Friday, 27 September 2013

Thank You, Gerry McCann


Gerry McCann, Sept 27th, 2013 (at 01:02 on video above):

"Well, the law's changed and I think, ...err... I think Kate and I know better than anyone else, ...err... what we've experienced and what we've gone through and the facts of the file and, ...err... the damage that's been caused to the search for Madeleine..."




And also thank you, Anonymous Sep 27, 2013, 3:04:00 PM by providing the link to the video in your comment to our post Historic Registry 3

58 comments:

  1. Foot wedged firmly in mouth again!
    That's because the subconscious often speaks before the brain engages mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't beat the man up.... as the files and the book do say the same it's so easy to confuse them!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kate’s mother stated that Kate was ‘not particularly religious’ – the behaviours and actions of the Mccanns are not those of a religious couple but I believe they have had to use religion because the church in pdl played a very large part in the early stages of Madeleine’s disappearance. Father Pacheco was a Catholic priest who later claimed ‘he had been deceived’ could this deception have been from another source forcing him into retirement and consequent silence. Then the Anglican Chaplain Hubbard took over, two different religions from the same church! Susan Hubbard has given support to the Mccann couple since the beginning even there are so many suspicions surrounding the mccann couple and the majority of Portuguese people now question the mccanns version of events. Susan Hubbard in her early witness statement given in pdl said she had no knowledge of the church keys but these were given to the Mccann couple not by Father Pacheco but from somebody else. The church would have been an ideal place to store Madeleine’s body being of cool temperature without fear of anybody searching. Cadaver would be present anyway in a church due to funerals etc. The now iconic photograph of the Mccanns leaving the church and laughing shortly after Madeleine disappeared epitomises their relief that people believed their story and speaks volumes. IMO Father Pacheco was deceived by the establishment and his removal became a necessity to be replaced by the cooperative Hubbard and his wife. The church is a focal point of pdl and an ideal base from which the Mccann couple were able to speak freely to each other and use their laptops and mobiles without fear of being overheard or photographed. On the night Maddie ‘vanished’ Kate and Gerry asked to see Father Pacheco and they have continued with the religious pretence but as her mother stated ‘Kate is not a particularly religious person’. The case is not going well for the Mccanns hence Gerry’s ‘I want to go into the witness box’ he knows full well he would not be allowed to take the witness box at this late stage so it’s safe to claim he and his wife want to go into the witness box, but it makes great headlines for the Mccanns. Father Pacheco should have been a witness he was there at the beginning he could have explained what he meant by being deceived or why he personally did not hand the Mccann couple the church keys. The fund is a fraud always has been, set up in UK so Portugal has no jurisdiction and cannot do anything about it, this is what could have been discussed and arranged in the church in pdl by the mccann couple it’s all about money always has been.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous Sep 27, 2013, 8:28:00 PM,

      We do recommend the reading of our Holy Trinity post:
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/12/holy-trinity.html

      And about the body being taken and kept to PdL's Church, also the reading of:
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/05/body-disposal-debunking-part-i-church.html
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/05/clarifications-on-body-disposal-part-i.html

      Thank you very much for your comment.

      Delete
  4. Did the fund pay for Gerry and his sister to be flown to Portugal? Why don't the Mccanns save everybody time and effort and just tell the truth instead of lies, lies and more lies. Stop acting Gerry we're all fed up with it you and Kate are a pair of con merchants and deserve to be locked up. RIP Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gerry,

    You and Kate are now really a couple:
    http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2009/05/kate-mccann-confesses-finally.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. For the arrogant man he's shown to be, he seems to need the constant approval from ID for every word he says. He seems nervous and tries to push the reporters in ID's way. Not the aggressive Gerry we are used to.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You captured a gem! Gerry and ID’s expressions speak volumes.
    Nothing like GA and his lawyer coming of court recently looking very happy and positive. Of course that was before the lawyer had bad news about his son.

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2417.0

    From Anne Guedes today at 05:25:43 PM:

    "The Judge appeared at 9:50. All lawyers were there, as well as the interpreter. Dra Isabel Duarte had a new assistant. But in the audience we were only two members of the public (Astro and I), all journalists were outside waiting for Mr McCann and Mrs Cameron. Among the journalists, Martin Brunt was back in Lisbon and back was his very British sense of humour. He is literally chained to his photographer, since he holds the perch ! When the crowd of photographers suddenly rushes in a certain direction, he can't but follow.
    Back to court. Mr Amaral's lawyer made a request because his son was in the hospital (it seems the problem surged yesterday) to have a urgent surgery and the father was needed there. Dra Duarte said she made yesterday a request for the complainant G. McCann who is coming from the UK (she insisted twice on this) to be heard. This request has to be accepted by the lawyers of the defence within a few days. The Judge consulted a great amount of books and files when she was dictating to the court clerk. She found Dr Santos Oliveira's request justified and unforeseeable and stated that the adjournment had to be accepted.

    The Judge then announced that the 27th witnesses would be heard on the 2nd of October (Henrique Machado (journalist of Correio da Manhã), Eduardo Dâmaso (political analyst) and Mrs Cameron).
    From this I deduce that 1) Mrs Healy will not be heard and 2) Mrs Cameron is the last witness for the accusation, except for the bar association president, Marinho Pinto who eventually will be heard on the 19 of November.

