Saturday, 30 June 2012

Pimpleman - Class Review

At a certain point we asked our readers the following questions:

"Hands up all readers that call the 2009 McCann reconstruction a Mockumentary?

Why? Because you don't believe the witness statements it was based on?"

Although it was the common perception that those statements offered little or no credibility, we took the trouble to meticulously dismantle them so that the said perception would become a certainty.

These are the 18 posts we wrote about the Mockumentary and its Pimpleman:, absurd internal written instructions between just two people obviously to be seen by the general public, which set the mood and showed, together with many other things, the intention (and care) with which the Mockumentary was made and what credibility it offered., the appearances of all three witnesses who claim to have seen Pimpleman are detailed and it was highlighted the fact that CFT’s sighting is in Kate’s book and not in the Mockumentary., the Mockumentary debunks TS’s statement by placing her on the opposite side of the street from where she says she was., TS’s credibility as a witness is questioned and the abuse done by the BHs in using a child to serve their purposes is strongly condemned., TS’s statement about her first sighting of Pimpleman is completely debunked., the “Now I see, now you don’t” tactic used both by TS & TS’s MOM and DEREK FLACK & CHRISTINE when it comes to seeing Pimpleman explains, in our opinion, why TS and her MOM are filmed coming from the opposite direction from the one they reside in., TS’s statement about her second sighting of Pimpleman is completely debunked., the inexplicable discrepancy between where DEREK FLACK says he lives in the UK and where is said he’s from in the Mockumentary., based on the PJ Files, contrary to myth, it’s shown that none of the three versions of Pimpleman have been found to date.
It’s absolutely false that TS’s Pimpleman has been ruled out to be MICHAEL ANTHONY GREEN. It’s also absolutely false that DEREK FLACK’s Pimpleman is BARRIGTON GODFREY NORTON. About the latter, it’s clearly shown in the files that FLACK himself denies that NORTON is the man he allegedly sees.
There wasn’t any need to use the PJ Files as the fact that all the three witnesses participate voluntarily in the Mockumentary in April/May 2009, long after the case had been archived, shows how the three agree that then their respective Pimpleman hadn’t been identified. He’s still out there., it’s showed the incomprehensible and ridiculous inconsistencies of DEREK FLACK’S statements about when did he exactly see Pimpleman and about what led FLACK to be in that street., making use of the fact that this year the days fell on the same weekdays as in 2007, we showed how ridiculous FLACK’s “lack of memory” really is., DEREK FLACK’s statement about his sighting of Pimpleman is debunked., DEREK FLACK tries subtly to bring BARRINGTON NORTON into the case as a suspect by showing to have, after all, a very selective memory., it’s showed how unfamiliar DEREK FLACK was with the surroundings of Apartment 5A as well as is proved that Pimpleman couldn’t be looking at that apartment when DEREK FLACK crossed with him., a possible explanation for Pimpleman’s unexplainable inhuman behaviour is given: autism., it’s showed how impossibly erratic the weather had to be for Pimpleman to be seen wearing the clothes he was said to be in by the three Mockumentary witnesses., based on his address in PdL it’s showed how highly unlikely it was for DEREK FLACK to be where he is when he says he sees Pimpleman., it’s showed how improbable it was for Pimpleman to have been seen by only three people: one an Ocean Club tourist, another an Ex-Pat and the last one a Brit tourist with his own apartment in PdL. 

I think we made it pretty clear that JW, TS and DEREK FLACK are LYING and we’re not talking about three people looking for their 15 minutes of fame.

Two of them voluntarily showed their face only two years after their initial statements and the other, JW, opted to have an actress represent her and thus maintain a low profile to this day.

All three witnesses are referred to anonymously both in the Mockumentary and in Kate’s book.

We know that the schoolgirl is TS and the couple to be DEREK and CHRISTINE because we’ve read the PJ Files, and we know JW is JW because of Edgar and his whiteboard.

No, these people are not seeking fame. If it wasn’t for blogs like ours they would’ve remained nameless to this day. 

Two of these people, TS and DEREK FLACK, went to the PJ before a week had passed. from Maddie's disappearance. Much before sighting-fever began. Neither of the two would be people of interest to the PJ. Both lived, or resided, at a significant distance from Apartment 5A and the Tapas complex, so it was them who approached the PJ and not the other way around.

