAF Told Me That There's An Angry Panda Out There

If you remember, Panda left a couple of comments in our "Colouring Hats With A Crayon" post.

This one,

Panda has left a new comment on your post "Colouring Hats With A Crayon":

Just to clarify matters, I did not say I sat next to Mrs Fenns friend,
I said I sat next to a Lady who was a friend of Mrs Fenn.

Posted by Panda to Textusa at Feb 11, 2012 1:21:00 PM

and this one:

Panda has left a new comment on your post "Colouring Hats With A Crayon":

Textusa, how dare you snoop on MM copy lots of posts single me out for
dissection and be wrong without a word of apology,!!!!

You really are a vicious person and
I would say I feel sorry for you but I don't. You must be very sad to stoop to the kind of blogging you do.

Posted by Panda to Textusa at Feb 11, 2012 7:28:00 PM

First, I would like to address my apologies to Panda.

You see, that not-so-innocent-SIC-Psychic-whatchmacallitthing has diverted lately our attention away from you.

It almost seemed like we did a “hit-and-run” kind of post, and that just isn’t our style or attitude towards the issues we address.

Panda, please accept our sincere apologies for this one unexpected but explicable delay.

We know it isn’t the sort of apologies you demanded, but about those, we’ll speak about it later.

Let us clarify that we don’t “pick” on people. We, however, feel compelled to expose all tactics that we detect and which we deem relevant, and that are perpetrated by people such as you, in all this humongous effort of disinformation that has involved the Maddie Affair, from the very first minute the unfortunate child lost her life.

So yes, whenever we find an enforcer of such disinformation techniques, we will single out the person, or persona, as is your case, out, be it you or anyone else.

Of course, as you might imagine, we don’t “shoot” on sight. There's always the right and adequate timing to expose who we feel should be exposed. Your time came, because you did present "new evidence", that paramount concept which we've all failed to grasp to date as to what it exactly means, but were told, that it's like a magical wand that will allow the case to be reopened.

We know that it would be sufficient for the McCanns to request such, but, apparently, they seem not inclined to do that... go wonder.

Other wolves in sheep's clothing will just have to wait a little bit more for their turn...

But let’s get back to the subject, shall we? The thing about the “friend of Mrs Fenn friend” you mentioned.

I’m afraid that instead of making things right, it seems that, thanks to you, things have taken a turn for the worse... for you.

Let’s start on how confused I am by what you’ve said.

In your comment t at MMF you say, as said, “friend of Mrs Fenn friend”.

In comment referred above, you correct this statement with an “I did not say I sat next to Mrs Fenns friend. I said I sat next to a Lady who was a friend of Mrs Fenn.”

Isn’t that what we just said in the post?

Edna Glyn, the, and we’re just quoting you here, “Lady who was a friend of Mrs Fenn? Or is there any other Lady who’s a friend of Mrs Fenn, referred in the various fora about Maddie, besides Edna that we aren’t aware of?

If so, do please correct us that we will provide you, immediately, with all the apologies you so much seek, even demand.

Now, do allow me to turn to our readers. They, unlike you, don’t pretend that they don’t understand what I write, nor whine about the quantity of wording I tend to use. A nasty habit of mine, I’m afraid.

And I could write much about what Panda did write and what she really was meaning to write, but as Panda says, I’m a mean (or is it vicious?) person, so I’ll just assume that the typo in Panda’s comment at MMF is not the double use of the word friend.

I’ll assume, as I think was her intention that she indeed wanted to write “friend of Mrs Fenn’s friend”. Lady X, a friend of Edna Glyn. Edna Glyn, Mrs Fenn’s friend.

The storyline then becomes the following: Mrs Fenn hears a child cry, Mrs Fenn then calls Edna who isn’t surprised, Edna calls/speaks to, we don’t know how or when, Lady X, the “Lady friend of Mrs Fenn’s friend”, and Lady X then talks to Panda, a total stranger who, by coincidence, has sat next to her on an airplane trip to Gatwick.

According to Panda, Lady X seems to know a lot about the going-ons of the Maddie Affair, more precisely in the OC in PdL.

Lady X even knows, according to Panda, that the “the Ocean Staff had called out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a.

