Tuesday, 20 March 2012

The Proof That Kate McCann Reads Textusa

As you know, the “Cutting Edge”, best known as the Mockumentary has at 23:25 of its playing time, a segment dedicated to relevant sightings.

These were supposed to be the big NOVELTY from this video and were supposed to be what would decisively help solve the case quickly because it showed a new suspect: The Pimpleman, who had been seen by THREE different and independent witnesses on FIVE separate occasions.

Let us transcribe what is shown in the referred video:

Cutting Edge Witness #1 (1st Sighting April 29th at 08.00 / 2nd Sighting, May 2nd, at 15:00)

"Witness number one is a British Tourist. She first saw something strange four days before Madeleine disappeared."

“I was walking along the road with my daughter when I saw a man. I grabbed my daughter’s hand and brought her towards me, because for some reason he unnerved me.”

"She saw the same man again, this time close to the McCann’s apartment on the day before Madeleine went missing"

“The next time I saw him he was standing on the opposite side of the road to the apartment, he appeared to be watching it, he was about 5ft 10, slim built and wearing casual clothes, jeans I think, I would describe him as very ugly, pitted skin with a large nose.”

In Kate’s book, this witness is referred to, on page 373, as Witness Four:

“On Sunday, 29 April 2007, between 8 and 9am, this witness noticed a man loitering on Rua do Ramelhete whose appearance unnerved her. Three days later, in mid-afternoon on Wednesday 2 May, the witness saw the same man on Rua Dr Gentil Martins, on the opposite side of the road to apartment 5A, near the car park across from the entrance to the Ocean Club’s pool and Tapas restaurant area. The witness said that the man was standing still and looking over in the direction of apartment 5A.

Description: Male of Portuguese appearance; approximately 5ft 10ins (1.78m) tall; slim build; ‘very ugly – pitted skin with a large nose’.

Clothing: Casual; jeans.

Portrait: Sketch number 2 in the Picture Section.”

Cutting Edge Witness #2 (1st Sighting April 30th 08.15 / 2nd Sighting, May 2nd, at 12:25)

"The second witness is a schoolgirl who lives near the holiday complex. Three days before Madeleine was taken, she was with her mom outside the McCann’s apartment."

“I was walking to the school bus stop, I go this way to school every day, as I was walking down the road near the apartments, I saw a man on the small path behind the block, my grandparents used to live in that apartment so I always look at it as I pass by. The man seemed to be looking at the balcony of the ground floor apartment. He was wearing a black jacket leaning against the wall.”

"She saw him again as well, the day before Madeleine was taken."

I didn’t go to school that day because I had an ear infection, I was walking up the road with my two dogs when I saw the man, he was standing on the road opposite the Ocean Club and he was staring at the apartment.

In Kate’s book, this witness is referred to, on pages 372 and 373, as Witness Three:

“This witness is a young girl whose grandparents used to own apartment 5A. As this flat is familiar and of interest to her, her report is very precise and credible. She saw the same individual watching our apartment closely on two separate days. On Monday, 30 April 2007, at around 8am, she noticed a man standing on the narrow access path running between the apartments and the pool and Tapas restaurant area. He was leaning with his palms against the wall surrounding the garden area of apartment 5A and looking up at the veranda.

On Wednesday, 2 May 2007, the witness saw the same man near the car park opposite the entrance to the pool and Tapas restaurant area on Rua Dr Gentil Martins. He appeared to be just standing there and watching apartment 5A.

Description: Caucasian male; light-skinned; 1.8m (5ft 11ins) tall; slim build; aged 30–35; short cropped hair, thought to be light in colour. He had spots and was ‘ugly, disgusting even’.

Clothing: Thin, black leather jacket; light T-shirt; jeans with belt; trainers; dark, thick-framed sunglasses.

Portrait: Sketch number 1 in the Picture Section.”

Cutting Edge Witness #3 (One Sighting, May 2nd, or May 3rd at 11.30)

"Witness number three is a man with his partner from Cheshire, he gave a statement to the Police, describing a man he’d seen near the apartment."

“I don’t remember whether I saw the man Wednesday 2nd or Thursday the 3rd of May, but as we walked along the road I saw a man standing next to the wall by the parking area. On the opposite side of the road was a white van. I paid particular attention to him because he appeared to be focused on watching the apartment block. As I walked past him I looked at him and for a split second we had eye contact but then he just carried on staring at the apartment

In Kate’s book, this witness is referred to, on page 375, as Witness Five:

“This witness was walking down Rua Dr Francisco Gentil Martins with his partner around lunchtime on either Wednesday 2 May or Thursday 3 May 2007. They passed a man who was standing by the wall near the car park opposite the entrance to the Ocean Club’s swimming pool and Tapas restaurant. The witness followed the man’s line of sight and reported that he was ‘staring fixedly’ at an area close to our apartment block, where a white van was parked.

Description: Caucasian male with dark skin; assumed to be Portuguese and not a tourist; aged 25–35; 1.7–1.75m (5ft 7ins–5ft 9ins) tall; medium build; short, thick, dark hair reaching collar-level at the back.

Clothing: Plain light-coloured T-shirt.

Portrait: Sketch number 3 in the Picture Section.”