We know little of JW’s statement. Basically just what is shown in the Mockumentary. But there’s little doubt that her statement is interlinked with those from the other two witnesses.

Kate does feebly warn us that the different sightings may refer to different men. We know that there are two kinds of sightings: real ones and fictitious ones.

Smith, Carol Tranmer and Tanner belong to the category of the real. All of them saw people of interest to the case. Tranmer saw a blonde man and Smith and Tanner saw Gerry McCann, although the latter lies both about from where she sees him and about what path she saw him walk up to the farthest corner from Apartment 5A between Rua Dr. Francisco Gentil Martins and Rua Dr. Agostinho da Silva.

But our attention today is focused on the other three sightings. The fictitious ones.

If it’s absurd to think that TS, JW and DEREK FLACK saw a PimpleMAN, it’s a total irrational lunacy to even think that they saw three different PimpleMEN.

That would mean that we had to have abductors attacking in packs in PdL, all choosing the same child and all choosing the same spot from which to observe the apartment she was in.

Besides, we don’t even have to say that the statements from JW, TS and DEREK FLACK are interrelated because that’s the conclusion reached by all Mockumentary participants, in front and behind cameras, by using a single actor to play the part.

These three characters refer to one, and only one character and a fictitious one at that.

As we’ve shown, both TS’s and DEREK FLACK’s statements are so much filled with detail that it means they the subject of intricate planning. The intentionality is clear and the message was carefully delineated by its authors, pity the messengers failed.

Not only are they lying individually, as their statements are so clearly interlinked and intertwined, that it shows that they’re also lying “collectively”. That's what is most significant about the statements from these three witnesses

There's absolutely no apparent connection relating the three witnesses, JW, TS and DEREK FLACK,  between themselves. There's also no apparent connection relating TS and DEREK FLACK with the McCanns or with the remainder T7

If JW is JENI WEINBERGER as we think she is, then there's a link, albeit weak, between her and the McCanns and that's the Tapas tennis. However we don't believe that the sport would create, in less than a week, such a bond that would be strong enough to make one make up stories about a stalker in which the disappearance of a child was at stake.

It’s quite clear that JW, TS and DEREK FLACK are LYING, in a scheme greater than themselves, in their statements concerning Pimpleman made to the PJ with the clear intent to obstruct justice.

Anyone think otherwise? Please do raise your hands.


  1. ''Anyone think otherwise? Please do raise your hands.''


    So you can tell them there are plenty of other forums where their views will be welcome?

    You are accusing named witnesses of lying. You have no basis for doing so, except presumably a desire to harm by prejudice any future court case against the McCanns. You are an idiot, Textusa. Do your contributors know your site has been the subject of investigations because of your abuse of a child witness?

  2. Disrupter @ Jun 30, 2012 10:26:00 AM

    A child witness has indeed been abused as we mentioned and we mentioned as well who we thought abused her and what we thought about it. Just helping the investigators.

    Any site calling it a Mockumentary are saying witnesses are lying. We’re certainly not alone on that.

    If you say that what we’re saying prejudices a court case you are in fact saying that we're on the right track.

  3. No, Textusa.

    You are the ones who abused that child, by calling her a liar. Your conduct is absolutely despicable, it really is.

    It's only the fact that you are quite clearly off your head that keeps you out of jail, really.

    You will try your usual approach, as will the simpletons who are taken in by you ''Oh, we must be on the right track, look they are running scared''

    The truth is, Textusa, it's fools like you who unwittingly support the McCann case. People look at you and feel sorry for them, having someone who is so obviously mentally ill constantly writing drivel about them.

    But your abuse of that poor child was really the low point. Still, at least it means the authorities are now watching your blog.

  4. Incidentally, it's very amusing when you claim you have ''debunked'' or ''proved'' anything.

    The fact is, when it comes to these claims, you are completely delusional. It started when you claimed there were no Tapas dinners, and so it continues. Obviously, you will be aware that you are regarded as a complete lunatic on both pro and anti-McCann sites and it is largely because of declarations like that. Anyone who is taken in by you is akin to the twits who believed in the Emperor's new clothes.

    You claim that you are always willing to correct anything you get wrong, when in fact this is the biggest falsehood of all. You merely abuse those who challenge you, or refuse to publish their posts.

    And the reason for that?

    It's because all your barmy theories fall apart when reality and commonsense intervenes.If any of the numpties who post here had the sense they were born with they would see immediately that for your central argument to be true an enormous conspiracy would be required, and that simply did not happen.