This means that Lady X knows that Mrs Fenn’s complaint about a child crying in the McCanns apartment was not a single occurrence. According to Lady X, it did happen more than once.

Pity Mrs Fenn does forget to mention this rather important fact in her statement. But, as we all were able to read, Panda has assured us of that Lady X knows.

What we don’t know is how Lady X comes to know about this.

According to Panda, Lady X lives in Faro. Faro is almost about 70 km from PdL. It has the big cities of Lagos, Portimão and Albufeira, not to speak of others as Armacao de Pera, between them. Not exactly around the corner, is it?

Now, how does someone who lives so far gets to know what the OC Staff has done or not done about the McCanns and their crying children, while the PJ, in PdL, don’t have a clue?

It seems then that this popular topic of conversation all over the Algarve fails to reach the PJ ears.

The OC Staff were apparently telling this to everyone, all the way to Faro at least, but not to the PJ.

And who, besides the PJ, was singled out by the OC Staff not to share this information with?

Mrs Fenn, of course. They did forget to tell her, didn’t they? Otherwise she would have remembered this in her statement, wouldn’t she?


Oh, silly me! You’re absolutely right! The OC didn’t tell her because she would be the first to know about the multiple crying episodes, wouldn’t she?

As the upstairs neighbour, she would be the one who would’ve reported the repeated cries, wouldn’t she?

So, did Lady X get to know from Edna, who in turn got to know from Mrs Fenn that the crying episode happened more than once?

So why does Lady X say it was the Ocean Staff that had called out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar, instead of saying that Mrs Fenn had complained other times?

Or, let me guess, Mrs Fenn did hear repeatedly cries, but told the PJ about only this one instance so that she wouldn’t smear too much the McCann’s name… that must have been it.

But then, why bother to go to the PJ at all? After 109 days? Why not just remain in silence instead of reporting a single event, when there were others to be reported too?

So it remains important for SY to call in Edna Glyn. It apparently seems to be a fact that the complaints about children crying were many, and not just that one instance told by Mrs Fenn. Mrs Fenn doesn’t mention them in her statement, and this should be definitely clarified.

Edna Glyn is either to say what she knows about these repeated crying episodes, or, if she doesn’t know anything about it, help identify who this Lady X can be, a person that is saying that she's, allegedly, her friend and is talking about such relevant clues about the case to strangers.

Or maybe there's a direct connection that we don't know of, between Lady X, or Edna Glyn for that matter, and the OC Staff, which Panda doesn't tell us, and we have no way of finding out... but if it that was so, why bring up Mrs Fenn name at all? 

Is that important? About Mrs Fenn, it is, yes, and about Edna Glyn too. But the post is not about either of them. It’s about Panda and Lady X, two travel companions, although strangers to one another.

We maintain all said in the "Colouring Hats With A Crayon" post. We continue to say that it isn’t hearsay, but that it’s Panda clearly saying what she heard Lady X say, and not what she hears Lady X saying it’s being said, one huge and very important difference.

You see, what we are before here, my dear friends, is the most basic of all misinformation tools: the FOAF.

This is so much used, that I even dare ask all readers, s/he who hasn’t used it at one time or another in their lives please do cast the first stone.

I, for one, will remain motionless.

What is a FOAF?

It’s something we heard from a Friend-Of-A-Friend. You know, when you hear say "I have this friend who knows this person that..." You can add as many "OAFs" to the FOAF as you like. From a FOAF to FOAFOAFOAF...

Familiar isn't it? That’s how most Urban Myths are born and kept alive.

I’ll give you an example, very recently used in a comment in Joana Morais's blog about our Desperate Disinformation post: “Now seriously, I happen to know someone who works for SIC and who knows someone (technical staff) who knows someone who was involved with the programme so I am in a position (fingers crossed) to explain what happened. My source told me that...”

Remember that? What a classic text-book FOAF that one was!

Yes, we’ve all used FOAFs one time or another. All are meant to misinform, in some way or another.

It allows us to ad lib a story up a bit. “He who tells a tale, adds a detail”

And mind you, taking out most of the Urban Myths of the equation, most FOAFs are about 70% to 80% true. It's just when that bit of creativity, that, when exaggerated, makes the whole thing just be ridiculous,

Most are “innocent”, even inoffensive FOAFs, you know, those that just serve to magnify the importance of the storyteller.

