Friday, 9 December 2016

Christmas lights

1. Introduction

It’s Christmas time and in the majority of homes a Christmas tree is put up.

It’s indeed called a Christmas trees but it has no connection to Christianity other than the star some homes put on top of it and which is supposed to represent the one that guided the three Wise Men to Bethlehem.

But if one is not religious, one can always put a decorative star on the top and tell the children that it is what guides Santa Claus to their house.

All this to say that this is the time for Christmas tree decorations and lights to be expected.

Decorations and lights that appeal visually in such a way that dazzle and make one forget completely that they do represent something: icicles and snow on the tree branches.

They are not what they represent but they do represent something.

The Christmas tree decorations and lights are something fake representing something true.

Just like Maddie’s 2016 December Media Surge.

No question about it, its absurdity dazzled. A dazzling that impeded all seeing all that it had and was filled with more meaning than the number of presents that can fit in a Christmas stocking.

One just has to look through all the dazzle caused by its Christmas decorations and lights.

2. The surge

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 the Express published an article by Gerard Couzens published “Madeleine McCann LATEST: European trafficking gang snatched missing Maddie - Portugal cops”.

It had the peculiarity of being preceded by the Sun’s article by Mike Sullivan, on the previous day, Dec 4, “Cops given cash to probe ‘important’ new lead that Maddie was snatched by people trafficking gang” and followed by another Sun’s article on the following day, Dec 6, by Gemma Mullin and Gerard Couzens “'WE'RE COMPLETELY IN TUNE': Portuguese cops ‘working closely with British detectives’ after tip Madeleine McCann was snatched by traffickers”.

The 3 make up what we have called the Maddie’s 2016 December Media Surge.

3 days, 3 articles. Christmas things do seem to come in 3. What a brilliant team effort!

If one adds to the lot the article, which is basically an echo of the Express article, from the Metro by Georgia Diebelius on Dec 5 Dec 2016 “Portuguese police refuse to rule out new Madeleine McCann trafficking lead” then one can indeed say that what one watched was a 4 x 100 metres relay in which the baton got detail added to it by each one of the athletes.

First leg, the Sun starts off with ‘people trafficking gang’; second leg, the Express adds ‘it’s a Portuguese lead’; the Metro picks it up for the third leg adding that ‘the Portuguese are really going for it’ and the Sun crosses the finish line with the crowd on their feet under the standing ovation with ‘together, Brits and the Portuguese, will crack down that people trafficking gang that abducted Maddie’!

Some call it nonsense and it indeed appears to be.

But when one uses unicorns and leprechauns in analogies to illustrate truths is one saying one believes that these fairy creatures really exist?

No, one isn’t.

One is just using fake imagery to convey real information.

3. Anger relief

It’s a cinematographic principle to include in a serious movie a comic relief. It lightens up the audience, providing a momentary balance that motivates it to pay better attention to the plot.

In the Maddie case we have anger reliefs.

The audience is exposed to something to make them angry and repeating such exposures over and over again makes the public feel more and more pent up and frustrated.

People are losing patience. Saturation levels are starting to be reached. The simple mention of the McCann name is starting to cause unpleasant physical reactions on people.

The more the McCanns are disliked, the harder it is to protect the secret they represent.

The people trafficking gang in these articles is just another anger relief of this particular film.

Not to be taken seriously in terms of truthfulness, because we are certain it is far from it, but to be taken very seriously in emotional terms. And, from what we have seen, it has been taken very seriously.

To aggravate this, nothing like reminding people how this absurd case has sucked and is sucking up their hard earned tax-payers money in games that insult anyone’s intelligence.

The McCanns are the only people we know that can brag that their country has spent £12 million (by the way, this number has stayed the same for some time, so maybe update it?) on them.

And what for? To chase dragons, cyclops, centaurs and people trafficking gangs among other mythical creatures.

If one adds to that £12 million the millions they had outside Operation Grange, in the Fraudulent Fund and the millions Portugal has spent on them, the McCanns do come across to the common citizen as one humongous and merciless money shredding machine.

In times when pensions and the funding of the NHS are under debate, this heinous expenditure of public money does not sit comfortably with the public, to say the least.

The ‘people trafficking gang’ and the ‘new batch of money’ more than untruths are anger manipulators against the McCanns and quite effective ones.

Decorations to dazzle the public’s eye.

Once that is understood, the real pearls of the articles can be found.

4. Inter-nation tuning

The surge speaks of a supposed perfect tuning between the Portuguese and the British police when it comes to the next steps about Maddie.

The Express article practically contradicts itself on that.

It first says this:

“A senior Lisbon-based PJ officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: “Although we are talking from a formal point of view about two different investigations which are independent of each other, the contacts between the two teams are easy and frequent.

“The high-ranking meetings at the PJ HQ in Lisbon, which worked to establish models of co-operation are no longer needed.

“Since the Operation Grange leadership changed, the relationship is easy and fluid and conducted by phone.”

And then says this:

“He [a Faro police source] said: "We maintained regular email correspondence with the team but reached a point where they kept saying 'We are re-evaluating our investigation.'

"As they expressed the need for further questioning, we have been expecting a new rogatory letter, but it never arrived"

“The last letter of request was answered, once we received the remaining requested results.

“That was our task, to answer the letters of request about everything requested and allowed by Portuguese law.

“Now, we have no more contact with the British authorities unless something new is requested, which hasn't happened yet".”

Are Lisbon phones working better than Faro mails?

It doesn’t seem that the Portuguese are working in any way together with Scotland Yard on any line of enquiry much less on a people trafficking gang one.

We very much doubt that any “senior Lisbon-based PJ officer, speaking on condition of anonymity” ever spoke to the Brit tabloids about this.

So what’s the message here?

That Portugal and the UK are in synch about what outcome this case is to have, which it seems has been decided, just taking into account the public voicing of this alleged tuning.

Not on a police level but on a political one, because that’s where the Maddie case has been handled and decided since 2007.

We have said many times before that both the PJ and Scotland Yard are waiting to be told what they are to say they found out.

The other side is simply being informed that on a political level things are well coordinated between the 2 countries, whatever that means.

5. Whitehall

This is not new. We pointed out the stepping in of Whitehall into the case in our post “Follow the money”.

This article is very clear in confirming that: “The Met was said to be taking the development (…) so seriously that leading Whitehall officials were being briefed on its progress.”

With the Maddie case, the UK has brought into criminology a revolutionary concept: a crime is only a crime if there’s money for it to be a crime.

In modern western societies, crime investigation is paid for by money generated by taxation.

Not the investigation of this or that crime but of all and any crime taking place in their sovereign territory.

Crimes happen when they happen and certainly do not stand in line waiting to happen only when there’s available police for them.

And when they do happen they are investigated by people who are paid by society to do just that. Said investigation only finishes when said people determine, professionally, that it is finished because it’s either solved or because it’s worthless to continue pursuing it.

Never, ever because there’s a shortage of social funds to continue.

