Tuesday, 15 May 2012

Flack And The White Van

The whole “Mockumentary Witness Program” seems to have been more like a scouts group assignment. Everyone had a chore to complete, in this instance, each had to mislead the PJ on two counts:
- JW by seeing the abductor at the corner of the parking lot in front of Tapas entrance, AND somewhere else;
- TS by seeing the abductor at the corner of the parking lot in front of Tapas entrance, AND somewhere else;
- Derek Flack by seeing the abductor at the corner of the parking lot in front of Tapas entrance, AND...?
The white van.
The white van was the second thing that Flack had to make sure that the PJ noticed that he had allegedly noticed.
Why, we’ll see later.
Let’s see what the gentleman (?) has to say about the said vehicle.
On Sunday 2007/05/06: 

“At this time, when passing in the vicinity of residential block that enterprise, the deponent noticed the presence of a vehicle which he describes as a passenger vehicle, commercial type (vehicle in all identical to the make and model of an OPEL CORSA VAN), white in colour (dirty toned) and with only one side window, inserted in the passenger side door, however not knowing the respective brand, model or other identifying elements - among them, the respective number plate.
Moreover, states that, given the characteristics of the vehicle in question, he believes that it would be of an older model.
To the question asked, refers that, initially, he had associated the individual in question with the vehicle referred above, because he had realized that he looked ostensibly at the vicinity of where it was parked."
First question that pops into one’s mind is to ask Mr Flack how many vehicles did he see parked before this one?
The total sum between those he saw parked in the Rua do Ramalhete plus those he saw in Rua Agostinho da Silva.
And out of those, how many were silver, blue or white?
He can’t tell? We know he surely can’t because it can’t be expected from anyone to notice especially when  strolling leisurely... or on his way shopping.
So we can't see any reason whatsoever for him to have noticed this particular white van. Why did he then?
Because he sees Pimpleman looking at it? He says he FIRST notices the vehicle and THEN notices a man looking at it, so Pimpleman is no an excuse for him to have singled out that vehicle.
Nowhere does Flack even suggest that when noticing that Pimpleman is looking fixedly at something, he, Derek Flack turns his head to see what the man is indeed looking at.
On the contrary, the Mockumentary confirms that Flack simply looks at the man and continues his path.

But this very short observation of a complete stranger’s face allows him to deduce, among other things, the following as stated on Saturday 2007/05/05: 
“He added that, in the alignment from where the individual was looking, at the other side of the street, was parked a vehicle, van type, white, with one person (doesn’t remember if the person was inside or outside the vehicle). Doesn’t know how to, in any way, describe this person.”
So, not only he takes notice of the vehicle, but he also takes notice of a person in the exact same spot!
He then goes into one of his typical “faulty memory modes” whereupon he doesn’t remember if the person was inside or outside the vehicle!
It’s just like someone saying that they’d seen Big Ben but just can’t remember where exactly... if it was in a tower or if floating on the Thames River...
But once again, as it seems to be recurring with Flack, he who says that it can’t turn out to be the same person who, surprisingly, is able to do something. He, Flack, who can’t remember if the person that he saw together with the vehicle was inside or outside it, turns out to be, surprisingly, able to say that:
- it was a vehicle identical to the make and model of an OPEL CORSA VAN
- it was white in colour (dirty toned)
- it had only one side window, inserted in the passenger side door
- given the characteristics of the vehicle in question, he believes that it would be of an older model
Doesn’t the phrase given the characteristics of the vehicle in question, he believes that it would be of an older model” sound just like the having been convinced that he was not one of the many tourists who usually frequent that location, given the respective built and physical appearance when he spoke about Pimpleman?
Twice, he says his memory is imprecise, and twice passes judgement based on imprecise recollections. Amazing, to say the least. This is the man involved in neighbourhood watch where he lives in the UK, responsible for observations?
Remember that this is a vehicle not at all suspicious, nor the person inside/outside it is acting in any sort of suspicious manner. He passes by it, on the other side of the street; takes notice of it as anyone does when one sees ANY vehicle parked in ANY street. Plus, between him and the vehicle is Christine his partner. He, further away from it, apparently notices it, she, nearer it, apparently doesn't:

But, a little further down the road, he looks, for just 1.5 seconds, at someone looking opposite the direction in which he’s walking, and that fact triggers all the details that come to his mind.
Pretty awesome memory one must admit. Pity that it’s not that precise when it comes to weekdays...
He does remember a significant amount of detail if you do pay attention to what he’s said.
There are two that stick out like a sore thumb for, as said, someone who is unable to remember where the person he saw together with the vehicle was, if inside it, if outside it.
No, I’m not speaking about the fact that he details the colour down to the tone.
I’m talking about these two:
- a vehicle in all identical to the make and model of an OPEL CORSA VAN
- it had only one side window, inserted in the passenger side door
Why refer to the vehicle as an “OPEL CORSA”?
This particular brand of car, as we know, is VAUXHAULL in the UK, so shouldn’t a Brit have referred to it as a VAUXHAULL CORSA?
Oh, say you that he has certainly spent such a great deal of time in Portugal that he’s probably become accustomed to recognize any VAUXHAULL as an OPEL to the point that he might even do that when he’s in the UK.
It could be, but the fact remains that this particular white van seems to be indeed a VAUXHAULL and not an OPEL.
Why? Because Flack says so when he says the other detail he has also apparently registered: a single side window on the passenger side.
Which is the passenger side of a vehicle? The one where the steering wheel is not. The side where’s the steering wheel is known as the driver’s side, right?
Apologise for patronising, but this is a very important detail, so I had to be as simple and straightforward about it as I could.
From which side of the vehicle is Derek Flack looking at it? The left.
Which countries have cars with the passenger side on the left side of their cars? UK is one.
So the spotted car a VAUXHAULL (UK) and not an OPEL (rest of Europe).

Oh, say you, Flack’s a Brit so he’s assuming the side he was looking at was the passenger side.
Either he’s a “British Brit” and says the “passenger side” + “VAUXHAULL CORSA” or then he’s an “ex-Pat Brit” and should have said "driver’s side” + “OPEL CORSA”.
He can’t be both. He can’t be simultaneously a “British Brit” for one and be an “ex-Pat Brit” for the other.
It shows, once again, how selective Flack's memory is indeed. He can't remember where was a person he sees with a car, bur he can remember on which side of the car he saw the steering wheel. It’s completely different for the PJ to go out looking for a VAUXHAULL than to go looking for a CORSA.
We know that he’s lying and we know that the van he saw parked is as real as the Pimpleman. But why is he lying?
Derek Flack’s mission was clear: create in the PJ the belief that he had seen Barrington Norton’s van parked next to Apartment 5A before Maddie disappeared.
Norton, AKA the vanman AKA the guitarman, owned and apparently lived in it, a FORD commercial white van.
On your left, Norton’s vehicle, on your right an OPEL van (do take notice of the side of the steering wheel):