But then there are very serious and intentionally harmful FOAFs.

Panda uses a FOAF (a friend of a friend of Mrs Fenn tells her that...), from it abusively reaches conclusions in which the following argumentation is based upon this "certified" source. This is far from being inoffensive, and much less innocent.

Back to you Panda, I do agree with you, that apologies are in order. Not from me to you, because I don’t see any reason whatsoever for them to exist, nor from you to me, because, again, I see no  reason, and if I did, I wouldn’t request such thing, much less demand it.

Where I do see apologies are due, is from you to your friends. But that’s between you and them.


  1. Who are the best users of FOAF?

    The Mccann's, Mitchell and their Mccournalists.
    There is always a source close to the family, close to the investigation, a friend, a relative, and so on.
    Wasn't strange to see a blog poster using exactly the same tool?

  2. Another fish trapped by the mouth. In this case, a Panda trapped by the keyboard.
    Panda, where did you seat next to Mrs X, in the bus or in the plane?

  3. If you speak for the McCanns, that makes you a BH.
    If you speak against the McCanns, that doesn't make you a WH.
    Panda, like so many BHs, misses the point in understanding that we know that they must hate the McCanns more than anyone else. Loads, loads of money was lost because of Maddie. Who can now say what a gold mine PDL could have been today if it wasn't for the T9? I can just imagine the hatred felt for these people while covering up for them, those who made their lives completely miserable!

  4. There is no doubt that team mccann have used the media to mislead the public with their FOAF misinformation.

    What amazes me is that SY have not started with a simple reconstruction involving the tapas and mccanns it also brings into question this case is a gross miscarriage of justice towards all genuine victims of crime who are not afforded the publicity nor the funding or indeed book deals that the mccanns whilst they are still suspects in their daughters disappearance have been able to do.

    at their first interview Kate was wearing make up and ear rings she had taken time over her appearance they were telling us their daughter had been abducted but their body langauge showed it was more about image. Gerry said 'we first must do what is best for ourselves and then for madeleine' this is how cold and calculating they are this was the mccanns without the lawyers and clarence mitchell spinning, what gerry meant 'we are watching our backs, dont want to lose our other children, jobs or home'. People were shocked at their lack of emotion, their coldness so much was not right.

    What of the deleted phone calls and why did clarence say none of the tapas wore watches to dinner or carried mobiles, they must have used their watches when compiling their timeline.

    Jane Tanners ridiculous abductor, more lies and inconsistencies.

    Kate states in her book the twins could have been sedated but neither she nor Fiona did proper checks on them, Kate and Fiona both qualified Anaesthetists Registrars, why did they not properly assess the twins.

    The dogs detecting cadaver in the apartment suggest Madeleine died in apartment 5a and with all the controversy surrounding her parents and their possible involvement why has this case not been dealt with.

    I believe madeleine is dead and her parents did not want an autopsy due to what it would reveal and so decided to cover up, by the time the pj were called madeleine had been dead several hours and had been hidden. The fund was set up for legal expediture to protect the mccanns.

    the mccanns have knowingly wasted so much police time both here and in Portugal, the pair are not as innocent as they would have us believe it was written all over Kates cold and perfectly made up face and dry eyes from day 1.

  5. Textusa,

    Thank you for your apology and just to reiterate:

    1, I was travelling on a Coach to
    Gatwick Airport...a 3hr trip.

    2. The Lady sitting next to me after we had got into conversation (Her name is Linda ) said she lived in Faro and being curious I
    asked what she thought about the
    disappearance of Madeleine. It
    turned out she was a friend of a
    friend of Mrs Fenn.