    The last session (exhibition of the documentary and final allegations) will now be on the 27th of November.
    On the 8th of October will be heard only witnesses for the defence :
    Inspectores Tavares de Almeida and Ricardo Paiva, Luis Nunes, the head of the Central unit against organized crime, Manuel Catarino, editorialist in the CdM (who seems specialised in juridical issues) and the journalist and writer Hernani Carvalho (who is doing a PhD on criminology)

    On the 5th of October will be heard other witnesses for the defence :
    Paulo Sargento, Moita Flores, two persons related to Guerra&Paz, etc.
    On the 19 of Novempber, will be heard the last witnesses for the defence :
    Carlos Coelho da Silva (the documentary film maker), Margarida Teotónio Pereira (TVI director of international programs), etc. and possiby a witness for the accusation (?), José Viega Soares, a consultant in PR who was at the court on day 1 (the only (but me) reading a book and not consulting a smart phone) and was dismissed for that day.

    Meanwhile Mr McCann and his sister had arrived. The Judge asked to call the two witnesses first Eduardo Dâmaso and later Trish Cameron. She explained no hearing was possible if a lawyer was missing. She said she was sorry the witnesses would have to come next Wednesday. Mrs Cameron observed it was the second time.. The Judge acknowledged and apologized for this. She said this kind of circumstance, like health, cannot be anticipated and we can't but accept it. She said the court thanked the witnesses.
    Mr McCann didn't even enter the audience room.

    The Sun guy wasn't there, the one who works for 4 newspapers with 4 different identities to-day was working for 5.
    Gonçalo Amaral's car was parked behind the building. So he took another exit. The reporters saw him (I don't know how, they do have hawk eyes) and rushed."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why are Kate and Gerry Mccann given preferential treatment - all comments about them point to their guilt yet still they are allowed such freedom their smugness and arrogance and still nothing is done to investigate them further and what about their frauduent fund, if all suspects received this level of protection our prisons would be empty.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "facts in the files". I should say that he knows what means the word "facts". "facts in the files" in oposition to the lies on their spin machine.
    If GA end up condemned on that saga, we must definetly conclude that justice in Portugal has a double face and is a farce.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think The McCanns are important,it's what they know about people in high positions that is important,and therefore keeps them out of jail.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This guy is a disgrace, 5 minutes of stage already show his narcisistic egocentric shenofhobia.
    Perhaps could he explain in court all his strange behaviour in 2007 when PJ was desperate searching his daughter: why was he more interested in the results of UK football then on the developments of Madeleine investigation? Why was he sucking lolipops when PJ was dealing with important information? Why was he reading the book" Mannual to conceal a cadaver" if he wanted the world to search an alive girl who shows absolutely no evidence to have been harmed by who was with her. And WHY MW WAS APPOINTED AS THE SECOND DRIVER OF THE SCENIC INSTEAD OF KATE?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And do not forget, not only was his mind on the footy rather than his daughter, he also was SUCKING ON A LOLLYPOP!!! Can you believe it? A grown man, whose daughter has vanished, suppodedly taken by a paedo, is at the police headquarters sucking candy???

      Delete
  13. I'm sure that Gerry McCann is very disappointed to have come to Lisbon.
    About the spinning that's being done about Gerry taking the stand. Today is the 28th. The trial started on the 12th.
    The new law went into effect on the 1st. It just doesn't appear from one day into the other. It was discussed with the Laweyrs' Bar and other Legal associations/organizations/representations. This to say that any lawyer, ID included, knew before the 1st what new things that law brought.
    So it is NOT because of the new law that Gerry and Kate now want to testify. If that was so Kate had plenty of time before the trial started. If the law states there's a 10 day notification period needed for the various sides to prepare themselves and these are business days then maybe she couldn't testify on the 12th but coud have on the 19th. And Gerry could have come yesterday without any doubt about whether he could testify or not.
    This is exactly the same stunt "we're available to reopen the process" in front of court the last time. Saying something but wanting the opposite. Yes, we want to testify but woe us we can't because of the stupid burocarcy and long timelines. Even Marinho Pinto got caught in them!
    Well this time you put your foot in your mouth, Gerry because you are going to testify. As you saw the court dates change (how on earth do you think the Casa Pia case lasted the long it did?). The Nov 5th date to provide a sentence has already been postponed and will be postponed as many times as needed until the judge thinks the relevant witnesses are heard. And you and Kate are relevant witnesses and you have just said that you BOTH want to testify. So I'll be glad to be hearing all your woes about the files, sorry, the book.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Where are all the heavyweigths now? Like JK Rowling?
    Kate's mum gave up on testifying? Or was it too much that afternoon to lie about her grandaughter's fate?. She should be the best person to speak of Kate's s mental state.
    And her friends from UK? Only Emma Loach? Where's Nikki Gill and Jill Renwick who spoke of their happy marriage..
    And what about Clarence? The man the press still report to about the couple and who has been with them from the beginning?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most definitely, Clarence Mitchell should be on the witness list, at the very top! He was the "voice" of the McCanns in public, he was the one who fiercely denied Kate's suicidal mood, he should explain that to the court...was he lying or is Kate lying? One of them has to...or is she suicidal on and off?

