Friday 17 February 2017

Counter-Attack


1. Facts

Daily Mail Alternative Fact: “These allegations were aired during the 2015 libel case in Portugal and it is important to point out that the blood traces were never identified as human”

FACT: It was considered proven by the 3 Portuguese courts, 1st Instance, Appeal and Supreme Justice that: “6. The dogs Eddie and Keela, from the British police, have detected human blood and cadaver scent in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club.”

Daily Mail Alternative Fact: “As for the Irish couple Amaral cites, the man [Martin Smith] who was in his 70s admitted he was not wearing his glasses at the time”.

FACT: Martin Smith never of himself not wearing glasses. He twice makes a reference to glasses, when he states that the man he sees carrying the little girl is not wearing a pair and then of when he had seen Murat previously and he remembers that Robert Murat was not wearing glasses when he saw him that time.


2. First impression

As the reader has realised, this post has started in a completely different way. We will explain why we have done so later in the post.


Today, we will be speaking about the Daily Mail article by Neil Tweedie published on Feb 11 2017 “When will the McCanns’ tormentor in chief stop adding to their misery? The Portuguese detective whose book pointed the finger at Maddie's parents is now writing a second volume”.

The only opinion we have given so far about it was in the comment in which we brought the article over to the blog, where we said: “A long but very interesting article, and interesting that it comes from the Mail”.

The first thing we would like to do is ask readers to ask themselves what did they feel when they read it for the first time.

The first time and not the opinion formulated after it was reread. What was their opinion when they were trying to understand whether it was a good or a bad article.

Good as in the pursuit of truth, bad as in trying to perpetuate the hoax.

It’s said that first impressions are the truest ones, the ones that we should trust and count on and that’s why we are asking what we are, as we think it’s important that each one person understand what they felt when reading that particular article for the very first time.

We think we can summarise it in one word: confusing.

When going through it we saw that it contained blatant truths never said before and blatant lies that we all knew to be absurd and when we finished it, unsure of what exactly was its objectives we all asked ourselves what was it all about.

And then we reread it. As many times we thought necessary to come to a conclusion.

First thing to note, only those interested in the case reread the article. All others just read it once and moved on the next piece of news that captured their attention.

Those interested wanted to understand it, they saw the first time they read it that it contained things that were right and things that were wrong, so we went back to try to understand what was the point of it all.

Only the article was not written for those who would reread it but precisely for those who wouldn’t. The all others we spoke of.

We are saying this based on a simple fact: the vast majority of the people read the majority of news articles only once.

People only reread an article on any subject when they have an interest in the subject reported.

So when we say that the article was written for those who wouldn’t reread it, we are saying that it was directed at the majority of people who have read it. That, in itself is very important.

So, if we are right, the majority of people who read the article just felt confused afterwards.

Only we have just misled the reader. The above statement is absolutely false and it’s important that is understood.

Only those who reread the article, a minority, felt confused. To be confused one has to have 2 conflicting ideas to begin with which means one has knowledge which reveals interest. So only those who were looking to see if it was good or bad did reread it, a minority in the broader picture.

So what is really important to understand is to what conclusions someone who doesn’t have a particular interest in the case came to after reading it just once.

Understanding that is to understand the article.


3. The ‘principle of untidying

As any housewife knows, it’s very easy to untidy anything in a house.

Let’s imagine that one has 3 t-shirts in a laundry basket, one red, one blue and another yellow, which one has to put in a drawer.

One first has iron the first t-shirt, let’s say the red one, then fold it and put it neatly inside the drawer. Next, do the same with the next one, say the blue one, iron it and fold it and then put it inside the drawer neatly on top of the red one that we had just put there.

To finish, repeat the process with the yellow t-shirt, ending by putting the ironed and folded t-shirt neatly on top of the red and blue ones already there.

The above describes succinctly the process of tidying up.

If we were before people who wanted to derail our logic, we would have to detail what we meant by ironing and folding and so forth.

Let’s now look at the process of untidying the above: turn drawer upside down.

That’s it.

In 4 words all of the above was undone. Untidying is not only simpler, as it’s much faster and concise.

It takes a lot to construct but very little to destruct.

We may need 10,000 words to describe how a castle was built and only 100 or less to say it was blown up and in the end, those 10,100 words are about a castle that no longer exists.

Whoever reads them only retains those last 100 words or less because they are those that sealed the fate of the castle.

The first 10,000 words only matter to those who have an interest in the castle. To all others, they were pleasant to read, they made sense, but that castle is gone – gone being the key word here – let’s focus on the next one.


4. The article

The article is confusing, that’s a fact.

On rereading it, one gets the impression that it was written by more than one person as some ideas contradict each other.

As an example of this, it first says “He made that clear in his book, Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, written soon after he was hauled off the case in 2008 and took early retirement. He uses evidence garnered in the police investigation to question the kidnap theory and pin suspicion squarely on the McCanns” but later down the post, it is said: “Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories.”

It doesn’t make any sense that the same person would write both those snippets.

Before we proceed we would like it to be noticed the order in which the snippets appear in the article. The good, the truth, first, the lie afterwards. The truth is untidied by the lie. Those reading this only once, the target audience of the article, will retain that Mr Amaral has no base for his theories, forgetting they read the exact opposite just before. A lie will be taken as truth.

Also, please note the difference between the vague “evidence garnered in the police investigation” (truth) and the very concise, precise and clearly understood “baseless” (lie).

But back to the authorship. Reading attentively, one gets the idea that it was like someone asked a Mail reporter, Dr Jekyll, to write an article as truthful and as unrestrained as he could about the case.

That done another Mail reporter, Mr Hyde, was commissioned to introduce evil inputs.

That way Jekyll’s words, the good, are there but Hyde, using the principle of untidying, as we will see, made sure that they became meaningless.


5. The truth for the laypeople

We will now ask readers to forget all they know about the case.

We want them to put themselves in the shoes of the majority of the laypeople on the case.

What do these people think about the case?

That the McCanns and friends left the kids in the apartments (negligence) and that Maddie is dead and that the couple is involved in both her death and disposal of body.

We are not, in anyway implying this is true, just saying what the general public thinks. And based on why does it think this?

We would say on 2 things: the dogs and Martin Smith.

It was widely reported in 2007 that the dogs signalled both cadaverine and blood in the apartment and in the car the couple hired long after Maddie had disappeared. Plus cadaverine was also signalled on Kate McCanns clothes.

Also, it was widely reported that Martin Smith had identified Gerry McCann as the man he saw, when he saw him going down the stairs off the airplane after fleeing Portugal.

This, the Smith Sighting, was rammed down the public’s throat during the Oct 2013 “UK Crimewatch”. With it, SY showed that this sighting was of great interest to the case.

To the laypeople, the conclusion was a very simple one to reach: the man who Martin Smith saw was Gerry McCann carrying Maddie.

Again, not saying we subscribe this – we don’t, we think it was Gerry with Jane Tanner’s daughter – just stating what we think the general public thinks.


6. Destroying truth, the dogs

Lets’ now see what the article has to say about the dogs and Martin Smith.

About the dogs, the article first says:

“In an interview he [Mr Amaral] claimed the witness statements and depositions of the McCanns ‘reveal a major level of imprecision, of incoherence and contradiction . . . the existence of blood traces behind the sofa in the apartment, which was confirmed by preliminary analyses.

‘One can presume that the little girl fell behind that piece of furniture . . . The same for the finding of odours and traces of blood in the vehicle that was rented by the McCanns, three weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance. It was the only vehicle among 11 that retained the dogs’ attention.”

Very good. It confirms the existence of blood detected by Eddie both “behind the sofa in the apartment” and “the vehicle that was rented by the McCanns”, even highlighting the fact that it was rented by the McCanns “three weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance”.

No question about it, pretty, pretty damning for the McCanns.

But let’s see what is said next about the blood: “and it is important to point out that the blood traces were never identified as human”.

We know this to be a lie. We will say that it is an outrageous lie that screams falsehood but does the general public know that it is a lie? No, it doesn’t.

And after being told this when reading such an apparently well-researched article, will it question its veracity? No, it will not.

The general public will instead think, oh, that explains why they never charged the McCanns, after all it couldn’t be ruled out that it could be blood from some animal.

No use saying that Keela was trained to detect ONLY human blood nor that all 3 courts in Portugal agreed that it was a proven fact.

The article is destined to those wanting to be spoon-fed rather than go and find out if it is true or not, so by outright lying one is able to destroy truth.

Dismantling truth with an unchecked lie makes truth to be a lie.

It’s unchecked because the whole article is based on the premise, unfortunately real, that the laypeople, the ignorant, will accept these as facts without checking them. Reality tells us that is the case.

With the blood being possibly not human, then it makes sense for the McCanns for not having been charged.

We hope the reader understands how the untidying principle was used, very effectively.

Please note that in article that is unquestionably researched, there’s not a single mention about cadaverine. Eddie, according to this article wasn’t even present, there were only blood signalling dogs there if one is to trust this article, and the general public has every reason to trust it.

Or, apparently it has no reason not to trust it as it appears to be researched and balanced.

If the article meant to tell the truth, cadaverine would be mentioned together with blood, as it’s much more damning for the McCanns. We know that besides the cadaverine having been signalled behind the couch and in the car, it was also marked in the bedroom closet and the backyard.

Nothing in the article about this. Why? Because the only lies that have been running about this are ridiculous, Kate McCann having been in contact with corpses before coming to Portugal, the seabass story and Insane’s graveyard in the backyard.

As this piece of truth can’t be destroyed, best be left out as it was.


7. Destroying the truth, Mr Smith

Now let’s look at Martin Smith:

“There is equally the witness statement of an Irish couple that states they saw Gerry McCann carrying a child on the evening of the events.”

That’s the true bit which is then it’s dismantled with:

“As for the Irish couple Amaral cites, the man who was in his 70s admitted he was not wearing his glasses at the time, while dozens of witnesses confirmed Gerry McCann was at the holiday complex at 10pm when the man and his wife ‘thought’ they saw him.”

No glasses? That, the general public will say, explains why they couldn’t charge Gerry!

An article so well researched, which evidently it was, could not have missed the fact that Mr Smith nowhere in the PJ Files say he was visually impaired because he was not using glasses at the time. Mr Smith refers glasses twice, once to say the man, and not him, was not wearing glasses and then when he says Robert Murat wasn’t wearing any when he saw him in a previous occasion.

To say that Mr Smith has admitted he was not wearing glasses is to lie without shame. It’s to go out of the way to lie. It’s to debunk truth with an outrageous lie. Again. And it’s effective.

We won’t even ask for the “dozens” of witnesses who say Gerry is at Tapas at 10 pm. Witnesses account for the presence of a group that night but as we have explained in detail in various posts we have reason to believe the Tapas staff were being very economical with the truth when they gave their statements. But even they, being complicit with all as we think they were, do not place Gerry at Tapas at that hour.

All are very uncompromising, not to say vague about how the alarm was given that it would be very strange not to be able to be precise about it and to be specific about one person within the group at that exact moment.

As for the other guests supposedly present, none has come forward to confirm Gerry’s presence, and the only one we have the statement from, fantasist Stephen Carpenter, says he left Tapas before then.

What matters is that the article dismantles the Smith Sighting with a lie, and if one doesn’t know it to be one, one believes in it.

That’s the reason why we opened this post with the Daily Mail’s Alternative Fact v FACT.

It’s our little contribution against this process. Anyone stumbling on us, and without any further research, will be given right away the information that the Daily Mail has so blatantly lied about this and the blood.


8. Not to mislead but to destroy

The author(s) also bring up Kate’s fingerprint on the shutters:

“Finally, there’s Kate McCann’s fingerprint on the window of Madeleine’s bedroom, which clearly indicates that she opened that window, undoubtedly to make us believe in the abduction theory, while stating that the window was already open when she arrived on the spot at 10pm, the time at which she noticed Madeleine’s disappearance and raised the alarm.”

And the “undoubtedly to make us believe” is immediately dismantled in the following paragraph with “nor are fingerprints on a window evidence of any wrong doing on the part of Kate McCann.”

So, to sum up, according to the author(s) there are 3 things that are damning for the McCanns: blood, Mr Smith and Kate’s fingerprints.

Nothing else, apparently, is damning otherwise such a well-researched article would mention it.

All 3 are detailed TRUTHFULLY and then their truths debunked with what we, who are familiar with case, know to be lies but those who are not, don’t.

The fact that the general public doesn’t is the whole point. Only a minority can call them out and where can they do that? On the internet where their protest, our protest, has to be searched for it to be seen.

Note that this debunking of the truth is not done to mislead.

It goes much further than that, it is done to destroy, cripple and maim truth.

The truth is there for people to see, that cannot be denied but its presence serves only for its demise to be witnessed.

Very, very effective.

And all is done in accordance with the fact that the McCanns were not cleared BUT they were not charged either.

Basically explaining why by fooling people who on reading such a well-researched and balanced piece have no reason not to trust it.


9. Lets’ mystify, international antagonism

One must also pay attention to the nationality slant that is brought into the article:

“The ruling also raises questions about the impartiality of the Portuguese courts in a highly politicised case that saw prime ministers from Tony Blair onwards intervening at one level or another to assist in the investigation.

There is continuing widespread and bitter resentment towards the McCanns in Portugal because of the case’s impact on tourism in the Algarve.

Last year, Rui Pereira, a former Portuguese minister of internal affairs, condemned his own police force for not making Kate and Gerry McCann suspects for child abandonment.

He accused his countrymen of a sense of inferiority to the British that allowed the latter to push the kidnap hypothesis at the expense of something nearer to home.

‘At the beginning, there was an extraordinary and ridiculous theory that said the English have very peculiar cultural customs,’ said Pereira. ‘And, therefore, it was natural for them to leave the [children] alone in a bedroom for the parents to go out a few hundred metres away to socialise with their friends.’”

The idea is to explain to the general public that things weren’t done correctly because there was animosity between the 2 countries, either because the UK intervened or because Portuguese had an inferiority complex to overcome and was resentful.

The article raises, outrageously, questions about the impartiality of the Portuguese justice system, without explaining from where that idea has originated. But it is there, baseless but to be retained by the reader.

The resentment that is spoken of, is evidently false. Everyone knows that Maddie was never kidnapped so it has had absolutely no effects on the region’s tourism numbers which, by the way, have grown yearly afterwards.

By reading the above, one senses there were decisions taken in Portugal on what to do and on what not to do that were based on external pressures – which is true – and that resulted in a resentment that drove the PJ to charge the McCanns at all costs, which we know is false.

Reading the above, the general public gets the idea that even wanting to desperately charge the McCanns, they weren’t able to, which is a point in favour of the McCanns’ innocence, irrelevant of what the Portuguese court said about them not having been cleared.

After all, the blood, Mr Smith and Kate’s fingerprints were useless pieces of evidence, weren’t they?


10. Let’s mystify, evil Mr Amaral

This is followed up with the destruction of Mr Amaral´s character:

“He is said to have made some £300,000 from his book and an accompanying documentary, but the money appears to be long gone and, now 57, he attempts to make a living writing books from his father’s home in Lisbon. Counter-suing the McCanns, as he has threatened, may be the only way to restore his finances.

That, and writing a second book on the case — which is just what he is planning.

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories. He continues to insist the long-running, high-profile campaign to find Madeleine, the vast fund accumulated for that purpose, the marathon inquiries into her disappearance conducted by first Portuguese police and then Scotland Yard are constructed on nothing but a lie.

(…)

Goncalo Amaral insists he is not obsessed by the case but frustrated that lines of inquiry were not properly followed through because of what he claims were political pressures emanating from Lisbon via the British government.

An associate of Amaral’s said this week the detective has been motivated in his legal battles purely by a desire to ensure evidence relevant to the case is available to the public, and not locked away in official archives.

‘He is a man with a strong feeling of justice,’ says the source. And that is the enduring theme of his personality. He has the right to have an opinion about what happened to Madeleine McCann, and the right to justice.’ But his many critics believe Amaral’s fury at his own treatment, both in Portugal and by the media worldwide, is a more likely driving force in his apparent refusal to allow the McCanns some sort of peace.

He was singled out for criticism — many would say justifiably — from the start over the faltering investigation and had his career and private life raked over.

In a recent interview, Amaral said he wrote this book partly to answer criticism against him in the British media.

‘They called me — the British press — 418 times “shameful”, 440 times “outrageous”, 140 times “torturer”, 45 times “disabled”, 37 times ‘incompetent’, 23 times “libertine cop”, 20 times “sacked”.’

For their part, the McCanns have made their frustration at the court’s decision clear in comments made to the media last week by ‘friends’. ‘It was never about winning big libel damages, but all about them silencing him to stop him spouting his untruthful and malicious lies,’ said one. ‘Any award made would have gone into Madeleine’s Fund to help find their daughter, and would never have been used for Kate and Gerry’s own use.’

Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie appears destined to remain on the shelves, in Portugal at least, for years to come. And despite fresh legal warnings from the McCann camp, Amaral is hoping to have his second tome published in English and possibly by a British publisher.

One book could be interpreted as a genuine attempt to air one’s views on aspects of the investigation, but a second looks like cashing in.”

To sum up, Mr Amaral has blown £300,000 away. He’s desperate for money. The only way to get some is to sue the McCanns or write a new book.

It’s said “he continues to insist” after having said “an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories” making his insistence not to be a quest for truth but one out of bitterness and implied bankruptcy.

By saying “Goncalo Amaral insists he is not obsessed by the case but frustrated”, provokes in the general public after having read how obsessed he was to be the words of someone who is indeed obsessed would say to deny it.

It’s not innocent the use of “he was singled out for criticism — many would say justifiably”.

Nor the “one book could be interpreted as a genuine attempt to air one’s views on aspects of the investigation, but a second looks like cashing in”.

Note that it COULD be interpreted, meaning other interpretations are valid, while when referring to the second book the article does not say it COULD be looking like cashing in but that it DOES looks like it. Oh, how greedy Mr Amaral is!