As you can see, this is all documented both in the mockumentary “The Cutting Edge” and in Kate’s book. In this book, these sightings begin at #3, because, if you’ve read the book, Witness One is Jane Tanner and Witness Two is Smith.

Personally, and talking just about the Kate's book, I would order the sightings by the time they happened, like it's done between Witnesses 3 and 5; but I wasn’t the editor or author, so I'm just a reader limiting myself to noticing it.

This might seem irrelevant at first but as I told you, the way information is presented is almost as important as the information itself. The way in which the witnesses are sequenced makes it seem that it was done by order of importance, and as such, Kate seems to say that for her the most important sighting is Tanner’s, followed by Smith’s and so on.

As you’ll see, this criterion is far from innocent.

In the same video, in “Edgar & Co Control Room", there’s a board where all relevant information has been drawn up.

It’s nicely detailed and shown in a way that we’re not used to seeing, and that is putting Rua Dr. Francisco Gentil Martins horizontally, which normally appears vertically. Right by Edgar’s head is apartment 5A (red circles):

As can be seen, Edgar and his team have identified on the board all the sightings referred by the 3 witnesses shown in the in the Mockumentary:

The Tanner sighting is added, which is natural, and the Smith sighting doesn’t appear, which is totally comprehensible because where it happened, Rua da Escola Primária, doesn’t appear on the board.

Kate, also has a picture with sightings, in her book on page 374, which I’ve replicated below:

The stars, according to Kate’s word on the same page, “indicate the locations of the sightings described in this section”.

On the same page, there’s another drawing above this one, where Tanner and Smith sightings were. This drawing isn’t relevant for this post, so let's concentrate on the one that is.

Let’s put Kate’s drawing above in the same position as the one on Edgar’s board:

The drawing doesn’t have as much information as the one in Edgar’s board but clearly there’s a correlation between them, as there should be, although she ignores the “Cutting Edge’s” Witness One’s first sighting (supposedly for the same reason Edgar omits Smith’s and that’s because the location falls outside the respective map)

Kate omits Witness One, as explained but has the upper hand on Edgar as she shows where Smith’s sighting happened, on the other drawing, the unimportant one, not on this one.

What? One is missing? You don’t say…

You say that there’s one that’s in Kate’s book, but NOT on Edgar’s board? Let’s then compare the two:

You’re absolutely right. There is one that is in Kate’s book, but NOT on Kate’s board. This one:

As can be clearly seen, inset, on Edgar’s board there appears one and ONLY one sighting in the pathway.

So what sighting is this that Kate sees but Edgar doesn’t? It’s Kate’s Witness Six, as per pages 375 and 376:

“On 3 May 2007, this witness was standing on the veranda of a first-floor apartment in the same block as 5A, overlooking the pool and Tapas restaurant area. Some time between 4pm and 5pm, she noticed a man coming out through one of the little gates leading from the terraces of the ground-floor apartments to the access path. His behaviour struck the witness as suspicious: he appeared to be trying to close the gate quietly, using both hands, and very slowly and deliberately checking in both directions before walking to the end of the pathway and on to Rua Dr Gentil Martins. The witness thought this was the first gate along the pathway from the road. If her recollection is correct, it was the gate to apartment 5B, where our friends Matt and Rachael were staying. That afternoon, Rachael, Matt and their daughter were on the beach at Praia da Luz with the rest of our friends. They were away from the Ocean Club complex from before 3pm until 6pm.

Description: Caucasian male; fair-skinned, assumed not to be Portuguese; aged 30–40; medium height; medium–slim build; very fair, cropped hair.

Clothing: Pale T-shirt.

Portrait: Sketch number 4 in the Picture Section.”

You know what sighting this is don’t you? It’s Carole Tranmer-Fenn’s (CTF) sighting.

So why does CTF’s sighting appear in Kate’s book but NOT on Edgar’s board? It seems to be a VERY IMPORTANT sighting.

It’s the nearest independent sighting, both in time and location, to the event in question isn’t it?

We were led to believe that the “Cutting Edge” was made after a very attentive reading of all documentation so it’s impossible for Edgar’s team have missed this one, isn't it?

Kate says that only after August 2008, when they had access to PJ Files, did they get to know about all these sightings. The Mockumentary was made in April 2009. Did the McCann team miss this sighting in all that translation, revision and attentive readings?

This particular sighting is mentioned, as far as we can tell, in the PJ Files, three times by two supposedly independent witnesses.

Firstly, on May 8th, 2007 by CTF, a statement that only the privileged are able to lay their eyes on. It isn’t part of the PJ Files but it’s mentioned in them;

Secondly, the first time it appears in the PJ Files, by Mrs Fenn, at end of August 2007;

And thirdly, exactly also where the May 8th statement is first mentioned, on CTF’s rogatory interview in 2008.

Quite hard to miss, isn’t it?

And yet, the McCanns, Edgar and his team and the script-writers for the “Cutting Edge” all missed it!

Or they might have thought it unimportant… but then why Kate’s change of heart from April 2009 and May 2011?

It’s also symptomatic that Kate lists it as the SIXTH and LAST witness, isn’t it?