Except in the UK.

There, it seems, a crime is only investigated if there’s money to investigate it. Fascinating country.

Plus, and respecting the separation of powers, governments of modern western societies shouldn’t be able to intervene in any way in any criminal investigation.

Except in the UK.

There, it seems, police have to update government on a criminal investigation. That means it is the government that is overseeing this investigation and not the country’s police or even its justice system.

Please note that it’s the  “leading Whitehall officials” and not just any Whitehall officials who are being briefed.

Outside Idi Amin’s Uganda and other similar regimes, it’s the first time we’re seeing the government of a nation be so directly involved in a criminal investigation.

But, however thwarted in principle it is, this confirmation that it is Whitehall controlling things does represent excellent news, for us seeking justice for what happened to Maddie.

The reader just has to ask him or herself: why would Whitehall impose on itself this responsibility if the outcome was archival?

Does Whitehall want to pass the image that it’s made up of people easily conned out of public funds by Scotland Yard?

Archival would make it appear to be so as just 3 months ago they were briefed and convinced by them that this final push was worthwhile paying for.

For us, this Whitehall commitment tells us that things are not heading for archival.

The other options? Truth or Third Option.

6. Annulment of the Third Option

We have explained it in our “Third Option” post. It basically validates the bungled burglary theory.

The article clearly says that the PJ considers that bungled burglary is ridiculous:

“The PJ made no secret of their rejection of the theory championed by former Operation Grange chief Andy Redwood about Madeleine being kidnapped from her Algarve holiday flat by a gang of thieves during a bungled burglary.

Before (…), it was thought the botched burglary claims formed the final line of inquiry.


“In July 2014 four Portuguese men faced a barrage of more than 250 questions while being questioned as arguidos or formal suspects in interviews conducted at Scotland Yard’s request.

They included the question: “Did you kill Madeleine?”

All four men denied any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

They were quizzed after British detectives honed in on the theory Madeleine, three when she disappeared on May 3, 2007 from her holiday apartment in Praia da Luz as her parents ate tapas nearby, may have killed during a bungled break-in and her body buried on waste ground nearby.


Portuguese police privately dismissed the botched burglary theory and indicated at the time they believed Madeleine had been snatched by a foreigner no longer in Portugal…


The arguido status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.”

When one reads the above, one may be tempted to think that the bungled burglary has been abandoned.

Not exactly although we do come to that conclusion in the end.

Factually, the above only means a shift from a burglary gone wrong and ending up in accidental death to a snatching targeting Maddie which, we suppose, ends up in the accidental death as well.

In practical terms, stopping calling it a bungled burglary to call it a bungled snatching. All other elements of the theory would remain intact.

It’s the ridiculousness of it all that makes it null.

If the botched burglary would be extremely hard to pull off – we don’t say it would be impossible because nothing is when it’s the stupid deciding – then the trafficking snatching gone wrong just piles on it very significant difficulties.

We are not even going to go into how the gang would have to have photographed Maddie on the beach, send the picture to whomever deciding, get the green light to target her specifically, do all the recce work to find out where she and her family were staying, find out she was part of a bigger group taking into account the only activity in which the entire group took part together was the gruesome walk to the Millenium on the first night, realising that her parents and friends abandoned her every night in the apartment and to study and understand the “checking routine” to work around it, what we would like to know is why on earth would child traffickers take with them a dead girl?

And why on earth would they take the dead girl when they had, literally, a live one at an arm’s distance?

Plus, why would they wait inside the apartment for 45 minutes (from 21:15 to 22:00) in order to allow the development of cadaverine in detectable quantities – which we know takes much longer but are pampering to the only way the Third Option could be tried – with that same dead body?

If the Third Option in its bungled burglary version is ludicrous as we showed then in our post, in its bungled snatching one it goes into profound and unknown territories of ridiculousness.

The article crosses out completely the bungled burglary version of the Third Option and it has become void due to the ridiculousness of the alternative option.

Please note that this conclusion comes after an attentive reading. The general public will read what is written in the article and conclude very quickly that the bungled burglary is history and as the people trafficking is so transparently far-fetched that the entire things is just… words fail.

But was it only anger relief that was the objective here? We think not. We think the idea was to make it really clear that the botched burglary is indeed history.

By putting an end to that story, the July 2014 arguidos are once and for all taken out of that picture.

But, and this is very important as we will later see, out of that and only that story of the bungled burglary.

If the only link any of them had with this case was this absurd accusation, which we think is the case of the homeless boy and that of the drug addict, then they are completely off the Maddie case.

What about the others, Malinka and the driver?

Well, the same applies to them if they are only linked to the case because of the burglary.

If they are linked to it for other reasons, nothing takes them out of the picture. Quite the contrary, there’s something that places them well in it.

7. Subtle message

That something is a very subtle message that is supposed to be noticed only by those with a guilty conscience.

It’s subtle but very important as it starts to show exactly in what direction things seem to be going.

We will transcribe the passages from the article where that message is:

“In July 2014 four Portuguese men faced a barrage of more than 250 questions while being questioned as arguidos or formal suspects in interviews conducted at Scotland Yard’s request.

They included the question: “Did you kill Madeleine?”

All four men denied any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

They were quizzed after British detectives honed in on the theory Madeleine, three when she disappeared on May 3, 2007 from her holiday apartment in Praia da Luz as her parents ate tapas nearby, may have killed during a bungled break-in and her body buried on waste ground nearby.

Eleven witnesses including several Brits were questioned in December 2014 at the same police station in Faro.

Portuguese police privately dismissed the botched burglary theory and indicated at the time they believed Madeleine had been snatched by a foreigner no longer in Portugal, although they didn’t rule out the involvement of Euclides Monteiro, a former worker at the Ocean Club where the McCanns stayed.


The arguido status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.”

Did the reader capture the message?

If not, it’s a good sign. It means the reader is not burdened by a heavy conscience.

Hopefully we hope the huge emphasis put on how the 4 July arguidos were cleared of the burglary accusation was noticed.

After all, of the 7 paragraphs transcribed the July 4 or the botched burglary are mentioned in 6 of them!

Who wrote this really wanted to convey the idea that these 4 men were no longer arguidos of any burglary involving Maddie.

And who gets mentioned in the only paragraph they are not? The December 11.

Nothing similar as to what has been said about the July 4 is said about the December 11. Nothing is said that they are no longer anything.

If the trafficking gang is a new lead, which it’s supposed to be, then shouldn’t the efforts made by SY involving these 11 people also be discarded? Certainly they were not asked about this gang then.

Whatever drew suspicions on the July 4 is now to be discarded, shouldn’t the same reasoning be applied to the December 11?

No, the July 4 are exempted from the burglary (and only the burglary) but nothing is said that the December 11 have stopped being of interest to the case.

Or, to be precise, they continue to be.

Of the December 11 people, we remember the Murat and the Hill couples and Sílvia Baptista. We spoke of this group and the importance of the December 2014 questionings in our “2015” post.