Yes, the words above are populated with truths, but just like with the blood, Mr Smith and Kate’s fingerprints, the truth is there only to be destroyed and ensured that its obliteration is witnessed.


11. The objective of the article

And what is it all for?

It is for this:

“After the fruitless pursuit of numerous theories and leads, the team is now investigating just one: that Madeleine was abducted by a European human trafficking ring.

No one is holding their breath after so many false dawns.

What happened to Madeleine Beth McCann appears destined to remain one of the great unanswered questions in the annals of crime.”

The reasoning is pretty clear: we have shown there is no real proof against the couple, reason why the McCanns weren’t charged, the investigation was tainted by an obsessed investigator and hampered by problems of animosity between the 2 countries involved, so it’s natural that because of all of this, this case does not stand a chance of ever being solved. Best get used to it.

To the general public, a well-researched and balanced article that comes to the conclusion that there will be no conclusion to the case.

That is what the general public reader will retain from reading this article the only time it does.

The article is unusually lengthy and that is done to convince the uninterested reader not to go over it again.

Our posts are lengthy, but we write for people who are interested in the case and not by people who read the issue on a let’s see what’s happening now mood.

We are fully aware our posts are reread, they are filled with detail which makes a single reading difficult. This article on the other hand is lengthy to avoid being reread.

Note that the quotes above are not the last words of the article, the readers will after reading them continue to run their eyes over words after that further demotivating them from going back and rereading it all again when finished.

The final words are to confirm that Mr Amaral is the bad guy.

After having read somewhere in the middle of the article that “the McCanns, who have endured so much already” the reader is left with a “That is something Goncalo Amaral will not allow”, with that something being “Paul Luckman, a British resident of the Algarve and editor of the English-language Portugal News. ‘Their home has been tarnished for years by this. They just wish it would all go away.’”

People of Luz want peace and Mr Amaral won’t let them have it. What a terrible man.

If first impressions are the ones to be trusted, what we remember last is what we end up retaining.

Not by coincidence, Portugal News has always been a staunch supporter of the McCanns and the abduction theory.

We call this a surf article. Riding the wave against the McCanns to push that it will end with an unsolved abduction.


12. Katie Hopkins

As we said in our comment, we thought it was “interesting that it comes from the Mail”.


One reason for that is that on the previous day, Feb 10, Katie Hopkins published on that paper an article comparing the Matthews and the McCann case “KATIE HOPKINS: The McCanns hate Maddie being named in the same breath as Shannon Matthews. But were the two little girls really so very different?

It was published at 15:40 and updated at 16:42.

We, once we took notice of it reacted with the following comments in the blog:

“Textusa 10 Feb 2017, 19:16:00,

People are elated with this article but we are quite worried.

This is quite worrying.

We keep on repeating that because a tune is pleasing to our ears, doesn’t mean it is meant to please. Isn’t that the whole principle behind the story of Pied Piper of Hamelin? To play the music the victim loves so much that it is willing to follow it to, literally, death?

The article has one main focus: let’s really beat the McCanns to a pulp. And isn’t that so Pied Piper?

As Pied Piper it is to use Karen Matthews to do it.

However, the key phrase is this: “If someone took my lovely baby away, I would put Cuddle Cat under my pillow every night to be close to the baby I lost. Not wash its memories away.”

Again, Pied Piper in action. Bringing up how incomprehensible it was to wash that cuddle cat.

What people are failing to see is that the entire premise is Maddie having been abducted.

The evil, neglectful McCanns BUT with an abducted Maddie.

Where have you heard this before? We told you so in our post “Third Option”.
http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2016/03/third-option.html

Exactly what the other side wants to be conveyed.

And before someone says we are being unfair to Ms Hopkins, we don’t think we are.

We accept that many still buy the negligence story, but we don’t believe for a single second that anyone in the entire world believes that Maddie was abducted and if Ms Hopkins truly believes that then she truly is exceptional and not in a good way.

With her position and connections we find very hard to believe in such ignorance.

Ms Hopkins seems to overlook the fact that the dogs’ evidence accepted as proven fact by the Supreme Justice Court. And their noses did not sniff abduction.

What they sniffed is what made them all refuse to participate in the reconstruction.

Let’s not also forget that this is the Mail, considered so unreliable Wikipedia are no longer prepared to use it as a source.”

And:

“Textusa 10 Feb 2017, 23:33:00

Anonymous 10 Feb 2017, 20:26:00,

Even the media protecting the McCanns have long ago lost the use of 'abducted' and 'taken' when speaking about Maddie, replacing them with the more truthful 'vanished' and 'disappeared'.

Ms Hopkins chose to say "If someone took my lovely baby away" which clearly implies abduction.”

This was not the first time we mentioned Katie Hopkins in our blog. We first mentioned her, in a quite complimentary manner in our post of a year ago “Tide change

This what we said then:

“The historic moment was set when UK’s biggest loudmouth – said as a compliment because it is by being one that she earns her living very nicely – said “I have never been allowed to say this before”.”

The change of the tide that we highlighted then was not about the content of the message but about the fact that it had been possible for it to see the light of day:

“If Katie Hopkins, who in the past has used the media to say the most outrageous things, couldn’t up to now give her honest opinion about the McCanns, then who could? No one.

Or as she describes it, “It’s been a white-out, like the silence of snow” up to now.

So when she does finally give her opinion about the couple – and publicising it beforehand – it was like a large stone door protecting some ancient treasured secret that had been sealed shut was finally opened.

(…)

We return at this point to the “opening of doors” of the media that allowed this article to see the light of day. And be pre-announced.

No way the Mail online would allow itself to be surprised by such the content in an article.”

In fact, no one had until then written in a public British paper an article questioning the McCanns. That’s why we ‘forgave’ her for defending negligence then:

“We realise that the content of Katie Hopkins’ article is basically about negligence.

Negligence, or “The Narrative of Negligence”, is something our readers know we think has never happened. No child was left alone in that resort that week either by the T9 or any other. All, when not with their parents, were being taken care of by nannies.

We think Katie Hopkins speaks of negligence not because she was curtailed in any way but because she, like the vast majority of the public, is what she believes happened. And by implying strongly that Gerry is Smithman, her narrative doesn’t seem to support abduction.”

But that was a year ago. Since then Katie Hopkins has had enough time to educate herself. And it seems she hasn’t.

She seems to say that she was simply being cautious in her tweet about the article published last Friday:


“Katie Hopkins‏ @KTHopkins

I apologise for the delay. Currently playing dolphin noises to the legal team to calm them down. (link: https://twitter.com/kthopkins/status/830062232683814912) twitter.com/kthopkins/stat… #maddiematthews”

So, from this tweet one can be led to deduce that she chose to insist on abduction for legal reasons.

We happen to have answered that question when replying to an Anonymous who was accusing Katie Hopkins of using a ghost writer:

“Textusa 11 Feb 2017, 11:58:00

Anonymous 11 Feb 2017, 05:17:00,

Thank you for your comment.

You provide your opinion, which like ours when out of deduction and not fact, is subjective. And like ours, others can or cannot agree with it.

Katie Hopkins does not come across to us as someone who would have someone write things for her.

We have never argued against the 2 cases, McCann and Matthews, being compared.

In fact by saying it is music to our ears, we not only think they can as we think they should. And even in the exact terms Ms Hopkins has done.

What we are saying very clearly is that such a comparison should not be made under the background of abduction, and that was what she did in our opinion.

In times when the media is widely reporting that the parents continue to be suspect of her disappearance (and the Mail, the same Mail, goes as far as calling it death - were the Mail lawyers distracted then??) and so a general recognition that there was no abduction, we see no reason at this point in time, to have to use the abduction in any way if one wants to question their innocence.”

In fact the Daily Mail, had published the day before, Feb 9, an article called “Fresh anguish for Madeleine McCann's parents as Portugal's supreme court insists they haven't been proved innocent over their daughter's death by Alisha Rouse.

This article was initially published with the title “Portuguese court says Madeleine McCann’s parents HAVEN’T been cleared”, which is visible in its URL: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4206214/Court-says-Madeleine-McCann-s-parents-HAVEN-T-cleared.html.

We know that it was published at 01:10 of that day and then updated at 02:10.

We don’t know if these times reflect the changes in the title but we do know that the word ‘death’ when referring clearly to Maddie was introduced in the title, after the article has in caps the word ‘HAVEN’T’.

By saying, explicitly, that Maddie was dead, the Mail was clearly ruling out the possibility of abduction, of Maddie having been taken.

From this, we can deduce that whatever legal issues about the article Katie Hopkins had it was to do with something other than with abduction being implied, as the paper had made a much more serious allegation just the day before.

And as we said in the comment, having used disappeared or vanished, would not represent any legal issue with the McCann lawyers as they have been widely used by the media for quite a long while now.

In fact, the media outlets don’t refer to Maddie have been taken or kidnapped anymore, with very few exceptions, and not innocently.


This, gives a whole new meaning to Katie Hopkins’s words “we’ll never know what really happened to Maddie” in the title of her article on February 22 2016 on her Mail Online column “KATIE HOPKINS: We'll never know what really happened to Maddie but her parents should accept their share of the blame and let her go” bashing the McCanns.


13. Almost all quiet on all fronts

It is interesting to note that on Thursday the 9th, the Mail publishes an article quite damning for the other side (in synch with other media outlets) and on Friday 10th (Katie Hopkins) and February 11th (Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde) they publish counter-attacks.

Our modesty stops us from thinking that this was done knowing that we publish on Fridays and by publishing the counter-attacks on those days we wouldn’t be able to respond. Even if it was so, this post proves the contrary.

What this tells us is that that the Mail has now become the real voice-piece for the other side.

We have said before that the biggest constraint Theresa May has to go for the truth is her need for the help and support of the British elite in the Brexit process, independent if they voted for it or not.

She has to come to a decision based on how much she perceives the truth about the McCann case will antagonise the British elite.

She has to ponder this against the benefits in coming clean which would show the international community that the UK, a Brexit UK, was determined to put their money where their mouth was when it came to credibility.

The drawback of coming clean is that it would show that all was indeed a high level pantomime but we think that wouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

To concede to possible antagonism of the elites, she has to realise that there will always be an elephant in every room in which a British delegation will be in as it is not up to the UK to stop the comparison between Maddie and every single child that goes missing. As we have seen, whenever one goes missing the immediate reaction is for the press of that country to call it “our Maddie”.

And whenever Maddie’s name is mentioned, inevitably everyone present will do a roll of the eyes dance. That’s how credible everyone thinks the abduction story is.

It must not be forgotten that a decision to go for an unsolved abduction after wasting years and millions of pounds without questioning the couple, has as background a ruling from the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court which states very explicitly that in no time were the McCanns considered innocent and it does raise serious questions about the veracity of the abduction theory. 

In terms of media outlets we would say the Mail represents Brexit while the Guardian, Remain.

Only elites can control media output. These Mail articles seem to indicate that the Brexit elite seems to be pushing for the hoax.

We would like to make it very clear that we are not linking in any way the Brexit/Remain vote to wanting or not to perpetuate the hoax.

The Maddie case is transversal to all, and from what we have been able to read on social media, wanting to out the truth about Maddie is something that is unifying across the board.

We are speaking only about the elite.

And we are not even pointing the finger at the Brexit one. The Mail published the article about the Supreme Justice Court Decision while the Guardian has remained completely silenced about it.

So, in much the same way, we can say that the Remain elite is not showing signs of wanting to put an end to the hoax.

Add to this, the deafening silence from the “Operation Grange Groupie Website” tells us that outside this Mail attempt, the battlefront is completely silent.

And this attempt has not been echoed anywhere outside the Mail.

In fact, we have had 3 articles that were not pleasant for the other side.


The first was the Daily Star article of Feb 16 2017 by Jerry Lawton “Maddie McCann parents considering legal action as TV show appears online in English

“MADELEINE McCann’s parents were last night considering legal action over a TV show about their missing daughter.

The programme appeared on the internet in English after the couple spent nine years trying to ban it.”

As if the UK was North Korea or other similar countries in which only state controlled internet providers exist, thus limiting the access of their population to the worldwide web.

The article is evidently a reporter stirring the pot and calling out for people to go on the internet:

“Now the TV show has appeared on YouTube with an English voice-over”, so please go and search for it, it’s what is being said.

A video that has been uploaded in 2009 and as far as we know under the new U.K. Libel law one has to take action within a year of publication.

And to use ‘may’ and ‘are considering’ does not exactly imply determination, does it?

The McCanns cannot sue anyone.

We remind readers they never did, they claimed damages and never, in court, have said that Mr Amaral was lying, just stated that he couldn’t, legally, say what he said even if it was true and they didn’t deny there, in court, that it wasn’t.

The only legal foothold they had to go into battle without discussing facts was the presumption of innocence and that has been thrown out the window by the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court.

With that Court’s ruling they’re left to fight for their innocence with fact and fact is not a McCann ally.

This article was echoed by the following articles, Lawton’s stirring seems to have produced something:

- In the Sun by Ellie Flynn and Tracey Kandohla published on Feb 16 “'IT'S ALL NONSENSE' Kate and Gerry McCann may sue over ‘lunatic conspiracy theory’ video blaming them for Maddie’s disappearance

- In the Mirror by Steve Robson published on Feb 16 “Madeleine McCann's parents 'considering legal action after controversial Portuguese documentary appears on YouTube'

- In the Mail by Keiligh Baker and Tracey Kandohla published Feb 16 17:04 GMT, updated today Feb 17 02:12 GMT “Kate and Gerry McCann may sue over Portuguese detective's 'nonsense' YouTube conspiracy video blaming them for Madeleine's disappearance

The Mail article even goes as far as to help the search:

“Mr Amaral's controversial documentary can be viewed on the web around the world.

'It is based on the former Portuguese police chief's best-selling book The Truth of the Lie, which the McCanns complained was libellous but which Portugal's Supreme Court ruled on appeal was not.

For viewers in Britain is has been dubbed in English with a tribute saying 'Many thanks to Joana Morias in Portugal for translation.'

It opens with a bold statement: 'The documentary the McCanns don't want you to watch! Huge red letters than flash onto screen: 'BANNED'- emphasising: 'Banned by the McCanns in September 2009' followed by: 'Decision: Overturned on October 19th 2011 by a High Court judge.'”


It seems that someone really, really wants the general public to go look up on the internet and search for this video!

And what about this dare from Lawton: “He is said to be seeking a British publisher to release his book in the UK for the first time”?

Isn’t that just calling all British publishers cowards if they don’t publish?


The second is the article from the Sun by By ELLIE FLYNN and TRACEY KANDOHLA also on Feb 16 2017 “'UTTER RUBBISH' Kate and Gerry McCann slam claims they are plotting to make hundreds of thousands out of 10th anniversary of Maddie’s disappearance

“The couple say they 'want to make it clear they are not making any money out of Madeleine's disappearance'

(…)

The couple are considering two pooled interviews in Britain, one for print through the country’s national agency Press Association and one for broadcasters.

Both are being organised through Scotland Yard, Mitchell explained. He said: “There will be no fee.””

Or, in other words, backtracking as in no, the couple won’t have the financial conditions to continue the investigation about Maddie on their own.

Although, it seems, they have enough money to re-hire their spokesman and pay one of the most expensive law firms around, Carter-Ruck to issue idle threats of libel.

If it wasn’t so sad and pathetic, it would be comical.


The third one is the article from the Sun by by Hannah Crouch, published Feb 16 “MCCANN COURT BATTLE Who is Goncalo Amaral? Ex-Madeleine McCann cop whose claimed Gerry and Kate faked her abduction

It is quite a short article but look at how many times a very clear finger is pointed towards the McCanns:

“Madeleine McCann cop whose claimed Gerry and Kate faked her abduction”Amaral claimed Maddie had died in the McCann's holiday flat and her parents faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy

“to silence an ex-cop who claims they covered up their daughter’s death”

“Goncarlo Amaral claimed Kate and Gerry McCann faked the abduction of their daughter”

“In July 2008, Amaral released a book called “The Truth of the Lie” which claims the McCanns faked the abduction.”

“In the book, it is claimed that Maddie had died in their holiday flat and her parents faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.” 


Could it be clearer that no abduction took place? And not a single bad word about Mr Amaral. It even explains why he was taken off the investigation.

“Amaral is an ex-police officer who led the initial hunt when three-year-old Maddie went missing from the Algarve in 2007.

The now retired detective was removed as head of the investigation after criticising British detectives.”


Note it’s detective and officer and not cop in the above.

Also note that all contradiction and all nonsense calling comes directly from the McCanns and their legal team. There is no negative opinion against Mr Amaral from the paper itself.

All this from the Sun of all rags.

And of course, we couldn’t stop mentioning this from the Portugal Resident in the article “McCann spokesman admits parents “sufficiently realistic” to admit Maddie “probably dead”” published on Feb 16:

“A source working for a several tabloids has been in touch with the Resident to find out if the clause was highlighted by Portuguese papers.

He reiterated his opinion that “the tide in UK is changing”.”


One can certainly feel the pressure on the dam wall.



14. Conclusion

When a lion is dying, even the most cowardly and vegetarian rabbit comes to take a bite of its rump.

To point the finger at the McCanns, after the Supreme Justice Court ruling is non-news.

It’s now a given that in whatever scenario, the McCanns are to be made to look really bad.

Even in the partial truth scenario – we believe full truth will never be known as we will never see confirmed the names of those with a social status above Freud – the worse the McCanns are made to look the less light is thrown on all others.

In the patsy scenario (the vague European human trafficking gang) or archival, having the McCanns portrayed as the evil, arrogant negligent couple will be the only thing that will mitigate the public outrage for the lack of results after a scandalous waste of public money all these years.

We urge those deciding to resist temptation and read our “Third Option” post again.

Fact is, the McCanns, whatever scenario, are to be thrown under the bus, which is followed by a bulldozer, then by a caterpillar and a roller steamer. That is very clear.

So to see an article badmouthing the McCanns doesn’t exactly mean good news.