    3. "Linda" said her friend told her the McCanns had been called from the Restaurant/Bar to attend to their children who were crying
    on another night .
    Case closed


    A wonderful analyze of the first lies. Nothing new. All already debunked by many people in the Internet, specially on this blog. The difference, is now the debunking is coming from an USA criminal profiler, largely respected in her country and a helper in many investigations done by the FBI.
    Now, lies down the excuse many times used by FOAF of the Mccann's that Internet was making stories up and they were victims of a nasty parcel of the public.
    They were victims and still victims of themselves. When the first story is invented, you leave your life without other choice then inventing more lies to bake your first lie.
    Wonder what makes some adult people who work in very dubious papers , spread that lies and insult the police who " competently" don't believe them. How much all that "antonnella's lazzeri" cashed in to help spreading confusion? How can you sleep night after night, knowing the main victim was a defenseless child with less then 4 years old?
    Pat Brown is showing also how "Textusa is many steps ahead". No surprise, this blog is hated by Tapas 9 and BHs. You are on the right track.

  7. About the Mccann's not wearing watches. Candifloss published in a post on Jill Forum (about the window/shutters-Pat Brown) a picture of Kate on the Balcony of the OC flat to where they were moved on, wearing a watch. The watch is completely exposed and one of the most famous Mitchell lies.
    This picture was from May 2007 and throws on the floor the excuse gave by Mitchell for a confused timeline, "they went to PDL without watches". Laughable.... If so, how they manage to be on time for the tennis lessons and for the dinners they claimed to be hardly booked?

  8. Over the time I develop an idea that at certain point (moment) the Mccann's wanted the body to be discovered to relief their stress in dealing with it. But were not able to dispose it in a way that could incriminate only a stranger and totally eliminate them from the crime.

  9. Feb 26, 2012 5:33:00 AM
    Nice post! What if the McCanns wanted that, but were no longer able to do that? It seems that they had little or no control over the events. CM was not their spokesman, he was their voice. This doesn't make the McCanns any better to my eyes, it just makes me realize how small they're really were/are. It becomes evident that the time they're to be disposed of has come.

  10. well Panda, not what you said, but because you said, makes me wonder why you feel 'obliged' to excuse youself and come back with even more dubious explanations.
    Is it only me? from your previous posts, I got the idea that the travelling was on a coach, but in a portuguese land. Now, you are trying to twist the things with that '3 hours to Gatwick'.
    Let's pick your idea...if the travell was to Gatwick, I imply you both were coming to Portugal. What makes you start a conversation about Madeleine with a stranger that could be travelling for the first time to Portugal? I know, 3 hours is a long time and word after word, you get there.
    You said the friend of Mrs Fenn lives in Faro, which is quite far from PDL and sorry to disapoint you but the Algarve has not an easy and proper service of public transportation. That means, to go from PDL to Faro you need your own vehicle or you get disturbed by public buses or trains that take ages to take you to the place. Taxis are too expensive for who bargains the holidays. On top of that, Mrs Fenn clearly stated to the police how she used to be at home most of the time and (amazing) she just have been out of her flat on May 3 evening. Exactely on the crucial hours. From her statement, she appears to be a quite lady, without car and not having many activities outside. is very unlike to see her travelling to Faro. Then, her friend must be the one travelling to PDL and staying with mrs. Fenn. If so, no surprise the tentacles of the lies contaminated all involved in the cover up.
    Silvia, the manager of the OC was the one who took GNR to the crime scene and her first statement was very relevant. She was not believing the story Gerry was passing to the police, due the way she found the flat. If the crying epysodes were true, she as a manager working on the night shift, must be aware of them and must have reported it immediately to the police because any recurrent cry of a child is relevant, specially when one of the childs is missing. Basic. She don't need a PHD degree to achieve it.

  11. Panda,

    1, If you say so.

    2. FOAF

    3. ""Linda" said her friend told her the McCanns..." Which friend of Mrs Fenn is "Linda" talking about? Edna Glyn? If so, Textusa is right, she should be heard by the Police as this is new evidence. Another friend? Then the information has no credibility and should never have been mentioned by you, or connect it, like you do, with statements from OC Staff, or, since you mentioned it, you think it has credibility and that means that Mrs Fenn is a blabbermouth and has herself no credibility, and you should be the one that should go to the police and tell them how credible Mrs Fenn is.

    "Thank you for your apology and just to reiterate:" Textusa apologises for the delay and you reiterate as if Textusa agrres on what you've said, when she's exactly reiterating what you said but shouldn't have!