8. Person of interest

But the article contains other Interesting messages. All very worrying to the other side.

One is that a certain person of interest continues to be of interest.

If, the Portuguese were enthusiastically pursuing the trafficking gang lead, why mention Euclides Monteiro twice?

“The Operation Grange team, now led by DCI Nicola Wall, is in regular contact with the Madeleine McCann review team based in Porto which got the case reopened in Portugal in October 2013 after linking convicted burglar Euclides Monteiro who died in a tractor accident in 2009 to the British child’s disappearance.”


“Portuguese police privately dismissed the botched burglary theory and indicated at the time they believed Madeleine had been snatched by a foreigner no longer in Portugal, although they didn’t rule out the involvement of Euclides Monteiro, a former worker at the Ocean Club where the McCanns stayed.”

Note, as we said, that in the article it was carefully shown that the July arguidos were no longer arguidos but it links Monteiro to the case very clearly and, in our opinion very clearly, nowhere takes him out of it.

It’s very clear in saying that it was because of him the case was opened in Portugal and is also quite clear that his involvement is far from having been ruled out.

Loads of clarity.

We explained in our “Person of Interest” post what we think was Euclides Monteiro’s involvement in this case and that is that we think he may have been asked to help and hide the body after it was taken out of Murat’s property when the authorities suspended the searches just before dawn of May 4.

9. DNA

But the crucial words that the other side dreaded to read were these:

“A spokesman for Portugal’s Attorney General’s office confirmed today the first of the six letters was returned on November 26, 2014 after being completed.

The remaining five were returned between January 12 last year and October 25 this year, when the final one which is thought to have contained the results of DNA tests from Portugal’s Police Scientific Laboratory, was sent back to the British authorities.”

Unless INML is as permeable as FSS proved to be, and we are certain it isn’t, this really is not good news for the other side.

Nothing determined independently about DNA on this case is good for the other side. And we’re not seeing INML compromising their reputation and independence to do anyone any favours.

For the other side DNA is like sunlight, garlic, crucifixes and wooden stakes put together are to vampires.

Reading “confirmed together with results of DNA tests from Portugal’s Police Scientific Laboratory” must have drained the blood out of many, we are certain.

10. Hyenas

Following the surge but not a part of it but rather as a consequence, on Dec 6, the Daily Star publishes the article by Jerry Lawton “Investigator who exposed Jimmy Savile questions theory traffickers snatched Maddie McCann

The Daily Star, Jerry Lawton and Mark Williams-Thomas make up quite a pro-McCann trio. One that we will abstain to qualify with any adjectives because we’re unable to do so without being crude.

And why have they come together? To ridicule the people trafficking gang theory, of all things!

One could think that it was the response from the other side but a quick look at the content quickly shows that it isn’t.

Mark Williams-Thomas asks not a question but THE question that blasphemes the McCann sanctity, the question everyone has asked since 2007 but no one has even tried to ask directly to the couple and which is why if someone went in to abduct a young British female toddler, why didn’t they take Amelie instead?

And the Daily Star in an article by Jerry Lawton validates it!

Mark Wiiliams-Thomas tweeted this at 01:32 on Dec 6:

“How many cases exist of traffickers breaking into house & abducting a 3yr old from their bed whilst leaving another younger female child ?”

On that same day, James Lawton publishes this:

“Mark Williams-Thomas suggested if traffickers had broken into the McCanns' Portuguese holiday apartment in 2007 instead of abducting Madeleine they would have probably taken her sister Amelie sleeping just feet away.

Skeptics have pointed out the younger child was only two and would have been easier to abduct, lighter to carry and smaller to conceal.

They claim she would have had poorer speech skills than her sister – who was then nearly four – and in time would have been less likely to be able to recall her ordeal or true family.”

Note that he speaks of Mark Williams-Thomas’s tweet – Lawton must have been awake late that Dec 5 night – but gives the opinion of skeptics.

It’s not only Mark Williams-Thomas that says it but many others.

And for the other side to defend itself by ridiculing the only hope they can cling to, the people trafficking gang – which basically was what the McCanns claimed from Day 1 – would be more than ridiculous, it would be utterly suicidal.

Without that gang, without the burglary then there are only 2 options left, archival and truth, and one of them seems that Whitehall is not very much interested in.

The other side HAS to defend the gang thesis.

But The Daily Star, Jerry Lawton and Mark Williams-Thomas not only don’t but make the effort to ridicule it.

This is just hyenas reacting to blood they’re smelling.

And that’s what makes this Daily Star article so important: it shows that there’s blood out there to be smelled.

11. The timings

Another particularity in this surge is that it’s like it’s the Sun’s articles buffering the Express article on either side of time, the before and the after.

Like if the intention was to capture the public’s attention (and anger) with the Sun’s articles and in-between the rain drops make the point with the Express and Metro.

If the reader hasn’t noticed, in this post we have only quoted from the Express article.

But there’s another sequence we think people should pay attention to and that is linked as to the reasons why this surge happened when it did.

We very much doubt that it was because it was linked to the forthcoming Supreme Court decision on the McCann appeal.

We say this because if there was indeed that link, it would be safer for Whitehall to wait for it and then act than to do it in anticipation, expecting it coming in the next following days.

Experience has shown, since October 2013 when the trial began, that the Portuguese Justice System has exasperatingly foiled time and time again any possible planning.

If it doesn’t come before Dec 15, then it will only come next year. That happening it would empty out the purpose of this surge, in case that was the intention, which we don’t think it is.

It can’t be to generate Christmas sympathy for the McCanns as it has generated the exact opposite.

It can’t be to generate funds for the McCanns for because it shows clearly to the public that the nation has already spent far too much of their money on this farce. Besides, the article doesn’t ask, suggest or even hint for donations.

Also, if one is to remember, the McCanns are not “allowed” to make any more money as of this summer as we explained in our post “Follow the money”.

Not being because of the trial decision, of generating sympathy or money for the couple, why this surge?

We think there’s a reason and it’s called Ben Needham.

Remember us noting the McCann awkward silence about Ben Needham? It has never broken, has it?

Now please try to recollect that since September, Ben Needham dominated the news. Absolutely nothing about Maddie.

On October 17, as we have repeatedly pointed out, South Yorkshire police stated in very clear terms that Ben Needham died in an accident near the farmhouse.

It was then said that they had up until the end of November for it to conclude the investigation.

November has passed and no conclusions from the South Yorkshire police on what seemed to be a straight-forward and fully understood case.

When the December Maddie Media Surge began, on Dec 4, the FindBenNeedham FB page published the following:

“All it takes is ONE person, ONE phone call , ONE anonymous tip sent to South Yorkshire Police. PLEASE help us find Ben and end this horrific torment now. 25 years is too long to hold this secret. WE WONT GIVE UP OR GO AWAY.”

Who has ever implied the Needham family was giving up?

Most importantly, who is it they feel wants them to go away?