With the same logic, reading one in their favour, is not exactly bad. Usually these are just to intensify our hostility against them.

What one has to pay attention to is neglect. Only with neglect can there be an abduction and only with an abduction can there be an unsolved one.

If an article supports the McCanns being neglectful, thus abduction possible, then it’s from the other side.

If on the other hand it speaks the truth without manipulation, then, evidently, it’s ‘one of ours’.

140 comments:

  1. Interesting article in the Sun and comments all in favour of Amaral,

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2751442/goncalo-amaral-madeleine-mccann-cop-book/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Text
    Enjoyed today's post immensely. Always you provide clarity from within the deliberate confusion. Greedily hungry for more. Loved " add to this the deafening silence from The Operation Grange Groupie Website". Just willing the dam to burst and see what flows forth.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whitehall was given important reasons to continue funding Op Grange.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great read ladies,my first reaction was anger and I'm still angry at the discrediting of the dog blood not human blatant lies and absolutely no need for it now after supreme court findings.Obviously McCann friendly

    ReplyDelete
  5. Where I'm from we call this "running with the hare while hunting with the hound". Well done on your clear analysis. I suspect the red tops are on a fishing expedition. They have laid the bait by practically advertising where to access Amarel's documentary in English. They will wait to gauge reaction but will be eager not to lose the opportunity to sell more papers which the tenth anniversary gifts them. The response to these earlier tasters will determine what slant the anniversary articles will take. I suspect it wont be "The poor McCanns' decade of agony" but rather "Ten years on it's time to regretfully give up on the mystery. Perhaps she was kidnapped due to the parents neglect (hint hint, they lied about how often they checked leaving loads of time for kidnapping) and as to the other suspicions of Amarel, the dogs' findings, forensics - well who knows? it was all so long ago now". Only a public backlash at the failure of Grange to advance any further than the P.J. had ten years ago, despite wasting millions will impact this. I fear that won't happen and the case is heading to the cold case files while suspicion will always hang over the McCanns' heads. But hey! At least we kept you from being hauled into court so grin and bear it!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Would like to bring over to blog this from Lorraine Holden's FB page:

    Val Mulraney
    Val Mulraney I still think it reads like it was written from a very anti Mc viewpoint then someone's done some kack handed editing before it went to print x
    Like · Reply · 2 · 1 hr

    Lorraine Holden
    Lorraine Holden Yes I agree Val x
    Like · Reply · 1 hr

    Maria Santos
    Maria Santos Exactly my point Val Mulraney, agree with you on that. On where we may disagree is for the reasons for the Anti-Mc stuff to be there.
    My opinion, which I expressed in post, was to be destroyed.
    Like in a conversation between 2 laypeople:
    - The Mcs are guilty because the dogs sniffed blood behind couch...
    - Yeah, I know that, but I read the other day an article where that was said but then it said that it could be animal blood... so I don't know about that.
    Like · Reply · 2 · 1 hr

    https://www.facebook.com/lorraine.holden.395/posts/1925729860993539

    ReplyDelete
  7. This Mail article was also posted in two halves.

    The original article (published 00.09 & amended 00.13) only went down as far as

    ‘There is continuing widespread and bitter resentment towards the McCanns in Portugal because of the case’s impact on tourism in the Algarve.’

    This was then updated at 01.19 with the odd second half of the article seemingly hastily cobbled together.

    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13552-when-will-the-mccanns-tormentor-in-chief-stop-adding-to-their-misery#356308

    Doug D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Doug D.

      It seems like someone jumped on board of an already moving train to pursue their agenda.

      Delete
  8. I've said it before and I'll say it again...Think UK prosecution & all is explained
    The UK media pay very expensive lawyers to say what can be written & in what context, the media are also aware of what can be written in a live UK murder inquiry...Sometimes the real truth doesn't have to be as complicated as having everyman & his dog involved in a conspiracy.
    1matthewwright1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "A live U.k.MURDER inquiry"???? But we've been told this is a search for an abducted child who may well be alive somewhere! I don't believe the media spin is so innocent. As to the litigious nature of U.K. inquiries, where is litigation more eagerly pursued than the U.S.A. where a recent program openly claimed that Burke Ramsey had killed his sister by striking her with a torch and that the parents covered this up? Fear of litigation did not stop the media repeating this claim or televising the program in which it was made. If the U.K. media were unbiased toward the McCanns now would have been the perfect time to re hash the whole Madeleine investigation. Acres of print going abegging. The fact that they are not is in itself noteworthy.

      Delete
  9. Think your post is spot on!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Merci, Textusa. About "confusing" : that's why I am always exasperate. I read and reread and re re read always these articles while questioning my english understanding. Yes my english is bad but not my brain. I'm sure of that, because I understand very, very well your well constructed and unambiguous posts, Textusa. MSM make me crazy. TEXTUSA enlighted me. Your post: SERIAL-JOURNALISM 2014= wonderfull. Je vous souhaite un excellent week-end et encore merci.

    ReplyDelete
  11. But was the blood proved to be from Madeleine?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 17 Feb 2017, 15:18:00,

      Yes, we think that was established by the FSS.

      In swabs 286A/2007-CRL 3A & B as we showed in our post "FSS - It's Maddie's blood"
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2013/11/fss-its-maddies-blood.html

      Delete
    2. Then the McCanns tried to explain away Madeleine's blood by saying she had nosebleeds or saying it was when she cut her leg climbing the aeroplane steps.

      Delete
  12. An excellent and highly fascinating post.
    Thank you Textusa.
    I've always enjoyed analysis, analysis of any text.
    Love to deconstruct and declutter and get to the heart of anything that is being said or written and that may have an impact on life.

    Only since I started reading Textusa blogs that I thought to apply the skills that I had learned previously from past studies to what the Media were publishing in relation to the McCanns.
    Via Textusa it has been a fascinating journey.
    Textusa asks us to initially reflect on what were our first responses to the Mail's publication.
    Mine were:

    "How contradictory!", followed by:
    "What a strange, jumbled , ill thought out post that contradicts one statement after another."

    Like most people I love to have the last word !
    Doesn't everyone?
    Whether that be verbally or in the written word.
    Textusa shows clearly that the last word is what is left imprinted on a readers mind.
    The last thought, hugely important and what the reader takes away to reflect on and absorb into their psyche, hugely instrumental in what the author is attempting to achieve.
    So yes, very confusing post indeed but when deconstructed all becomes clear, extremely clear.
    The article lends further weight to the fact that the media are colluding.
    They're "All in on it!"

    Indeed to say, how could it possibly be that there were so many contradictions?
    Definitely more than one colluder!
    A group of top juniors in school, working on a presentation would know instinctively that their work would not be acceptable for such presentation without first collaborating initially as a group and again before the finished Presentation. It seems that so called professional journalists have no such need for collaboration as such.
    Does it clearly show what they think of their readers?
    I think so, treating us as fools has become the norm, but here, the agenda seems more important.
    State the facts and then clearly and not so succinctly debunk !
    The thought that this will all go away and be referred to as an 'unsolved abduction' is painful to say the least.
    Those of us who have followed the case from its early days know there was no abduction and no neglect.
    The media write as if we are all oscitant but the use of the words 'vanished ' and 'disappeared', appearing more regularly give hope.

    Theresa May V the British élite is yet another hurdle in the truth.
    To not come clean about this Pantomime hoax will lose credibility indeed Theresa May is already struggling at home and is looked upon as 'weak'. As a former Home Secretary, she has access to files that have not been seen and which may be a vital key to unlocking this hoax.
    Operation Grange cannot continue to hide behind the façade they have created.
    The tide has turned.
    I don't realistically expect people will accept that Madeleine was abducted, if they don't go for truth this will drag on for years and years and years and be a bitter thorn in the government's side.
    Such a very enlightening and very welcome post Textusa.
    I hate to say this in terms of the subject matter but I thoroughly enjoyed the blog and the reasoning behind it!





    ReplyDelete
  13. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2890547/kate-gerry-mccann-ban-lawyer-not-cleared-maddie-disappearance/

    'DON'T SAY ANYTHING!'
    Kate and Gerry McCann ban their lawyer from answering questions after judges reveal they have NOT been cleared over Madeleine’s disappearance

    The order comes after they lost their libel case against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral

    Exclusive
    BY TRACEY KANDOHLA
    17th February 2017, 3:17 pm

    MADELINE McCann’s parents have begged their Portuguese lawyer to keep quiet after judges ruled they weren’t in the clear over their daughter’s disappearance.

    Isabel Duarte is believed to have been readying herself to comment on the failed libel battle against ex-cop Goncalo Amaral, who claims the couple faked Maddie’s abduction.

    But Kate and Gerry have now reportedly ordered her to not “say anything” or respond to any media requests after the judgement was handed down last week.

    Ms Duarte said today: “We received instructions from the clients not to make any declaration or give public information about the file against Mr Amaral or the case itself.”

    The couple lost their nine-year civil battle against Amaral, who claimed their daughter had been accidentally killed in May 2007 and they had covered it up.

    They have always vehemently denied any involvement.

    The devastating blow came after judges ruled former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry were not officially in the clear over their daughter's disappearance.

    They were ruled out as “arguidos” – formal suspects - in 2008 but the country’s top court said in newly released 76-page dossier that this does not “equate to proof of innocence”.

    The previously reported Supreme Court ruling said there were “serious concerns” over the theory three-year-old Maddie had been snatched from her bedroom at the Ocean Club apartment in the Algarve’s Praia da Luz nearly 10 years ago.

    The comments were made in the huge dossier after Amaral, who headed the hunt for the missing girl, was handed victory.

    The McCanns had insisted his 2008 Maddie book The Truth of the Lie and a TV documentary about the case had been hurtful and libellous.

    The Supreme Court is Portugal’s highest court but has no criminal authority.

    Judges added their job was not to decide if the McCanns bore any criminal responsibility over Maddie’s disappearance.

    And they said it would be wrong to draw any inferences about the couple’s guilt or innocence from their ruling.

    After receiving a copy of the ruling Ms Duarte said she would make a comment after “carefully considering the contents the judges wrote” – which has now been blocked by the McCann’s.

    The couple, both 48, from Rothley, Leics, are fiercely private and rarely speak in public about Maddie.

    But Kate does the odd interview as ambassador for Missing People to highlight the charity’s work.

    Amaral, 58, was booted off the original Maddie inquiry after criticising British police, and he later retired.

    He insists everything written in his book was already contained in police and court case files which had been made public.

    The ex cop is now writing a second Maddie book after judges ruled his “right to freedom of expression” was worthy of greater protection than the McCann’s “right to honour.”

    Ms Duarte, speaking before the couple’s original libel victory was overturned on appeal: “It has been proved in the civil file that Amaral earned around 380,000 Euros in one year from the book, which is made of up false stories based on the case. Kate and Gerry expect compensation for the dreadful damages this book has brought their family.”

    Maddie vanished from a holiday rental apartment in Praia da Luz, Algarve, in May 2007.

    Her disappearance made headlines across the world and the search for Maddie is thought to have cost £10m so far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ermmm… Ms Kandohla,

      You say “The McCanns had insisted his 2008 Maddie book The Truth of the Lie and a TV documentary about the case had been hurtful and libellous.”

      No, they didn’t say it was libellous. They just said it was hurtful.

      And the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court has ruled that it wasn’t even hurtful.

      Delete
    2. Funny, back in 2007, her lawyer told her not to answer police questions.

      Ten years down the line, they are telling her not to answer media questions.

      Delete
  14. Here we go again !

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4235434/McCanns-ban-Portuguese-lawyer-speaking-press.html
    T Kandohla again

    ReplyDelete
  16. https://twitter.com/K9Truth/status/832657205367181312

    The Gaspar statements are in the comments of the Sun online!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As our readers know, we DON'T subscribe the paedo theory as we DON'T think Maddie suffered any paedo wrongdoing nor was she a victim of it.

      However, as we have stated before as well, we fully support the discussion around paedophilia in the case namely the Gaspar statements as well as those by Yvonne Martin.

      And irrelevant of what we think, up until today, the Gaspar statements were a big no-no in the press.

      The dam wall is really starting to crack.

      Delete
  17. Daily Mail updated at 19.49 ..."The McCanns even prevented some British newspapers from reporting certain details about the Maddie mystery."

    ReplyDelete
  18. Comment in The Sun online:
    I@Claire Mybusiness Its no secret in Scotland that the McCann's had regular contact with known paedophiles and both Kate and Gerry were participants on the swinger circuit. What is very surprising to the legal fraternity in Scotland is the massive amount of public funds that has been spent on this case, when it is crystal clear they were directly involved in the death, either accidentally or deliberately. There was no abduction, and the discredited story of the McCann's fails under scrutiny. The subsequent disposal of Madeleine's body by the McCann's shows their actions were precise and calculated.


    There are various theories on how this was done, but one thing is very clear, Madeleine is dead and the McCann's have not provided a credible story on the events.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Everyone going on about McCann's telling their Lawyers not to comment
    I'm more interested in the extraordinary lengths they've gone to banning family and friends from speaking out is this the first hint at injunction orders?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't remember GA being taken of the case, because he criticized the British Police. Wasn't it because he made the McCanns arguidos?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Amaral was taken off the case on October 2 2007 because he gave an interview criticising the British for meddling in the investigation.

      The McCanns continued as arguidos under Mr Rebelo, who took charge of the investigation after Mr Amaral, until July 2008, when the case was archived.

      Delete
  21. “There's an effective cartel of media on the right; they've made clear to the PM she has their adulation as long as she delivers Brexit.” TB

    Textusa this quote from Tony Blair seems to back up the theory that there are powerful people who have the power to distory or save Theresa May if she does or doesn't do their bidding over Brexit. It could so easily apply to the Maddie case

    ReplyDelete
  22. This morning's Daily Mail is carrying a story that the McCanns are planning to appeal or complain over the most recent ruling, citing their fury over the passage about their arguido status being dropped for lack of hard evidence rather than them having been cleared of involvement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When they say the McCanns, did someone whisper in their ear or did they speak directly to Kate and Gerry. Because all this does is makes them lose any miniscule drop of support that might remain.
      This just makes them look like litigous monsters (which they are but which has been hidden till now).
      I think the other side has plunged the knife in with this unattributable declaration.

      Delete
  23. O casal McCann, pais de Maddie, a menina inglesa desaparecida no Algarve em 2007, pediu a nulidade do acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, classificando-o de leviano "por não ter sido possível ao Ministério Público obter indícios suficientes da prática de crimes pelos recorrentes".

    O Supremo confirmou a decisão da Relação em revogar o pagamento de uma indemnização de 500 mil euros pelo ex-inspetor da PJ Gonçalo Amaral."

    http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/pais-de-maddie-acusam-o-supremo?ref=HP_Grupo1

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4237066/Madeleine-McCann-s-parents-fight-court-ruling.html

      Madeleine McCann's parents 'plan to fight Portuguese court ruling that they haven't been cleared of involvement in their daughter's disappearance'

      Couple lost libel battle against police chief who claimed they faked abduction
      Portugal's Supreme Court last month rejected last-ditch appeal over the case
      McCanns are trying to get decision invalidated by launching formal complaint

      By Gerard Couzens For The Mailonline
      Published: 09:40 GMT, 18 February 2017 | Updated: 10:34 GMT, 18 February 2017

      Missing Madeleine McCann's parents are reportedly fighting a Portuguese court decision to side with former police chief Goncalo Amaral over his hurtful claims about her disappearance.

      The country's Supreme Court last month rejected their last-ditch appeal over his 2008 book The Truth of the Lie in which he alleged Maddie died in their holiday flat and they faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.

      Judges backed a lower court's April 2016 decision to reverse their 2015 libel win against the ex-detective, leaving them facing a huge legal bill and the nightmare prospect of being sued by Amaral.

      And they also challenged Gerry and Kate's insistence they had nothing to with their daughter's disappearance in a devastating put-down which is said to have sparked their fresh legal challenge.

      Best-selling Portuguese daily Correio da Manha said the couple were seeking to get the Supreme Court decision invalidated after launching a formal complaint against the judges' findings.

      It was known they had 10 days to file an objection with court officials.

      It is thought the McCanns' reported attempt to nullify the decision is based on comments made by the judges in their 76-page ruling that the 2008 shelving of the Portuguese probe into their daughter's disappearance 'was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.'

      The McCanns had their status as 'arguidos' or official suspects lifted on the same day - July 21 2008 - just three days before Amaral published his controversial book.

      Correio da Manha reported today: 'The McCanns have requested the annulment of the Supreme Court decision, terming it frivolous for saying it 'had not been possible for public prosecutors to obtain sufficient evidence of crimes by the appellants.'

      The newspaper said the McCanns had described the ruling as 'leviano' in the complaint lodged through their Portuguese lawyer - which in English translates as 'frivolous' but can also mean 'sloppy' or 'rash'.

      No-one from the Supreme Court was available for comment this morning.

      The McCanns' lawyer Isabel Duarte is refusing to say anything after receiving instructions from the couple not to make any public comment on the case.

      She said yesterday when asked whether the couple had filed a formal complaint to the Supreme Court about the ruling: 'We received instructions from the clients not to make any declaration or give public information about the file against Mr Amaral or the case itself.'

      It was unclear today if another set of Supreme Court judges dealt with complaints about rulings - or they were handed to another judicial body to deal with.

      Amaral was ordered to pay the McCanns EUROS 500,000 euros (POUNDS 430,000) by a Lisbon court in April 2015 after they won round one of their lengthy judicial battle over his book and a subsequent TV documentary.

      The former police chief got that ruling - and a ban on selling his book - overturned on appeal in April last year.

      The decision by Lisbon's Court of Appeal sparked the Supreme Court fight which was resolved on January 31.

      The full 76-page ruling said to have sparked a new legal challenge by the McCanns was released last week.

      (cont)

      Delete
    2. (cont)

      Judges made it clear in their decision their job was not to decide whether the McCanns bore any criminal responsibility over their daughter's disappearance and it would be wrong for anyone to draw any inferences about the couple's guilt or innocence from their ruling.