      Delete
  15. Anonymous 28 Sep 2013 10:16:00

    Let me just add this to what you're saying: if in 2007 the McCanns had the power to move this world and the next one why aren't they able to summon that same power now in their rescue? Their story was as ridiculous in 2007 as is today and the lack of shame needed to support their story then is no different than the needed now. So where is all the couple's power that many blogs said they had?
    Or like Text says, they never had any power and those that did have in 2007 couldn't care less about them now and that's why we're seeing now this pathetic show of witnesses?

    ReplyDelete
  16. It would appear the Mccanns now lead separate lives, she went with her mother to Lisbon and he travelled with his sister. Has the strain of their lies and duplicity also destroyed their marriage?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Why didn't Gerry put himself on the list of witnesses in the beginning, if he really wanted to be called as a witness this is just another publicity stunt when he gets refused permission the tabloids will have another go on his behalf at the Portuguese this is another example of the Mccanns hypocrisy, at the Leverson enquiry they played the perfect victims of a hostile media, but now they are again feeding the media stories to print trying to portray themselves as the wronged party.
    Amaral's book was not published in UK which is where the Mccanns reside why are they allowed to sue Amaral when the 'disappearance' happened in Portugal where Amaral worked and resides. Surely Amaral is entitled as the chief invesgative officer at the time to write about the case as it happened on Portuguese soil. The Mccanns monetary interests are all based in UK as is the fund, they refused to cooperate with the Portuguese authorities Kate calling them F****** T****** that sole comment did more harm to any search, it shows contempt and arrogance for the people trying to help the Mccanns.
    Please somebody bring this money making circus to an end.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This case is not going well for the McScammers, they have tried the cry baby act and the suicidal act, none of that worked, now Gerry pretends he wants to take the witness box to try and add some weight to the lack of witnesses acting on behalf of the Mccanns, what a load of old rubbish this couple are, they believe through their arrogance that they have a sense of entitlement when they themselves did nothing for the search. The pair look ridiculous they have become a complete joke, but this is not a joke because a child died through their lack of human decency as parents. Madeleine deserved so much more...

    ReplyDelete
  19. http://www.abc.es/espana/20130929/abci-reconstruccion-crimen-santiago-201309290414.html

    Uma história aterradora, cheia de mentiras e mais mentiras.
    Uma coincidência a assombrar os testemunhos de outros pais que tanto mentiram e continuam a mentir num tribunal, em Portugal.
    Gerry, chega de palhaçada.... Quando se apresentou à porta do tribunal para testemunhar, sabia muito bem que não podia legal e oficialmente fazê-lo. Tinha requerido essa condição no dia anterior, o que tornou a ocorrência fisicamente impossivel porque os advogados tinham de concordar antes dele depor. Não houve tempo para obter essa concordância... Entào, que número foi este? Mais uma triste palhaçada para " inglês ver" ou melhor, para usar os media e tentar distrair a atenção do publico da desgraça que têm sido as prestações dos "suporters" dentro do tribunal.
    Que diferença, no caso espanhol, quem conheceu e privou com a menina, acorreu à policia para relatar episódios suspeitos a envolver a criança e os pais. No caso de Maddie, os amigos que a conheceram, fizeram/ fazem de tudo, para esconder o que realmente se passou nos ultimos dias/ horas da criança. Não estão isentos de responsabilidades neste crime. Deviam ser todos obrigados a testemunhar, por força das circunstâncias. Mas este é um julgamento viciado, que dê as voltas que der, tem de condenar o policia a pagar um montante em dinheiro que alimente a boa vida dos mentirosos, e tem de retirar das livrarias o livro" Maddie, a verdade da mentira" porque numa democracia hipócrita, 35 anos após o 25 de Abril, Portugal é uma colónia Inglesa, onde estes aplicam a censura a seu belo prazer.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I was always of the opinion that in a libel trial or whatever else they call this trial the Mccanns needed to produce positive proof beyond any reasonable doubt that Amarals book harmed the search. Their case is based upon their opinions and those of their friends and is falling apart because it has no substance. The so called search or 'fund' was damaged because the public became aware of what the Mccanns were involved in (making money) - none of the big celebrities from 2007 have supported this couple because thanks to the internet and sites like this we are allowed freedom of speech and information Ann Gedes is supplying much information from the trial if we were to rely on our tabloids we would be fed pro mccann stories. The Government has thrown millions at this search and the public gave millions the Mccanns have spent the lot and now they feel entitled to more easy money. The publicity afforded to Madeleine Mccann knew no bounds - worldwide publicity - reaching out to every country. Madeleine is no longer on this earth or she would have been found and their ridiculous stories that someone is looking after her belong in a fairy story book, sadly she is dead but how did she die?The Mccanns have no right whatsoever to sue Amaral the fictional book Kate wrote attempting to gloss over facts and change events proves beyond doubt that this couple needs further investigation into Madeleines disappearance and the subsequent setting up of a fund. This trial is based on heresay, emotions and opinions and they feel entitled to claim one million euros and it should be thrown out of court it is a waste of tax payers money and the judge's and Amaral's valuable time. Gerry's latest publicity stunt is in keeping with what we would expect from this deranged couple and their desperate PR machine and where is mouthy old Clarance at this very important time, like the others he's 'jumped ship' too embarassed to support or be part of the dubious duo any longer. Well done Textusa on an absolutely truthful thought provoking site. Thanks to the internet it has become harder to control public opinion and freedom of information and speech and consequently cover crime. Tick tock Mccanns!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don't believe anything is going to come of this yet again! The video shows McCann's great discomfort, and yet all the British press cover this as his "anger" at the "farce" that is the Portuguese courts! The establishment that has shrouded this pair continues to exert the same influence. It is all absolutely appalling, as it has been since this all began. Can anyone tell me why John Blacksmith has cleared his Interrupted Investigation blog??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John Blacksmith has a new blog:

      http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.co.uk/

      He continues to write about the case.