    However, the fact that you do still subscribe to this nonsense idea means that it does have the convenience of correctly identifying you as a completely irrelevant lunatic, ensuring that no-one takes a blind bit of notice of anything else you say. Even on Missing Madeleine, hardly a hotbed of robust sanity, they regard you as a nutcase and a figure of fun. You must be so proud.

  5. This person is completely terrified, the person's first comment.

  6. The first comment is from someone in a panic because it recognizes that the parent of a girl allowed it to be used in a documentary distributed by Mc Company for the whole world.

    Actually a girl that age should never have been used by compatriots. If the person who is only today horrified by this abuse and is all on the files and translated into English, I ask:

    If this is all public knowledge and official,

    you who wrote the first comment made the appropriate about the involvement to child protection services in your country, Uk?

    If not............. you are guilty, very, very guilty

    If you are the P.S. troll you have Uk services at Portugal

    So, you must complaint about who who allowed the child entered the fiction film playing the role "witness"

  7. Anonymous "disrupter" 10.26.Textusa never lies ,so if I were you I,d be very careful what you accuse her of.As for her "being the subject of investigations"because of her reference re abuse of a childwitness,how far may I ask has that investigation got to date???IMO ,you know there,s more to responding like you have,unless,you know something we don,t??????

  8. Dear Disrupter @ Jun 30, 2012 11:57:00 AM

    Now you got me confused.

    You say “No, Textusa. You are the ones who abused that child, by calling her a liar.”

    Please clarify if you mean that there’s a legal limit for one to be called a liar if one lies and the child was under that age to be considered as such or do you mean that we’ve wrongfully called her a liar? Because if you say she’s telling the truth you’re explicitly recognizing the existence of Pimpleman, who appears to be a pro-McCann character.

    That is a very strange attitude on the part of someone claiming to be anti the couple while accusing the blog of protecting them, or are you just tying your feet into such an entanglement of knots that you don’t even know what you’re saying?

    By the way, scaling up the threat now are we? It's jailtime now? That's new.

    If by "authorities" you're referring to SY, don’t worry, we're fully aware that they're reading the blog and it’s not because of what we wrote about TS.

    And talking about SY, as you seem to have assumed the role of Sheriff of Nottingham, what part are they playing? Are they King John's (the Establishment) men as they appear to be or are they loyal to King Richard (the Principles) as they should've always been?

  9. Dear Disrupter @ Jun 30, 2012 12:42:00 PM

    We've become accustomed to your verbal abuse. In fact it's becoming a bit tedious but does make us wonder why you want to spend so much time on us old mad ladies.

    We will continue to wait for some sort of attempt on your part to resolve the cognitive dissonance of your positions instead of limiting your speech to useless and desperate aggressiveness.

    However do be careful not to use, as is your habit, explicit verbal abuse or foul language. Censoring you is a waste of time which ignoring you simply isn't and your revenue diminishes with each comment we don't publish.

  10. There are more authorities that just the PJ and SY, Textusa

    You took the testimony of a child and you publicly ripped it to pieces

    You accused her of lying

    You claimed that she was a victim of abuse by adults close to her.

    The irony that the only people abusing that child were you and your raggle-taggle selection of evil witches completely escapes you, doesn't it?

    Fortunately, it didn't escape the attention of the authorities, who have their own ways of dealing with people like you who get their kicks out of abusing children.

    As for ''Lynn'', if you seriously believe this woman doesn't lie, then ask her how long she has known that the site was under investigation. Then ask her why she didn't tell you all.

  11. Hi! I think the The inhuman (first comment) is very, very concerned about the forged witnesses to the McCanns.

    They are really anxious, panicky complete. I do not understand the reason for the Mcs they ruined, and how, their lives.

    Well, then there could a few perks, the worst was what happened to the girl. Justice for her!

    The inhuman is only concerned with the living.

    Who abused a minor? Were the MCs and the person responsible for T.S. ?

    These English are conniving in the abuse and use of minors.

    Also, it's all in the official files of this case with full names. It is well known for Justice of Portugal and UK. It is also the world's knowledge: it's all on the net.

  12. Os monólogos do border-line são tão estranhos.

    Aquele ,o mais conhecido aqui por disruptivo , demonstra ser um personagem muito frustrado e com más atitudes.