      But they added: 'It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.

      'In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

      'The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

      'There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling.

      'It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence.'

      They added, highlighting the McCanns' Tapas Nine friend Jane Tanner's much-questioned sighting of the suspected 'abductor': 'It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

      'However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped.'

      The Supreme Court judges said the McCanns claimed Amaral's book and the TV documentary based on the book formed no part of case files made public in 2008 and would have damaged the honour and good name of any 'innocent person who had been cleared through the shelving of the criminal investigation.'

      But they stated: 'We consider the invocation of the violation of the principle of innocence should not be taken into account here, since this issue is not relevant to the resolution of the question that needs to be decided here.'

      They said the 'crucial question' for them was how to resolve the rights of Kate and Gerry McCann to their 'good name and reputation' and the rights of Goncalo Amaral and the other respondents including the book editors to the constitutionally-inshrined right of 'freedom of expression.'

      Concluding Amaral had not acted 'illicitly,' they ruled his book was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns with a 'defamatory intention' behind it which would not be protected by freedom of speech rights.

      Describing the book and the TV documentary based on it as an 'opinion' based on the logic of facts and evidence contained in the criminal case files, they added: 'Our opinion is that rather than an injurious animus, the intention was informative and defensive.'

      The Supreme Court ruling meant Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns the compensation he was ordered to hand them after the first court ruling in 2015.

      The payment was frozen when he launched his successful appeal.

      Earlier this month it emerged the ex detective, removed as head of the investigation into Madeleine's May 3 2007 disappearance after criticising British detectives, was writing a new book about the unsolved mystery.

      (cont)

      Delete
    3. (cont)

      It is understood he will be critical in the new book of some of the things Scotland Yard did in their review and later ongoing investigation of the case.

      The former cop insisted from day one of his court fight with the McCanns that everything he wrote in his book was based on the publicly-available case files.

      Kate and Gerry, both 48, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have said they will sue if 'The Truth of the Lie' is sold in Britain.

      They said in a statement after learning of the Supreme Court ruling against them: 'What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

      'It is eight years since we brought the action, and in that time the landscape has changed dramatically, namely there is now a joint Metropolitan Police and Policia Judiciaria investigation which is what we have always wanted.

      'The police in both countries continue to work on the basis that there is no evidence Madeleine has come to physical harm.

      'We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course.'

      It is believed the McCanns are discussing the possibility of taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

      The 20,000 page 'Madeleine files made public in 2008 contained a report by public prosecutors which said:' No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstance of Madeleine's disappearance from the apartment…including, and most dramatically, establishing whether she is alive or dead, which seems more probable.'

      Referring to the McCanns' much-criticised decision to leave their daughter, then three, alone with younger siblings Sean and Amelie while they ate tapas nearby, it added: 'We must also recognise that the parents are paying a heavy penalty over the disappearance of Madeleine for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.'

      Portuguese police chiefs said late last year they were 'completely in tune' with British detectives still investigating Madeleine's disappearance, appearing to end years of tension between the two forces whose theories on the youngster's fate have differed wildly.

      Portuguese prosecutors reopened their probe into Madeleine McCann's disappearance in May 2014, and are now working in close coordination with Scotland Yard's scaled-down Operation Grange probe into Madeleine's fate.

      Delete
    4. This is the first time we hearing of a Supreme Justice Court being contested.

      The whole principle of this court is, in our opinion, to have a place, shall we call it that, where all, and we mean all, legal issues are solved. All questions answered, all disputes resolved.

      A correction to the Mail article is that Correio da Manhã says they have requested (pediu) and not that they are planning to. The article contradicts itself by saying that there is a 10 day deadline to comply, so it would be a little late to be doing any planning on Feb 18 about a decision of Jan 31. Counting working days, it ended on Feb 14.

      We are trying to find out where this appeal, or contesting, was filed. As soon as we know we will get back to readers.

      The Supreme Justice Court, in its sentence, justified very clearly why it said what it said, so it cannot be considered a frivolous (leviana) decision at all.

      From a layperson point of view, it seems that the McCanns are confusing closing with archiving until further evidence.

      As an example, and without passing judgement on what may be today's guilt of the McCanns, let's suppose that tomorrow a witness who has been silent all these years, comes forward and points the finger without any doubt to the McCanns.

      That would be admissible new evidence and one that would incriminate the McCanns.

      That alone shows that the McCanns were not cleared.

      Delete
    5. Discussed this with source who was caught by surprise.

      Said that it is possible to request annulment of decision, based on a legal technicality.

      It is submitted to the Supreme Justice Court, where it will be analysed.

      As it’s about technicalities, decision is quick.

      Not seeing frivolous as being a technicality

      We STRONGLY recommend that should contain themselves on this subject.

      We’re not questioning that a contest was submitted, however we think it to be too big of a mistake to make.

      Having read the sentence attentively, we’re not seeing any possible reason for it to be contested, much less on frivolity.

      This has all the hall marks of pot stirring.

      To collate information against us.

      Hysterical overreactions may lead to the compilation of a dossier to portray an angry lynching mob that will be used against us.

      Delete
  24. Ghoul tours are back!

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2894902/madeleine-mccann-tour-guide/

    'I'M LOOKING FOR MADDIE' Guide defends ‘ghoulish’ Maddie McCann tour around the apartment where tot went missing and says he is ‘trying to progress the case’

    He says he is just 'trying to progress the case' as the 10th anniversary of her disappearance approaches
    Exclusive
    By SAM CHRISTIE
    18th February 2017, 10:08 am

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, 18 Feb 2017, 11:28:00,

      We dealt with these Ghoul Tours and why they were being reported on the media in our post "The messages".
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2016/10/the-messages.html

      It seems blogger published a post on Feb 8 whining about how life was unfair to him because one Scott Michaels, who we have never heard of, and who owns something we also have never heard of, the Dearly Departed Tours, in Los Angeles (http://dearlydepartedtours.com), is getting "lauded" (?).

      All quotes from this article come from that post.

      Interesting to see that said blogger, who is a fierce pro-abduction, has not said a word to date about the Supreme Justice Court ruling.

      We think that this article, unlike the October surge on this subject, is just the Sun keeping both sides of the fence happy.

      Delete
  25. http://www.infobae.com/america/mundo/2017/02/17/la-sospechosa-prohibicion-que-los-padres-de-madeleine-mccann-impusieron-sobre-su-abogada/


    La sospechosa prohibición que los padres de Madeleine McCann impusieron a su abogada

    Gerry y Kate McCann están furiosos con el ex detective Gonçalo Amaral. Ahora le dieron órdenes seguras a su abogada portuguesa

    ReplyDelete
  26. Have been catching up with the stuff on the McCanns, ie the Gaspar statements in Sun !
    As you said, the Dam is definitely showing signs of cracking.!
    Not liking the lynch mobs and the constant repetition of "They left their kids alone!"
    That kind of lynch mob mentality is seriously disturbing.
    It's all over the forums.
    I'm very worried how this and how will all turn out.
    I can't see anything happening tbh, they've been protected for so long, why change it all now?
    Those in the higher élite will not relinquish the fight so easily.
    Who are they really protecting?
    That's the question, as puppets are the Mcs to be thrown to the wolves ?
    The statement from a 'Reader' in the Sun online comments, saying they were swingers and we'll known to be in touch with P groups is somewhat disconcerting bearing in mind current situation.
    All very fascinating

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 18 Feb 2017, 13:24:00,

      Thank you for your comment.

      At least here that will not ever happen as we have exposed as much and as often as we could, the hoax that negligence is in this case.

      The only way we see that will appease the mob-like tension is to come clean, explain that no child was ever left alone, that no child ever was in danger.

      People will continue to be angry but it won't be one generated from harm coming to children.

      Delete
    2. I'm worried too, Anonymous 24:00. The circus should have been stopped ages ago and the MCs brought back to reason. Authorities are protecting themselves, their infantile belief in a cock-and-bull story. I've no doubt that they'll throw the MCs to the wolves if necessary.

      Delete
  27. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-gerry-mccann-lodge-complaint-9843695


    However, it has emerged today that the couple have lodged a complaint with the Supreme Court.

    When asked if she had lodged a formal complaint against the Supreme Court ruling, the The McCann's Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed today: “We delivered it.”

    Bampots

    ReplyDelete
  28. The intitial investigation took place against the backdrop of the Lisbon Treaty negotiations with Britain a powerful member of the E.U. club. My gut feeling is that the Portuguese government was somewhat cowed by the demands of their bossy, more powerful club-mate. Now however, Britain's decision to Brexit has left them the unloved child of the E.U. and it is they who are seeking favours from those still within the fold.(eg free trade) I can't help but feel that the Portuguese no longer feel the need to tug the forelock and that this has emboldened the Supreme Court to go further than expected in their statement. Will the British establishment now risk alienating the Portuguese by being seen to back those who wish to overturn its Supreme Court ruling? I doubt it. The McCanns are sabre rattling to save face.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Joana Morais has just published the following concerning the filing for annulment of the Supreme Justice Court, with which we agree with and recommend that it be shared:

    https://joana-morais.blogspot.pt/2017/02/maddie-parents-accuse-supreme-court.html

    "Even though we don't know if this is a request to annul the Supreme Court ruling or if it is, as was published in the UK media, a formal complaint against the ruling or judges, a few thoughts:

    An annulment can be requested of a ruling, even of a Supreme Court ruling. This must be done on a point of law. Since the ruling is extremely well structured, there are no technical points they can pick, the likely outcome is that this will be denied .

    Fact of the matter is that the judges wrote several pages to come to the conclusion of the not cleared explanation and were explicit that it was not up to the Supreme Court to deliberate on their innocence or guilt.

    There is a massive difference between being innocent and being cleared by an archival. The McCanns can always claim they are innocent but they cannot claim they have been declared innocent by the archival.

    This issue was only addressed as a reply to the points in the appeal, points that were made by the McCanns themselves.

    An annulment can only be considered on points of law, which would never include frivolity as an allegation.

    In no way do we believe that frivolity may be invoked regarding the explanation of what a shelving of an investigation process means, about three Supreme Court judges when writing a structured and impartial decision which is available to read in its entirety and due context.

    Finally, it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

    ReplyDelete
  30. http://portugalresident.com/hysteria-mounts-as-mccann-parents-revealed-to-be-%E2%80%9Cfighting%E2%80%9D-defeat-in-portugal%E2%80%99s-supreme-court

    Posted by portugalpress on February 18, 2017
    Hysteria mounts as McCann parents revealed to be “fighting” defeat in Portugal’s Supreme Court

    Rising hysteria following the crushing defeat suffered by the parents of Madeleine McCann in the Supreme Court last month has been ratcheted up even further this weekend with news that the couple are now on the attack.

    According to a report in today’s Correio da Manhã, the couple consider the court has been “frivolous” in upholding last year’s decision, on appeal, to free former PJ coordinator Gonçalo Amaral from paying any damages for his thesis on their daughter’s disappearance: the best-selling book “Maddie: The Truth of the Lie”.

    The basis of the so-called frivolity, says CM, is the reference the panel of judges made to the couple not having been considered “innocent” in the affair (click here).

    The particular clause under attack is the one referring to the Public Ministry’s decision to drop the McCann’s ‘arguido’ (official suspect) status on the basis it had not been able to “obtain sufficient proof of the practice of crimes”, claims the paper.

    But huge question marks remain over which body the McCanns are actually complaining to, and how an annulment of a decision from the highest court in the land could be obtained.

    For the time being, CM’s story is just a small paragraph in the “latest news” stories on its Saturday back page.

    In the UK, the Daily Mail has picked it up, without adding anything new.

    Stretching the story out to nine paragraphs, the top-selling tabloid addresses a lot of its ‘gaps’: the “huge legal bill” that the couple will be facing now that Amaral does not have to pay them the €500,000 set by an earlier court, the “nightmare prospect of being sued by Amaral” for damages he has suffered over the eight years of litigation, and of course, the “devastating put down” said to have sparked this “fresh challenge”: that they had a hand in the affair - something they have always denied.

    If this was the only story to have followed the Supreme Court’s decision, it could be argued that this was ‘the next logical step’. But stories have been hitting the UK media almost daily since January 31 (when the judges’ decision was first published) - and Correio da Manhã has had its moments, too, where it claimed the McCanns have been making ‘thousands of euros’ by “selling their pain” in the form of media interviews.

    Added to the latest media circus comes a new policy by UK tabloids to seemingly allow all readers’ comments, without screening.

    Bystanders have been astounded by the venom unleashed online, with the Sun particularly allowing the kind of commentary that in the past it condemned as coming from ‘vile trolls’.

    “Suddenly, anything goes”, a UK media source told us.

    Even more bizarre have been stories alluding to the McCann’s having ‘banned’ their Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte from talking to the press (another account from the Daily Mail/ Tracey Kandohla, a reporter who writes about the Madeleine mystery for the Sun and the Mirror and is believed to be a friend of Kate McCann).

    Kandohla explains that Duarte had been “carefully considering reaction” on behalf of the couple, since the Supreme Court put down, but has now been warned by the couple: “Don’t say anything!”

    This has thrown up the contents of a BBC Panorama programme, screened years ago, when Duarte told reporter Richard Bilton that she felt “alone” and that many of her friends refused to talk to her about the case, as “everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=979aGU6Ezkk).

    Considering this is a story previously protected by top-flight lawyers - who have used the threat of legal action to silence dissenting voices - and further shielded by a high-profile press spokesman, publicity since the Supreme Court ruling appears to have gone haywire.

    ReplyDelete
  31. http://e3.365dm.com/17/02/536x302/36e0af9639df838a80c13234f732ecb4609f22b76e86488879082bd6a2f62c20_3893580.jpg?20170218225120

    Sharing front page with murderer of girls, Rose West, not a good look.

    ReplyDelete
  32. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mccanns-launch-new-court-battle-9847926

    McCanns launch new court battle against cop's claims they faked Maddie abduction - amid fears his case could leave search fund broke

    Lawyer confirmed couple are fighting a court judgment which could cost them hundreds of thousands and wipe out the “Find Madeleine” fund

    By Alan Selby
    23:00, 18 FEB 2017
    Updated00:32, 19 FEB 2017

    The parents of missing Madeleine McCann have launched a desperate bid to overturn a Portuguese court ruling which fails to put them in the clear over her disappearance.

    Yesterday their lawyer confirmed they are fighting a court judgment which could cost them hundreds of thousands and wipe out the “Find Madeleine” fund.

    This week the Sunday People tracked down the ex-detective at the centre of the misery facing Kate and Gerry, both 48.

    Goncalo Amaral led the initial ¬investigation when Madeleine vanished in May 2007 when she was three.

    Now the McCanns are fighting the latest decision by Portugal’s Supreme Court.

    The couple were ruled out as formal suspects, or “arguidos”, back in 2008 but in newly-released court papers, judges have specified that this does not equate to a ruling of innocence.

    In the 76-page ruling, the Supreme Court also said the archiving in 2008 of the criminal case into Madeleine’s ¬disappearance does not prove the McCanns are innocent. The court concluded Amaral’s book was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns. It was an “opinion” based on the case files.

    There was no defamatory intention behind it and so it is protected by “freedom of speech rights”. That ruling left Madeleine’s parents facing legal costs and the nightmare prospect of being sued by the former detective.

    Local reports yesterday said the couple were seeking to get the decision thrown out after launching a formal complaint against the judges’ findings.

    The couple, doctors from Rothley, Leics, could eventually take the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    The McCanns’ lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed a formal complaint had been made. The latest ruling means Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns compensation he was ordered to hand over two years ago over his book The Truth of the Lie.

    According to the latest accounts filed last month the couple’s Find Madeleine fund has just £200,000 left after half a million was placed in investments.

    Experts say legal fees and a possible pay-out to Amaral would easily dwarf this sum, leaving no cash left to continue the couple’s efforts to find their daughter.

    Amaral was relaxing this week in the Olivais region in the north of the capital Lisbon. A local who spotted Amaral dining told the Sunday People: “He rarely mentions it. We know who he is – everybody does.”

    A shopkeeper added: “He comes to the newsagents and then goes to one of the restaurants here for lunch.”

    Roadsweeper Enrique Gonzalez said: “It is popular with all of the police officers who live and work around here.

    “He comes and talks about the old times.”

    The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “If Mr Amaral’s current book about Madeleine or any new one he may be planning to write is published here in the UK Kate and Gerry’s lawyers will take immediate action. He needs to know lawyers are watching.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. About Selby:
      http://sellyourstoryuk.com/2016/02/14/alan-selby-and-a-spot-of-byline-banditry/
      Alan Selby and a spot of byline banditry…
      Alison Smith-Squire Comment
      Journalist Alan Selby displays extraordinary lack of moral code…
      Let’s get one thing straight. If someone has added something to a story I have written then I have no problems with a credit to that person being put on my copy.
      But as everyone in this industry knows I write my own stories. I do so for a reason – because I know if I write them they will always be spot on accurate and the interviewee will be happy with their article.
      What I do not take kindly to is some oik, who has done absolutely nothing at all to my copy in any way, sticking his name on it as well.
      Step forward Mirror reporter Alan Selby. I had never heard of Alan Selby until an interviewee told me she had contacted the Mirror paper to sell her story and he had spoken with her. She was so unimpressed she came running to me to ask if I could do the story instead.
      Which I did – that meant doing the interview, sorting the photos, writing the copy, answering sub’s queries and in her case, also researching and writing a medical box to go with the article.
      The Mirror were keen that having been told about the story, it would remain with them. I like the Mirror group – The Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People are all papers I respect and have worked with for decades. I always felt I could trust them implicitly to do a story justice and treat freelancers fairly.
      Over the next few days Alan Selby – presumably because he had let this story slip through his fingers at the outset – was clearly tasked with simply asking me when the copy would be filed. His emails asking how I was getting on were ridiculous and unnecessary frankly as every editor knows I am able to write copy extremely fast and file within hours. I do not need a reporter hassling me with stupid little emails about when will I be sending the copy over.
      However, while an irritant, Alan Selby seemed fairly harmless so I politely replied to him.
      Copy was sent. After about three tiny questions from subs that was it. Job done.
      So you can imagine my surprise when I opened the Mirror to see Alan Selby had proudly put his name on my copy.
      I have emailed Alan Selby – who describes himself on Linkedin and Twitter as ‘award winning’ to ask him what contribution he made to my story as I would love to know? When he responds I will post it here.
      However, I am afraid I am an honest journalist and I speak as I find – hence this blog. I have written on this subject before and most people already know how I feel about byline banditry. Everyone except Alan Selby it seems. Why Alan Selby thought he could get away with passing off my story as his own I have no idea, but clearly he lacks any moral code (you don’t need to be a graduate to know putting your name on someone else’s work is wrong) and I can only assume he is a bit of an idiot.