      Delete
    2. This blog has been cleared of all content. Does anyone know why?

      Delete
    3. Sorry, now I see what you mean, it's the new blog that is "empty", no posts at all!
      I have no idea of what happened, hope we will hear from Mr. Blacksmith soon, maybe via McCannFiles. I remember reading something in the old blog about some trouble regarding menacing posts, people accusing John Blacksmith of having turned against Mr. Amaral or something of the kind..."trolls and clutter" doing some dirty work on Mr. Blacksmith and his blog(s)?

      Delete
    4. Just saw this in Jill Havern's forum, people there are also wondering what's going on:

      Comment posted by:

      scrants Today at 18:29

      "He's this before, he archives his posts from time to time. You can find them in mccann files. perhaps he's clearing the decks for next week!"

      (sure he meant "he's done this before")

      Delete
    5. Anonymous29 Sep 2013 20:33:00

      Sunday, 29 September 2013

      A pause
      This is the first occasion since May 3 2007 when people on both sides of the argument must answer for their words and actions at a hearing designed to get at the truth.

      There will be plenty of time for analysis after the hearings are complete but for the present I believe the words of the witnesses should speak for themselves, in their full dramatic significance, without any comment.

      Back soon.

      Dear John explains for us. Thank goodness - I was worried it was something else.

      Delete
  22. From:

    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

    "A footnote, provided by Kate McCann, 15 May 2011"

    A footnote, provided by Kate McCann The Blacksmith Bureau

    Posted by John Blacksmith at 20:25
    Sunday, 15 May 2011

    On July 7 2008 Mrs Justice Hogg gave judgement in the Family Division of the High Court regarding the attempt by Kate & Gerry McCann to gain access to all the Leicester Police documents regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

    The judgement was by agreement between the parties and was made in open court.

    M/S Kate McCann in her book Madeleine has now provided an excerpt from the official submission of Leicester Police to the court regarding the matter and outlining the reasons why they could not agree to provide the documents. Signed by the assistant chief constable of Leicestershire it runs:

    "While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

    ReplyDelete
  23. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

    A lot of a good reading material, just a snippet:

    "Wright's Folly, 27 September 2013"
    By Dr Martin Roberts

    "As we have seen, Michael Wright, clearly influenced as much by his understanding as his knowledge, has made two very specific claims on the McCanns' behalf, viz:

    'They knew before the shelving of the case, that a book would be published.'

    'They read the book when I sent them the translation that was on the internet in August 2008.'

    Whereas attention was previously drawn to the possible unreliability of this 'evidence' in the light of the McCanns' own admissions, come September 2008, that neither of them had bothered to read the book in question, one may now be altogether more specific. It wasn't the McCanns who lied on this occasion, but Wright, who lied to the court.

    The English translation that appears on the Internet is taken from the French version of Goncalo Amaral's book, L'Enquête Interdite - 'The Forbidden Investigation'. The French edition of the book was not published until 03 May 2009. There has never been an English translation made of the Portuguese. And in case anyone should protest that Wright had the English narration of the broadcast documentary in mind, that programme did not materialise until April 2009 either.

    Exactly what translation of A Verdade Da Mentira does Michael Wright believe he discovered on the Internet in August 2008 therefore; a translation communicated to the McCanns that very month and which, for their part, they did not read?"

    NO internet english version of Mr. Amaral's book available in August 2008!!! LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  24. http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7823-wright-s-folly-dr-martin-roberts

    By Dr Martin Roberts
    27 September 2013

    WRIGHT'S FOLLY

    That the McCanns are perfectly happy to let others do their lying for them has been evident ever since they separately and severally fed their kith and kin the line about their holiday apartment having been broken into. They did their own line in perjury though. Kate McCann herself proclaimed before Lord Justice Leveson: 'There were no body fluids' (found in their hire car), despite having long ago attempted to explain away that very discovery as possibly arising from the transportation of soiled nappies, previously worn by bodies no doubt.

    That was until quite recently. Michael Wright's testimony in Lisbon on their behalf has since 'pushed the envelope' significantly.

    Maybe Wright forgot where he was. Maybe he did not properly understand what he was being called upon to do. The script was so new to him after all, that he had to jot it down on a hotel napkin. Whatever the reason, he is now in the very precarious position of possibly becoming a defendant himself, should Goncalo Amaral, win lose or draw, exercise his right to sue Mr Michael Wright for giving false testimony against him (we shall come to the specifics in due course).

    First a word or two about correlations; those slippery statistical things that, even when significant, prove nothing (see: www. correlated.org). They are often appealed to as indices though, just like the behaviour of sniffer dogs in fact. And what might the principle of correlation have to do with the McCanns vs. Amaral? Gerry McCann, newly arrived on the scene, gives us a clue:

    GM - "The law has changed, and I think that Kate and I know better than anyone else what we have experienced, and what we have gone through, the facts of the file and the damage that has been caused to the search for Madeleine."

