Friday, 3 March 2017

The McCann trial

1. Introduction

Looking at the picture above, the man with a beard in the centre is holding a pitchfork. The woman a torch and the man behind an axe.  We are trying to be helpful. To let people know which is which.

People may not be aware but the McCann trial in Britain has begun and is taking place and from what we have witnessed, we think it’s best clarify what objects are involved in a lynching mob as we certainly don’t want to see people looking silly trying, for example, to light up a pitchfork.

Last week, we showed how – and why – the McCann complaint against the Supreme Justice Court had been a manoeuvre to regain, even if only temporarily, the ‘innocent-look’ for the McCanns.

To sum up a very long post, it was to have the McCanns continue to be perceived as being declared innocent by the Portuguese when government has to decide about granting or not Operation Grange further funds for the next fiscal year.

That was, or is, a risky move, or one filled with uncertainty.

Uncertainty not about the outcome of the complaint but because it may not convince the government and it may even backfire as the response from the Supreme Justice Court will highlight even further how the McCanns were never cleared.

But there’s one thing that there’s absolutely no uncertainty about: how the McCanns are to look neglectful.

It benefits all scenarios, even truth, or partial truth as we call it.

By concentrating all bad imagery on the McCanns beforehand, it focuses the beam of the spotlight just on them and that leaves all others caught just by a slight twilight or not even no light at all.

Both in the largely undefined, very vague and quite obscure European human trafficking gang scenario and in the archival one, the negligent McCanns are an absolute requirement.

2. Negligence and Maddie’s death

Negligence has had quite the attention lately.

And because it is walloping the McCanns it is getting a lot of support.

We think people should stop for a minute to think before applauding negligence the way they are. Just ask themselves how negligence fits in with Maddie’s death involving her parents.

Negligence and Maddie’s death are olive oil and water, no matter how hard or how long you swirl them together they will never mix up.

The only scenario for both negligence and death to fit together somehow, and please do take note of the somehow, is the sedation one.

To newcomers, the sedation scenario would be the McCanns having overdosed Maddie with sleeping inducing drugs to go on a binge and the whole hoax would be to hide that fact from authorities.

Notwithstanding that if this group was as powerful as some say they are, it would never allow for an autopsy to take place and if it did the results would be stifled.

One has to wonder how blood fits in such a scenario, as the only plausible explanation would involve the unblocking of Maddie’s air ways and for that to have been, the parents or whomever, would have to have been present while she was suffocating, otherwise why unblock the air ways?

If they were present at the time of her death, then negligence wasn’t happening.

Plus, an overdose in sedation, as far as we know, does not cause suffocation.

But even if it did, and please remember that this exercise is to try and join up negligence with death by sedation, then it would mean that they would have gone to dinner negligently and upon their return they would have encountered Maddie suffocating and rushed to help her, only a minute too late.

But for that to have happened, it would mean the dinner – otherwise when did they abandon the kids? – had to be quick and early because for the alarm to be given at around 10 pm, it means returning, seeing an asphyxiating Maddie, trying to help her by freeing up the airways that would justify the blood spatters, realise and come to terms that she was dead, decide on the hoax, clean up the apartment and go back and pretend dining (again?) and raise the alarm to have been done before that time.

Is this minimally realistic? Even if it was, which it isn’t, there’s the problem that Tapas staff said the group was at Tapas as of 20:30 and stayed there until the alarm.

And on the other nights the group is said to have stayed there until around midnight, so why return earlier to apartments on Thursday?

So, when did they neglect the kids that night so the sedation scenario would be possible? It isn’t.

Negligence and sedation seem, on a first look to fit, but upon analysis they don’t. Thus we’re asking readers to note that somehow just now.

In reality, there’s no scenario that makes negligence fit together with the McCanns being involved in her death.

Independent of how the reader thinks Maddie died and of who killed her, by accident or not, the blood in the apartment states that someone, the person or people who killed her, by accident or not, was or were present.

Even if blood came from unblocking the air ways, that means someone was there.

If the reader believes, as we do, that the blood found in the apartment is from Maddie at the time of her death and believes as we do that the McCanns and/or one or more of the remainder T7 were present when she died, then that same blood rules out negligence completely.

The more people pursue the alleged fact that the McCanns were negligent the more they are distancing them from her death.