The similarity is evident.
It’s quite easy to understand why Flack (or whoever helped him concoct this story) “reports” an OPEL, as it would appear too obvious to have said that it was a FORD van.
Then he introduces into the equation “the passenger side” detail, subtly letting the PJ know that it’s a Brit vehicle that he says he saw.
A witness, any witness, unless intentionally lying, doesn’t let the police know anything subtly. A witness tells all that s/he thought she saw and doesn’t beat about the bush. No witness in their right mind challenges the intellect of the police they're reporting to by playing any sort of mental games.
Fatal mistake Mr. Flack, unfortunately for you and fortunately for us, just one of the many you made.
But why does Mr. Flack want the PJ to believe that he has seen Barrington Norton’s van parked next to Apartment 5A?
Here you have to make a linkage with the infamous Gerry McCann’s statement on 2007/05/10 about the fictitious family beach trip.
We dealt with this issue on two posts.
In the first we proved that Dr. McCann lied about the family trip to the beach, when he says:
“----- Pertaining to the routine, on Tuesday there was a slight change given that after lunch, at 13h30, he and KATE decided to take the three children to Praia da Luz, having gone on foot, taking only the twins in baby carriages. They all left by the main door due to the carriages, went around to the right, down the street of the supermarket and went to the beach along a road directly ahead.”
On the second post, we showed that the whole purpose of inventing such family trip was to direct the spotlight of suspicion onto a particular character:
"----- They were at the beach for about 20 minutes, the deponent and MADELEINE having paddled in the water. During this time the weather changed with a cloudy sky and cold, they went to an esplanade of a cafe next to the beach, on the left, where they bought five ice-creams and two drinks. Asked, he said that at that place there was an individual playing Latin music on a guitar to whom he intended to give some coins, but having none at the time, he didn't. That the individual had a neglected and careless appearance, unshaven and somewhat shabby [raggedy]. He was Caucasian, 175cm tall, thin, 70 to 75kg in weight, dark, short hair, almost shaven-headed with grey sides, and not wearing glasses. Wearing a light brown-coloured 'kispo', with a hood at the back, and dark cotton trousers, not noticing the footwear. He said that he never behaved strangely, nor approached or looked at the children in an ostensible [deliberate/menacing] manner. On returning they left the children at their creches, as usual, the parents having gone to play tennis or went jogging."
So we have two totally independent witnesses stating about a street musician first being seen in person by the father of the missing child on Tuesday, 2007/05/01 and then having his vehicle seen by the other, by coincidence a Brit, parked just outside Apartment 5A, either on Wednesday, 2007/05/02 or Thursday 2007/05/03 (please don’t laugh because this is a serious matter)
Dr McCann and Mr Flack supposedly don’t know each other, so what was the PJ to think at the time?
The expression “Red Herring” rings a bell now, but there was no reason to ring one then, was there?
Very important is to ask why two people who don’t know each other from anywhere lie about the same person, about the same supposed crime.
Pity that the scriptwriters chose poorly the storytellers, but I’m sure that in the case of Mr Flack, they must share the burden of the blame because they forgot to tell him two things:
- The first was that Mr Norton was 56 years old, which would modify completely the photofit produced, or at least be aged accordingly instead of the one that depicts a 25/30 yr old and is de facto pretty ridiculous in terms of what the intended purpose was: to frame Norton. Very much like Tanner would be instructed to do a few days later with Murat. Notice that Dr. McCann is well indoctrinated in this area as he's careful to age the "suspect" by saying "almost shaven-headed with grey sides"
- The second thing, we’ll leave it for the next episode: Flack, Distances and Angles.

Post Scriptum:
Some readers are wondering where we’re heading with debunking people that are consensually taken as liars, otherwise the Mockumentary wouldn’t be known as the Mockumentary, would it?
It’s important that you understand completely and beyond any doubt that these people have indeed lied. We cannot simply let that to be a general perception. We have to assure that it’s a certainty.
Once proved that they’ve indeed lied, and then we’ll show you how pivotally important their falseness is, so we ask you, once again, to bear with us.
We still have to publish three or four more posts about the Mockumentary before we reach the level of certainty that we like and like to think we’ve accustomed you to, and reveal the climax it certainly deserves.


  1. Brava, Textusa, the lie-debunking master!

    I almost turned my computer screen into a Jackson Pollock's painting with my coffee, as I burst into laughter when I read your Big Ben analogy!So funny!

    Textusa and Sisters, YOU ROCK!