Almost as if out of all of them, it’s the one that least matterslike if it’s meant to go unnoticed.

Also, it’s the ONLY sighting in the book where she questions the witness's correction and that she justifies the whereabouts of the apartment residents.

Why didn’t she apply the same criteria to the other sightings and say where they, the McCanns were when each of the other ones happened?

Why was it so important to state the whereabouts of the Oldfields?

But the important question remains: why does CTF’s sighting appear on Kate’s book, in May 2011 and but NOT on Edgar’s board, in April 2009?

I’ll tell you why, because Kate McCann, or whoever helped her write that book pays close attention to Textusa’s blog.


CTF’s sighting wasn’t mentioned ANYWHERE on the net (except the in the PJ Files where we found it), BEFORE we did on our Thanksgiving post in 2010.

Textusa’s Thanksgiving post, in November 2010, was the only difference about CTF’s sighting between the time the “Cutting Edge” was made, in April 2009 and Kate’s book’s being published in 2011.

We got our information from the PJ Files and nowhere else, because it wasn't anywhere else at the time.

This proves that Kate McCann reads this blog. And that she takes it seriously. So seriously that she felt the need to react to it in her book.

It proves that this blog has forced the other side to make a move, a major move, because now we have the recognition from the McCanns of a sighting of someone exiting the Oldfield’s apartment on the afternoon of May 3rd described as “Caucasian male; fair-skinned, assumed not to be Portuguese; aged 30–40; medium height; medium–slim build; VERY FAIR, cropped hair” and not your usual monstrously looking text-book abductor.

Is Textusa, maybe also “setting the pace” somewhere else? Say, in some HQ of some famous police force of some country out there?

And you thought blogs weren’t that important?

These days, it’s our opinion that they, be it on this case or on any other, they are your only voice.

On this particular subject, the Maddie Affair, we sincerely hope that Textusa will have decisively contributed in helping people realize, which we hope to be soon, that there were no Tapas dinners, no child checking and NO NEGLECT.

All simple and straightforward as we always said it really was, just a collective cover-up of something that unexpectedly went awfully wrong.

Then we'll see how human memory really does work.

Post Scriptum: NOW, we're going on the said break.


  1. This one is for reading and re-reading, with a strong cup of coffee on the side to clear my mind and open my eyesand help me absorb all the information.
    You're a clever girl Textusa, nothing escapes your eyes, what a wonderful brains you have, I'm jealous!

    Enjoy the well deserved break!
    (but come back soon, please, my morning coffe break is not the same at all without a "visit" to Textusa's blog!)

    Oh, just a footnote, a small curious detail:-in the "mockumentay", see who is the lady walking the dog with her daughter...no other than the vicar's wife, Mrs.Hubbard! How much this woman(all of her family)was/is involved in the McCann tale! She gets a role in the "mock", her daughter is used as a stand-in for the role of Madeleine in the "abductor carrying child" scene, filming outside in the cold night, shaking and sobbing, but no one cared for her pain and fear, beggining with her parents! Strange people, those Hubbards, only too happy to put their own child through a distressful and traumatizing experience for the convenience of the McCanns, who we are to believe were complete strangers to them until May 2007...isn't this stretching your duties as a vicar a little bit too far...?

  2. Of course Kate reads your blog.

    Of course Carter Ruck spells Jill Haverns and possibly many others.

    Of course they wellcome any pointers to possible lapses and holes in their stories;

    Of course, the wide and open fora debate enables them to plug these holes up to the minute they'll be recalled for reconstruction duty and/or witness hearings;

    Of course any reconstruction and any new wittness statements will be fatally compromised by the knowledge and insights so liberally unearthed and shared by the good people manning these fora.

    Of course, any future criminal case against any of them is to be considered as having been fatally compromised and made virtually impossible to conduct because of this.

    The furthest it will probably get is that dr Amaral and mr. Bennett will walk free.

    And that the MacCs see fit to remove themselves to an outpost of the Empire as, say, Australia or Canada.

    I am not happy with the above, but there it is: my honest legal opinion.


  3. Disagree radically with you Portia. You say “Of course they wellcome any pointers to possible lapses and holes in their stories;” and “Of course, the wide and open fora debate enables them to plug these holes up to the minute they'll be recalled for reconstruction duty and/or witness hearings;”
    If the extra star in Kate’s book was the best Kate could do to react to Textusa, then she did a poor job didn’t she?
    And who is to guarantee that what Textusa is finding and exposed would ever be used. The authorities know what Textusa has been saying, let’s not fool ourselves. And they don’t appear very willing to use any evidence, do they? It’s been the pressure from the blogs that has kept Maddie “alive” all these years. Are you saying that all blogs accusing the McCanns should just shut up? Or are you saying that Textusa is the only blog that is right and she should be the only one to keep the information to herself?
    Please clarify Portia, because I don’t see your point. The authorities won’t act, because as many, many blogs have shown, and not only Textusa’s, it would take 5 minutes to finda a reason to do so. If blogs don’t show why the authorities don’t act, what do you expect will happen?