Very simple, and very straightforward.

3. Death and Maddie

Does the reader remember the good old days when the word ‘death’ was associated with Maddie in the British media?

Oh, wait, it was less than a month ago!

Fascinating how the connection between ‘death’ and the McCanns has almost gone with the wind so quickly.

The reader may think it’s because they are trying to put it behind them.

However if the reader thinks the association of the word death with the McCanns is the end of them please think again.

Maddie’s death is to be an integral part of both the European human trafficking gang scenario and in the archival one.

Only by including that fact, that Maddie is dead, will the dog alerts be ‘explained’, as well as giving reason for Andy Redwood when he said that there was every reason to believe that Maddie never left the apartment alive.

Until recently, and we were even asked that question by a reader, we wouldn’t mind if negligence was the option taken.

We then answered the reader that if that meant having the players sitting at the table and finally playing, the game openly, then we would welcome that or any other option.

We said that based on one simple fact, and that was that we were living in a society where facts were facts. But recently, we have witnessed that it is not so at all. And we’re not even being political.

The Ben Needham case has shown us that fact can be created and used to slap our face with it as the official reality.

It matters not if something happened, what only matters is if the due authorities pronounce it happened, because if they do that, then it has happened even if it hasn’t.

And that has even happened in the Maddie case.

One just has to remember Crèche Dad who is a man authorities say he was there and then, and even though we all know he wasn’t, officially he was and that means that him being there and then was from that moment reality even though it wasn’t.

Back to death, how will they fit Maddie’s death into their desired narrative?

If one reads our post “Third Option” which is basically a prediction of what the other side is currently trying to pull off, Maddie’s death is a part of it very clearly.

Or, to sum up, the McCanns were negligent and left the kids, along came the evil men who killed Maddie inside the apartment and took her body away.

In that post we debunked it.

Only problem with that debunking is that we used reason. We showed very clearly that there was no time for the cadaver scent to develop and that it would be impossible to explain the scent in the Scenic.

But Ben Needham’s toy car has shown all of us how the impossible is just the possible yet to be invented.

A car found half a mile from the farmhouse, by bulldozers and with no media noticing that it had been found even though they were right there, is sufficient evidence to allow the police to come to the firm conclusion that Ben died by an accident near the farmhouse.

Either the toy car had some sort of tape recording device that we are unaware of, we cannot see how such conclusions could be reached from such an object.

And maybe because we are not alone in questioning this, it explains why South Yorkshire Police has since not detailed how it came to such a conclusion.

They just said it was, and we are all expected to nod our heads, accept it was and move on.

In the Maddie case, Operation Grange can use the exact the same shameless brazenness and just tell us what we said above, that the McCanns were negligent and left the kids, along came the evil men who killed Maddie inside the apartment and took her body away, and then tell us to move on.

We have already seen that the cadaver scent was left out of the Daily Mail article that mentioned only the blood alerts.

And then dismissed said alerts as possibly not being from human blood.

That will be the first tactic to pull off Maddie’s death, just say Maddie is dead and not explain why that conclusion was reached.

Never mention, the cadaver scent.

The blood, as shown, can be easily explained both in apartment and in the vehicle.

About the death scent, any question will be ignored and if this is the option officially taken, no media will dare speak of it.

We on the internet will shout and holler but will be ignored.

It will be left to people like Insane, to justify that all is due to contamination.

That Maddie died in the apartment, killed by the European human trafficking gang and not by the evil McCanns who were drinking their hearts away at Tapas, and by misfortune Kate’s clothes were contaminated and that in turn contaminated the closet, the shrubbery in the backyard and evidently the Renault Scenic.

But, as we said, the idea is to ignore cadaver scent. As per, we will see later, the Jodie Marsh incident.

And to those thinking that is simply not possible, let us remind them that we have already seen the following: blood being non-human blood, Mr Smith not wearing glasses and Ben’s toy car.

When there’s a will there’s a way, and these days when there’s that will, then the way, even if illogical, unreasonable or just a big huge lie, will be truth.

Keela can be made out to be useless and Eddie will ‘only’ serve to confirm that Maddie never left the apartment alive.

Notice, the dogs will be used in the narrative, their findings completely distorted.