      Delete
  33. Are Mcs trying to claim that half a million in investments can't be used to pay court costs?
    What investments? In interest raising accounts or property?
    GA even had his car sequestered if I recall.
    As the original application was also done in the name of M, doesn't this also mean that any assets in her name are not protected?
    No mention of Ward of Court status of M.
    Does it still exist and if so, if permission was given to take an action in the name of M, some thought should have been given to the consequences of losing the court action.
    Now more money will be paid to Duarte for making this complaint against the SJC.
    Maybe not a great deal of expenditure as it seems to be a paper exercise, but there could also be negative consequences for Mcs if Joana Morais is correct.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ward of court point is indeed interesting. The MCs had to be authorized to represent MMC in the first instance lawsuit. Had lady Justice Hogg to decide whether MMC would or not appeal a decision that deprived her of everything requested on her behalf ? Was JH even questioned ?
      JH retired in June last year, who substitutes her ?

      Delete
  34. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2895292/infamous-holiday-villa-where-maddie-mccann-went-missing-is-closed-to-spooked-holidaymakers/

    'wiping away the horror'
    Infamous holiday villa where Maddie McCann went missing is closed to ‘spooked’ holidaymakers

    Infamous Apartment 5A has now been sold to a British gran after complaints from tourists

    Exclusive
    By Tracey Kandohla
    19th February 2017, 10:04 am

    THE holiday flat where Madeleine McCann vanished from has finally been closed to tourists after complaints they were “too spooked” to stay there.

    Infamous Apartment 5A in Portugal’s picturesque Praia da Luz has now been sold to a British gran who is enjoying holidaying there while trying to “wipe away all memories of the horror that happened.”

    The property, which the new owner is partially shielding from public view, was axed from tour operators’ recommended accommodation after stunned holidaymakers learned it was “the Maddie flat.”

    A British expat living in the resort told The Sun Online said today: “The place is no longer being used as a holiday option. I’m surprised it lasted so long as a viable let with its grim history.”

    Portuguese police fear the youngster died accidentally in the seaside resort’s sought-after property. But her parents believe she was kidnapped while they were dining in a nearby tapas bar with pals, and could still be alive.

    As the Spring holiday season approaches the ground floor, two-bedroom apartment in the popular Algarve destination is no longer available to families and couples after Maddie’s disappearance nearly 10 years ago.

    The local villager said: “Quite wrongly, many people staying there over the years were never told of its past and when they found out they were spooked out and some asked to move. But is wasn’t always possible because the complex is busy and often full.

    “There were lots of complaints from clients and unfortunately it put them off ever coming back again.”

    Whitewashed Apartment 5A in the Ocean Club was once sealed off as a crime scene as forensic experts and cadaver “blood” and “death” trained sniffer dogs scoured it after three-year-old Maddie was snatched from her bed during a family holiday in May 2007.

    But it was later re-let by posh tour operator Mark Warner, who are now understood to have completely pulled out of that holiday complex after negative “kidnapped girl” publicity.

    Tasteless “Maddie” bus tours had even been given in later years, showing ghoulish holidaymakers the flat from the street and the church where heartbroken parents Kate and Gerry McCann once prayed for their daughter’s safe return.

    A Dutch mum and her husband who stayed in the accommodation last summer blasted holiday bosses for not warning them of the sickening past.

    The middle-aged woman and her husband looked visibly shocked when they learned it was the place where Maddie had last been seen alive by her parents.

    The woman, speaking in perfect English and who declined to be named, said: “We had no idea this was where Madeleine had disappeared from. It’s terrible. No one told us when we booked the apartment, we didn’t have a clue.

    “They should have let us know because we would have chosen another villa. We will be speaking to the manager about this. I know it is the past but it is their duty to explain what happened because some people, definitely those with children, would be put off.

    “We’re here on our own but we don’t like the thought that something horrible happened to that little girl where we’re staying. It’s tragic and the worst thing that could ever happen to a parent, particularly a mother.”

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  35. (cont.)
    The holidaymaker added: “Even in Holland we all know about the Madeleine story and that she disappeared from this resort but did not dream it was from the place we booked. The villa has been renovated and decorated nicely and we will stay put. But it sends shivers down my spine to think that girl came to harm here and that all the police and dogs were searching for clues inside.”

    The apartment owner had been renting it out for many years through the Ocean Club.

    “The retired teacher from Liverpool co-incidentally called Ruth McCann – no relation to Maddie’s parents despite being from her mum’s home city – died a few years ago

    Her family who inherited the “damaged” property were desperate to sell it while still being used as a holiday but failed for a long time to find a buyer because of the history.

    A British expat living in the resort told The Sun Online said today: “The place is no longer being used as a holiday option. I’m surprised it lasted so long as a viable let with its grim history.

    “No one wanted to rent the place and no one wanted to buy it.

    “What happened to Maddie was awful and everyone hopes she can be found alive but it seems very doubtful.

    “It’s a lovely resort and although it’s still busy at times the drama surrounding that poor girl has taken it’s toll on tourism generally.”

    Portuguese police fear three-year-old Maddie died accidentally in the apartment while her parents insist she could still be alive after being kidnapped while they were dining in a nearby with seven friends.

    Former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 48, of Rothley, Leics, have vowed never to give up the search for their daughter, who would now be aged 13.

    A duty manager at the Ocean Club, which is now believed to have been re-named the Garden Club and used by Thomas Cook, said: “I’ve been told not to say anything about Apartment 5a.”

    The new owner recently declined to discuss the global fascination with her flat, saying: “I don’t want to talk about it. I’m trying to wipe away all memories of the horror that happened here.”

    She refused to say if she lived there year-round or used it as a holiday home.

    A gate to the front of the fairly exposed property – which overlooks the tapas bar where Maddie’s parents had been enjoying a night out nearly a decade ago – has now been boarded up.

    And blinds at the windows remain drawn to keep prying eyes away.

    Despite the tragic past, tourists are still tempted to the resort. Thomas Cook boasts on its website: “You’ll love the location with shops and restaurant very close to hand.

    “The beach is further afield but you’ll be rewarded with golden sands, beach bars and water sports.”

    Madeleine McCann’s disappearance is still shrouded in mystery as investigators continue to hunt for the tragic girl.

    She vanished on May 3, 2007, when her family, from Leicestershire, were holidaying in the Algarve.

    Portuguese police fear the youngster died accidentally in the seaside resort’s sought-after property.

    But her parents believe she was kidnapped while they were dining in a nearby tapas bar with pals, and could still be alive.

    This week a Madeleine McCann tour guide defended his “ghoulish” business – insisting he’s just trying to help find the missing toddler.

    As the 10th anniversary of her disappearance approaches, Gerry and Kate McCann have slammed claims they are plotting to make hundreds of thousands out of the milestone.

    The pair recently lost their latest court appeal to silence former cop Goncalo Amaral, who claims they covered up their daughter’s death in his book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Tasteless “Maddie” bus tours"

      Really?

      Delete
  36. Meanwhile in the real world the people who really should be listened to, OG officers and their PJ equivalent, remain quiet.

    ReplyDelete
  37. The McCanns are mere puppets for the Establishment and higher Elite.

    They will do what they are told to do.

    No one who is seriously mentally sound believes that it is the McCanns who have silenced their lawyer Isabel Duartes, surely not?

    No doubt there are frantic reworkings going on behind the scenes as a way further forward is sought.

    The McCanns, meanwhile, will be waiting to be told their next step.

    What fun being puppets in the mere scheme of things !

    ReplyDelete
  38. "Nobody wanted to rent it, nobody wanted to buy it"....."police fear the youngster died accidentally in the seaside resort's sought after property". Both sentences in same article! Another rushed keep the McCanns daily in the Dailies it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Last week (circa 2013) as part of Scotland Yard's decision to update the public on the progress of their 'investigative review' into the Madeleine McCann case, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood stated: "Neither her parents or any of the member (sic) of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects."

    There will be many who will be greatly surprised at those words. Not least the Assistant Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police, who stated in July 2008 that "While one or both of them [the McCanns] may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance." At that time the McCanns were attempting to gain access to all the documents held by Leicester Police regarding the disappearance of their daughter. The request was denied.

    But that wasn't the first or last time that British authorities had placed a question mark against the parents insistence that Madeleine was abducted.

    Less than a month after Madeleine's reported disappearance, Lee Rainbow, who was at that time Senior Behavioural Investigation Consultant for the NPIA (National Policing Improvement Agency), wrote a report in which he stated: "The potential involvement of the family in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann cannot be discarded, and it can be considered that, when pondering the basis for research, this hypothesis deserves as much attention as the criminal with sexual motivations that has been previously prioritised.

    ReplyDelete
  40. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/madeleine-mccann-missing-abduction-parents-legal-battle-goncalo-amaral-police-claims-portugal-a7588281.html

    Madeleine McCann's parents launch fresh legal battle over police claims they faked daughter's abduction

    Lawyer confirms money from 'Find Madeleine' fund will be used to fight ruling that failed to clear couple of involvement in child's disappearance

    Lucy Pasha-Robinson
    @lucypasha
    3 hours ago
    12 comments

    Madeleine McCann’s parents have launched a fresh legal battle to overturn a Portuguese court ruling that failed to clear them of involvement in their daughter’s disappearance.

    Kate and Gerry McCann’s lawyer confirmed they would use money from the “Find Madeleine” fund in a bid to overturn the ruling, and challenge claims by former police chief Goncalo Amaral that they had faked their daughter's abduction.

    Portugal’s Supreme Court rejected their libel appeal last month relating to Mr Amaral’s 2008 book, “The Truth of the Lie”, that alleged their three-year-old daughter had died in their holiday flat and they had faked her kidnapping to cover up the tragedy.

    The couple were successful in their 2015 libel action against the former police chief on the case, however a lower court overturned the decision in April 2016, opening them up to huge legal costs and the possibility of being sued by Mr Amaral.

    The McCanns, both 48, reportedly decided to launch the new challenge based on comments made by the judges in the 76-page ruling, which stated the decision “was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.”

    The McCanns were considered official suspects at one stage, however their “arguido” status was lifted on the same day it was issued in July 2008.

    Judges said the archiving of the criminal case did not equate to the McCanns being cleared of criminal responsibility.

    "In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime," they wrote.

    “Even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped."

    They also found Mr Amaral had not acted "illicitly" ruling the content of his book had no "defamatory intention" behind it.

    "Our opinion is that rather than an injurious animus, the intention was informative and defensive,” they wrote.

    The McCanns said in a statement after the ruling: ​"What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

    "We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course."

    ReplyDelete
  41. Jeez when did lawyers start commenting on the source of payments made from their clients

    ReplyDelete
  42. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-say-keep-9851773

    Madeleine McCann's parents say they will keep fighting libel battle with ex-cop and bring their daughter home

    Kate and Gerry McCann are making a formal complaint to Portuga's top court in a bid to stop the detective telling "awful lies" about her disappearance

    ByTracey Kandohla
    21:25, 19 FEB 2017
    Updated22:18, 19 FEB 2017

    Madeleine McCann ’s parents will keep fighting their libel battle with a former police chief because it will “empower them to help bring their daughter home”, according to a pal.

    Kate and Gerry McCann are battling to overturn a judgment in favour of Goncalo Amaral, 58, by making a formal complaint to Portugal’s top court .

    The couple, both 48, won damages from Mr Amaral over his claim in a 2008 book that they faked ¬Madeleine’s kidnap to cover up her accidental death.

    But he won an appeal on freedom of expression grounds and the Supreme Court has since rejected the McCanns’ counter-appeal.

    It leaves doctors Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leics, facing a huge legal bill. Their lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed: “They have now made a complaint over the ruling to that court, it is sort of like an appeal.”

    A family friend added: “It’s been ¬dragging on for nearly nine years and they’re not giving up for the sake of a few more months.

    “They firmly believe one day they can stop Mr Amaral telling these awful lies about their daughter’s disappearance. They need to do everything in their power to bring Madeleine home”.

    Mr Amaral led the botched hunt for ¬Madeleine in 2007 after she vanished, aged three, at the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

    He is now planning a second book based on his own experiences, potentially piling on the misery for the McCanns.

    Our sister paper the Sunday People tracked Mr Amaral down to a cafe north of Lisbon, where he was pictured drinking beer and smoking in the sunshine.

    The family friend added: “It appears he has no idea of the hurt and anguish he continues to heap on Madeleine’s poor parents.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very, very, VERY, really VERY important phrase:

      “They have now made a complaint over the ruling to that court, it is sort of like an appeal.”

      :)

      Delete
    2. For Mcs friend to accuse GA of lying is defamatory. And an appalling insult to SJC judgement.

      Delete
  43. This is really getting media attention...

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/19/new-legal-battle-for-mccanns-against-claims-they-faked-madeleines-abduction-6458128/

    New legal battle for McCanns against claims they faked Madeleine’s abduction

    Charles White Sunday 19 Feb 2017 12:22 pm

    Kate and Gerry McCann will continue their legal battle against claims they faked their daughter’s abduction.

    The couple previously lost their appeal to the Portuguese Supreme Court over a book by former police chief Goncalo Amaral, which claimed Madeline McCann ‘died’ and her ‘abduction’ was a cover-up.

    Courts had reversed a libel win against the author in 2016 and the highest court in the land supported the reversal.

    The parents of Maddie, who went missing in 2007 from an apartment in Praia da Luz, have lodged a formal complaint against the ruling.

    Isabel Duarte, their Portuguese lawyer, confirmed: ‘We delivered it’.

    Kate and Gerry now face having to pay the author’s legal fees and potentially being sued by him.

    Amaral’s book ‘The Truth of the Lie’ was published three days after Kate and Gerry were regarded as no longer formal suspects in their daughter’s search.

    The Supreme Court also claimed they were not ‘formally in the clear’ and said in court papers that the dropping of ‘arguido’ or suspects status did not equate to innocence.

    The court ruling, amounting to a 78-page document, said: ‘It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.’

    Adding stopping of the case against the pair: ‘Was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn’t managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.’

    They continued: ‘It doesn’t therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence.’

    Amaral, 57, had originally led the case investigating the disappearance of Madeleine and was ordered to pay £360,000 to the parents in a libel case.

    But that 2015 ruling has now been overturned once in April last year and now at the Supreme Court.

    The court said the author did not have a ‘defamatory intention’ and the book was not a personal and unjustified attack.

    It has been reported that Kate and Gerry are thinking of taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    When the ruling from the Supreme Court came down the couple: ‘What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

    ‘It is eight years since we brought the action, and in that time the landscape has changed dramatically, namely there is now a joint Metropolitan Police and Policia Judiciaria investigation which is what we have always wanted.

    ‘The police in both countries continue to work on the basis that there is no evidence Madeleine has come to physical harm.

    ‘We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course.’

    The court touched on Kate and Gerry’s decision to leave Madeleine alone as they went to a tapas bar with friends. Saying: ‘We must also recognise that the parents are paying a heavy penalty over the disappearance of Madeleine for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.’

    ReplyDelete
  44. Is it a surprise that Lee Rainbow's over 30 pages report isn't in the PJFiles ? Though it doesn't fit in the list of documents that the British authorities ordered not to be included in the DVD.. We would never have known the existence of that report, hadn't the MCs lodged a lawsuit against GA. Thank you, Dr Cabrita !
    As well we would never have known about Chris Eyre's justification for not releasing the LC files to the MCs, without KMC's "Madeleine". Thank you, Kate !
    What's funny is DCI Redwood seeming not to be aware of those statements when he carelessly answered some journalist that the group wasn't "of interest".
    But the unacceptable then was jumping over the so-called AG Report, which shortly but firmly describes how the reconstitution's refusal condemned the investigation to nothingness.
    Reading isn't only vocalising little black signs on a paper...

    ReplyDelete
  45. http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-fighting-overturn-12626163

    Madeleine McCann’s parents fighting to overturn court ruling over disappearance
    Legal battle could wipe out the Find Madeleine fund

    ByLorna Hughes
    16:01, 19 FEB 2017

    The parents of missing Madeleine McCann are fighting to overturn a court ruling that failed to clear them over her disappearance.

    The couple were ruled out as formal suspects, or “arguidos”, in 2008 but in newly-released court papers, judges specified that this does not equate to a ruling of innocence.

    Their lawyer confirmed they are fighting the judgment – which could cost them hundreds of thousands and wipe out the “Find Madeleine” fund.

    In the 76-page ruling, Portugal’s Supreme Court also said the archiving in 2008 of the criminal case into Madeleine’s ¬disappearance does not prove the McCanns are innocent.

    It also concluded a book by Goncalo Amaral – the ex-detective who led the initial -investigation when Madeleine vanished in May 2007 – was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns.

    The court ruled it was an “opinion” based on the case files, that there was no defamatory intention behind it and so it is protected by “freedom of speech rights”.

    That ruling left Madeleine’s parents facing legal costs and the nightmare prospect of being sued by the former detective.

    According to the Sunday Mirror, local reports said the couple were seeking to get the decision thrown out after launching a formal complaint against the judges’ findings.