    Like Textusa says, there's an elephant sitting on your lap, and you're turning your head from side to side asking "where's that elephant you speak of?"

  12. Thanks, 8:20.

    I have that feeling. If we go back to late May and beginning of June, we see the Mccann's calling Kruggel but the strategy doesn't work. PJ ruinned their plans. Slowly, Gerry who loves the spotlights and the cameras of the journalists start getting hungry with them and trying to keep them away. They were in need of some space outside their house, to breath and to get ride of the trouble. Gerry appears in some paper articles asking the journalists to go away because they wanted privacy for the twins. That was the excuse, but I never buyed that excuse, because there is many ways for a parent to protect a child from the journalists. They were scared by what they cannot control- the movements of the journalists and the visits of their families and friends at home. I believe, who visited them spot some odd thing and that explains why they decide to remain in silence since they become arguidos. That could also explain why many of the inicial directors of the Fund resign. Attrapped by the situation, the Mccann's had no free space outside their belongs, to dispose the body. The police must go back to this time, the places where the car have been and to the properties where they went. Is in the Files that PJ also investigated some flats where the Mccann's were been seen visiting some people. They arrived there with twins in another car, not the Scenic. Then, there is more cars on the saga. If they arrived in another car, where was the scenic? Remember, Kate cousin stated to the police how bad was the smell in the car. There was clearly, some 'Xs' going out of controll and disturbing, including their own family who was probably also questionning some things they found very odd.
    From 5:33

  13. Panda,

    I tend to think, your travel was from PDL and you get really disturbed by what is being exposed on that blog. Quite often, people bring third persons to spread ideas that could help them being away of the things they lived, as first persons.
    I know how convennient is for most of the people who lived the case in loccus, if the case resumed as a Tapas 9 issue ONLY.

  14. 9:10

    Kate’s expression when she heads for the Portimao police station has always puzzled me.

    It’s not one of “I’m being wrongly accused” because that would either be a tearful one or show wrath

    It’s not one of “I’ve been caught” because then she would try to hide her face and show worry

    It’s almost of impatience, of I’m tired of all this… I even detect a slight smirking. What I’ve always thought that expression meant was “You people don’t know half of the story, I’m not the least worried, somebody will get me out of this so go on and take your pictures… “

    She wasn't master of her own fate. She was waiting to do what she would be told to do next.

    24 hours later she was on a plane. In Portugal, there are reasons, after you’re named arguido by which a judge MUST put you in prison, one of them being the risk of fleeing.

    A whole new set of legal rules for an upper-middle class doctors.

  15. Textusa says:
    Panda is a BH
    Panda used a FOAF
    Panda’s FOAF has no credibility

    Panda’s answer to Textusa:
    I’m a BH
    I used a FOAF
    My FOAF has no credibility
    Textusa I accept your apologies


    The above link is interesting it questions the missing 6 hours madeleine and Kate were not seen for in the afternoon of May 3.

    Timings are also quite specific from the tapas group concerning their evening meal, so evidently they were wearing watches.

    David Payne mentioned that he saw Madeleine early evening he is the only witness and not a very reliable one to have seen her.

    Jane Tanner is the only witness to have seen the abductor again not a very reliable witness.

    If operation grange clears the mccanns I wont believe it!

  17. Anon Feb 26, 2012 9:39:00 AM:

    While there's evidence to sustain your statement "Jane Tanner is the only witness to have seen the abductor again not a very reliable witness", there is NO EVIDENCE to what you say about David Payne "David Payne mentioned that he saw Madeleine early evening he is the only witness and not a very reliable one to have seen her"

    There's absolutely nothing that makes David Payne a NOT RELIABLE witness of not seeing Maddie alive late afternoon may 3rd. The fact that there are discrepancies between him and Kate, about the time he spent in 5A makes what he says about the time he spent there as the ONLY possibly non-reliable information of his statement, and even so, his 30 minutes make much more sense than the 5 minutes said by Kate. I think, I can't recall at this moment, that Gerry supports more Payne's 30 minutes, than Kate's 5.

  18. Wonder what Payne and Kate could be doing during 30 minutes, since she open the door wrapped in a towel after having a bath. Oh my silly brain...