All in caps.

Making such a fuss about the McCann case now seems to us to be to distract us from the Ben Needham’s case, distract us from the absence of conclusions from the South Yorkshire police.

If the case is not mentioned again, the general public will retain that it was the digger driver who accidentally killed Ben and the case, in their mind, is closed.

With this surge they caught the attention of the general public on the subject of missing children, shifting it from Ben to Maddie.

In the process they took the opportunity and informed the other side that a certain number of people continued to be of interest to the case, that untainted DNA results had been handed over and that things are well coordinated between the UK and Portugal.

As we have been saying, we think the conclusion of Ben’s case is closely linked with Maddie’s and it’s not a surge of news that will distract us from that.

Speaking exclusively within the Maddie game context, we won’t be surprised if  “ignoring” Ben is an option taken by those deciding.

But we would like it to make it very clear that when all is done about Maddie, if it ever is, Ben deserves as much justice as she does.

We will be here with the same determination to contribute to that.

12. Conclusion

December Maddie Media Surge cannot be linked to the other side.

It’s not of their doing as it really goes against them.

When the hyenas smell blood they get all excited and their excitement can be felt.

We know it’s not very “Christmassy” to speak about hyenas but when we must, we must.

The hyenas are starting start to appear and their laughter can be heard loudly so near they are.

However, we would recommend some hyenas to watch Disney’s Lion King and watch attentively what happened to the hyenas that collaborated with uncle Scar in that film.

And lest there be doubt, we evidently are not only talking about the hyenas mentioned in this post.

To all our readers we wish a Merry Christmas and a Happy 2017.


  1. And Season's Greetings to you, Textusa Sisters. Enjoy your rest. Hope to hear from you in between things, especially when the McCann stuff starts to hit the fan. Go well.

  2. Seasons greeting to you Textusa sisters,bit of a leap of faith to have a link from Murat to Euclides Monteiro isn't it?

    1. Anonymous 9 Dec 2016, 13:06:00,

      Thank you for your comment.

      We have explained extensively the reasons why we came to that conclusion in our post "Person of interest".

      You may not agree with us and we respect that.

      Do you have another reason for Mr Monteiro to have been considered a person of interest to the case by PJ in 2013?

    2. Ah! I have it now,bit slow on the uptake,you assume or presume that he was contacted by some one of interest,not likely to be the McCanns,that would leave Murat? yes?
      Happy for you to not publish but just acknowledge if correct.

  3. Greetings to everyone & particularly Textusa Sister who work so tirelessly.

    There is so much in this last post. But wish to concentrate on the Funding from central Government. We all know the saga of various Prime Ministers, their Ministers REFUSING extra funding for the McCann case, although granted £100k for Gambles scoping exercise. Then along comes Brooks, Sun, NEWS HEADLINES, and despite, Mrs Fluffy-speak (aka May) refusing McCanns, was later granted, presume because of mounting media (Sun) pressure.
    Now just look at the fool (Cameron, best friend of Brooks) who took a country to a referendum and when he didn't get what he wanted, or even had bothered to evaluate the legal consequences (now before the Law Lords) did a runner.
    I put it to Mrs May, now the 'fool' has gone, time to CALL TIME, at the end of the funding period April 2017 and let the case be shelved along with all the other unsolved cases. And perhaps the police can get on with looking to solve current crimes, rather than those nearly ten years old, that happened in another country and the parents FAILED to co-operate, by answering questions and taking part in a reconstruction (ok their friends refused).
    I’m sure with hindsight the UK Government much regrets treating the McCann case as special and providing funding. Since, where does it end?
    And don’t forget how much the LP spent and a top up from Central Government of £1m as the investigation was given special consideration as they had gone over normal budget. Needless to say how much this has cost Portugal.

    In the world order, at Christmas just how many young lives would this sort of money have saved?

  4. Was wondering about the recent flurry of news relating to the Mc Cann case and why it had arrives at this particular time. You have explained it well and with good reasoning. I definitely disagree with above comment that the case be shelved in April - I want to know, as many do, that crime does NOT pay and that there is a consequence to committing a crime, especially that of obstructing a lawful investigation. Without justice, what do we have? So let's keep on keeping on...

  5. Hyenas are fantastic creatures. I object to you comparing the Scum newspaper, Williams-Thomas, and Lawton to these fine animals, cockroaches would have been a more fairer comparison.

  6. Textusa Merry Christmas to you also. I love the Hyenas analogy and do very much hope that all of them including the ones you mention get their come upons. Will anyone forget how William - Thomas tried to bring Cyprus into their sick game. I am just interested to know why you feel that the government would want to ignore Ben, is it because we are passed the point of no return with Maddie and the truth must come out but for Ben ignoring it at this stage will stop it growing into something. Was things done by the government when Ben disappeared that they would rather not be disclosed. Obviously the Needhams have been asked to take it down an notch with their " we won't give up or go away" comment.

  7. Nothing is said about the 'December 11' because they were witnesses and aren't being accused of any crime, while the 'July 4' were because they were made arguidos.

    1. Anonymous 10 Dec 2016, 08:44:00,

      First thing we must clarify is that by being made arguido one is not charged. We have the example of the McCanns, arguidos and yet to be charged.

      That legal status was designed to protect the citizen to whom it’s attributed. Upon realising that a citizen may have a POSSIBILITY, however remote, to be charged, the justice system is obliged to provide him with a status that guarantees that person all the rights possible for him to conduct his defense or proof of innocence the best way possible.

      To be very clear, as far as we know, neither the July 4 nor the December 11 were charged.

      But you do make a valid point.

      However, we don’t think we ever got to know under which legal status were the December 11 heard in Faro, if as arguidos or if as witnesses.

      John Blacksmith, who later on would be highly critical of people publishing names on the internet, not only published the identities of the December 11 as he stated under what legal status they were heard.

      Blacksmith has since deleted that post for reasons only he can explain, but fortunately we have record of its contents in a comment left by an Anonymous in our post “2014 Christmas Break”:

      “Anonymous5 Dec 2014, 15:42:00

      Friday, 5 December 2014
      Make up your own minds

      For interrogation, with the option of being made arguido during the process

      Christine Callan

      Luis Antonio

      Mario Marreiros

      Michael Green

      Robert Murat

      Michael Walchzuch

      Joaquim Marques

      To be questioned as witnesses only:

      Sylvia Batista

      John Hill

      Donna Hill

      Tiago da Silva

      at 13:52”

      As he was right on the list of names (again, only Blacksmith can say where he got them), it’s a possibility he may have been right also about their legal status.

      That would mean there were arguidos within the December 11 as well.

      But even if they were only all witnesses, the point is that THEN (at least “officially”) the main line of inquiry was, we are told, the botched burglary.

      For them to be people of interest, independent of their legal status, would have to be within this scenario.

      If this scenario is now said to have been absurd then it should have been said that the December 11 people were also of no interest to the case.