    Notice that his conclusion is not 'the damage that has been caused to the search for Madeleine by Goncalo Amaral’s book'. That might just have been untrue, the more especially if the court should eventually find otherwise. Furthermore, 'damage' is left clinging to the lifeboat of 'the facts of the files', which Kate and Gerry 'know better than anyone else' just as they do 'what they have experienced'. Which raises the obvious question as to why those with such superior knowledge did not elect to speak for themselves in the first place? (Could it have had something to do with point one above, perhaps?).

    It rather appears that Gerry McCann, having watched proceedings from a safe distance, has been parachuted in to provide additional data; data that will strengthen the correlation earlier witnesses, including Michael Wright, have laboured in vain to establish - the three-way correlation (as yet unspoken by Gerry McCann, who is obviously saving himself for the witness stand) between Goncalo Amaral's book 'The Truth of the Lie', the McCanns' interminable suffering, and the damage done to the 'search' for Madeleine (whether defined as a brand or an activity is unclear).

    The story so far is that, according to the McCanns' writ, an unquantifiable degree of damage and suffering (unquantifiable except in terms of financial compensation demanded) can be attributed, directly or indirectly, to the publication of the Amaral book. Several witnesses for the McCanns having now been heard, this putatively indisputable association appears somewhat less convincing, especially given the earlier, widespread announcement of the McCanns' arguido status and immediate release to the public of the process files upon relaxation of this status in 2008, the year in which A Verdade Da Mentira, to give it its Portuguese title, was published.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  25. (cont.)

    A major difficulty for the McCann case therefore is the impossibility of disentangling these, shall we say, causal elements, in order to apportion 'effect' with any degree of accuracy. And that's just as regards Portugal, both productions being in Portuguese in the first instance. Hence we have heard attempts to convince the court that the Goncalo's book is the more credible/influential on account of its being easier to read and digest, say, in a day. The significance of the all-important correlation is therefore weakened. From being 'entirely responsible' the book is inevitably down-graded to 'largely responsible' - at worst, if at all, given that quantitative attestation has so far been conspicuously absent from any witness testimony to date (no doubt that is what Gerry McCann intends to bring to the table). The issue does not rest there however.

    The 'search' for Madeleine McCann has been considered a worldwide activity since her parents first stepped aboard that hired Learjet on their tour of Europe, and then 'did America'. If that nasty paperback edition of the Algarve Police Gazette (or the film of the book) had any meaningful effect upon its readers' searching intentions, that effect would have been restricted to Portugal, Brazil and one or two African communities. To maximize the return on their investment in proceedings, the McCanns need to be rewarded (compensated seems altogether inappropriate a term) for damage to their search elsewhere on planet earth. All English speaking zones should cover it, i.e., virtually everywhere else. Except everywhere else doesn't speak or read Portuguese necessarily.

    And so we begin to close in on Michael Wright's folly.

    It is difficult to apportion individual effectiveness, should two or more publications on a single subject emerge at around the same time (e.g., Newton - Leibniz, Darwin - Wallace). Better, in principle, if there is a lapse of time in-between, following which one can assess any influential change(s) occasioned by subsequent accounts. The histrionic Ms Stilwell, who might care to reflect upon what happened to her namesake Frank after he shot Morgan Earp in the back (they almost lost count of the bullet holes Morgan's brother Wyatt put in his body), would have it that there was a rebellious upsurge of anti-McCann feeling following introduction of Amaral's material to the world. She is, however, wholly unable to offer evidence in support of such a claim. Just like those witnesses who have preceded her.

    One of those witnesses was Michael Wright, whom we know, thanks to the astuteness of the lady judge, was 'coached' before giving evidence. His approach to the complete absence of reliable data on search and suffering effects (those phenomena obviously more familiar to the McCanns) was to broaden the contiguous alignment of 'The Truth of the Lie' and the official files (the Portuguese scenario), so as to embrace translations available via the internet, English in particular, and endeavour to push home the claim that the book took precedence in the public mind. Of course for that situation to pertain, the relevant materials had to be publicly available at the same time.

    (cont)

    ReplyDelete
  26. (cont.)

    As we have seen, Michael Wright, clearly influenced as much by his understanding as his knowledge, has made two very specific claims on the McCanns' behalf, viz:

    'They knew before the shelving of the case, that a book would be published.'

    'They read the book when I sent them the translation that was on the internet in August 2008.'

    Whereas attention was previously drawn to the possible unreliability of this 'evidence' in the light of the McCanns' own admissions, come September 2008, that neither of them had bothered to read the book in question, one may now be altogether more specific. It wasn't the McCanns who lied on this occasion, but Wright, who lied to the court.

    The English translation that appears on the Internet is taken from the French version of Goncalo Amaral's book, L'Enquête Interdite - 'The Forbidden Investigation'. The French edition of the book was not published until 03 May 2009. There has never been an English translation made of the Portuguese. And in case anyone should protest that Wright had the English narration of the broadcast documentary in mind, that programme did not materialise until April 2009 either.

    Exactly what translation of A Verdade Da Mentira does Michael Wright believe he discovered on the Internet in August 2008 therefore; a translation communicated to the McCanns that very month and which, for their part, they did not read?

    Not only should Wright's testimony be stricken from the record, but it should be regarded as prejudicial to that of any other of the McCanns' witnesses who appeal to the same 'translated' source in support of whatever claim they might make (or have made) regarding supposed adverse effects upon the plaintiffs.