  19. I keep seeing subtle messages to exonerate David Payne from any responsibility. It's happening in this post, and it's happened lots of times before. Very subtle and very polite, and always in the middle of other issues. This makes me believe even further that he's directly involved in Maddie's death.

  20. Typical BH comment from Pand accepting your apology when there wasn’t one then finishing in the style of Yawn/Insane/Advocatus/honestbroker .....‘case closed’.

    As if they're the ones who say what has been decided and what hasn't!

  21. Anon @ 10.52 I wrote the post concerning David Payne and no way am I attempting to exonerate him, he is as involved in all of this as much as Jane Tanner and the Mccanns. What I am saying is these people along with the mccanns have questionable statements. Just because they say they saw something does not mean it actually happened, they are all covering for each other, there are no independant witnesses to support what either of them is saying.

    Scotland Yard should have started with a reconstruction, all of their lies would then become so obvious.

  22. Anon 12:12

    My apologies then. Agree with you. Fortunately we have people who're able to sift through all the clutter like the Sisters!

  23. I don't know if the Ocean Club staff had to do and get the McCanns from the Tapas bar because the children were crying in the flat (complaints from other guests?), but I remember there were rumours of them having been fetch from CHAPLIN'S for that very same reason...was it maybe on the "famous" quizz night? The one that they want us to believe happened in the Tapas? By now it's evident that the most famous and attended quizz nigjts were held at CHAPLIN'S, not the Tapas...

  24. Anon,Feb 26, 2012 8:20:00 AM, wrote:

    "Feb 26, 2012 5:33:00 AM
    Nice post! What if the McCanns wanted that, but were no longer able to do that? It seems that they had little or no control over the events. CM was not their spokesman, he was their voice. This doesn't make the McCanns any better to my eyes, it just makes me realize how small they're really were/are. It becomes evident that the time they're to be disposed of has come."

    Agree! That would also explain kate's outburst when she arrived puffing and panting at the Tapas:
    I believe she had a terrible to schock when she entered the flat and found Madeleine's body gone! "They" had alredy acted , but had not informed the McCanns yet...just a thought...

  25. I apologize to the blog for my off-topic post, but after my (many) daily visit(s) to Textusa, I also visit McCann Files and saw this:
    "Above the law", by Dr. Martin Roberts

    Have a look at the photo of Kate, Gerry and Rachel Oldfield, my, how they look OLD and tired! Rachel in particular, nothing like the "vamp" she was in 2007, she looks like a granny! Oh, dear, what a devastation a heavy soul can make...

    Also, I don't know if anyone has read this:

    "Madeleine's Fund - Review & Investigation of Accounts"

    Very interesting reading (although difficult for non-native english speaking people like me)

  26. Textusa wrote:

    "The time he (Payne) spent in 5A makes what he (Payne) says about the time he spent there as the ONLY possibly non-reliable information of his statement".

    The ONLY possibly non-reliable information of his statement? Come on Textusa! Talk about Procrustes! Forgot "the bag" didn't you? What about "we have a pact" ? (which strictly speaking is not on his statement but is on record just the same.) Of course that finger-sucking Freudian slip doesn't count either. It can be put down to Mrs. Gaspar (somewhat supported by a paranoid delusioned Yvonne Martin) making wild inferences on a innocous, informal chat about children's sexuality.

    Naturally, none of these make Dr. Payne an unreliable witness but simply a test to your rhetorical skills.

    Yes Tee, I am listening and I know what you are going to say... :)