  4. Portia,
    We’re not here playing legal games. Or any games at all.
    If what we say isn’t true, then all that has to be done, is have that pointed out to us, and we’ll either correct it, or withdraw it completely.
    We do not seek for the McCanns to be condemned.
    We want the guilty convicted, and the innocent exempted. We’re not personifying the appliance of justice.
    We think do that there’s enough evidence to find the McCanns guilty, but that is because there’s the said evidence and not because they’re the McCanns.
    If what we say helps prove the guilt of the guilty, we’re pleased. If on the contrary it helps to wrongfully accuse who is innocent, then nothing will please us more than withdraw such accusation.
    For us it’s about finding the truth and not winning or losing the case.

  5. Comment from May I:

    A quote from Michael Mansfield QC on March 19th in The Guardian. He was responding to concerns that the Leveson Inquiry could prejudice future criminal trials.
    "The public nature of the phone-hacking inquiry doesn't mean the cases of those arrested in the scandal are prejudiced."
    " On the whole, the UK courts have regarded the trial process as providing sufficient safeguards-for example- by warnings to jurors to ignore what they may have read, seen or heard in the media or on the internet. They take an oath to try the defendents on the evidence presented to them. In exceptional cases at the start of proceedings, a judge may pose a question to establish whether a potential juror feels able to return an impartial verdict"
    In my experience, many defendents who appear before the courts have well- documented criminal histories in the media. The jury are instructed as Mr Mansfield writes above. Some may not to do as instructed, but will find themselves in contempt of court if they are discovered to have ignored this legal injunction.
    I have no idea what the situation is with regard to Portuguese law, which is the only legal entity that could deal with the most serious charges that could be made.

  6. Portia, isn't Textusa blog regarded by the BHs as being on another planet of irrationality? It can't be blamed for uncovering evidence of any significance or prejudicing any future trial.

  7. I must congratulate on you,Textusa.
    Really, you're brilliant!!!

  8. Whenever they receive a displeased or indignant comment the Sisters must think "gotcha!" I remember Portia making some kind of comment about feeling sorry for the McCanns, and now reacts this way when Kate is criticized...

  9. You have to give one Black Hat full credits: DCB2 - “…all the others pale into insignificance when compared to textusa.”

  10. Dear Textusa,

    You -like dr Amaral and like mr Bennett- impress me no end. I have the highest esteem for the three of you.

    As an attorney however, the path I pointed out just now, is the path I would take for any client, regardless: detect the weaknessess in his/her position, and plug the gap(s).

    That is why people hire lawyers.

    Textusa in her above comment pointed out something I, as an attorney, had never taken into consideration.

    To find the truth, instead of to find the perpetrator.

    Truth, for lawyers, is a commodity. Getting your clients off the hook, on the other hand, is any lawyers core-business.

    In the discussion at hand, I have tried to amalgamate the two: applying my professional abilities and on the other hand, getting emotionally involved, and care, to put a light on things unlit before.

    From now on, I'll restrict myself to reading, maybe.

    But I think I'll distance myself from something I do not feel comfortable with any more.

    Finding the truth: OK. But untill proven guilty by a British Court of Law, people are to be considered innocent.

    This includes Mr. Bennett.
    and the Mc Canns, however much I personally pity them and the twins Sean and Amelie.

  11. Portia comment made me think of a question that if someone could help me find the answer I will be grateful. Let's suppose that the SY is not a whitewash and that we all know that it is. If SY finds reason to reopen the process, what can it do about it? The crime is not under their jurisdiction is it? They'll have to propose to Portugal to reopen the process,, placing Portugal under a very difficult position. Portugal must accept the PJ was incompetent and accept that SY did a better job, or not accept the proposal. So what is SY doing exactly? Nothing in my opinion because what Cameron should have done was to have proposed to Portugal a review )in my opinion reopening) of the process for that to have any validity. Once again Britain thinks it can do anything it wants just because they're British.

  12. Sorry Portia I disagree with you, for a very simple fact, if we have to believe in justice- they cannot change a single commas from their previous statements and the same is applied to all witnesses already heard. They can clarify some points, some issues, but never erase what they have done already. They signed the statements after reading them and stated that what was written there was true. If they are allowed now, to change their statements in order to fill the gaps highlighted by many in the Internet, they are intrinsically assuming, they lied on the firsts ( I don't know what is more dangerous).