    As for Michael Wright, the best advice one might offer is 'Lawyer-up mate!' That's what funds (sorry, friends) are for, is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  27. And this one http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html :

    "Mr Helpful
    A First for Mr Wright
    The Internet monitor Mr Wright is, of course, the same Michael Wright who has featured so helpfully before in the Madeleine McCann affair – helpful, that is, and I regret having to say it, to the parents, rather than the child.

    Mr Wright has the doubtful honour of being the very first person to start putting in place alibis for the parents' behaviour – on May 4.

    It was he who, after conferring with Gerry McCann, contacted the Evening Standard to get the clan's version of events out having been persuaded to say that he was defending them against unfair criticism.

    He did this early in the day so that it would make the London Evening Standard before the evening of May 4. Alert readers will note that this is well ahead of the "surprise" that Gerry McCann told parliament and Leveson he got when he returned from Portimao police headquarters to find a media mob waiting for them.
    Some surprise! As I wrote in the Cracked Mirror in 2009 Gerry McCann had been on his mobile all morning providing feeds for that media – from within the very police headquarters where he was supposedly present to help the police search for the child. You'd think he'd have been so busy racking his brains for any detail that he could pass on to the police to assist the search or help his child that he'd have no interest in what the media thought.

    Mr Wright told the Standard that there had been "spin" against the McCanns that had given a misleading impression of what had happened the previous evening. If I may be permitted to quote the whole relevant passage from the Cracked Mirror regarding Gerry McCann's organization of friends and family to brief the media from Portimao police HQ:
    "Perhaps M/S Renwick's next comment was her own - or perhaps not. "She said," The Standard continues, "the McCanns had chosen the resort because it was family friendly. [Untrue; the resort was not, as we have seen, chosen by the McCanns but by David Payne] This is the first time they have done this,” she added [untrue; it was not the first time they had done this] They are very, very anxious parents and very careful," she said. [As we have seen earlier, in Praia de Luz the parents had in practice been neither very anxious nor very careful].

    And then The Standard had this: "Michael Healy[this was Michael Wright], the missing girl's uncle, added: "There has been some negative spin put on this, with people criticising them for leaving the kids and going on the tear.” Mr Healy added, "But it's nonsense, they were close by and were eating within sight of where the children were and checking on them. Other members of the group were checking on her as well. No one was rip-roaring drunk."

    How have news reports about a disappearance, or "desperate efforts to get publicity for Madeleine" led to this? How have Kate's dying-fall mutterings to Oprah Winfrey about involving the media because of "...absolute helplessness, absolutely desperate. I mean, this is our daughter who we love beyond words, and every second is like hours..." led to this mutation to a pre-emptive defence of themselves? How has "the natural instinct...to appeal for information" that Gerry McCann described to members of Parliament morphed into denying that they were drunk?

    "Negative spin" and "criticism." How could there be any spin or criticism of the parents by Friday afternoon when these were the very people telling the world what had happened the previous night for the first time and when the pair hadn't even given their statements to the police?"
    The usual prizes are offered for anyone who can provide a link, or any evidence at all of this "negative spin and criticism" that helpful Mr Wright referred to. Where had he seen it? What had he been told by Gerry McCann?"

    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7823p10-wright-s-folly-dr-martin-roberts

    ReplyDelete
  28. From poster Petermac (hope he doesn't mind):
    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7823p10-wright-s-folly-dr-martin-roberts

    "ID - When did they read the book and watch the documentary?
    MW - They read the book when I sent them the translation that was on the internet in August 2008.

    (Later) MW objects that the book was published immediately after the release of the files and was written by a PJ Inspector. Moreover he says GA's book can be read in a day.
    Oh dear, Michael. What it is to be easily led.

    On 6 September 2008, Expresso published an interview with the McCanns, both of them. Whilst more than one exchange therein is of relevance to the current proceedings, the following single example is oh so pertinent:

    Q – Former inspector Gonçalo Amaral remains convinced of your involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. Did you read 'The Truth of the Lie', the book that he wrote?

    Kate and Gerry – No.
    Kate – Why would I?
    Gerry – I won't learn anything from reading it.

    We have a couple with anticipatory knowledge of a potentially 'harmful' book, albeit written in Portuguese, who, in August 2008, receive a translation via the internet that can be read in a day, and who, according to court witness Michael Wright (who is under oath to tell the truth don't forget), read it at that time, presumably in the one day required to do so. And yet, when asked about it publicly in September, BOTH DENIED HAVING READ THE BOOK AT ALL."

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous 29 Sep 2013 13:35:00

    That's an article posted by JBS and that has been wooshed away. It was called "Mother's Little Helper" and it continues with this:

    "And Again

    In April 2008, when the pair were, of course, still arguidos Mr Wright was once again helpful beyond the call of duty. He gave his rogatory statement, requested by the Portuguese PJ, to Leicester police describing his connections to the McCanns, his very frequent trips to Portugal and his observations about the effect the disappearance had had on the McCanns.

    The statement covers a period of nearly a year and runs to 1497 words. Of those nearly 20% deal with his use of the McCanns' vehicle for rubbish disposal. Twenty per cent! You could read it and think, what is this guy, a nutter? Why is he going on and on about garbage? And the stench the garbage left in the car. And the bodily and waste fluids that were carried in the vehicle. All without ever attempting to clean it out. You might think What the f*** is the guy, a f****** coprophiliac? Where's his head at?