  27. Anon 2:53, Feb 26.

    this is very unlike. Who will take the risk of carrying a body, if had nothing to do with the accident? Unless it was a worker of the OC under demand of his boss to carry and store one of the McCann's luggage somewhere, since they will travel back soon. Needs to be a very naif or very well paid guy, to not spot on what was inside such strange luggage.
    Your post remind me what GA said on the last interview with Julia Pinheiro when they were talking about Gerry blue sport bag and Julia show Gerry with a blue golf bag. GA said, some people talked about 2 bags and Gerry claimed he had no one. GNR pictured one of the bags which disappear mysteriously before PJ went on the terrain. This could not be a bag with a body inside. Too risky. But what about clothes? Could had the clothes of who deal with the accident and the corpse on the first hour. It is very odd that the dogs just marked Kate clothes. If was due to contamination, Gerry clothes must had the same marks since they spent 4 months in Portugal acting like lovebirds ( at least in Public). Kate must had contaminated Gerry clothes and the twins clothes. The absence of that evidences could indicate, the source was not a contamination and some clothes disappeared.
    Looks more if they had the help of somebody who provide them a temporary location where the body was disposed. Probably an empty property out of PDL and without the owner knowing what was going on. Around the OC will be also too risky, since the Mccann's don't know what kind of search the police could do. GNR were there with recovering dogs, very early, on May 4( a Portuguese camera man hired by Sky news reported it on the book " porque adoptamos Maddie".
    Soon they and who help them, realized they were framed by the police who don't buy their lies and they were forced to deal with body on their owns. This explain the evidences only on their belongs. But I believe, there is more evidences somewhere in a place the police didn't reach yet.
    What was found in the car and in the villa they rented after their daughter went missing, kills the abduction by a strange and leave them doing an inside job. But they needed the help of some outsiders knowing well the location and who helped with cover up ran away quickly from PDL. Starting with their friends who ran away leaving them to deal with situation.
    Imagine the story they want us to believe? A child from one of your friends went missing and you strongly suspect the child could be alive and under the hands of a Paedo? What you do? You ran away leaving your friends to deal with lost, with their other children's and to search the missing one, or you stay and help? Even if for doing that, you need to extend your holidays and ask for some permission at your work? Their behavior speaks more then their manipulated statements. Just my feeling.

  28. Another BH angry on the field, or maybe a new version of an old one.

  29. Here they go again:


    After a quite christmas, the Paedo version of a nonsense story is back to divert the attention fromPat brown blog and from what is going on in court in Portugal.
    A new Hewlett dragged to the stage, no matter if he only target boys and if the young one was 8 years old.
    The paper has no problems claiming that SY is investigating that rubbish story ( showing the competence and the credibility of that police) and the source of the photofit used by SY, was Kate McCann book. Since when that lady is a reliable source? There is where the thousands of Pounds are being used.... In rubbish to keep the investigation like it is and protect the Mccann's, making the cover up, now...National. If we had doubts, about the objective of the review, after all this months, the scandal is becoming clear and seems there is nobody with balls in UK to ask a simple question:

    WHY SY DIDN'T START THE REVIEW WITH THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE LAST DAY OF MADELEINE? a lot of money will be saved and the reputation of the police will be preserved... But not the image of the Tapas 9 and the image of who let them drive the circus until that point.


    Interesting information. Connections with connections.

  31. "ProfilerPatB I was a guest of the Ocean Club on a public walkway & touched nothing. But I'll go back to PDL for a reconstruction if the #McCann s will."
    yesterday · reply · retweet · favorite

    Somebody twitted that message to Pat Brown. What could mean "touched nothing"? If want's to go for a reconstruction, means saw something that could be relevant or in a reconstruction all guests need to be present?
    I can see how nervous the Tapas 9 and the BHs who help them should be. Now, there is a lot of parcels in the equation, they cannot control: who contacts who to say what....

  32. Panda's a pathetic response which shows she intended us readers to believe she was going from not TO the airport. A 3 hour trip! Who spends that long and where from?
    It sounds such a schoolgirl excuse for a lie. I would be embarrassed to use this cover story as it's so obvious she's trying to wriggle out of the first story.
    I can't believe these people are any longer being guided by disinformation experts.

  33. ..."touched nothing"...
    Could this be one of the many persons the McCanns allowed to enter the apartment during the period between the alarm was raised and the arrival of the police...?
    If I understood correctly, the person was in the Ocean Club, passing by on a public walkway (the resort is crossed by many public walkays, not an enclosed resort at all) when she/he heard the commotion and went to see what was going on? Entered the apartment? Watched and listened to the McCanns and friends reations...? Interesting!
    I wonder if this person talked to the police or conveniently and wisely left before they arrived at the scene and never came forward...