  2. Well done Textusa. From my point of view andcfrom everything I read, you are on the right track since long ago. That's why, your blog is not even mentioned by team McCann or the BHs. They want the majority of the public away from your place. How stupid they are, behaving like that.
    It is clear, there is a linkage between Gerry statement about the musician and the all witnesses who " voluntarily" and I highlight that word "voluntarily" because is very important, show up to PJ to deliver their manipulate lies. Why I think like that? Because the events over the time speak by themselves. How many times the police made appeals to witnesses to come forward and deliver important information? Many. How many witnesses show up in result of that appeals? NONE. witnesses did not respond for police appeals but show up when the Mccann's want them to show up. This all, are not independent witnesses. Their statements were planned and agreed. All planned under the same roof. A roof that was not known by the police( unsuspecting ). I go with J G house, outside PDL, where some forums said the Mccann's, the Hubbards and Murat use to dine. DF, as a owner of a flat in PDL for quite long and TS living there, must be part of the guests of that dinners. PDL is too small to allow a community of Brit expats to not know each other.
    The musician was the center point around who the all statements should be build. Why?
    Because he was a usual foreigner in PDL streets. Because all witnesses know him, where he use to be, where he use to park the car. In fact was not the Potential abductor who follow Maddie and target her. From my point of view, the musician was the target, followed by Mccann's gang, who have been very vigilant at the point of only giving some details to PJ and deliberated hide others. They want to frame the guy just QB. That means, enough to distract the police but not serious enough to create any damage to him with a potential arrest or the risk of making him arguido. They also know, that if that statements created any serious confusion to the man, will be easy for him to find alibis and witnesses to dismiss him from any suspiction( which happen, because PJ) dismiss him.
    Now I have the idea that the Mccann's where confident that the police could not frame them( some dark forces working behind scenes convinced them of that). They distract the police but their main target was the public and the journalists. They want to pass the message of an abduction and play the victim roll. That will attract people to transfer money to their Fund.
    They know, the musician has an odd appearance. They know his Physical characteristics and they know his van and where he use to park it.
    Vans are very common in Portugal, specially in commercial areas such supermarkets or resorts. White vans are even more common. Why they pick a white car from many ( if there was 2, are already many) to point the finger at one in particular? Deliberated. Gerry gave the first carrot and the others bring the rest of the cabbage.
    I hope PJ Porto, look at that during their review and try to find out where is the car the Mccann's use to use when they were not using the scenic. In Pj files, there is reference about the Mccann's visiting some friends and arriving with twins in a car different then the scenic. Why, they need to use that car? Where was the scenic at that time? Why was it not available? And why JG stored the scenic for private forensic exams? Was he the old guy, reported in the files, who returned the keys of the car to the rental company?

  3. Brooks has come out fighting! On tonight’s news she was making threats and quite openly the way I read it. The message I got was she was not going to take the blame for what others were also doing and if they don’t make themselves known....she will do it for them. She is angry and scorned, DC has let her down and RM hasn’t openly supported her recently. 6 people charged including her husband are so obviously the tip of the iceberg. There is no way the contents of 7 removed boxes of files don’t incriminate lots of others, even the physical removal would involve others.

    It appears her predictions ARE coming true. I’m sure LI was what she had in mind when she said there was an expensive side show.

  4. the Sun is trying to twist the case. not A Lazzeri... another journalist to say that a clairvoyant believe Madeleine died long ago and is waiting for a reincarnation in another girl.
    interesting, the picture connected with that article is the first picture of Madeine with oloboma and ot the latest with 9 years old.

  5. Anon May 15, 2012 7:46:00 PM

    If Brooks starts to untie knots then there will be a lot of Flacks doing flic flacs, backflips and various kinds of somersaults... Flack himself will even might appear to be a honest man when compared to others!

    Will Antonella thrash her boss?

  6. Wasn't now, the time the gang announced another chapter on the previous book "Madeleine"? Where is the big event? No JKR involved on it that time? No more delirium with some adjectives of bad taste dedicated to Madeleine and the couple intimal life?

    On the continental side, justice speaks louder- GA book is back in the stores, free to be read by who wants to buy it. It is Madeleine making justice from where she is.

  7. Now the BIG BIG CIRCUS is starting in UK. Each cat will scratch the others, unable to live on the same nest. Brooks is just one of them.

  8. "
    Recentemente, Gonçalo Amaral escreve o essencial: «A Maddie foi vista pela última vez às 17h30 de dia 3 de Maio de 2007. Nessa altura foi feito tudo o que se podia e conseguimos demonstrar que era materialmente impossível ela ter sido raptada. Infelizmente não chegámos ao seu paradeiro.»

    Nenhum cidadão, em qualquer parte do mundo, pode desejar outra coisa que não seja ver este caso resolvido. O livro de Gonçalo Amaral tinha e continua a ter o mérito de ser o ponto de situação mais objectivo que até hoje foi feito sobre o caso. «Maddie, a Verdade da Mentira» é o livro de uma investigação: apresenta dados e factos, bem como as interpretações e as interrogações pertinentes que, à luz do direito, podem ser feitas a partir dos acontecimentos ocorridos.