    Gerry and Liverpool -born Kate could eventually take the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    The McCanns’ lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed a formal complaint had been made.

    The latest ruling means Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns compensation he was ordered to hand over two years ago over his book The Truth of the Lie.

    According to the latest accounts filed last month the couple’s Find Madeleine fund has just £200,000 left after half a million was placed in investments.

    Experts say legal fees and a possible pay-out to Amaral would easily dwarf this sum, leaving no cash left to continue the couple’s efforts to find their daughter.

    The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “If Mr Amaral’s current book about Madeleine or any new one he may be planning to write is published here in the UK Kate and Gerry’s lawyers will take immediate action.

    “He needs to know lawyers are watching.”

    Madeleine disappeared from a holiday home in Portugal’s Algarve region in May 2007, days before her fourth birthday.

    ReplyDelete
  46. The Mc Canns themselves are writing the book that they want to prevent to be publicized in the UK for almost 10 years now. Using the MSM as docile ghostwriters. It has become a never-ending story of almost biblical proportions. But the crucifixion of the protagonist takes endless time. In the absence of proper nails, maybe? It is said by 'sources' that he is killing his time while drinking beer and smoking cigarettes on the terraces in the northern region of Lisbon. 'Always look at the bright side of life, tee-dum, tee-dum, tee-dum, tee-dum... '.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the portrayal of him by the MSM in recent days is intended to reflect a calm unfazed Goncalo who clearly knows his job is done......."He comes and talks about the old times.” i.e. you eejits are the last thing on my mind.

      People shouldn't get themselves into a fit over all this nonsense of a complaint come appeal come distraction. It over and them 2 have lost. I met one McCann supporter over the weekend who ignored the supreme court ruling, ignored the clauses within the ruling and yet was almost bursting at the seams that the MCs were fighting on. My response Ha ha ha ha ha

      Goncalo you are a LEGEND

      Delete
  47. Unpublished Unknown 20 Feb 2017, 14:14:00,

    We are withholding your VERY pertinent question for now.

    We will think if we are going to publish it or not.

    Most likely we won't (we will include it in our next post if we don't) because we are not seeing how we can answer you without spoiling what we wish to say next Friday.

    Hope you understand.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Mark Williams-Thomas was going to appear on this morning tomorrow,he's since tweeted it's changed and he's writing a report and will update. Now we all know his theory Madeleine wandered off and was snatched by abductor,and he completely ignores everything else evidence wise.

    So obviously it will be a pro McCann piece,I'd rather it was Lee Rainbow personally but hey ho.

    My personal opinion is that all msm outlets should wait for a response from the supreme court then they will have the facts going forward until then I feel they should all stfu...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder who got to him...?

      Delete
  49. In no way do we believe that frivolity may be invoked regarding the explanation of what a shelving of an investigation process means, about three Supreme Court judges when writing a structured and impartial decision which is available to read in its entirety and due context.

    Finally, it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple...................one can only hope.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What can a lawyer do to save their image when losing two consecutive lawsuits, having their allegations disproved, perhaps for having made a confusion between reality and dream ? When moreover that lawyer suffered from being cruelly abandoned by friends for daring to defend victims?
      What else than heading for disaster ?
      The detail adored by the devil, here, is that it was that lawyer who provided, in the allegations, the motive for the STJ to dot the i's and cross the t's. Hence the now by the media abusive assertion "not cleared !" is the exact opposite of the ad nauseum repeated, 8,5 years ago, "cleared!". Grotesque.

      Delete
  50. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4244534/McCanns-launch-legal-fightback-against-judges-ruling.html

    Madeleine McCann's furious parents say judges' ruling that they have not been cleared of any involvement in the girl's disappearance is full of 'contradictions' as they launch legal fightback

    Kate and Gerry McCann are in a court fight with ex-police chief Goncalo Amaral
    Amaral's book'The Truth of the Lie' claims McCanns faked Madeleine's abduction
    The McCanns have said they will sue if 'The Truth of the Lie' is sold in Britain

    By Gerard Couzens for MailOnline
    Published: 08:39 GMT, 21 February 2017 | Updated: 08:51 GMT, 21 February 2017

    Missing Madeleine McCann's parents have accused the Supreme Court judges who ruled against them in their court fight with ex-police chief Goncalo Amaral of nonsensical 'contradictions.'

    Furious Gerry and Kate made it clear through lawyers that they strongly disagreed with the judges' 'erroneous' premise the lifting of their status as 'arguidos' or formal suspects did not mean they were innocent of any involvement in their daughter's May 3 2007 disappearance.

    Portugal's Supreme Court issued its devastating put-down earlier this month when it backed Amaral over his hurtful 2008 book 'The Truth of the Lie' in which he claimed the McCanns faked Madeleine's abduction to cover up her death in their Algarve holiday apartment.

    Judges angered the McCanns by claiming the July 2008 archiving of the first Portuguese probe into their daughter's disappearance 'was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes' by them.

    The couple's fight-back was laid out in a nine-page complaint revealed today, which was lodged with the Supreme Court last Friday in a bid to invalidate its ruling rejecting the McCanns' libel appeal against Amaral and the makers of a TV documentary based on his book.

    The document, drafted by the McCanns' Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte and and her colleague Ricardo Correia, says: 'The appellants understand the archiving of the case took place because during the inquiry, sufficient evidence had been collected to show the 'arguidos' had not committed any crime.'

    They said the removal of the McCanns' 'arguido' status had legally-binding connotations and claimed the Supreme Court judges' argument it could be easily altered 'lacked foundation.'

    Accusing them of acting 'frivolously' and contradicting themselves with their statements about the reasons for the 2008 probe archive, they added: 'It cannot be stated that it is not acceptable that the archiving of the case is considered the equivalent to proof of innocence.'

    Mrs Duarte confirmed at the weekend the McCanns had lodged a formal complaint against the latest court ruling, although she declined to go into detail about why and how they were fighting it.

    It was unclear today if another set of Supreme Court judges dealt with complaints about rulings - or they were handed to another judicial body to deal with.

    Amaral was ordered to pay the McCanns £430,000 by a Lisbon court in April 2015 after they won round one of their lengthy judicial battle over his book and a subsequent TV documentary.

    The former police chief got that ruling - and a ban on selling his book - overturned on appeal in April last year.

    The decision by Lisbon's Court of Appeal sparked the Supreme Court fight which was resolved on January 31.

    The full 76-page ruling which sparked the new legal challenge by the McCanns was released just under a week later.

    Judges made it clear in their decision their job was not to decide whether the McCanns bore any criminal responsibility over their daughter's disappearance and it would be wrong for anyone to draw any inferences about the couple's guilt or innocence from their ruling.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They all copy on each other instead of reading the ruling and reckon that it has merely 75 pages.
      Had Gerard Couzens, a nice guy who, in Court, took notes in Spanish, read ID's motives for appealing, he would understand the STJ decision better.

      Delete
  51. (cont.)

    But they added: 'It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.

    'In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

    'The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

    'There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling.

    'It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence.'

    They added, highlighting the McCanns' Tapas Nine friend Jane Tanner's much-questioned sighting of the suspected 'abductor': 'It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

    'However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped.'

    The Supreme Court judges said the McCanns claimed Amaral's book and the TV documentary based on the book formed no part of case files made public in 2008 and would have damaged the honour and good name of any 'innocent person who had been cleared through the shelving of the criminal investigation.'

    But they stated: 'We consider the invocation of the violation of the principle of innocence should not be taken into account here, since this issue is not relevant to the resolution of the question that needs to be decided here.'

    They said the 'crucial question' for them was how to resolve the rights of Kate and Gerry McCann to their 'good name and reputation' and the rights of Goncalo Amaral and the other respondents including the book editors to the constitutionally-inshrined right of 'freedom of expression.'

    Concluding Amaral had not acted 'illicitly,' they ruled his book was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns with a 'defamatory intention' behind it which would not be protected by freedom of speech rights.

    Describing the book and the TV documentary based on it as an 'opinion' based on the logic of facts and evidence contained in the criminal case files, they added: 'Our opinion is that rather than an injurious animus, the intention was informative and defensive.'

    The Supreme Court ruling meant Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns the compensation he was ordered to hand them after the first court ruling in 2015.

    The payment was frozen when he launched his successful appeal.

    Earlier this month it emerged the ex detective, removed as head of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance after criticising British detectives, was writing a new book about the unsolved mystery.

    It is understood he will be critical in the new book of some of the things Scotland Yard did in their review and later ongoing investigation of the case.

    The former cop insisted from day one of his court fight with the McCanns that everything he wrote in his book was based on the publicly-available case files.

    Kate and Gerry, both 48, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have said they will sue if 'The Truth of the Lie' is sold in Britain.

    They said in a statement after learning of the Supreme Court ruling against them: 'What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

    'It is eight years since we brought the action, and in that time the landscape has changed dramatically, namely there is now a joint Metropolitan Police and Policia Judiciaria investigation which is what we have always wanted.

    'The police in both countries continue to work on the basis that there is no evidence Madeleine has come to physical harm.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  52. (cont.)

    'We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course.'

    It is believed the McCanns are discussing the possibility of taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    The 20,000 page 'Madeleine files' made public in 2008 contained a report by public prosecutors which said:' No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstance of Madeleine's disappearance from the apartment…including, and most dramatically, establishing whether she is alive or dead, which seems more probable.'

    Referring to the McCanns' much-criticised decision to leave their daughter, then three, alone with younger siblings Sean and Amelie while they ate tapas nearby, it added: 'We must also recognise that the parents are paying a heavy penalty over the disappearance of Madeleine for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.'

    Portuguese police chiefs said late last year they were 'completely in tune' with British detectives still investigating Madeleine's disappearance, appearing to end years of tension between the two forces whose theories on the youngster's fate have differed wildly.

    Portuguese prosecutors reopened their probe into Madeleine McCann's disappearance in May 2014, and are now working in close coordination with Scotland Yard's scaled-down Operation Grange probe into Madeleine's fate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Says it all: The 20,000 page 'Madeleine files' made public in 2008 contained a report by public prosecutors which said:' No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstance of Madeleine's disappearance from the apartment…including, and most dramatically, establishing whether she is alive or dead, which seems more probable.'

      Delete
  53. https://m.facebook.com/ThisMorning/posts/10155218405142122:0?hc_location=ufi

    This was aomplete waste of minutes of my life I will never get back. Why this eejit gets air time isn't a mystery though. He supports neglect leading to her waking and wandering off!!
    Nobody saw her or heard her.
    She would have been wailing in the dark. Into the arms of the person who just happened to be there and took her.
    An insult to all intelligent people.
    I suppose morning TV is the best place for such propaganda.
    A Mc supporter who avoided saying what he could have said without any legal restrictions - what SJC was and what was said.

    ReplyDelete
  54. https://mobile.twitter.com/7iain7/status/834013956314382336

    Twitter concluding MWT interview a complete waste of time. Even 2 interviewers seemed bemused by it all, as if listening indulgently to a demented relative.
    The tweet sums it up: Something something legal reasons, can't say bla bla

    ReplyDelete
  55. https://www.facebook.com/groups/JusticeForMadeleine/permalink/1257506494345422/

    MWT on This Morning

    With thanks to Trish Hills Allen of the Justice for Madeleine FB group.

    ReplyDelete
  56. His theory is old, from 2009. He actually wrote a report about it. It is strange that anyone would have watched this programme expecting anything different.

    From MWT 2009 Report:
    "Conclusion
    It is acknowledged that no review about this particular case can be definitive,
    but based on the various documents which we have seen it is my opinion that
    the McCanns did not murder their daughter, or have anything to do with her
    disappearance.
    So too I would argue that Madeleine walked out of apartment 5a through an
    insecure rear patio door looking for her parents –she was then abducted. "

    http://williams-thomas.co.uk/sites/default/files/Review%20of%20Madeleiene%20McCann%20Investigation.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  57. We all know the 'unlocked door' never happened so this is complete BS...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure, the so-called unlocked door at most was left slightly open by GMC after his proud father moment. First statement, less biased statement : didn't GMC open the main door with his key that night ? It would be foolish to imagine he said it if he didn't do it, foolish also to imagine he forgot he had left the back door open half an hour before.

      Delete
  58. So Madeleine lifted the shutters, opened the bedroom window (and the front door if we take the parents' first statement as true)and the proceeded to do what Kate claimed was impossible for a 3 year old - pull back the patio door curtains, open the sliding door,close it behind her, open the gate to the steps and close that behind her - and wander into the arms of a kidnapper who just happened to be passing. Meanwhile blood residue and cadaver odour miraculously appeared in the apartment for no reason. Ye gods!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The opening of the shutters/window/curtains is simply ignored by MWT. He likely thought it would be CR risky to suggest that the MCs opened themselves (or simply said they did, words do the job without disturbing the twins) in an attempt to escape their responsibilities.

      Delete
  59. Having now watched MWT this morning can I please ask which legalities prevent the ood Morning Britain presenters from being able to question openly the evidence that points to MbM dying in flat 5A but does not prohibit MWT from being asked what his theory is on what happened ? Surely the next step would to question that theory ... have the presenters been living in a bubble of done any research? In fairness, their faces suggested they were not accepting of what they were hearing but why talk of a nonsensical restriction? Blatent lies being fed by ITV to unashamedly push the neglect myth.

    ReplyDelete
  60. So, I'm wondering, Textusa, if this MWT on 'This Morning' was just another move by 'the other side'? You said that the game had now begun. I'm assuming this is just another 'move' in which case I wonder if we will see a counter move in return... I hope so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 21 Feb 2017, 16:53:00,

      Apologies for the late reply but kind of busy trying to follow up all the information that is flooding in.

      Yes, it is a move from the other side. Will try to explain in due time :)

      As far as counter-moves, the gov front, as far as we can see, is quiet.

      Delete
  61. M.W.T. on "This Morning" also claims that it was SO warm in P.De Luz on the night of May 3rd 2007 that the apartment's door was left open -"there was no air conditioning". What on earth was Jane Tanner doing shivering in her husband's borrowed fleece? And obviously Kate was crazy to fret about Maddie catching cold in her short-sleeved p.j.s! As for "It was so dark and cold" while they waited for first light. This man should at least engage his brain through basic research before putting his mouth into gear!!

    ReplyDelete
  62. http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/astonishing-new-madeleine-mccann-theory-9860820

    Astonishing new Madeleine McCann theory revealed on This Morning 10 years after she went missing

    Investigative journalist unveils his view on the unsolved case

    By Jessica Gibb
    15:59, 21 FEB 2017
    Updated16:00, 21 FEB 2017

    Nearly 10 years since she vanished from her Portuguese holiday flat, investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas has revealed his theory on what really happened to Madeleine McCann .

    The reporter went to Portugal to report on the case just days after Madeleine went missing on 3 May 2007 aged three, from the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

    “It’s such a well trodden story by so many and such a difficult story to tell now because there are so many legal implications,” he explained on This Morning .

    But the journalist revealed what he thinks is really behind the unsolved case.

    “On that morning of Madeline’s disappearance, we do know she went to [her parents] Gerry and Kate and said: ‘Where were you last night?’” he explained.

    “Because we know the twins did wake up on days prior to her disappearance.

    "And I think as a result of that, Madeline was clearly aware they were in the tapas bar that was in the resort.

    "Now the interesting element in that is in order to get to the tapas bar you had to actually come out of the premises, walk on a public road to go back in again.

    "And that raises a concern I have in regards to Madeleine I believe woke up in the middle of the night, she went looking for Gerry and Kate and she left the apartment and went out.

    "Because we know the patio door at the back was insecure.”

    “Legally we have to leave it there,” Phillip Schofield explained to viewers.

    Madeline vanished from an apartment in Praia da Luz as her parents ate at a nearby restaurant. Detectives are said to be working on a theory that she was kidnapped by a European trafficking gang.

    Kate and Gerry have never given up hope that she could still be alive – but this year will mark the milestone 10th anniversary without her.

    Maddie, who has a distinct and inoperable blemish in her right eye where the pupil runs into the iris, would now be aged 13.

    Detectives have explored dozens of theories about Madeleine's disappearance from being snatched by paedophiles and murdered during a botched burglary.

    Despite nearly 9,000 potential sightings across the globe police have struggled to unearth any new clues.

    This is potentially Operation Grange’s final year of searching and they are concentrating solely on the fact she was sold by child traffickers – her parents’ and their first team of private investigators’ initial hunch – and could still be alive.

    Reports following her kidnap suggested she could have been smuggled to Belgium or Morocco in North Africa.

    Forensic investigations into Maddie’s disappearance just nine days before her fourth birthday were concluded last year.

    So far the inquiry, launched in May 2011 on orders of then Prime Minister David Cameron , has cost more than £12 million with topped-up funds set to run out at the end of March.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We do hope that Mr Mark Williams-Thomas has sorted out all copyright issues with Danny Collins, as this theory is in his 2008 book "Vanished".

      We wrote a post about it with that same name "Vanished":
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2013/04/vanished.html

      Words from above to be retained:
      "This is potentially Operation Grange’s FINAL YEAR year of searching and they are CONCENTRATING SOLELY on the fact she was sold by child traffickers – her parents’ and their first team of private investigators’ initial hunch – and could still be alive"

      To MWT, supposing that the "where were you?" episode was true, which we don't, we would like to ask you from where did you get the idea that "And I think as a result of that, Madeline was clearly aware they were in the tapas bar that was in the resort"?

      Did Gerry tell her "we were at Tapas" and the 4 yr old knew what Tapas was and where it was located?

      Or did Gerry take her to the terrace, pointed Tapas from there and said "next time we leave you and your siblings alone is because we are there"?

      By allowing people like MWT to call themselves investigative journalism and have him talk about this way about Maddie, the media can only blame itself for the total lack of credibility that it currently has.