Why would any human trafficking gang take a dead child with two live ones to take, is something the narrative will find a solution to, and if it doesn’t, it will be made sure such inconvenient questions are simply not asked in the media and are to be ignored on the internet.

4. The other side’s tactics and objectives

Negligence only significantly benefits the government in the truth scenario but is absolutely essential for the patsy and archival ones, those pursued by the other side.

So negligence is their main effort in pressuring the government into going their way.

But the other side is acting on various fronts, or vectors, and not only on that.

Fortunately, and this went unnoticed, we had someone write the “Other Side’s Manual” and this happened in… Australia.

We think it happened there as if to test the waters far away from the UK.

The author is the first to recognise that she has a connection in the case: “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”

A journalist in the centre of the 2007 storm as it happened. Storm, as in the media playing games with all of us then.

We are speaking of the article by Louise Roberts published in the Australian paper the Daily Telegraph, on Feb 22: “Maddie McCann’s parents need to move on, for their kids’ sake”.

Let’s then use quotes from this article to exemplify exactly what the other side intends to achieve.

Vector #1 – Promote neglect

“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.


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.””

We will evidently come back to this but we would like readers to retain for now this last phrase: “Any working class parents would be hauled upon child abandonment charges, was the repeat argument”.

It’s a very important sentence.

Vector #2 – Assume death

“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.”

We have already handled this but please note how vague it is by saying it was “perpetrators”, makes it suitable for it to have been the infamous European human trafficking gang and distances death from parents.

Assume death but stay as far as possible away from detailing it in any way.

Anything linking the parents to that is strictly forbidden, as it is to be the European human trafficking gang.

Vector #3 – Make McCanns fade away

“But it’s time for the McCanns to turn off the legal tap and focus on the family life they have left.


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.


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.”

The article speaks for itself.

Vector #4 – Discredit Portugal

“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.”

Dismisses Mr Amaral’s claims by saying that he’s just on a gravy train.

To the above, please add “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”

Mr Amaral, says the article, is just a greedy notoriety seeker and the McCanns are helping by giving him free and “invaluable publicity”.

In this vector frivolity is included with which the Supreme Justice Court was accused, as reported by the Daily Mail, by the McCann legal team.

Such an accusation, however groundless it is, makes the Portuguese justice system flawed and biased before the eyes of the British public.

It explicitly claims that a decision from the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court can be frivolous and it implicitly says that it may have done so in the past. Or, in other words, its decisions are not to be trusted, or at least, given with a significant amount of error.

This has 2 objectives.

On one hand, pass the image that the McCanns are being persecuted by an obsessive cop helped by a morally corrupt third world justice system and on the other give a reason, and make it be quite understandable to its citizens, as to why the UK has come to protect 2 of its citizens.

Did the Portuguese say the McCanns were not cleared? Well, it would be expected wouldn’t it? And even, look people, the resentful Portuguese wanting so much to charge the McCanns with anything concerning Maddie’s life, were they able to? No, of course not. Of course they weren’t able because no matter how hard they tried, and they did, they couldn’t undermine the unshakable innocence of the couple could they?

So, they will say, it must be concluded that it’s absolutely ludicrous to even think the McCanns are involved in any way in her death.

About them leaving her and her siblings all alone, well, that’s completely different story… but don’t worry, we are dealing with that.

Vector #5 – Discredit truth-seekers

“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.


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.


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.”

This is a very complex vector, the most difficult to understand and the most brilliantly played by the other side, as they are also throwing into the bonfire those they are using to help make neglect sink in.

In this vector, one must include the articles about Apartment 5A, rehashing the Ghoul Tours but now adding that people – we would really love to know who – have offered money to visit the apartment.

a. Apartment 5A and Ghoul Tours

The blog promoting these tours is again named to facilitate it being searched and, as we showed in our post “The messages”, it is to make people go and look and, due to its politeness and apparently good research, find out that the internet (as the blog is then supposed to represent all of us) agrees that there was indeed an abduction and in no way were the parents involved in Maddie’s disappearance.

But the main point of these articles is that those interested in wanting to know what happened are morbid and ghoulish people.

b. Katie Hopkins

Then here we have the current wave of people in the media supposedly promoting truth, or to be clear, really letting the McCanns have it.