    But as we all know, given the dog alerts that Gerry McCann was so dismissive of, he was just being helpful again, wasn't he?

    Used and Exploited

    It was a bit different when he was helpful last week, wasn't it? Instead of an ignorant and complaisant Evening Standard or a guardedly neutral Leicester police interviewer he had a court to deal with and the truth to confront. There he wriggled. And squirmed. And fell silent. And contradicted himself. And had his little prompt list taken away and exposed, just as Gerry McCann's timeline prompt lists were taken away and exposed. It was a terrible humiliation.

    But who had put Mr Wright in this position in the first place? Who was it who'd so ruthlessly used the bonds of kith and kin to allay suspicion and get the world on their side without once considering the dreadful harm this would eventually cause their families ? Mr Wright's efforts on behalf of the people who briefed him strike me as those of a sincere man, a believer.

    Nobody with any sanity is accusing the parents of doing away with the child or attempting to harm her. The police have never suggested that this whole nightmare was caused by anything more than an accident followed by wrong and fateful decisions. Has he really, alone with his thoughts at night, never asked himself the questions that matter? The nightmare is now deepening with frightening speed. It's never too late Mr Wright."

    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html
    http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mother-little-helper.html

    ReplyDelete
  30. It very much seems that the legal team have let them down again with BAD advice. Now either the new law applies to their situation that they can appear as witnesses, in which case THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADVISED.

    Or the new law doesn't apply and this is all lip service for the public and gesture - but no one could possibly that foolish.

    Considering ADVICE, why would he have thought he could DROP in out of the blue on last court session and be heard. Heard without notice to GA's team.

    It doesn't make sense. It's a question of here I am, in the flesh and deny me at your peril!

    What about a low key submission to the court\judge, via his solicitor it's pretty obvious that there remains many to heard over several sessions.

    Why turn up and then act out all disappointed. Actually - it probably took the wind out of TMs sails that it had to be cancelled. But surely the judge had time for a ruling? Or was the absent lawyer needed in case he wished to lodge an objection.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps Gerry went there KNOWING he wouldn't be heard. He was probably certain of that. The whole thing was a ploy to distract attention from the farce inside the courtroom.

      Delete
  31. This is VERY EASY to understand.
    Gerry came here to hear from the Judge's mouth that he couldn't take the stand as a witness. The why wouldn't matter. The tabloids would have their headline:
    "MADDIE'S FATHER BLOCKED FROM DEFENDING HIMSELF"
    "PORTUGUESE JUDGE SAYS OH NO YOU'RE NOT TO GERRY"
    "GERRY McCANN KICKED OUT OF SOURT-ROOM BY JUDGE"
    And many more.
    Remember out the kidnap threat was blown out of proportion?
    Gerry came here to get a headline and he didn't. That's why he's not happy and sticks his foot right in his mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Unpubished Anon at 29 Sep 2013 18:37:00,

    We're not publishing your comment as Dr. Robert's "Mother's Little Helper" of 24 September 2013 has already been published in these two comments:
    - Anonymous 29 Sep 2013 13:35:00
    - Anonymous 29 Sep 2013 13:47:00

    Thank you so much for your participation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry for that Textusa, I did not read all the posts, should have had,really... I read Anonymous29 Sep 2013 13:47:00 comment, which said that that article had been wooshed away, which I found strange because I had just been reading it in McCannFiles and had saved it in a file, so I decided to copy and paste it here.

      Thank you for understanding, and thank you for all your good work!

      Delete
    2. I watched Gerry McCann's outside the court in this video:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fTyyXsyUeac

      According to Isabel Duarte, Gerry McCann came to Lisbon as a witness in the trial to say...NOTHING!!!

      "(British reporter) What is it you wanted to say to the judge in this…in these proceedings?

      ID: (interrupts Gerry who smiles but is keeping his lips sealed) Nothing (she swivels round and stares at Gerry and smiles, then turns round one way and then the other, then throws her hair back)
      (she says "nothing" and then makes a weird giggling, sarcastic, hum, hum, hum,)
      GM: Well…answer the questions…ask Martin"
      (transcript in Jill Havern's forum)

      "NOTHING" ?! Really Dra. Duarte? Gerry wants to say NOTHING to the judge???!!!

      And what is that that he says in the end, "answer the questions, ASK MARTIN"???
      It has been transcripted that way, is it really what he said? I heard over and over again and I am not sure of it, it sounds like something else, "as marked"? Martin? Martin who? Brunt?! Why? What?
      Anyone with a good ear and familiar with the scottish accent, please...?

      Delete
    3. I'll answer the questions that I'm asked, Martin." is what he says, so obviously it was his good friend Martin Brunt to whom he was responding as he was filmed

      Delete
    4. Many thanks! Yes, it sounds like Brunt's voice asking the question, and at around 0.06/0.07 secs into the video, we see Brunt hurrying to get in front of Gerry and Isabel Duarte, with the other reporters.

      Delete
  33. History as never seen the such.
    A death of child makes people become celebrities.
    For over 2,300 days these criminals have walked the street and justice has just looked the other way.
    Terrible. Terrible

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous 29 Sep 2013 19:25:00:

    Transcript

    By Nigel Moore

    João C. Rodrigues: Hello. So, Gerry, I'm sure you was not expecting that?