      Delete
    2. Poor muddled MWT. He goes to great lengths in his TM interview to stress that Maddie asked her parents on the morning of the 3rd "WHERE were you?" when allegedly THE TWINS woke the previous night. If she knew they were in the Tapas, as she supposedly did in order to "wake and follow them" why on earth would she ask this? She would have said "We were crying when you went out to eat last night". Secondly, it was supposed to be Maddie or Maddie and Sean who cried in the most repeated versions of the parents, not the twins. Why the change? Why did they have to "leave it there" for legal reasons? Baloney!! This is a worryingly clear attempt to stifle the debate which the Portuguese S.C. ruling has permitted and encouraged. It is an unsubtle threat to the public to keep to the accepted (McCann) version of events or fear the consequences. "Carter Ruck will be after anyone who says differently" is the clear message "Look, the McCanns are prepared to sue the highest court in Portugal and are unafraid of even the august and learned m'luds over there. Given that fact,best keep your mouths shut. Team McCann are terrified that the Supreme Court ruling has emboldened people to utter another possibility than their version of events. Their arrogance reminds one of the old attitudes found in Agatha Christie novels toward inferior "Foreigners". How very dare a country's most senior judges contradict THEM!!!

      Delete
    3. OMG !!! Textusa "we" have now tetetered into" LA LA LAND" !!!! but you and I and thousands and thousands of people are just begging for someone ,just SOMEONE "whether she is tattoed all over or not"!!but is in the public eye,and is actually questioning this "cover -up"is HOPEFULLY the game changer!!! Jodie I applaud

      you !!!

      Delete
    4. "the media can only blame itself for the total lack of credibility that it currently has."
      There's nothing to do against the media, it would be censure and it would be wrong. But people have to be stimulated to think by themselves. And public media should remind that.
      Can anyone imagine a little 3/4 child asking "Where were you last night?". I don't know whether MWT has kids, but if he has, he has no memory.

      Delete
    5. AnneGuedes,

      You have slightly misunderstood our criticism because what we were criticising was the fact that MWT was allowed to bear the title of journalism.

      But about your criticism, what do you call the fact that the media doesn't report the truth? That it carefully leaves out details that are inconvenient for the official truth and allows lies that confirm it?

      Self-censorship or hypocrisy? We say the the last.

      Delete
    6. I don't reckon I misunterstood you, Textusa, because I don't disagree with the fact that "The media can only blame itself for the total lack of credibility that it currently has". But then what ? Do we have to conform to this ? My answer is no, but I understand the reasons for complying with.
      Are you aware that the House of Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport launched an inquiry into the phenomenon of "fake news" and invited submissions from members of the public. The deadline for submissions is 3 March 2017.
      https://inforrm.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/select-committee-inquiry-into-fake-news-submissions-invited-but-perhaps-not-in-relation-to-newspapers/#more-36544

      For almost 9 years news has been hammered that MMC was abducted, despite the so-called AG report. Isn't that blatant fake news ?
      Didn't it have effects (particularly in the red tops), some hideous, in mentalities ? To say nothing of the insulted ambassador of Portugal.

      Here is the link to submission
      http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/inquiry2/commons-written-submission-form/

      Delete
    7. Our apologies then!

      Thank you for the link!

      Delete
  63. Unpublished sloganman at 21 Feb 2017, 18:10:00,

    We are not publishing your comment because it promotes negligence. We will not have that here.

    ReplyDelete
  64. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-gerry-mccann-baffled-after-9863404

    Kate and Gerry McCann "baffled" after TV detective unveils "astonishing new theory" about Madeleine's disappearance on This Morning

    Kate and Gerry McCann believe their daughter was snatched by burglars or child traffickers, but investigative reporter Mark Williams-Thomas has another possible explanation

    ByTracey Kandohla Joshua Taylor Jessica Gibb
    17:50, 21 FEB 2017
    Updated17:53, 21 FEB 2017

    The parents of Madeleine McCann are “baffled” by an investigative journalist's new theory about how the youngster vanished.

    Mark Williams-Thomas, a former policeman, appeared on ITV's This Morning to voice his “astonishing new theory” about Maddie’s disappearance.

    The couple have always insisted their three-year-old daughter was snatched from a Portuguese holiday flat while they were dining in a nearby tapas bar, either by a sex fiend or during a botched burglary.

    But TV detective Mr Williams-Thomas believes the unsettled youngster walked out of the unlocked apartment searching for her parents in the poolside restaurant.

    The McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell hit back today, saying: “This is pure speculation and, as such, Kate and Gerry will not be dignifying it with any sort of comment whatsoever.”

    A source close to the couple added: “It’s baffling a television programme had him on as an authority on the Madeleine case.

    "He’s re-invented himself as a criminologist but when did he become an expert on this high-profile case? Never.”

    The friend added: “He said he had received a statement from the McCanns saying they were pleased there was an ongoing investigation which they hoped would unearth some news but they haven’t been in contact with him, neither has their spokesperson.

    “It seems he was rehashing a years-old statement that was circulated to all the media.”

    Mr Williams-Thomas revealed his theory about that fateful night in Praia da Luz in May 2007 when he appeared on the show as part of a new series on unsolved crimes.

    Speaking to hosts Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby, he echoed previously reported lines about Maddie’s asking her mum and dad “where were you last night?” and her twin siblings waking up on previous nights.

    He then stated: “The concern I have, I believe she woke up and went looking for them, she left the apartment and came out, we already know the patio door was insecure.”

    The McCann source said: “With no disrespect to this investigative reporter, he is forever trying to latch himself onto the Maddie case. He’s said this all before and he once stood outside Apartment 5A reporting his same old belief.

    “But they’re (Kate and Gerry) not going to fall out with him over this. It’s all based on speculation and it’s a free country and they’ve got enough to be dealing with.”

    Former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 48, of Rothley, Leics, believe Maddie could still be alive and have never given up hope of finding her. They face the heart-breaking 10th anniversary of her disappearance in 10 weeks. She would now be aged 13.

    Detectives have explored dozens of theories about Madeleine's disappearance from being snatched by paedophiles and murdered during a botched burglary.

    Despite nearly 9,000 potential sightings across the globe police have struggled to unearth any new clues.

    This is potentially Operation Grange’s final year of searching and they are concentrating solely on the fact she was sold by child traffickers – her parents’ and their first team of private investigators’ initial hunch – and could still be alive.

    Reports following her kidnap suggested she could have been smuggled to Belgium or Morocco in North Africa.

    Forensic investigations into Maddie’s disappearance just nine days before her fourth birthday were concluded last year.

    So far the inquiry, launched in May 2011 on orders of then Prime Minister David Cameron , has cost more than £12 million with topped-up funds set to run out at the end of March.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Excuse if this is a duplicate, Textusa .. the 'I'm not a robot' confused me :)

    It cannot be be assumed that an informative individual will ever speak on television about the evidence (which is what detectives follow not ideas) and the facts we all know of - until there is justice and suddenly they are all experts. For now however, given the recent penetrative developements in Portugal, in my opinion MWT's speil will promote a collective exploration of alternative versions to the script among the public - this is a positive as it's supported by these other recent and published developments.

    Do not under estimate the pressure on the script now, perhaps a formidable revealtion is now imminent, mathematically they have run out of cul de sacs - ironically like Jez on his night of walking down dead ends.

    Appreciating your work as always, Textusa.

    GP.

    ReplyDelete
  66. http://lifestyle.one/closer/celebrity/news/jodie-marsh-twitter-kate-gerry-mccann-madeleine-morning-tv/

    Jodie Marsh goes on a Twitter rampage about the McCann's after This Morning interview

    By Emma Dodds
    21 Feb 2017 13:30

    Jodie kicked off big time...

    The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is one of the biggest missing child cases of the last few years.

    Since little Maddie tragically disappeared back in May 2007 whilst on holiday in Portugal with her family, many people have given their opinions on what they think happened to her.

    And as the investigation draws to a close in its final year of searching for the young girl, who was just three-years-old when she went missing, investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas gave his two pennies worth to Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby on This Morning earlier today.

    But as he did, former glamour model Jodie Marsh vented her frustrations at the case, shockingly blaming Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate McCann for her disappearance.

    Whilst Mark was explaining his theory that Maddie left the holiday apartment to go and look for her parents, Jodie angrily tweeted that they "should concentrate on finding Maddie," rather than being "concerned with all this legal action."

    She first retweeted a tweet that Katie Hopkins had written, which linked to an article about the missing Maddie case, and said: "Nothing in the McCann story reads well to the mum in me. I'm not buying."

    She then wrote: "In my opinion, it's all going to come crashing down for the McCanns..."

    As people started to respond in agreement with her, Jodie retweeted one and wrote: "I must admit, if it were my child I'd be on my hands & knees digging up the earth with my bare hands! Nothing else would matter..."

    She then wrote: "My dog went missing for 10 mins the other night & I was running up the street screaming her name like a lunatic. I was beside myself...

    "And if I was so hysterical over my dog, the hysteria would be ten fold if it were my child. I wouldn't be suing people. I'd be SEARCHING."

    The 38-year-old then posted a YouTube clip of Kate McCann and wrote: "If someone told me that a void in the earth had been found I would NOT dismiss it. I would dig the earth myself!!!

    "If my child was missing, I wouldn't care who said what about me. I would just want to FIND HER!!!!!"

    Jodie retweeted one person who had written: "I was just thinking the same thing.. more concerned with getting the "suspect" status removed from them rather than finding her."

    However, not everyone agreed with Jodie. One person tweeted her: "Do you actually think they had something to do with her disappearance? I'm not too sure."

    Another wrote: "Don't jump the gun lest ye wish to be judged equally."

    Journalist Mark explained his theory on the This Morning sofa today, saying: "It’s such a well trodden story by so many and such a difficult story to tell now because there are so many legal implications.

    "On that morning of Madeleine's disappearance, we do know she went to Gerry and Kate and said: 'Where were you last night?'

    "Because we know the twins did wake up on days prior to her disappearance. And I think as a result of that, Madeleine was clearly aware they were in the tapas bar that was in the resort.

    "Now the interesting element in that is in order to get to the tapas bar you had to actually come out of the premises, walk on a public road to go back in again.

    "And that raises a concern I have in regards to Madeleine I believe woke up in the middle of the night, she went looking for Gerry and Kate and she left the apartment and went out. Because we know the patio door at the back was insecure."

    Phillip then stepped in, explaining: "Legally we have to leave it there."

    Do you agree with Jodie? What do you think of Mark's theory? Let us know over on Facebook and Twitter.

    ReplyDelete
  67. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/21/madeleine-mccanns-parents-attack-portuguese-judges-acting-frivolously/

    Madeleine McCann's parents attack Portuguese judges for acting 'frivolously' in ruling over ex-police chief

    By Telegraph Reporters
    21 February 2017 • 2:16pm

    Madeleine McCann's parents have accused the judges who ruled against them in their court fight with an ex-police chief of acting "frivolously" and claimed their argument "lacked foundation".

    Kate and Gerry McCann made it clear through lawyers that they strongly disagreed with the judges' "erroneous" premise that the lifting of their status as "arguidos" - or formal suspects - did not mean they were innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance in May 2007.

    Portugal's Supreme Court earlier this month backed former detective Goncalo Amaral over his 2008 book The Truth of the Lie, in which he alleged the McCanns faked Madeleine's abduction to cover up her death in their Algarve holiday apartment.

    Judges angered the McCanns by claiming the July 2008 archiving of the first Portuguese investigation into their daughter's disappearance "was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes" by them.

    The couple's response was laid out in a nine-page complaint revealed on Tuesday that was lodged with the Supreme Court last Friday in a bid to invalidate its ruling rejecting the McCanns' libel appeal against Amaral and the makers of a TV documentary based on his book.

    The document, drafted by the McCanns' Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte and and her colleague Ricardo Correia, said: "The appellants understand the archiving of the case took place because during the inquiry, sufficient evidence had been collected to show the 'arguidos' had not committed any crime."

    They said the removal of the McCanns' 'arguido' status had legally-binding connotations and claimed the Supreme Court judges' argument that it could be easily altered "lacked foundation".

    Accusing them of acting "frivolously" and contradicting themselves with their statements about the reasons for the archiving of the 2008 investigation, they added: "It cannot be stated that it is not acceptable that the archiving of the case is considered the equivalent to proof of innocence."

    Mrs Duarte confirmed at the weekend the McCanns had lodged a formal complaint against the latest court ruling, although she declined to go into detail about why and how they were fighting the case.

    Amaral was ordered to pay the McCanns £430,000 by a Lisbon court in April 2015 after they won the first round of their lengthy judicial battle over his book and a subsequent TV documentary.

    The former police chief got that ruling - and a ban on selling his book - overturned on appeal in April last year. The decision by Lisbon's Court of Appeal sparked the Supreme Court fight, which was resolved on January 31.

    The full 76-page ruling that sparked the new legal challenge by the McCanns was later released.

    Judges made it clear in their decision their job was not to decide whether or not the McCanns bore any criminal responsibility over their daughter's disappearance and it would be wrong for anyone to draw any inferences about the couple's guilt or innocence from their ruling.

    But they added: "It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.

    "In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

    "The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  68. (cont.)

    "There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling.

    "It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

    The Supreme Court ruling meant Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns the compensation he was ordered to hand them after the first court ruling in 2015. The payment was frozen when he launched his successful appeal.

    Earlier this month it emerged the ex detective, removed as head of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance after criticising British detectives, was writing a new book about the unsolved mystery.

    The McCanns, both 48, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have said they will sue if The Truth of the Lie is sold in Britain.

    They said in a statement after learning of the Supreme Court ruling against them: "What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

    "It is eight years since we brought the action, and in that time the landscape has changed dramatically, namely there is now a joint Metropolitan Police and Policia Judiciaria investigation which is what we have always wanted.

    "The police in both countries continue to work on the basis that there is no evidence Madeleine has come to physical harm. "We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course."

    It is believed the McCanns are discussing the possibility of taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Quick comment on MWT,didn't watch it knew what it would be and reading up I was right.MWT isn't interested in Madeleine it's about him that is painfully obvious.

    The McCann's appeal is what it is a desperate attempt to get their imaginary image back and to basically look like we honestly believed we were cleared we haven't lied all these years that's how we read it to mean when status lifted blah blah blah think you get the drift. But that's how I'm reading this they have been for the first time ever totally humiliated and by fuck hasn't it stung.
    No Portuguese police files advertised in msm all these years then bang one after the other plastered over front pages supreme court's findings..McCann's Not Cleared.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lorraine,

      You are indeed right but only partly so.

      You are missing a huge piece of the puzzle which explains all, as we hope to explain on Friday :)

      Delete
  70. If they believe they can be 'tried' in civil court on the evidence from the PJ then on the balance of probabilities they would be guilty....they were probably hoping that the SJC result would have been published after Grange published. Grange is now in an awkward position...

    ReplyDelete
  71. I can't wait to see your analysis of this Textusa. Obviously MWTs appearance on the morning TV show was intended to provoke some sort of amazement not just amount followers of the case but the general public. Everybody is now talking about it and not in a oh that's what happen rather in an OMG this case is getting so ridiculous now. I mean anybody with even the slightest interest in the case knows that that option couldn't possibly fly. I think the black hats should go back to the smelly man with the bandages on their feet wearing the dads aftershave.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Recommend reading this excellent post:

    https://joana-morais.blogspot.pt/2017/02/waging-war-on-all-fronts.html

    ReplyDelete
  73. To those wondering how new is MWT's new astonishing theory, it was published in 2008, in Danny Collins' book "Vanished"-
    http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2013/04/vanished.html

    Only 9 years new... and a different author.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I also look forward to Textusa's analysis. For me, I am thinking this MWT feature was quite a clever move. It enabled an opportunity for the Mc Canns's to react and be 'baffled'...thus creating a lovely diversion. The public can now discuss and argue whether she wandered off or was abducted. So, in my eyes, the reaction of the Mc Canns to MWT's theory was a 'staged' bafflement....

    ReplyDelete
  75. I cant wait until Friday Textusa! I also think there was a lot more to this than first appeared. It was deliberately put across as a ridiculous idea ignoring what the McCanns had claimed all along. More to it than meets the eye

    ReplyDelete
  76. The most important messages in the never ending reporting of MWT's This Morning interview are, in my mind, the repeated claims that the case is not up for full and frank discussion because of legal constraints and the "new" S.Y. theory of how peadophiles got her. They are desperate to show that the MCCanns can still stifle dissenters. The unspoken message that they are even prepared to challenge the Supreme Court of Portugal is meant to serve as a warning to lesser mortals to keep other ideas on what happened to Madeleine silent. They will grudgingly permit "woke alone and wandered" while pretending bafflement "We wont fall out with him about it" to prepare us for official acceptance that this is what must have happened. Is this where Grange is heading? Having her abducted from the apartment has become untenable as it was always such a ridiculous claim. Kate must not be let off the hook if this is so. She described how she found the apartment, therefore, Madeleine must have operated the mechanism to winch up the shutters, opened the bedroom window and curtains, opened the front door, opened the patio curtains and door and closed both behind her, Unbolted the gate to the steps and bolted it behind her before wandering off. If not she, then WHO did all this unless Kate is lying? Sorry, if this is the new narrative it wont wash.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely.
      Up to where can those acknowledged legal constraints spread ?
      They would have to admit they lied (trying to escape their responsibility, and who wouldn't understand they tried ?). Admitting it however would definitively open the Pandora box.

      Delete
  77. Prime Ministers question time contained two little gems of info relevant to McCs......

    1. From Chris Davies(question about kirsty Jones murder in thailand 17 years ago) jist of question was to ask prime minister to push authorities to use recent improvements in DNA detection! And to endevour to help bring comfort to more families who have lost loved ones abroad!!

    2.concerened Barry Pring run down in ukraine and Neil Parish claims his ukrainian wife was clearly implicated in his death....Parish urges Theresa May to raise case with ukraines PM....Theresa reply is.....its not for the British government to interfere in the legal processes of another country....understands that uk police have assisted with information....

    Just seemed pertinent to that which interests us!

    Bampots

    ReplyDelete
  78. Hi Textusa.