  34. Sorry, a bit too long but quite interesting for who can read french. A new book 'Belle famille' writen by Arthur Dreyfus.
    I copy/Paste an extract from an article about the book and the author:
    'Pour son roman Belle famille, paru chez Gallimard, Arthur Dreyfus, lors d’une interview sur France Culture, dit avoir fait un rapprochement entre cette affaire et Le Rouge et le Noir. Pour le personnage de Julien Sorel, Stendhal se serait inspiré des mésaventures d’un criminel, Antoine Berthet, qui a été guillotiné en 1828. (Je crois que ce n’est qu’une hypothèse.) Dreyfus a été captivé par le côté magique de cette histoire. Les parents couchent leurs enfants, ils vont au restaurant, puis… « Quelques heures plus tard, ils reviennent, elle a disparu, il n'y a pas une trace d'ADN dans l'appartement, il n'y a pas une trace d'effraction, les frères n'ont pas été réveillés. C'est comme si l'enfant s'était évaporée. Donc, il y a quelque chose d'assez magique dans cette disparition. »
    Son livre, c’est l’histoire d’un petit garçon. Il a 9 ans, il s’appelle Madec Macand. Et il n’est pas anglais, mais français. Durant la première partie, c’est le personnage central. Un enfant à l’esprit vif, qui découvre la vie et qui s’interroge sur la mort. C’est d’ailleurs la dernière phrase de l’épilogue : « Madec aime bien mourir ».
    Puis il disparaît. Il n’y a pas de mystère, on sait ce qui lui arrive. L’intrigue est basée sur le comportement de sa mère. L’auteur n’a pas cherché à se rapprocher de la réalité, mais de l’aspect humain, psychologique. Un enchaînement de gestes non réfléchis qui enferment la femme dans ses mensonges. Au point qu’elle ne parvient plus à faire la part du vrai du faux. Il ne soutient aucune hypothèse. Il ne cherche pas à démontrer la vérité, il en invente une. Il la rêve. « L’écrivain ne fait rien d’autre que cela : rêver la vérité ».
    Arthur Dreyfus a 26 ans. C’est son deuxième roman. Dans cette interview, il raconte qu’une lectrice l’a interpellé pour lui demander si le fait de partir d’un fait divers pour écrire un livre, ce n’était pas un peu comme regarder dans un caniveau… Et il lui a répondu que la seule chose qui l’excitait, en tant qu’écrivain, c’était justement de regarder dans les caniveaux...
    Ce n'est pas une très bonne réplique, mais son livre est remarquable à bien des égards. Je n'ai aucune compétence pour juger un écrivain, mais en tant que simple lecteur, je dois dire que ce monsieur a du talent. Il farfouille dans les âmes.
    Dans la vraie vie, la famille McCann a systématiquement attaqué tous ceux qui parlaient de « leur » affaire d’une manière estimée déplaisante. On dit d’ailleurs qu’ils ont récupéré une petite fortune en dommages et intérêts. Je ne sais pas s’ils attaqueront Gallimard en justice. Leur dernier exploit juridique remonte à quelques mois. Ils s’en sont pris à trois personnalités du petit écran portugais, un présentateur-vedette, un psychologue et un journaliste.
    Quant à Gonçalo Amaral, qui avait été condamné en première instance pour son livre L’enquête interdite (Bourin Éditeur), la Cour d’appel lui a finalement donné raison. Les McCann ont bien tenté un recours devant la Cour suprême de justice, mais celle-ci a rejeté leur demande. L’ancien policier va donc pouvoir récupérer une partie de ses biens qui avaient été placés sous séquestre et remettre son livre en vente. Sa vie privée en a pris un sérieux coup, mais c’est le bout du tunnel, comme il dit. Pourtant, je crois qu’il n'en a pas fini avec les McCann.'
    Source: Georges Moreas Blog POLICEtecetera

  35. Intriguing message to Pat Brown.
    Was a guest at the Ocean Club and wants to go for a reconstruction. Means a relevant piece to me, looking maybe for some help from Pat to get out from the Tapas 9 chain.
    Could not be a curious guest who went to the flat after the alarm because the reconstruction is about the last hours or day of Madeleine, until the alarm. That is the time the police wants to understand what happened. After the alarm, is more or less known.


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.