  13. Conclusion: from one way or another, the witnesses are all in some way, connected with Mccann's.

    They reported sights happening around May 3 but what is important is WHEN THEY DELIVERED THE INFORMATION TO THE POLICE. Whas it on May 4? On the first week? On the second week? I believe not. All this witnesses came up later.
    The news about the case crossed the planet in hours. Children and parents all over the world were scared of an abductor they don't even know how he looks like, or if was a real person or an imagination. Anyone around us, was a potential suspect. We all become polices of all people around us, checking, controlling, looking at strange behaviors. Was a collective syndrome.
    But this people remained quite for long time, while holding a so important information? Who believes that? Who believes them? We just need a small pinch of brain to understand who could have been the source of all this sights. That's why the police dismiss long ago this sights( the Smiths are the exception). Garden mans, a poor fisherman and the deceased Hewlett, were all checked and disturbed by the police due to a bunch of liars who delivered contra- information to the police.
    If we look to the timing, this sights come up, we see that they were always very opportune for the Mccann's. They always happen, when they were in troubles with something, in the police or in the media. Always strategies to divert the attention from them and to cause some entropy inside the investigation. If a witness delivers an information, the police have to check, no matter how useless was for the case. Time and money wasted, but during that, the real perpetrators were able to breath and look at strategies to survive. It is really a question of surviving. I hope, they are now at the end
    of the line. One of them has to loose at the end of that review- the Mccann's or SY. They can't have both faces of the same coin.
    Mr. Cameron has to be brave and make the right decision for his country: keep protecting the Mccann's and kill the reputation of SY or let justice to work and the investigation follow all the steps?
    A small exercise done at home, just by looking to the Portuguese papers since May 2007, show a huge increase in high criminality in Portugal. This has many causes and is jeopardizing the reality if we connect it only with open borders and the economical crisis. The way the police was threatened, since the Mccann's start their campaign, plays a huge roll in the safety of all people living or visiting Portugal. When you let suspects to kill the image of your police and watch everything with passivity, you are doing more damages to your country then many weapons coming inside or circulating illegally. You are putting all citizens at risk because the criminals have little fears to refrain their instincts. They interiorize how easy is to do wrong things and get away with them and they realize how weak is the police under the commands of certain governments. That is what the last government left in Portugal. The country will need a huge work to rebuild what was destroyed in few months. You can criticize me, but I believe, everything started or increased a lot with the Maddie case. The manipulation, the campaign against the police, worked in prol of the McCann's and all potential criminals and against the honest citizens who have to face the streets everyday for working.
    Think well, Mr. Cameron, if you want a bunched police manipulated by a group of suspects for self protection or you want the safety of all citizens.
    Is too late for SY to come up and say the PJ investigation was rubbish. Was a joint investigation and in Uk was also at the desks of top investigators from SY. They know everything. GA already made it clear, SY knows everything. If they come up with something very bad to Pj, they will be shutting at their own feet: 5 years to dismiss the most mediatic and most high investigation where they were involved since day one? Will be the end of SY.

  14. Anon:Mar 20, 2012 10:56:00 AM

    "Oh, just a footnote, a small curious detail:-in the "mockumentay", see who is the lady walking the dog with her daughter...no other than the vicar's wife, Mrs.Hubbard! How much this woman(all of her family)was/is involved in the McCann tale! She gets a role in the "mock", her daughter is used as a stand-in for the role of Madeleine in the "abductor carrying child" scene"

    Of course all those who were around were helpful - as Kate has said "I believe people are inherently good" and rightly so when someone is in distress who would refuse. But this is somehow now discredited because so many are doubting the "abduction thesis". But it's too late the help offered has now become part of the circus.

  15. SY is not better then PJ. Look how many reports we have already in UK papers claiming the activities SY is doing or is going to do?
    Last week, they are planning to reinterview the Tapas 7. The latest, they are planning to interview the Smiths and those are happy and free to help the police.
    Who is leaking all that information from the desks of SY, EXACTLY LIKE IN 2007 WHEN PJ WAS VILIFIED AND THE LEAKS ATRIBUTED TO PJ?

    Somebody is working on the dark side of that case, trying to misinform the public and testing the terrain where the police could be.
    Whatever was the intention of PJ and SY, that intention is not in public domain, is not known by the papers who still making money while fooling the public with lies. Again some editors doing their best to help and please the Mccann's and Carter-Ruck. Wonder why 'The Sun' appears to be abandonning that boat.

  16. Anon: Mar 21, 2012 6:17:00 AM

    I have to agree with you here... as a mother of 2 and expecting no 3 at the time (in 2007), one was petrified at the possibility of an abductor going around - include a paedofile ring. The world has become so small, so no matter where you are, your family could be at risk. All that these people have successfully done, besides hiding the truth, is create mass hysteria & paranoia. Ok, I may be over reacting here, but this is what I have to remind myself often, don't give in to fear and guard against becoming paranoid. I live in one of the most corrupt & lawless countries of the world, I have to be wide awake at all times. When a political candidate from the ruling party won my local county, he promised that if we ladies don't want to be raped we have to get 'steel panties'. This abduction incident has just added to my sleepless nights. I still catch myself looking for Maddie in every little girl that I pass by. It would be the most wonderful thing if this case comes to closure - in the right way, all that is hidden brought to light, exposed.
    So Kate, if you truely are reading this blog, why don't you do us a favour and just ask for the case to be re-opened and co-operate. Nobody wants innocent people to be judged as guilty, so IF you are not guilty, we will accept it, but please just co-operate. If you have reason not to co-operate & continue to hide which is hampering this case, I will never understand how you can live with your consience, it must be a living hell...