    Do you think the following a viable outcome?

    They take on the Portuguese "state" through European Courts.
    The Portuguese counter is to reinstate the Arguido status.
    Reasons as to why status has been reinstated are legally challenged or speculated in the media alike.
    Evidence (old and perhaps new) is published / or statement justifying status reinstatement is released.
    End game commmences. Brexit commences. UK government eventually now forced to compromise and close out.

    Too much activity too fast perhaps? I feel this is coming off back of Porto reopening of the case which has been silent since its commencement, faslely assumed as a joint operation with UK, and.. opened based on new evidence as per the statement at the time.

    Thanks

    GP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GP

      Thank you for your comment.

      Mcs speaking of ECHR is a ridiculous suggestion.

      It suggests they know the complaint will fail.

      Even if ECHR accepted which it won't, it could take years and wouldn't have any effect on current decision.

      They still have to pay all court costs and, probably, lawyer costs of all defendants.

      Hopefully will explain what we perceive the status of the game is next Friday.

      Delete
  79. Thanks Textusa...

    True indeed re. ECHR... if not through that channel I guess I hope the the rest pans out via continued challenges and provocation toward Portoguese courts via "Complaints", anullment requests or whatever that may be.

    Look.forward to Friday.

    GP

    ReplyDelete
  80. Cressida Dick is new SY chief

    ReplyDelete
  81. Not a word from Mr Murat he was given the same statis as the Mccanns so why has he not said anything and why are the british press not hounding him and photographing him eating his lunch like they have Mr Amaral.
    the McCann are truly bad parents full stop .T he twins are living a vile life with this couple no parent that loves their kids would keep putting them through this torture,they must be so unhappy and feel so unloved knowing their parents have put them to one side all these years just for the money no amount of money can make up for the loss of their sibling due to the lack of care by their parents and no amount of money can make up the time that they could have spent growing up .They are getting to the age where they want to have a little bit more freedom like all kids do but that cannot be because they will always be the McCann children and will be hounded forever.
    They may always love their mother and father but it could be a different story to like them all the McCann children have suffered sadly one is not here to say how she feels but the twins are .Not forgetting Mr Amaral children how do they feel they also have lost out on a father don't get me wrong I know he loves them and cares about them but maybe the too are resentful not in a bad way but resentful that their father was doing his job trying to find a little girl that had disappeared and the only thing her parents were bothered about was the money how sad this and how different all the childrens lifes could have been.
    For the sake of the children Kate and Gerry McCann stop and start caring about the all too soon to be adults the children involved you seem to sue everyone that says something to upset you what about the kids how do you exspect them to deal with this for the REST of their lifes,but again only you matter oh and sorry the money MONEY WONT BUY HAPPINESS and kids need love and happiness it will buy nice houses clothes,cars ,nice holidays but the anger and resentment will follow them into adult hood then can you both say we did them proud.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Suppose the MCs listen to you and become aware that they've put their kids in a hellish situation, do you think that they will be allowed to tell the truth ?
      What about all those eminent persons who believed their unbelievable story telling ? Surely their gullibility will impact their credibility. Would some kind of agreement have to be found ? I only see one solution that would permit anyone to come out of this mess with a certain serenity.

      Delete
  82. MWT should ask Sandra about the dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  83. According to Jodie Marsh's twitter account she was invited to write an article for Closer magazine's online version discussing her recent entry into the McCann case discussions via twitter. She had added a link to Peter Hyatt's "Embedded confessions" from the Richard Hall films. She claims the offer was withdrawn because of legal concerns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 22 Feb 2017, 16:24:00,

      Our opinion about Peter Hyatt's "Embedded confessions" from the Richard Hall films is expressed quite clearly in our post "To abuse abuse".
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2016/12/to-abuse-abuse.html

      Delete
  84. I think Kate and Gerry are being played like puppets... but yes, their children have been born into something over which they have no control and is likely to hang over their lives. The sooner this is brought to an end the better for everyone, and that includes the Mc Canns and everyone who has a finger in this bubbling cauldron

    ReplyDelete
  85. "The Star" today has a report of Kate McCann pouring scorn on MWT's "new" theory. She is quoted as pointing out that Madeleine would have had to close the patio doors behind her and unbolt and refasten two gates, "What 3 year old do you know who would do that?". Oddly enough she omits the shutters, bedroom window and front door, all of which the toddler would have had to grapple with too. I would have thought that a bigger no-no!!! Textusa, I do believe your post "Proof Kate McCann reads Textusa" was absolutely spot on. It seems they have been hoist with their own petard. Their insistence on how Kate found the apartment rules out "woke and wandered" so any findings must be that Maddie was removed by SOMEBODY. Bet they wish they could take back those first details re the scene. Eagerly awaiting your next analysis tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She does not posess a logical mind. It is a public way and others could have closed the gates or they could have been left open . As for the patio doors, well there are pictures of Payne's daughter trying to open them. Not that I believe MWT theory . The dogs and Martin Smith are the key.

      Moreover, why is Kate denying the obvious. She knows MWT, he was in Portugal only a few days after the disappearance in an official capacity. He wrote a very long review in 2009 saying the same things he repeated on breakfast TV and moreover, there are reports by Paulo Reis that WT Associates were in fact hired by the McCanns or their associates back in 07 or 08.

      MWT always discredited the dogs which suits the McCanns just fine. It seems that KM needs the story to be an abduction, a simple wandering away is not quite dramatic enough for her.

      Delete
    2. The wandering away would make the McCanns more accountable for the disappearance than a kidnapping, at least in the eyes of the general public, so it is logical for them not to be keen on that theory. They have never been. Quite clearly, MWT is no friend to the Truth, but he is not a McCanns friend either.

      Delete
  86. Wood for the trees'some one somewhere decided MWT should be wheeled out to spout his old new theory about woke and wandered,thus showing that abduction from the apartment is not necessarily a line of enquiry being followed,there are other alternatives,but why? are the black hats beginning to show their hand? maybe Textusa can explain their thinking in regards to this in the next blog.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Very, very interesting article from Australia:

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/maddie-mccanns-parents-need-to-move-on-for-their-kids-sake/news-story/3abc612fcf35abb9d81ff9ca1f72b5a2

    Louise Roberts
    February 22, 2017 1:00pm

    Maddie McCann’s parents need to move on, for their kids’ sake

    Only Madeleine McCann and her presumed abductors know what really happened the night she went missing, but none of them are available to reveal the brutal truth.


    Maddie should be 13 now, armed with an iPhone and cocooned in family love and the carefree discoveries of teenage life in middle England.

    Instead, we know her as the international face of missing children, a statistic aged three while on holiday with her parents in Portugal 10 years ago.

    There isn’t a single clue as to whether she is alive today but the lucrative whodunit industry dogging her parents Gerry and Kate, who deny any part in her death, rumbles on.

    But it’s time for the McCanns to turn off the legal tap and focus on the family life they have left.

    Maddie was asleep in the holiday flat alone with her twin siblings while their parents ate tapas in a bar 50 metres away. It was a spring evening in May 2007.

    She disappeared and the guilt and the blame game began for them. There is no doubt they were remiss in leaving her alone — even Gerry said it was a mistake.

    The couple are emotionally paralysed not only by her disappearance but by their consciences, never shaking off the sick feeling that they were not there when Maddie needed them. And the public has never let them forget it.

    This week the former Portuguese detective, who led the initial and highly-criticised probe into the little girl’s disappearance, was back on the controversy gravy train with more sensational claims.

    The McCanns faked the abduction, according to Goncalo Amaral, to cover up the death of their eldest daughter in their holiday flat in Praia da Luz in the country’s south.

    Maddie’s legacy has gone from a relentless search for clues to a ruinous, exploitative and mind-blowingly expensive war between her parents and anyone who challenges their steadfast belief that a stranger abducted her.

    Even yesterday a UK TV show fielded unproven theories that she woke up and wandered off, looking for her parents.

    It’s time for Gerry and Kate, trapped on a grief and reputation treadmill, to change focus.

    Time to get busy living, ditch the reputation management and let the chips fall where they will.

    Time to give Maddie’s siblings Amelie and Sean, now 11, the best of what childhood years they have left before they are adults.

    Kate revealed that, despite not growing up with her, these siblings remember their older sister and “want her back”. It is gut-wrenching.

    This week the couple lost their appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court to stop publication of Amaral’s book The Truth of the Lies, just days after they were told they were no longer suspects.

    Last year they won a libel case against Amaral and $585,000 damages. This has also been quashed. They face being sued by him and more legal costs.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  88. (cont.)

    Meanwhile the Supreme Court in a 78-page ruling says they are “not formally in the clear”. Next stop is apparently taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

    All the while, the waters get muddier and the major players in this tragedy get further distracted by why it all started in the first place.

    And I speak with more than a passing interest in this case. I was a reporter in London when the story broke and my son was the same age as Maddie. The couple hired private detectives to continue the investigation until Scotland Yard set up its own inquiry, Operation Grange, in 2011.

    Despite tips leading investigators from South America to a paedophile ring in Germany and even under the concrete floor of a UK shopping centre — a vindictive call I fielded one day on this story — she is still missing.

    Kate, emotionless and purse-lipped in public, was likened to Lindy Chamberlain, I observed while covering the case, because she didn’t cry and rant for the cameras. Who owns a How To guide on appropriate decorum if your child vanishes?

    There was unprecedented vitriol from armchair critics for these two “uppity” middle class GP parents who “thought they knew better than anyone else”, I was told.

    They left the child alone, a mother who didn’t know them screamed in my face during a round of interviews.

    “What did they expect?”, was the frequent, illogical and cruel retort. Any working class parents would be hauled upon child abandonment charges, was the repeat argument.

    The McCanns should see that pursuing a legal battle serves no other purpose than to provide notoriety and invaluable publicity to the people they are trying to silence.

    Of course I am not saying they should give up hope but maybe the time has come to turn the page on this chapter. There are other children in this family who are victims in their own right.

    Surely they have some right to fade into the background and find some kind of a normal life away from the glare of scandal and innuendo.

    I could never imagine giving up hope to find a missing child but I would not sweat over what was said about me either.

    None of it is going to bring Maddie back. Only the perpetrators know where her body is, who took her, where they took her. And why.

    The only “winners” here are lawyers and so-called authors still making a buck from the blonde preschooler with the signature blemish on the blue iris of her right eye.

    ReplyDelete
  89. There is to much water under the bridge for walk and wander even people with only a mild interest in the case wont buy that. Very interesting point Anneguedes makes the mccanns are long out of the picture as far as turning the clock back and coming clean. Set aside the swingers and the family of swingers there are so many people who backed their story that if it broke it would be the ruination of careers. When abduction was running high in the uk mark harrison and martin grimes were pursuaded that their careers lay outside the uk. What of the likes of Kelly, brunt, thomas, gamble and co. They cant be like your woman from loose women who made a wee cough cough interview about being fooled by karen mathews a case that lasted the best part of 6 weeks and claimed to be fooled. This has gone on for 10 years and they have been heavy involved too involved to make a cough cough interview. Wouldnt this bewonderful if this was the case t not only cemented fake news but o brought it down

    ReplyDelete
  90. Well, at least the news waters are muddy : "This week the couple lost their appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court to stop publication of Amaral’s book The Truth of the Lies, just days after they were told they were no longer suspects.
    -- Who, reading this, will understand that the Public ministry shelved the case through a dispatch, that one of the mechanical effects was to put an end to the MCs' arguido status and furthermore that the dispatch is neither permanent nor definitive and has not the value of a judgement, judgements being the privilege of judges, not of prosecutors ?

    "Last year they won a libel case against Amaral and $585,000 damages".
    -- It wasn't last year and it wasn't a libel case !

    "Meanwhile the Supreme Court in a 78-page ruling says they are “not formally in the clear”.
    -- In that part of the ruling the judges were just replying to the MCs' allegation that the shelving dispatch had established their innocence (the judges have to answer any allegation of the appellants).

    And so on..

    "Post-truth" was the 2016 winner word elected by the Oxford Dictionaries, as we live in a "post-truth" age that doesn't care about objective facts.
    After all aren't the appeals to emotion and personal belief, supported by fake news becoming viral through the Web, more influential in shaping public opinion ?


    ReplyDelete
  91. Another relevant story:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2941709/apartment-in-praia-da-luz-madeleine-mccann-vanished-from-sold-to-british-gran-for-255000-half-the-asking-price/

    maddie flat sold
    Apartment in Praia da Luz Madeleine McCann vanished from sold to British gran for £113,000 – half the asking price

    Kathleen Macguire-Cotton said she has been staying in the property herself after secretly buying it years ago

    Exclusive
    By NICK PARKER and JOHNNY DILLON
    23rd February 2017, 10:00 pm

    THE apartment Madeleine McCann vanished from has been sold to a British gran for half the asking price.

    Apartment 5a at the Ocean Complex in Praia da Luz on Portugal’s Algarve had been on sale for £255,000 – £50,000 less than identical properties nearby.

    But property records obtained by The Sun reveal the white-painted ground floor flat has now been sold to widow Kathleen Macguire-Cotton for just £113,000.

    Mrs Macguire-Cotton, in her 60s, said she has been staying in the property herself after secretly buying it years ago and is not advertising it as a holiday let.

    And she vowed never to let in snoopers who still stop by and peer inside the holiday home from where three-year-old Maddie vanished in May 2007.

    Kathleen, from Southport, Merseyside said: “I’ve stayed in that apartment for years and bought it years and years ago.”

    Asked whether she would allow in Maddie sightseers, she told The Sun: “I’ve been offered money by the whole world but I’m not interested.

    “I don’t think that’s very fair to the McCann family or the people of Praia da Luz, upsetting everybody – it’s terrible.

    “It happened a long time ago and I don’t have any opinions on it.”

    Former British owner Ruth McCann - no relation - spent years trying to sell the smart two-bed flat close to a pool and restaurants.

    But prospective buyers ran a mile when they learned its dark history.

    Madeleine vanished after being left in the unsecured property while her parents Gerry and Kate went for a tapas meal nearby with friends.

    Her parents and British police believe the tot - who would now be 13 - was kidnapped after a bungled break-in.

    But Portuguese authorities initially declared Kate and Gerry, from Rothley, Leics as suspects and continued to point the finger in appeal judgements issued last week.

    Sick tour guides have been running Madeleine McCann trips around Praia da Luz which take in the flat and the tapas restaurant.

    (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  92. (cont.)

    Mrs Macguire-Cotton told friends she plans living in the apartment most of the year as part of her sunshine retirement plans.

    Ruth McCann said before selling when she decided to take the property off the market in 2011: “The property has had several viewings.

    “But as soon as women buyers are told it was the apartment that Madeleine was taken from they immediately pull out.

    “A lot of couples have shown an interest. The man usually makes the first approach and a meeting with the estate agent is arranged.

    “But before agents show people round a property in Portugal, they are required to tell them about previous owners.

    “As soon as the female member of the viewing couple learns about the link with the McCann family, she says ‘no’ to the deal.

    “Women are concerned that the flat will continuously remind them of Maddie’s tragic disappearance.”

    Retired teacher Mrs McCann ended up asking the Ocean Club to let it to holidaymakers again in the spring of 2011 after giving up trying to sell it.

    But bookings were so slow they did not cover the cost of her outgoings on the property.

    The tour guide organising trips to the apartment and other spots linked to the Madeleine McCann case has defended his business.

    The unnamed organiser, who writes a blog called “Shining in Luz”, said he was just “trying to progress the case.”

    He wrote: “Luz Tours are for people with considerable expertise in the Madeleine McCann case.

    “I don’t think there is a way to commercialise Luz Tours and I wouldn’t want to even if it was possible.”

    Gerry and Kate will fight Portugal’s recent Supreme Court judgement backing ex police chief Goncalo Amaral over his 2008 book “The Truth of the Lie.”

    The court said he was was entitled to claim in the book that Madeleine died in the holiday apartment and the couple faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.

    Judges overturned the couple’s 2015 libel win against the ex-detective, leaving them facing a huge legal bill and the prospect of being sued by him.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Hello Textusa Sisters, very good ! Suspicious of Kandohla's words now, copy of the mirror, your post, Textusa 19 Feb 2017, 23:05:00 "A family friend added: “It’s been ¬dragging on for nearly nine years and they’re not giving up for the sake of a few more months."

    What if the '10 years' has significance for a WOC ? Are these parents abiding their time ? what if the UK justice System makes a decision after 10 years ?

    Thanks !

    ReplyDelete
  94. What a pile of steaming chocolate logs this stuff is!! Almost Fake news is alive and kicking from those who courted Leveson. What is this...

    Kathleen, from Southport, Merseyside said: “I’ve stayed in that apartment for years and bought it years and years ago.”
    Yet a few sentences later we have Ruth McCann taking it off the market in 2011.....
    Hardly years and years ago that Kathleen bought it.... a few and given Ruth took it off in 2011 it must be 2012 earliest that Kathleen bought the place so maybe five at most....and unlike a Grimm fairy tale only just years and years ago.

    Bampots

    ReplyDelete
  95. Addendum to above 21.54.....from Irish Independant.....

    The reputation of Apartment 5A goes before it. Put on the market by its owner, Ruth McCann (no relation to the McCanns), it was later withdrawn from sale. The flat's proximity did not deter Lesley Peeke-Vout, from Newcastle, from buying a neighbouring ground-floor property.

    "Very few people rent 5A," says Mrs Peeke-Vout. "I haven't seen anyone in it since last year."

    She believes Madeleine's disappearance has had a negative effect on Praia da Luz, but the current problem for the resort is recession.......

    So the time span looks to be even shorter.....can we assume by the years and years its at least two?
    Also in article Rev Hubbard mentions Kate returning every 6months and visiting said apartment.....
    Can we trust even the most basic of information to be true??

    Very quick survey to read full article....and is /was very quick!

    http://m.independent.ie/lifestyle/madeleine-mccann-few-people-rent-apartment-5a-since-maddie-vanished-26850396.html

    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