    Gerry McCann: No, errm... but we are where we are, so... we'll look forward to the next date.

    João C. Rodrigues: Did you understand what happened?

    Gerry McCann: I think, errr... Isabel will be able to explain that better.

    Martin Brunt: Are you feeling disappointed?

    Gerry McCann: Obviously we're disappointed, yeah, sure.

    João C. Rodrigues: Are you coming back?

    Gerry McCann: If I get the opportunity to be heard I'll certainly come back.

    Martin Brunt: What is it you want to say to the judge who is in these proceedings?

    Isabel Duarte: (interrupts) Nothing.

    Gerry McCann: I'll answer the questions that I'm asked, Martin.

    João C. Rodrigues: But maybe do you have new expectations about finding Madeleine?

    Gerry McCann: I think, you know, all the investigation enquiries are being directed to Metropolitan Police at this time.

    João C. Rodrigues: So, you are quite with the hope about what is going to happen in Portugal in a few... in the coming days?

    Gerry McCann: Sorry, I missed that.

    João C. Rodrigues: You have some hope of what is going to develop in the coming days?

    Gerry McCann: I would just direct you to the Metropolitan Police. They're very much dealing with all enquiries regarding the investigation.

    Martin Brunt: Gerry, why is it important that you give evidence at this trial?

    Gerry McCann: Well, the law's changed and I think, errr... I think Kate and I know better than anyone else, errr... what we've experienced and what we've gone through and the facts of the file and, errm... the damage that's been caused to the search for Madeleine.

    João C. Rodrigues: That justifies another coming back to Portugal?

    Gerry McCann: We'll do what it takes.

    ReplyDelete

  35. Sunday, 29 September 2013

    A pause
    This is the first occasion since May 3 2007 when people on both sides of the argument must answer for their words and actions at a hearing designed to get at the truth.

    There will be plenty of time for analysis after the hearings are complete but for the present I believe the words of the witnesses should speak for themselves, in their full dramatic significance, without any comment.

    Back soon.

    Dear John explains for us. Thank goodness - I was wondered it was something else.

    ReplyDelete
  36. typo - wondered should read worried. oops

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anonymous 29 Sep 2013 18:39:00
    Spot on! Tabloids left without their spinning headlines this weekend! Couldn't sell the McCann victimology pills they wanted!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Martin Brunt is just one of the gang. That's why Gerry treats by his first name.

    http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/07/muratbrunt-get-together.html
    http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/11/swan-lake-act-3.html

    ReplyDelete
  39. Este ( Gerry) tinha de vir de novo à ribalta e faxer um dos números habituais- ludibriar e distrair.
    Foi tudo para poder atrair os media e enganar os mais distraídos. Ele já sabia que não podia testemunhar, então porquê este circo de palavras à porta do tribunal? Se fez o pedido no dia anterior, é evidente que o pedido não teve tempo de seguir os tramites normais e conseguir o parecer de todos os advogados. Foi mais um numero com a assinatura do team Macc, que agora parece andar à deriva.
    O sr terá de facto muito para explicar ao tribunal, nomeadamente porque precisaram de escrever no livro da filha uma sequência de horas e eventos, se todos tinham acabado de os viver. Todo o grupo sofria de Alzheimer ou teve uma amnesia no único dia, em que pelo seu caracter traumático, nenhum passo, nenhum segundo se apagaria da memória do comum dos mortais.
    Mentira....a quanto obrigas...

    ReplyDelete
  40. Gerry Mccann playing his little " victim mommentum" and the bad guy, the Judge, Amaral lawyer, Portugal in general.
    You are a shame, little man, inside the monster you have created.

    ReplyDelete
  41. There seems to a discussion going on about when GA's book was translated, or was available to be read in English. I would like to add my contribution to the subject if I may.
    I can't say exactly when the book was fully transalated but being Portuguese I bought an hardcopy of the book in the beginning end July/beginning August to read during the holidays. That's when I became interested about the issue. In those days there was no portable internet so I only began to look for information about it after I returned from holidays and that would have been end of August. I ran into Joana Morais's site which quickly became my reference to all related to Maddie (before I came addicted to Textusa who only started the blog much later).
    What I want to say is one thing that I remember is how zealous Morais was about defending Amaral's royalty rights back then and how she was very critical of the translation bits that were then appearing. Based on my memories I don't think there was a fully translated "black market" version before mid-September. In August, like cousin Michael said he read it, impossible, unless he's bilingual.
    Plus, the priority in translation was then about the files and not the book. People wanted to know what the book said but first wanted to know what was in the files.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Anonymous 30 Sep 2013 06:52:00 (DELETED)

    We have deleted your comment before its content grows "legs" and and disappears.

    We consider its content very relevant thank you very much for having submitted.

    We will do our best to have it reach the hands of those really interested in it.

    Once again, thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  43. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id137.html

    A summary of Gonçalo Amaral's book, in english, appears in McCann Files in 27 July 2008, but it's just a summary. maybe that's what M. Wright read, I'm sure team McCann surveiled McCann Files like hawks
    The full translation I'm familiar with is the one of Anna Esse's (2010 ?)

    ReplyDelete
  44. Does anyone know if Havern's forum has been CR'd? It appears to be unavailable.

    ReplyDelete

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.

Textusa