  17. Anon. 2:23,

    I agree with you and would like to joint my voice to the appeal you made to Kate. But I confess, with little hope. The behavior of this couple during the last 5 years says it all about their personality and the way they drive their lives.
    They disturbed people around the world, accused innocents without evidences, showing how little is their hearts when comes to save their skin. I still don't understanding how they manage to sleep after dragging to the news ( based on a story they created) a weak man dying with cancer - Hewlett. The physical condition and appearance of the man speaks by itself and was showing the world how impossible was for him to have done what they claimed. From the top of their arrogance, they insisted at the point to disturb the guy in German when he was already in a dead bed in the hospital. Only the good sense of a German prosecutor stops their assault and bring some peace and dignity to an innocent. No matter, if he was a convicted criminal in the pass. He payed for what he have done and was
    innocent in Maddie issue .
    They cannot stick crimes on people, just because somebody had a dark pass and then come to the Lev Enquiry and complaint about what the media published regarding them. No any article could be more disturbing then having the police interrogating you, just because a couple who lost one of their child's decide to point the finger at you, based on your social condition and your pass. Even, for doing that, the Mccann's have accounts
    to pay in justice. From a couple who allow all that circus to happen while feeding it everyday for a couple of months, I expect everything. This speaks a lot about their innocence on the disappearance of their daughter.
    Going back to old videos from 2007, made me pay attention to some details I didn't pay attention at the time. It is amazing to see the last sentence/ words of Gerry while he speaks in the airport of Midlands( immediately after coming back to Uk) matching perfectly the words of Justine Mccguiness on the statement she made at the same time. Means, everything was programmed. Is it possible that this couple has nothing spontaneous, even in the dramatic moment when they had to face for the first time their old life without their daughter? I will be killed by the pain of old memories and specially by the fears of what my daughter could be suffering without me. Kate, was beside Gerry, showing no any emotion. She looks like if she was mocking the situation. Gerry looks more disturbed and not confident at all, on what he was saying.

  18. I suspect not only does Kate Mccann read your blog Tex but also the Tapas bunch and Carter Ruck, they must all be worried because one day justice will come knocking on their door and they will have to answer as to why they all lied and perverted the course of justice and Textusa will go down in history as helping solve this case. Just look at your stats, many people visit here, many guilty people with dark secrets but one day the truth will out and they will have to pay for their crimes.

  19. Tex, much more difficult would be to prove that they don't read you!

    They read you, and on other blogs and forums try to compliment as much any other blog/author to draw attention away from you.

    On this post, like you do best, you proved a simple fact. There was is a sighting in Kate's book which wasn't documented in the Cutting Edge. You've shown it, we can all see it. It's something tha can't be denied. What they're doing is pretending to ignore you, and waiting for what you're going to reveal next.

  20. Is the phone-hacking over? I was enjoying where it was going, because it seemed to explain what is Smith's position. I thought further episodes were coming. If it's finished, is Smith a BH?

  21. They are scared with some blogs, because no matter how strongly they control the media, they can't control internet and most of the blogs. They don't know which information is inside the secret files of the police and which information reach the owners of some blogs. Information that could come from important witnesses, who decide to disclose it to blogs and the police.
    Day after day, internet and the blogs are becoming important sources of accurate information, available immediately. they are at the distance of a simple click.
    Today, I was watching the news in the TV, regarding the terrorist attack in Toulouse. Journalists were highlighting the importance of Internet and the blogs, to help them access information very quickly.

  22. Anon Mar 22, 2012 8:03:00 PM

    No, it's far from over. Mrs Fenn got in the way, indeed. It seems that the Smith Sighting has resurfaced, so we're just watching and seeing where it's going... as soon as we think adequate, we'll pick up the issue again.

  23. I don't keep too much hope on the Smiths. Not because what they have seen is irrelevant ( in fact, I believe, is very important) but because by now, they already receive the visit of very important guys who framed them and tried to force them to change their previous statements in order to add entropy to the investigation and lead the police to dismiss the previous statements. They recieved the visit of Brien Kennedy and perhaps some calls ( not emails or letters, because that guys don't leave evidences) from Carter- Ruck. They can always leave the idea they mistake everything, got confused, etc. If the case was in court, will be more difficult to do that, because judges don't buy some strategies, but at the police stage will be difficult to clarify the situation. Unless, they could be incriminated by delivering lies, because if they changed the statements, means at certain point during the investigation, they lie- now or before-. In fact, in Portugal, the law is going to change and who lies is going to be incriminated. In court, a witness can't lie, or he changes his status, but to the police, I think they can do it without major problems . the Portuguese police is afraid to reopen the case because they know important steps to solve the case need to be done in Uk and Uk already shows how weak is their cooperation when what needs to be done could cause big damages on the Mccann's strategies. They are false and not cooperating at all and in Portugal there is no politicals with balls to come forward and expose in TVs what is going on. I believe, if somebody expose that, the British position inside the European community will be very bad.

  24. From Joana Morais- JM blog

    'Update on the books restitution:

    Update on March 23, 2012
    The mandatary and lawyer of the McCann couple, Isabel Duarte, has until the 29th of this month to return the books; the 10 days deadline are not consecutive and are measured as working days. Meanwhile, the lawyer to whom the books were entrusted by the First Instance Civil Court of Lisbon, has been trying to delay the restitution of the books to its rightful owners as ordered by the Supreme Court of Justice alleging that the Court of Appeals judgement did not transit in rem judicatam [unappealable decision/final ruling].'

  25. Soon it's going to 5 years.
    5 years of living hell for all those involved in this. I'm not referring to the McCanns, the other Tapas or the PJ.
    If only you could take back time.
    What a nightmare.