  8. We would like to call the attention of the readers to a very important thing.

    The article - and even our post we must recognise - because it uses the word "arguido" implies that both the July 4 and December 11 were considered people of interest by the PJ.

    That was not the case.

    They were heard by PJ under the request of SY.

    They were considered to be people of interest to the case by SY and no one else.

    The fact that some were given the arguido status had simply to do within what legal context they were heard.

    This legal context has to do with legal sovereignty. They were heard in Portugal by the Portuguese police as they should have been, so Portuguese legal rules were applied.

    We just wanted to make it very clear that it was the British who put these 15 people under the spotlight.

    1. Hi Textusa,it is a pity that Scotland Yard have completely failed in their duty to question the Tapas Seven,Nine in light of their investigation Operation Grange/abduction Remit,yet see fit to question Fifteen other people on their conduct into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from her holiday Apartment 5a,Ocean Club?

    2. How do you know they haven't interviewed them. I mean me know nothing about what way the investigation is going

  9. Logically, if the botched, bolting burglar theory is now discarded the only reason any of them could still be of interest, according to press reports, is because they were allegedly part of a paedophile ring snatching small 3 yr old children.
    It's all nonsense of course. When has a paedophile ring who snatched small children ever been identified?
    They would need their own nanny service to look after them all.

  10. Textusa,
    Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a New Year, which brings "The Truth" of this matter to the fore and for your tireless work to be properly acknowledged and appreciated. This post is simply wonderful. Your analysis of the current media focus is meticulous and though this case is so very complex, you explain these complexities in such a way that clarity bursts through the deliberately muddied waters. It's disappointing that some who hold differing views choose to attack. I for one, have had my eyes opened so very wide by that very act. Heart felt thank you.

    Aileen Peeble

    Anger relief or desperation?


    Last throw of the dice suggests reckless gambling, not a planned search. A dice can give 6 results

    1. Oh dear - it's TRACEY KANDOHLA and JESSICA HAWORTH pretending to care about other missing people, whilst giving yet another freebie to the McCanns.

  13. How does Kate saying she believes M is still in the PDL area fit in with a paedo gang snatching her?
    Is it supposed to be going on under the noses of the local community and police?

  14. Help Find Ben Needham
    an hour ago

    Ben's Mum Kerry, his sister Leighanna and his Grandmother Christine, will be giving their first interview tomorrow since the excavation on Kos for Ben's remains ended.
    Appearing on ITV1 Good Morning Britain
    Tomorrow morning (Monday) at approx 7.40am
    #BenNeedham #helpfindben


    ITV Report
    12 December 2016 at 9:05am

    Ben Needham family insists: 'People do know what happened to him'

    The fate of missing toddler Ben Needham is being kept a secret by people who know what happened, according to his family.

    Police believe Ben, who went missing 25 years ago during a family holiday on the Greek island of Kos, died in a digger accident.

    A three-week dig on the island by South Yorkshire Police this summer revealed 93 items of interest - including a toy car.

    Officers concluded the 21-month-old had likely died on the day of his disappearance in July 1991, probably during a digger accident.

    Now Ben's family has called for renewed pressure on the Greek authorities, insisting that people on the island know what became of him.

    Speaking to Good Morning Britain, Ben's mother, Kerry, said: "We know for a fact that there are people on Kos that know what happened to Ben that day".

    She added that witness statements given to South Yorkshire Police had backed up that belief.

    "We have been assured by South Yorkshire Police that people do know. They do know. But they've lied", Ms Needham said.

    Ben's mother, grandmother Christine and sister Leigh-Anna called for more pressure to be put onto the Greek authorities to help with the investigation.

    His family accept that Ben is likely dead, although the official police investigation remains open.

    Christine Needham said it was now about bringing home Ben's body.

    "He deserves that. We're not asking for very much... It's time that somebody just gave us a bit of respect", she said.

    Last month, Leigh-Anna Needham told GMB that the family remains hopeful of finding Ben.

    "We've been stuck in limbo for 25 years. I don't think my grandparents can take much more of this", she said.

    "It's absolutely destroyed my family and now I'm even more determined to find out what happened on that day".

    Last updated Mon 12 Dec 2016

    1. Of the above, would like to highlight the following:

      "Police believe Ben, who went missing 25 years ago during a family holiday on the Greek island of Kos, died in a digger accident.

      A three-week dig on the island by South Yorkshire Police this summer revealed 93 items of interest - including a toy car.

      Officers concluded the 21-month-old had likely died on the day of his disappearance in July 1991, PROBABLY during a digger accident."


    Ben Needham's mum claims villagers on Kos 'know what happened to her missing son'

    Kerry Needham now accepts her son is probably dead and has called on locals to reveal the truth, after police revealed they believe he was accidentally killed by a digger

    Villagers on the Greek island of Kos know what happened to missing Ben Needham , his mum claims.

    She called on the Greek police and British government to put on pressure on locals to reveal the truth.

    Mum Kerry accepts her boy is probably dead. And she insisted that some people on the Greek holiday island of Kos knew exactly what happened to him

    She was speaking after a search earlier this year failed to find the toddler’s body.

    Police believe he was accidentally killed by a giant digger and then buried nearby.

    Kerry said: “We know for a fact that there are people on Kos that know what happened to Ben that day.

    “We have been assured by South Yorkshire Police that people do know. They do know. But they’ve lied.”

    She added: “The search still goes on, in my eyes we need someone on that island to be answerable to this.

    “There are people on Kos who know what happened and probably know where Ben is buried.”

    The Needham family is desperate to bring Ben’s body home to the UK.

    His grandmother Christine said: “He deserves that. We’re not asking for very much.

    “It’s time that somebody just gave us a bit of respect.”

    Kerry, Christine and Ben’s sister Leigh-anna Needham were speaking on Good Morning Britain.
    Ben went missing on Kos 25 years ago.

    A fresh operation into his disappearance took place in September but after a three week search the family were still no closer to finding answers.

    The dig by South Yorkshire Police revealed 93 items of interest - including a toy car.

    Christine, who was the last person to see him alive, said she was pleading with the British government to help them find Ben.

    She said: “They [the government] need to put pressure on to the authorities in Greece at the moment to find out who knows where our child is.

    “They need to do that, we are not asking for much.”

    She added: “He’s not a dead dog is he? He’s a person, he was a person.”

    When asked whether they accepted as a family that Ben was dead, Christine said: “Yes, yes. Well we’ve not come to terms but we know it’s the truth. Yes we know it’s the truth.”

    Leigh-anna Needham was asked what she would like the British government to do now, she said: “To put pressure onto the Greek authorities as Ben, as a British citizen, that British passport says that he is protected.

    “Now whether he’s alive or whether he’s no longer alive, he should still be protected as a British citizen and my mum needs answers.

    “She has lived this for 25 years, a lot of it unnecessarily….

    “Now my little girl, I’ve got a little girl of my own and she is at the same age, and I couldn’t imagine having to going through what these guys have been through.”