    Personagens assim só criam problemas por onde passam e exigem muita paciência para os re educar.

    Resumindo: está muito aflito e cheio de medo.

    Já agora está a oferecer um fim de semana animado.

  13. Not the response expected from a person who thinks he is getting the better of Textusa.
    Which blog does he go to, to laugh at the mad old bats? He doesn't sound as if he's in a laughing mood.

  14. Textusa, you clearly touch the nerve of some(one)with your intelligence.
    Like travesties, they keep changing their/his appearence and singing different songs to attract or intimidate. The best was 'your blog under the investigation of the authorities'. Which authorities? the portuguese, the british or the BH/Mccnnish? And under investigation because of what? because you offer a place where people can discuss and interpret what is open and available in the PJ files? Here, nothing is an invention. All opinions are transparent and based on official documents.It is not your fault that some witnesses made so interesting statements thinking that their words will be locked in a police desk and the police ruin their plans and made their words available for everyone to debunk them.
    That person seems so worried about what is being uncovered here.
    If there is lunatics on that story, the lunatics are the people who lived life the 3 of May 2007 and wanted the world to believe that an abductor enter the 5A, and the witnesses who, to help them bake the story, having no scrupulous to lie and involve another child on the story(TS).
    Why are you so worried, dear anonimous, to the point of wasting your time with many comments in a blog under investigation and belonging to a lunatic? You seems to be an adult close to the child that was without doubts, abused on the day she was hired to play a roll where she lies to millions of people with only objective of misinforming the public and interfering with the police investigation. If the authorities are watching that blog closely, you should be the one the police need to investigate, not the owners of the blog. you are clearly, a person of interest and again you make a mistake... none call you to come here, you approach the blog voluntarly with an agenda. Exactly like the convennient witnesses who voluntarly approached the police to deliver lies, with an agenda. What a Karma....

  15. A video has been carter rucked out of youtube. It is the video of May 12th 2011, where Kate and Gerry are attacking Cameron and where Kate says "if you are a prime minister you have a responsibility".
    The title was "Parents of Madeleine McCann urge prime minister...etc" I forgot the rest.

  16. Dirupter (Jun 30, 2012 11:57:00 AM)

    “You took the testimony of a child and you publicly ripped it to pieces”
    You’re admitting that Textusa is right! If she ripped the testimony to pieces it was because it could be ripped otherwise it would have stood the test. It didn’t, so it was correctly denounced. That child’s testimony had serious implications because it mislead and resources because of it.
    And what’s wrong with “You claimed that she was a victim of abuse by adults close to her”. How many children would have been spared sufferance if others had “claimed” to authorities the “abuse by adults close to” them (sadly the most common origin of abuse)?
    You do your cause very little good, you do realize that at least don’t you?

  17. Bom dia!

    Algo vai muito mal no Reino de Sua Majestade.

    Os factos e os encobrimentos acerca de um orfanato na Ilha de Jersey ;

    o caso H. Green;

    A BBC anuncia no día 29 de Junho que

    " A legal loophole which has allowed hundreds of child abusers to escape prosecution has been closed, Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has said."

    Também diz :

    New legislation covering child abuse is set to come into force on Monday

    Quanto ao vídeo de Mxxxxxxxa ( é enorme fan dos Mcs e dos "Grandes Afins") . E, dizem aqui, que o vídeo foi car.-ruc. ?

    Aqui o comentarista que aparece em 1º lugar está indignado com a utilização de uma criança . Só não percebo duas coisas:

    como foi permitido em Portugal vir uma equipa de britânicos fazer filmagens com as testemunhas do processo do caso Madeleine ?

    Principalmente porque todos os intervenientes do OC, Mcs mais os Ts apresentarem rotativamente desculpas de impedimento para a reconstrução dos factos sob investigação criminal….

    Todos os nomes estão nos documentos oficiais , os quais foram entregues em DVD. Todos os nomes com todas as respectivas letras que os compõem estão lá; estão traduzidos e são do conhecimento mundial amplamente difundidos pelos media de Uk a pedido dos Mcs e "Grandes Afins".

    Nesse ano ninguém se preocupou com os nomes; ninguém fez queixa da participação de Tasmin S. no McVídeo às entidades de UK. Ninguém de Uk se preocupou em proteger a criança que ela era naquela altura .