    Os factos que são factos estão neste livro que agora os portugueses podem voltar a ler em liberdade. Uma liberdade que os ingleses não têm."

    Guerra & Paz Editores,
    Lisboa, 14 de Maio de 2012

    ( Parabens e obrigado aos juizes que em Portugal nao se vergaram e tiveram a coragem de dar voz aos factos e a Liberdade)

  9. ..." El día 7 de octubre de 2007, cinco meses después de haber sido vista Maddie por última vez, yo, mi colega y amigo el Prof. Dr. Pedro Gamito y su brillante equipo de jóvenes investigadores realizamos la primera y única reconstitución de los acontecimientos de la fatídica noche del 3 de mayo de 2007, en la aldea de Luz, Lagos. A partir de la cronología de los hechos, supuestamente facilitada por los miembros del denominado “Tapas 9” (que incluía a los padres de la niña desaparecida, así como algunos amigos), recogida de cuatro fuentes de información independientes e internacionales, utilizando solo los hechos concordantes con todas las fuentes, realizamos un vídeo 3D.

    El día 7 de octubre de 2007 llegamos a las siguientes conclusiones:

    -       Algunas declaraciones de los intervinientes en el proceso eran falsas (en particular, la visibilidad y la distancia desde la habitación donde dormía la niña y el restaurante donde cenaban los padres);
    -       Teniendo en cuenta el teorema de la probabilidad condicionada de Bayes (estableciendo como condicionantes los desplazamientos de personas y los tiempos de esos desplazamientos entre el restaurante y los dormitorios donde dormían los niños), la probabilidad de que Maddie haya sido llevada por un raptor, en las condiciones referidas por los intervinientes, sin que este fuese visto o dejado alguna pista de su presencia, era aproximadamente igual a la probabilidad de un gato cayendo encima del teclado de un piano y, de una sola vez, tocara las cuatro primera notas de la 9ª sinfonía de Beethoven; es decir, prácticamente imposible."....
    Paulo Sargento in " O crime"

    Source: http://mercedessigueaqui.blogspot.pt/2012/05/caso-madeleine-mccann-maddie-las-195.html

  10. Mccann's castle is falling- R Brooks charged. Next, must be Mitchell and the lawyers from Carter -Ruck who tried to create an ambient of terror and intimidation by sending letters to who had the courage to desbelieve the abduction

  11. Which car the Mccann's had before the Scenic?
    They said they went to Sagres with Madeleine before May 3. If this is true, how they get there? Which car they used?
    And what about the other Tapas? I believe, they also had cars. Probably all parked near the OC and near the white van( the scenic was parked in front of Murat house. We can see on the media).
    At the beginning of the case there was rumors of a 4*4 belonging to one of the Tapas 7. Why a bunch of liars who want the world to believe they spent the full week in the resort doing tennis, jogging or ' beaching', need such type of car with an expensive rent? All that cars seem to have disappeared with Madeleine. And conveniently disappeared from the statements of the Mccann's witnesses. They were not vans and probably not white. Then, better to hide them from the police.
    Maybe the cars were bored from somebody and not rented.
    I don't believe the friendship between all this guys was born only after May 3. Nobody gets involved in a cover up like that if has nothing to hide. Most of them must be friends from other time and maybe other places. They must know each other from previous trips to Portugal or from UK.
    That reinforces my feeling that the Swing was one of the activities that connect all that people, in Portugal, in UK, in Spain and maybe in other locations where they use to meet.

  12. The Guardian: Rebekah Brooks made a defiant attack on the "weak and unjust" decision by the prosecuting authorities to bring charges against her on Tuesday and dismissed the case as an "expensive sideshow and waste of public money".

    Mrs Brooks, spending 2 Million on a VALUELESS review is a "waste of public money". Every penny spent on charging people like you is well spent IMO. About what main event they're distracting people from with you, you're the one to know about that.