  17. To see video

    "People think I took Ben to a building site - I did not"

    – Christine Needham

    Speaking for the first time since the dig on Kos to search for Ben Needham came to a close in October, the missing toddler's mum Kerry, grandmother Christine and sister Leigh-Anna joined us this morning.

    They revealed that they accept that their beloved son, grandson and brother Ben is confirmed dead, but they are still looking for answers about what happened - "yes, we' know it's the truth," Christine said.

    They are now calling on the people of Kos to give up their secrets and help them find Ben's body. "We've got to keep this investigation going", said Kerry.

  18. This is our transcript of the vídeo. We ask readers for transcription errors to be pointed out for correction:

    Good Morning Britain, with Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid – December 12th 2016

    Needham family plead for information about where Ben is buried

    “The family of missing British toddler Ben Needham say they’ll spend the first Christmas in decades coming to terms with the knowledge that he will never be found alive.

    In a moment, his mum, Kerry Needham, his sister, Leighanna and his grandmother, Christine join us for the first time since the police operation on the Greek island of Kos finally came to an end.

    Let’s recap with Keira Durkan.

    Voice-over (VO): “More than 25 years after Ben vanished, and 300 reported sightings of the toddler, this September South Yorkshire Police began excavations on the family’s former holiday home in Greece, close to where he was last seen in 1991. The search was prompted by information that he may have been killed in an accident involving a digger.”

    September video of Kerry Needham speaking: “It’s not the best solution but it will eventually, you know, lay it to rest for us. We’re all, we’re all extremely tired and distressed.”

    VO: “For 3 weeks, the 19- strong team, in painstakingly unearthed 93 items of interest. The day before the search was due to end, they found a toy car. His mother confirmed it was his, leading the police to conclude that Ben died on the day he disappeared.”

    DCI Cousins “They’ve had 25 years wanting an answer in relation to this and this is the answer that we are able to give them- at this stage.”

    Piers Morgan (PM): “Well, Ben’s mother Kerry, grandmother Christine and sister Leighanna are here with us. Thank you, all of you, for coming here today. Look, it’s a heart- breaking story that we’ve been following for 25 years. You’ve been living it because Ben is your boy. Let me ask you a difficult question, because I saw the passion and emotion that you’ve been showing about this- the government should be doing more- what more can they do, given that we all got our hopes raised, yours in particular, that we may be able to get to the bottom of this. It didn’t happen. What more can they physically do that they’re not doing, do you think?”

    Kerry Needham (KN): “We know for a fact that erm, there is people on Kos that know what happened to Ben that day. The police have got witness statements from some people. We still believe that there is other people on the island that know where he is.”

    PM: “But it may be that the key person is now dead and therefore you’ll never be able to ask the key question of potentially the key witness, if that is the case.”

    KN: “We have, we have been assured really, by South Yorkshire Police, that people do know, they do know but they’ve lied.”

    PM: “Other people?”

    KN: “Other people. Yes, on the island.”

    Christine Needham (CN): “Yeah, also, there is one other guy who was with the digger driver that day who swears he was with him 24/7, 24/7… quotes - I was his banksman. I was this, I never left his side, we went to lunch together- They didn’t go to lunch together at all because our police have checked.”


  19. (cont)

    PM: “So you think there are people still alive who are lying?”

    CN: “Yes, there’s at least one person, yes absolutely, yes.”

    Susanna Reid (SR): “Christine, you were the last person to see Ben alive (C –yes) weren’t you?

    CN: “Yes”

    SR: “What do you believe happened? What was he doing at that moment and what do you think happened after that?”

    CN: “I can’t comprehend it, I just can’t because it’s such a relaxing place, here, you’ve got your holiday brain on.. I can’t ..”

    SR: “Was he just playing?”

    CN “Yes, just playing, just playing outside, I mean in an area where there was no traffic, there’s no more children, where there’s no animals. Where, I mean, the machine digger when I went over there, there wasn’t a machine digger. People think we.. I took Ben to a building site. I did not.

    Leighanna Needham (LN): “Bearing in mind that we are talking about a completely different era as well.”

    CN: “Yeah”

    LN: “…it was the 1990s and these sort of things were completely unheard of.”

    CN: “Yeah. Of course I let them him play outside, we wouldn’t let him play outside in Sheffield.

    PM: “Do you? . Let me ask you another hard question. Do you accept, as a family, that Ben is dead?”

    CN: “Yes”

    PM: “You’ve come to terms with that?”

    CN: “Yes, well, we’ve not come to terms… ( K we’re trying ..)

    PM “You’ll never really come to terms with it ..

    CN: “We know it’s the truth.”

    PM: “But you’ve come to terms with the fact that he is dead?”


  20. (cont)

    CN: “Yes, we know it’s the truth.”

    PM: “And now it’s about being able to find his body?”(Yes) and bring him home (Yes)”

    KN: “He deserves that..”

    CN: “He deserves that, why.. .”

    KN: “He does deserve that.. we deserve it, .”

    CN: “We’re not asking very much, do you know what I mean? And we’ve never gone, poor us, poor us. We don’t do that, we just get on with it and we’re focused. But it’s time somebody just gave us a bit of respect, do you know, just a little…”

    KN: “We’ve got to keep the investigation going. We’ve got to stay strong.”

    CN: “Yeah, there is at least one person knows.”

    PM: “The police have said that the investigation is not closed (CN – yes, not closed, both say yes and nod) and they are continuing and I mean the police, let’s be fair to the police here (Yes, absolutely) they’ve done an amazing job trying, trying to give you what you want (CN – yes they have) ( and more) and it’s a difficult investigation so long after the event. Leighanna, you’re all so passionate and eloquent about this, it’s obviously heart- rending for you as a family, but if you want the government to do more, what is it you want them to do now?”

    LN: “To put pressure onto the Greek authorities as Ben is a British citizen and that British passport says that he is protected now, whether he is alive or whether he is no longer alive, he should still be protected as a British citizen and my mum needs answers. She’s lived this for 25 years and a lot of it unnecessarily. I’ve been brought up into it all and it’s not an easy thing to do, it’s not an easy thing to watch your family every day, never knowing how they’re going to be.”

    SR: “And this is a little boy that you never knew.”

    LN: “I never knew, exactly. And now, my little girl, I’ve got a little girl of my own and she’s at the same age. I couldn’t imagine having to go through what these guys have been through and what I’ve had to sort of witness over the years, I wouldn’t wish that on Hermione. I couldn’t do that to her and put her.. see her go through that.”

    PM: “Kerry, you’ve been inundated with the public support ( Yeah absolutely) What would you like to say to everyone who’s been rooting for you?”