  26. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

    (The Smiths sight)

  27. ...."That is not quite the same as guessing. Because of the documentation kindly made available by the Portuguese and, even more kindly, by Kate McCann, we can be quite certain that those lay people who have studied the case know more than most of the Scotland Yard officers did before they were appointed to the review team. And very much more than any journalists, whose knowledge of the case is gained by skimming the blogs and – again! – copying from the Portuguese media: note how poor Kier Simmons was once more caught out.

    That is one of the few benefits for those of us who have become obsessional about the case while others, police, journalists, lawyers, in both countries, have had to concentrate their energies on other cases, other stories. Those fortunate enough to have the time and wealth to keep in touch with the case in a way that is impossible for the others can be surprised by the eventual packaging of the review but no, not by its contents.

    90% of the evidence is known to us. 5% say, the vital 5% which includes the likely identity of the person or persons who removed the child from the apartment and disposed of the body, is unknown but will almost certainly already have been explored as a possibility by those interested in the case; the remaining 5% is the detailed information still held in confidence, mostly consisting of UK police files which were excluded from the case papers release, such as the statements of officer Bob Small, for example. ...."
    The blacksmith bureau - wrom, wrom

  28. "Comments (182)

    On the eve of her release from jail, lying mother Karen Matthews says ‘several others’ were involved in the abduction of her child four years ago, it was claimed today.

    Matthews, who pretended daughter Shannon, nine, was missing for a month but drugged and hid her under a bed, alleges she would be murdered if she revealed who was behind the plot in Dewsbury Moor, West Yorkshire.

    Speaking from Foston Hall Prison in Derbyshire, the 36-year-old says she is too frightened to say who actually did it, claiming ‘they should be here, not me’....."Friend and former neighbour Julie Bushby has visited Matthews throughout her time in jail - despite being conned by Matthews, like many others, into searching for her child at the time - and has revealed her views in the Daily Mirror.

    Sham: Karen Matthews caused as national frenzy after Shannon disappeared, but in fact had hidden her under a bed with the help of Michael Donovan

    ‘I won’t come clean about what I actually know about what happened because I’ve been threatened,’ Matthews told Ms Bushby.

    ‘When I get out I want a lie detector test to show I’m innocent – and a Big Mac.

    ‘There are others who should be here instead of me but I was too scared to open my mouth. They said they would kill me if I did. They should be here, not me.’...."Ms Bushby, a former residents association chairman, told the Mirror that she still does not believe Sharon is telling the truth but that the original plot was not about the reward money."
    Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2119151/Kidnap-mum-Karen-Matthews-claims-abducted-Shannon-bizarre-rant.html#ixzz1q1Hbva3B

    If Sharon was not lying and playing with justice again and Karen got involved on that seduced by others, who could be behind Shannon abduction? If the reward was not the motif of the crime, what else could be?

    In my mind came few answers, which will not surprise me, since at the time one couple was desperately looking for stories of abductions to support their story and some British papers even consider the possibility of an abductor coming from Uk soil and targeting Madeleine. Mitchell didn't came forward to dismiss that claims and call it as usual, rubbish.

  29. http://svtplay.se/v/2752582/skavlan/del_11_av_12

    ( Interview with Kate and Gerry Mccann- more or less at 39')

    Very interesting interview (according to me) with few new versions of old statements directly from Kates mouth and a lot of lies coming from Gerry regarding the police and the efforts put on the search.
    1- the couple was not seating side by side. Not anymore a lovely image, hand by hand.
    2- Kate looks very old.
    3- Did I heard well, or there is a new version about the woosh of the courtains? Now.... Kate arrived to the flat, went to the living room and saw the door of the childs room further open then when they left( wonder how this could be strange if other people, including her husband went to the flat before), but what is surprise for me is what she said after. She went to the room ( no door closing suddenly now due to the brise) she check the bed, Madeleine was not there and she went to toilet. It was when she came out from the toilet she saw the courtains ' woosh'. ( a new version of the courtains story)
    4- When the journalist ask Kate if she stills feeling/ believing the same, she answered, she still believing the same she believed at May 4. Why May 4 and not May 3?
    5- They feel embarassed when the journalist ask if the twins can remember, if they had memory. Of course, he was talking about memories of the night of May 3 but they shift the memories for Rothley, before May 3.
    6- Wasn't interesting that when the journalist ask which are the best memories they have from Madeleine, Gerry goes with last picture with Madeleine paddling in the pool? No mention of the crying epysode or the words of Madeleine that morning complaining about them being out when she was crying. No words from Kate regarding the story she read to Madeleine and Madeleine saying how she had enjoyed that day and the holidays.
    7- Gerry lying about the searches done by the police and other authorities( in fact the most complete and expensive in Portugal). He says, he was expecting a Metro type (polyshing SY while they are doing the review), with helicopters and a royal marine. Ridiculous... helicopters at night, to search where? No Royal marine but there was a huge team of Maritime police with boats and sophisticated helicopters searching everywhere. All cars in the streets of Algarve were stopped and searched. I doubt if the Metro police in UK, ever had a search so complete and so sophisticated as that, but Gerry was lying with all teeths he has in his mouth, convinced from the top of his arrogance, that Sthocolm is in another side of the Planet, very far from the warm Europe. In fact is at the distance of just a click in our computers, proving how small is the world and how quick information travels in the Internet.
    8- One more prove, they read Internet and the blogs- they are preparing the twins to read the 'vil untruthful' stories in the net. Really? Who is more vil? the Internet who analyse the files and debumked your lies, or you, who feed the brain of your twins with a burglary? A man who stolen Madeleine as a property, like a jewellery?
    Fooling the sweden now. Trying to assault their pockets. They need money to pay ID and all other opportunists who still insulting Portugal.