  13. The Baptista supermarket has delivery vans very similar to the ones in the photos, white, but with the supermarket logo on the side.

    About the McCanns and friends having access to cars in Luz, Murat went to a car rental service to rent a vehicle for his own use, and said to the attendant that he needed a car because he had lent his own to some "people" who needed a car (the Tapas crew, or the McCanns?). Why would he go and rent a car, paying good money for it? Out of the goodness of his heart?! Why didn't those "people" rent one themselves? And why would he mention the "story" to the lady attendant in the rental service, why make explanations for why he needed a rental car?!

  14. 'Medium diz que Maddie esta morta'
    in JN

    'O jornal 'The Sun' apurou junto de uma fonte proxima da familia Mccann que os pais de Maddie estao enojados com o Medium. 'Dereck Acorah nao e nada que um oportunista,' afirmou a mesma fonte....Kate e Gerry contam a angariar fundos para suportar os gastos com as buscas'.

    Kate e Gerry, grandes oportunistas, digo eu. Enojados com o Medium? Porque fala de morte e estraga o negocio da mendiguice de luxo.
    Se o Medium dissessse que estava viva, era o melhor do mundo. Idolatrado e com direito a um portrait em todos os jornais do mundo.
    Assim tem de angariar fundos, nao para procurar a Maddie, mas para pagar a Carter-Ruck que tem mais um alvo a quem mandar as famosas 'infame letters'.

  15. Anon May 16, 2012 8:51:00

    I'm not familiar with the Baptista commercial vehicles, but I«m supposing none have steering wheels on the right, and unless doing home deliveries, it's logical to think that they are parked near the supermarket itself.

    The vehicle Flack says he saw, exists, he just didn't see it where he says he did. Flack intentionally obstructed justice.

  16. Segundo os jornais, os crimes de que Brooks esta acusada tem uma moldura penal que pode ir de 10 anos a prisao perpetua. Se lhe for aplicada realmente uma pena( nao esquecamos que e sempre o mexilhao quem se lixa), valeu a pena ter usado as armas que usou para engordar o imperio Murdoch e ver gordas figuras na sua conta bancaria. Dinheiros e promocoes que nao sao limpos, acabam sempre gastos da pior forma.
    Agora o mundo espera que se limpe o tacho ate ao fundo. Significa ficarmos a saber porque os media Murdoch protegeram tanto os Mccann. Que segredos descobriram que lhes permitiram ter os Mccann na mao, dando a impressao que era ao contrario. As indemnizacoes que lhes pagaram, foram um negocio para ambos os lados. Uns criavam exclusivos e os outros alimentavam-nos. Madeleine viva e um rapto( ainda que forcado) eram os ingredientes primordiais para este negocio.

  17. Where's the man by the van that Flack speaks of in the Mockumentary? In the picture shown there's no one outside, and the next shot Pimpleman is filmed through the van showing no one inside.
    Mrs Isabel Duarte, how dare you accuse the PJ of "discarding" witnesses when your own people have done the same? Or isn't a person by a suspicious van someone that should also be as suspicious as Pimpleman?

  18. The Guardian:

    Leveson inquiry: Jack Straw used to gossip with Rebekah Brooks

    Former justice secretary reveals he regularly arranged to meet the then Sun editor as they made the same train journey

    Jack Straw arranged to meet Rebekah Brooks for a gossip once a week when they commuted on the same train when he was justice secretary and she was editor of the Sun, the Leveson inquiry has heard.

    How much promiscuous could the system be? Swinging in PDL? Nah... "swinging" everywhere in the UK! All so clear now.

  19. From the same link above:

    Earlier the inquiry heard how the Sun had been "ruthlessly hostile" to the Labour party and that owner Rupert Murdoch enjoyed playing "a power game" with politicians, according to Straw.

    Unlike other witnesses to the inquiry, such as Alastair Campbell, who testified earlier this week that the Sun backed Labour because it was a winner, Straw was of the view that the News International tabloid did have the power to make or break politicians' fortunes.