    KN: “Amazing. Thank you. We, I don’t actually think we could have done it without them, you know, just the support they’ve shown, the messages we have had from everybody. It really has given us drive and strength, to know that we’re not alone and out there… erm, unbelievable. It is actually unbelievable, I never expected it, to be quite honest. I know there’s a lot of people out there that are sort of saying they don’t believe this is what’s happened. We do. The police have got that, hold that information, they wouldn’t have told us that if that’s not what they thought. We just need them to and people to keep continuing supporting us, you know try and like Leighanna said, we need pressure still on the Greek police and the Greek authorities to keep this active and open. There are people on Kos that know what happened and probably know where Ben is buried.”

    SR: “You want to put him to rest?”

    KN: “Absolutely”

    SR: “And you want your minds put at rest?”(KN nods) about exactly what happened on that day?”

    CN: “Definitely”

    KN: ”Yeah”

    PM: “Kerry, Christine and Leighanna, thank you so much and all the best with what happens.”

    1. "Where, I mean, the machine digger when I went over there, there wasn’t a machine digger. People think we.. I took Ben to a building site. I did not."
      There wasn't a machine digger? So, what have we been hearing about this last while? I'm confused by this remark.

    2. The bit before that is more telling Suzanna Reid asks her directly what she thinks happened CN answers I can't comprehend, it was so relaxing I had my holiday brain on. She really is stumped for a reply.........they are between a rock and a hard place, for some reason they don't want to or are wary of going against the police yet they can't now start agreeing there was a digger outside when previously publically they have said no digger outside and all was quiet.

    3. Yes, thank you!

    4. Needhams still have appeal directed to Ben and age progression photos on their page. Nothing has been altered.

  21. Her name is spelled Leigh-Anna

    1. Anonymous 12 Dec 2016, 21:44:00,

      Kerry spells her daughters name as Leighanna in her book "Ben".

      Surely she knows how to write her own daughter's name as we're supposing she proof read the book.

      We just followed the spelling in the book!


    Clarifications and corrections

    By Daily Mail

    Published: 00:00 GMT, 12 December 2016 | Updated: 00:00 GMT, 12 December 2016

    An article on 19 June ('Clement Freud drank with Maddie suspect Robert Murat in Praia da Luz bar – and his local pub was dubbed the Plough and Paedo') reported claims in another newspaper that Robert Murat had known Sir Clement Freud in the Portuguese town where Madeleine McCann went missing. In fact, Mr Murat, who was totally cleared of any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, never met or had any connection with the alleged paedophile ex-MP. We are happy to make this clear and apologise to Mr Murat for any suggestion he was involved in wrongdoing.

    1. That must be another court case we were never told about in Portugal. First the McCanns were cleared of any wrongdoing now Murat is not only cleared he was totally cleared .......I wonder have the Portuguese given the British press judicial powers to clear people without trials

    2. Anonymous 14 Dec 2016, 17:14:00,

      About you saying British press - or any press - having the judicial power to declare people innocent, Peter Sutcliffe was questioned by police and released 9 times before he was eventually caught.

      After each occasion, he was technically innocent of any crime.

      If he'd had a PR agent, no doubt that agent would have told the press his client had been cleared of any wrongdoing and press would have printed just that.

  23. December 15, 18:00 in Portugal.

    Guess news about trial decision will only happen next year, then.

    Now (finally) asking for information on where B is buried:

    Help Find Ben Needham
    10 hrs ·

    Last night the Greek TV Show "Light At The End Of The Tunnel" featured Kerry's plea to any the island of Kos residents who know where Ben May be buried to come forward. Lots of Greek press are now covering this today ! Thank-you once again to ITV Calendar for supplying to footage to Nikolouli show.
    #helpfindben �� #BenNeedham

  25. Textusa Sisters, See this comment on the Statement Analysis Blog Sunday, December 18, 2016 Madeleine McCann: The Embedded Confession
    Anonymous said...
    My husband is a doctor and in the two places we have lived, there has been a doctor's swinging group. To me the possibility is there that they were on a wife sharing trip. (Nothing to do with sex abuse-- the kids werent involved-- strictly consenting adults). These groups arent exclusive to doctors, but docs make up a fair share of the groups.

    December 18, 2016 at 7:14 PM

    1. yes, maybe this little girl walked in on a swinging couple, who knows the combination (we know that Kate opened the door for D Payne, wearing a towel), was it the punishment to the child that went too far ?

    2. Anonymous 19 Dec 2016, 08:38:00,

      Thank you for your comment.

      Generalisations are always dangerous. We know that commentator was careful to say “these groups aren’t exclusive to doctors” but reading her comment makes it may seem there’s a direct link between being a swinger and being a doctor.

      As if the fact that in every single one of the T9 couples there was at least 1 doctor, makes it logical for there to have been swinging.

      That is baseless as there is no direct connection between swinging and the medical profession 'per se'.

      The link that there is between swinging and that particular profession is the same as that alternative lifestyle has with many other professions: it involves upper-middle or upper class people.

      Swinging is not a cheap activity. Certainly the practice between 2 or even 3 couples can be done in individual homes but over that number of people it becomes complicated in terms of facilities.

      Swinging events involve a significant number of people.

      That means discreet lodging and travel arrangements and the need of even more discreet facilities in which to engage said alternative lifestyle.

      Just the logistics involved make the expenses to be significant and not affordable to many.

      Also, as the concept is sharing of personal pleasures and discretion completely mandatory, only people within the same class status are allowed in these restricted circles.

      Doctors are upper-middle or upper class people. But so are other many other professions.

  26. Swinging is likely,i suppose,but that surely wouldn't warrant Government intervention??

    1. Anonymous 19 Dec 2016, 16:45:00,

      Interestingly, AndyB placed exactly the same question in a comment to our post "Swinging evidence":

      "AndyB28 Feb 2014, 13:00:00

      "Because swinging does warrant a VHLCU because being outed as swingers, in the UK, is despicable enough to completely ruin careers and reputations"

      Nonsense! Provide one example of a career ruined by swinging

      Even if it were true that swinging ruins careers, it doesn't give the establishment a reason to close ranks to protect a couple of low-level doctors."

      We then replied with the following:


      It wasn't to protect a couple of low-level doctors. In fact, we do question why "a couple of low-level doctors" earned such protection. It doesn't make sense and you seem to agree with us.

      We say it was protect the reputation of others present as well as the resort's for promoting such an alternate lifestyle activities.

      Before we go back to the relevance of one’s reputation and career in being outed as a swinger the question one must never forget is the timings and pressure of when the decision to go for an abduction scenario.

      There are 2 things that no one in those critical couple of hours could possibly anticipate: the dimensions to which things would snowball into and the effective power that would really be mustered.

      In our opinion, decision was taken and then favours called in and not the other way around.

      Even if swinging was taken as a minor transgression the choice was one being risked being outed swinger or let those idiots who killed the girl to find a way out of the problem in which they got themselves into without one being involved.

      At that moment no one thought that the engagement required by the cover-up would be humongous, mainly due to the stupidity, arrogance of the T9 and the unstable condition Kate was in, which was the cause for the premature alarm.