  18. I've seen books with less than 18 Chapters!
    I would call it "Pimpleman, a lie among lies".

  19. The Sunday Express of today's published an article where it tells that the Home Office refuses to disclose documents to a paper, because of its consideration with Portugal.It is about the Met and Portugal.I can't believe the Home Office is hiding information about clairvoyants, dreams and ghosts. It is definitely something else. I really can't wait. They must be much further than they admit.
    This article combined with Jim Gamble's words, saying he believes the case will be solved in his life time...
    Let us pray!

  20. Continuig whatt I just wrote above, it is possible that Portugal asked for secrecy of justice in England, speaking about this case. I can't think of 50.000 journalists at the PJ's door, asking for news. But I hope that the Express will continue trying to find out what is going on. At least we know now that there are documents (recent?) that will not be release yet.

  21. yesteday the Daily Star Sunday published an article about the secret documents gaven by Portugal to the Home Office.
    Please read the Maddie Case Files of today's.

  22. On the aricle of the Daily Star somebody of the Labour is complaining about the revision.
    Afraid we will find out about Gordon Brown? We know it already, no problem.

  23. The Home office is certainly hiding information about ghosts.
    They are all around in the UK, no doubts about it.

  24. Reading both articles, my conclusion is that England wants to influence Portugal in order to reopen the case, that's why they are complaining that they have no power.
    Tapas 7 must be aware of it and that news could be a way to pressure them to come forward telling what they know.
    The mystery of the documents and Tapas 7 will be judged for perjury and for helping hiding a crime.
    The circle around Tapas 9 is becaming narrower and narrower and it has cost over the 2 billion pounds to the taxpayer.
    Murdoch is leaving the UK, Tapas 9 are all by themselves, costing a lot of money to the British taxpayers.

  25. I as a reader of this blog was rapped over the fingers by Textusa for commenting that the child was lying. I had no problem with it and Textusa simply tried to bring to light as to what shameful extent the child was used, she never had a 'go' at the poor child. So the blame here, lies at the wrong door. Maybe Anonymous could explain to the readers here why this child's witness statement says one thing, with the documentary showing the complete opposite? If you don't understand, I mean the side of the road where she was walking. Another thing, if it is true that this site is under investigation, what is wrong with being under investigation? Do you want us all to shout: "Run, run... Textusa, ...Run!"?

  26. Anon @ 3:08:00 PM

    The idea is to scare away readers from Textusa. Create the feeling that if they come here they run the risk of being monitored by some sort of authorities. As you say anyone with a clear conscience has nothing to fear from any investigation. On the contrary it welcomes it so that innocence is confirmed. Which authorities? It's unclear but besides SY and and PJ I see only Leics Police and CEOP. I think CEOP has had already enough misuse in the past and I don't think that this is a job for Leics Police. It's just a pathetic attempt from BHs to drive us readers away. I'll be keeping coming back as I've always been doing.

  27. Excellent news!I sincerely hope this blog is being monitored by the 'authorities'. They would then see how many people are looking for answers and refuse to be fooled by the McCann propaganda machine.

    The information the blog is based on is available for discussion and it's quite clear people who come here to read and contribute do so wanting that information to be highlighted.

    It is a shame that anon can't tell us exactly which authorities are monitoring the blog, not that it really matters. What is important is that it is.

  28. the return of the ghost about 3:08:00 PM

    The ghost want people to talk with him because have no friends, i think.

  29. I just found the missing video

    "Brunt-Implanting the idea that Kate was the Perpetrator"

    rush yourselves before it desappears again.

  30. Anon Jul 2, 2012 4:14:00 PM

    According to Feedjit Textusa is almost reaching the the 195,000 figure! That's 1,000 readers for each SY new lead!!

  31. The documents held by the British Home Office relates to 'specific' information passed to them in the utmost confidence by the Portugese authorities. To break this bond of trust would create major ramifications diplomatically between the two European allies.

  32. Anonymous Jul 2, 2012 4:15:00 PM

    Sorry to disappoint, but I was actually commenting on the first comment and the ones following by the same poster. I have been away for a week and was simply catching up on the posts that I have haven't read yet. Textusa is free not to post my comments and I wouldn't be offended, it is after all her blog. Have a lovely day.

  33. Thinking about it.... Textusa is highlighting the fact TS was abused by those in PdL so it’s them who should be investigated. Textusa is actually supporting this visitor's stance so I can't understand what it is that's making him so upset!


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.