    The interview is available at MC blog aswell.

  30. http://tv1.rtp.pt/programas-rtp/index.php?p_id=28165&c_id=7&dif=tv&idpod=73836

    Rui Rangel, Moita Flores e Marinho Pinto, falam sobre o Caso Maddie e a revisao, no programa Justica Cega. Marinho Pinto A fazer peixeirada para falar mal de GA e defender o casalito que so por ser ingles e estar de ferias nao fez mal a filha.

    Obrigada MC pelo video disponivel no seu blog.

    Mãe e avó presas por morte de bebé de três meses-JN

    "A mãe e a avó de uma bebé de três meses foram detidos na Bélgica, acusados do assassinato da criança em Sint-Amands, a norte de Bruxelas.
    O corpo sem vida da bebé foi encontrado na sexta-feira. Segundo as autoridades, a mãe de 29 anos confessou ter sufocado a filha, relata a agência de notícias Belga.
    A mãe explicou o seu gesto com o processo de divórcio difícil que está a atravessar. A avó da bebé, que vivia na mesma casa que a filha, estaria presente na altura dos factos. O papel da mulher de 62 anos ainda não está explicado, sendo suspeita de ter deitado o cadáver no caixote do lixo da rua.
    A mãe tinha denunciado na sexta-feira o desaparecimento da filha, dizendo que teria sido raptada. A polícia, não tendo encontrado indícios do rapto, resolveu investigar o camião que tinha recolhido o lixo da rua, descobrindo o cadáver no próprio dia."

    Mais uma tentativa de falso rapto, com a crianca a ser vitima de quem a deveria proteger. O opportunista do Marinho, nao le estas noticias. Nem parece advogado.
    Brilhante e responsavel, foi Moita Flores, no programa Justica Cega.

  32. Muito bom dia!

    Eu agradeço os agradecimentos mas as entrevistas no meu blog das cópias vêm de outros blogs ou da informação que leio numa rede social.

    Eu não tenho mérito.
    Penso que é uma luta comum e colectiva. O meu inglês é zero e há quem diga que o GMcC fala de um erro colectivo. Por favor, quem tem paciência para ouvir e dizer em que contexto o McPapagaio diz isso?


    A very nice day to All, here.

    I appreciate the thanks but the interviews on my blog are copies from other blogs or information that I read a social network.

    I do not have merit.

    I think it is a common and collective fighting.
    My English is zero and there are those who say the GMcC speaks of a collective mistake.
    Please who has the patience to listen and say in what context the McParrot say that?

    Thank you.

  33. Sim, cara Maria, o Gerry disse mesmo isso na entrevista sueca, que o erro de deixarem as crianças sózinhas não foi só deles(casal), mas de TODO o grupo, um erro colectivo! Faz-me lembrar aquela frase dum personagem do JÔ Soares: "-mas sou só eu...? Cadê os outros?!"


  34. I could not believe my ears when Gerry said in the sweedish interview he had asked the first portuguese police oficers on the scene "where is the helicopter with the heat sensors?"!!!???
    He said he was expecting the portuguese police to be like "their Metro", and so he questioned them about the heli, but the officer laughed at him! This is the first time I hear about him(Gerry) asking about such a device, as far as I know it has never been in the media, so, maybe it's a new "Gerry invention" to further tarnish the portuguese police as backwards! I don't think "their" Metro immediately uses helicopters with heat sensors when called in on a missing persons case, I don't even know if they use them at all! I know the portuguese Navy uses them in searches oput at sea, but on land?! I suppose they would be useless, can you imagine the use of such a device in Luz? How many human heat sources the sensors would pick up, from the people on the streets and even inside houses???!!!
    What will Gerry come up with next?!

    And Kate indeed looked OLD, but I think it was intentional, aged by heavy make-up, to go with the distressed look and those "poor me" facial expressions, all an ACT!
    Look at her eyebrows, heavily lined, for instance.

  35. Another excellent article from Dr. M. Roberts in McCannFiles:

    "Another Story"


  36. Rosa:

    tchiiiiii que coisa! O tipo é. mauzinho.

    Por acaso não sabe em que momento (minutos e segundos) ele diz isso?

    Muito obrigada.

  37. Maria,
    desculpe, não voltei ao computador desde ontem, só vi agora a sua questão. Ele diz isso aos 45.45' minutos da entrevista:

    "Gerry: I think the hardest thing with this is, ye know with hindsight we made a mistake erm it was a collective mistake but unfortunately we can’t change that, and erm whatever anyone may think about our decision"...


    (transcrição no Joana Morais blog, por A. Miller)

    Um abraço,


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.