    "Few of us who took part, for example, in the 1992 general election, are in any doubt that the Sun's approach lost us seats. That was the purpose [of the hostile coverage] and it is disingenuous for anyone to deny it," Straw said.

    He added: "The Sun played a huge part in the fortunes of the Labour party."

    Need say more?

  20. Sorry, I know it is of-topic, but it is an interesting reading:


    "It won't go away" - part one
    "It won't go away" - part two

  21. "Dark Dealings of News International, The Prime Minister and the McCanns"


  22. Have a look on the last posts of Blacksmith bureau. A wonderful and insight analyse of the manipulation.

  23. Derek Acorah, already Carter-Rucked.

    If he had defended an alive girl, he will be idolatrated and having his visions spread across the world. Because he touch the most hated word for the Mccann's- DEATH- he had to apologise or face their legal team.
    That is what mean freedomn and the right to your own opinion, in UK 2012.
    The country is rulled by perverts and the world is knowing it. A shame to old Britain and their glorious History.

  24. More gunge squeezed by Olive Press Exclusive by Wendy Williams! 'Maddie Mystery Solved'
    (the story about the Karsten Mayer's daughter)
    It is lazy and ibncompetent churnalism to write the following when the PJ files are available on line.
    "The LAST confirmed sighting of Madeleine was in the early evening of May 3 by Miguel Matias, the manager of the beachside restaurant, who saw dad gerry dancing with his daughter while the family ate a meal on the terrace."
    NO Wendy, they were not part of the group at the Paraiso! Have you not seen the CCTV stills or read the police files?
    Why on earth should we take the slightest notice of churnalists like you if this is the best you can produce?
    Spanish Correspondent

  25. This was on my sugar sachet as a saying, which I thought applies to BHs
    " No me preocupa el grito de los violentos, de los corruptos, de los deshonestos, de los sin etica. Lo que me procupa es el silencio de los buenos."
    Martin Luther King
    My translation
    I'm not concerned by the clamour of the violent, the corrupt, the unseemly, those without morals. What concerns me is the silence of good people.
    I'm sure a Spanish speaker would make a better job of translation
    Spanish Correspondent

  26. There are many people including Flack who intentionally mislead by introducing more characters and more confusion.

    In the early days when the Mccanns would go to the church on their own to 'pray' it is possible that Madeleine is/was actually buried in the church in the foundations. In Mccanns mind this would be sacred ground, Amaral stated Kate's bedside table was like a shrine to Maddie.
    The day the dogs were brought in Amaral stated Gerry drove past 5a stoney faced. That day they were supposed to be leaving pdl for a trip but postphoned that trip.

    The priest said he had been 'deceived' by the mccanns.
    Eddie and Keela should have gone into the church to test for cadaver.

    After 5 years it is possible that somebody else could have removed the body and had it cremated, Gerry was very confident when he said 'show me the body etc'. Amarel suspected the body had been moved from different locations.

    Even now sniffer dogs should go thoroughly through that church inch by inch 'leaving no stone un turned'.
    If Madeleine had been hidden on the beach or sea or on open ground she would have been found, she was well hidden. Murat could also provide places he had access to empty houses all around pdl, today people could be living in a house that was once used to hide Maddie, there must be lists available of empty properties that Murat had access to. He leant his car to Mccanns group and he hired a hire car for himself, why would he do that?

  27. Anon 17, 7:08,
    I don't believe the body was ever in the Church. That was too risky. I don't know the church of N.Sra da Luz in PDL but I presume is like many in small towns in portugal- small and without foundations. Normally this churches have people from the comunnity in charged with clean and the fresh flowers on the vases. Maddie disappeared on Thursday. By Sunday morning the church must be ready for the mass.Then, who clean the church or decorate the church must work on that on Friday and Saturday. The Mccann's will not take the risk of having somebody spoting the body in a location they use to go. When they called the police, the body was already concealed in a location not easy to be found by the police. A house most probably.
    I don't know if that church was used also for funerals. If so, the cadaver dogs are useless because they will pick the sent without giving any clue regarding Madeleine.

  28. More likely the church was used for private meetings at late late hours of the night (they had the key), a place where they could talk and plan away from prying eyes and ears...


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.