      If the alarm had been set at the rightful time after the apartment been “effectively” broken into and all calmly rehearsed beforehand plus the help of Martin Smith coming forward as planned saying seeing a man with a child half a mile from the apartment, then the abduction choice would have been the correct one.

      No one today, except all those present in PdL then, would know what really had happened.

      Even with all the evidence pointing towards death, we’re still, 7 years later fighting for the truth, imagine where we would be today if things were done just half better than they were then.


    2. (cont)

      About swinging v reputation, just one phrase... are you kidding?

      Answering your question, a case, we will give you an example: Tommy Sheridan, a Scottish Labour politician.

      He was very upset to be accused of being a swinger.


      On Wikipedia, under “Defamation action” one can read:

      “The jury heard allegations that Sheridan had visited a swingers clubs in Manchester and engaged in adulterous affairs with two women. Sheridan, who claims to be a teetotaller, reportedly drank champagne and consumed cocaine during an extramarital liaison. Sheridan denies drinking the champagne and the claim of substance abuse. Eleven members of the SSP's executive committee testified that he admitted in an Executive committee meeting to attending a swingers club with women, but another four members of the SSP who were present at that Executive meeting backed Sheridan's claim that he made no such admission at that meeting.”

      Why defamation if swinging is accepted as you imply?

      Also “Perjury conviction”, it can be read:

      “In May 2007, it was reported that staff at Cupid's Swingers Club in Manchester had told police they had been offered bribes not to co-operate with the inquiry”

      Why accept bribes to lie about such an accepted thing as you imply?

      Swinging is a theme throughout his Wikipedia page. Quite a stigma, we would say.

      But it’s not only swinging that is very frowned upon and scandal-exploited.

      Immediately the Profumo case comes to mind… and when was that? In 1961.


      Currently, one just has to see how “sex-laundry” is being washed in a court-room between Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson.

      As far as we know, being unfaithful isn’t illegal.

      But we will return the question to you: name one high-profile name who has survived unscathed a sex scandal of which they were a part of."

      AndyB never replied to that last request of ours.

      We take this opportunity and ask you, Anonymous 19 Dec 2016, 16:45:00, that same question: can you name one high-profile name who has survived unscathed a sex scandal of which they were a part of?

      Thank you.

    3. hi Textusa,regarding the Profumo affair,the "Official Thirty years"mark has been breeched and who was in Office to have the "Official Papers"not released to the general public's consumption,dodgy Dave Cameron who's Mother in Law was one Lady Astor?
      Prince Philip quickly bought up all paintings that Stephen Ward had painted of"Personal posed"variety after he had taken his own life for being vilified for being a Homosexual living off immoral earnings,now remind me what was the film,"Scandal" really about,sex between consenting adults,Swinging?

    4. Thank you for you're reply Textusa!! The one "High Profile" name that most recent springs to mind is the actor Rob Lowe,he was caught on video tape having sex with an under age girl, plus he's never been more popular!!With regards to a "High Profile" person being in PDL at that time me, at the risk at being crude, would say perhaps,what better way for the "High Profiler" to make the escape,and leave the Tapas 9 to their own hard luck?? OH Yes,this Mccann thing has me thinking.....

    5. Anonymous 30 Dec 2016, 21:28:00,

      "Sex tape

      In 1988, Lowe was involved in a sex scandal over a videotape of him having sex with a 16-year-old girl he met in a nightclub. They were videotaped the night before the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta, Georgia. As the age of consent is 16 in Georgia, both were of legal age to engage in sexual activity, although not to be recorded.[39] At the time, Lowe was campaigning for Michael Dukakis.[40]

      Another part of the same tape was leaked at the time, showing Lowe and his friend Justin Moritt both having vaginal and oral sex with a young American model named Jennifer, who was never identified, in a hotel room in Paris. This part of the original tape was sold as one of the first commercially available celebrity sex tapes, damaging Lowe's public image.[41] Eventually, his career rebounded, and Lowe mocked his own behavior during two post-scandal appearances as host of Saturday Night Live.[42]"

    6. Thank you again for your reply!I am more familiar with the example i gave and maybe the name of the "secret" swinger, in time, will come to the fore!!Hoping 2017 will be the year that Madeleine,and of course snr Amaral,will get justice (of sorts)!

  27. Unpublished Anonymous at 16 Dec 2016, 12:15:00 and at 20 Dec 2016, 09:27:00;

    Thank you but we don't publish comments on murder conspiracy theories or link to site which do.

    Also, we are very careful before publishing any names and don't do so lightly.

    Thank you for understanding.

  28. Keith Vaz seems to have survived a sexual scandal and recently too. It does make you wonder if he has worse 'dirt' on others in positions of power.

    1. Yes, but hardly 'unscathed.'

      You could say Cliff Richard has survived (up to this point) but again, I wouldn't say 'unscathed.' It's really doubtful whether his career will ever pick up again.

      Michael Barrymore. He has certainly 'never recovered,' as is currently trying to sue the police for millions.

    2. 19:36, agree:

      “Keith Vaz sex scandal: Tory MP was stopped from making allegations about MP a year ago”

      “'We've all got grubby secrets' Keith Vaz wins backing in aftermath of male prostitutes sex scandal as celebs and MPs come out in support”

      “MR VAZELINE. Who is Keith Vaz? Slippery MP smeared with 30 years of sleaze – from expenses scandals to poppers and sex with male prostitutes”

      “HAS HE NO SHAME? Disgraced Labour MP Keith Vaz brazenly addresses Commons despite rent boy scandal after wife makes public show of support”

      “Labour backbenchers turn on Keith Vaz, as scandal-hit MP's seat on party's ruling body remains in doubt”

      Sex shame politician Keith Vaz 'not fit to be an MP' after escort scandal

      “'Treat me like a b****!' New tapes reveal how Keith Vaz 'ordered male prostitutes around as he took control of the sex party at his London flat' - and cast doubts on claims he had been drugged”

      Keith Vaz: one scandal too many for the publicity-seeking MP

    Jonbenet case.
    This will have impact on Maddie case as conclusion is brother did it and parents covered up.
    Brother now suing Werner Spitz.

    This and Ben Needham case - being accidentally killed and not abducted - now leave Mcs as only famous parents still claiming abduction, who haven't been publicly challenged, except by GA.

    Seems landlord is rightly indignant about slur on his pub

  31. The mystery of the builders rubble.
    [quote]Investigators have excavated hundreds of tons of soil and other debris from the two locations on Kos, which are a quarter of a mile apart. [/quote]


    Writer has same opinion as us about PdL and why would well-off people go there?

    1. I tried to add a comment but they are no longer accepting comments on that article...wonder why?!

    2. Sorry Textusa
      had not realised this article was from 2007 so my previous comment rather silly! Still the fact it was written back in 2007 makes it even more relevant... why exactly did they choose to go to that downmarket place.good question .. and thanks to your blog for showing us exactly why!



    Anonymous tip, that's what the Mcs may wait for if case archived.



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.