We are thinking of the following names and listing them by chronological order: Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh and Shannon Mathews

Ms Hopkins after it being called to her attention, doesn’t tweet anything similar to the McCanns being involved in Maddie’s death nor in the following cover-up as per Mr Amaral’s claims.

And, by the way, not a word to recommend his book.

She only likes to perpetuate how badly negligent the McCanns are. And how many people are reading her. As if Maddie had a voice she would say, I’m gone because and just because my evil mummy and daddy abandoned me.

And she has reached millions.

Millions of people who are now, thanks to her, convinced Maddie was left alone and we will never know what happened to her.

Because we think that when she says that we are close to knowing what happened to Maddie, she’s just referring to all are soon to discover is that what happened was that Maddie was left alone and because of that suffered the fate she did.

A supposed reality that has supposedly been hidden from the public until now: officially the parents are indeed responsible because they were, wait for it, neglectful.

That supposed truth, let’s be frank, was never voiced until now. Up until now, the McCanns were said to have been responsible parents who took an understandable decision that turned out to be tragic, so saying now, openly and officially, that instead they were neglectful is quite, officially, the novelty. 

c. Mark Williams-Thomas

Then we had Mark Williams-Thomas selling a theory on ITV – certainly by coincidence, NOT – that isn’t even his, but published by Danny Collins in 2008, before the files were released, in his book “Vanished”.

A theory whereby Maddie, the 4 yr old wonder-girl, who was able to know not only that her parents were in the Tapas esplanade, as to know where that esplanade was and how to get there from the apartment.

At least the original theory, the one from Danny Collins, although ridiculous had the decency to stop at Maddie wandering off into the street looking for her parents without knowing where they were, and was probably taken by gypsies. He even made some inquiries about gypsy camps.

Interesting to know that Mark Williams-Thomas has evolved in thought about what happened to Maddie.

In a CNN article published on Nov 3 2007 “Mom: Madeleine out there somewhere” this is written:

“Mark Williams-Thomas, a former detective and child protection expert, said the two most likely scenarios are that Madeleine was killed by accident and her death was covered up or that she was abducted.”

We would really like to know what was it that has made him change his mind from his “two most likely scenarios.”

People called out Mark Williams-Thomas’ bluff on his theory, thinking that they had accomplished their mission, not realising that it was never about making that theory credible but to further ingrain the premise in which it is based on: negligence.

Out came the McCanns allegedly baffled with this 9 year old new astonishing theory, which Kate already has commented on her book and Clarence Mitchell has acknowledged the McCanns were given manuscripts of Collins book (interesting they forgot to mention now they had read this theory somewhere before) contradicting the theory but not denying they left the children alone, thus confirming the neglect. Yes, we left the kids alone but in no way could Maddie wander off as there were 2 gates…

d. Jodie Marsh

Jodie Marsh followed, supporting Katie Hopkins.

Jodie Marsh‏ @JodieMarsh
@BonStine I'm not bullying anyone. I'm entitled to an opinion & the FACTS are there. Even if you think they're innocent;they LEFT kids ALONE
6:34 pm 24 Feb 2017”

We think Jodie Marsh was a typical case in which a friend of a friend is not necessarily a friend.

We think she came into the picture because she picked up from Katie Hopkins and so was welcomed and given visibility by the other side.

We say this because she wasn’t properly indoctrinated, it seems. At 6:34 pm she was one of the team but at 6:36 stopped being because she wandered off into cadaver odour territory and she shouldn’t have:

Jodie Marsh‏ @JodieMarsh
@BonStine and I’m not name calling. I’m simply saying do the research. The cadaver dogs found traces of corpses apartment etc… #weird
6:36 pm 24 Feb 2017”

Jodie Marsh‏ @JodieMarsh
@happyhammer74@BonStine to my knowledge, cadaver alerted in apartment, in Boot of car and on kate’s clothes
8:11 pm 24 Feb 2017”

Once she stepped over the line, by referring to cadaver odour while dissing the McCanns she not only was immediately dropped as they brought in a heavyweight to counter-attack: Kerry Needham.

This was in the article by Mel Fallowfield and Siam Goorwich, “Why are Madeleine McCann's parents Kate and Gerry under fire again?”, published Feb 28 2017.

“Kerry Needham, 44, whose son Ben went missing in 1991, hit back at Jodie explaining why she believes the McCanns’ are right to clear their names.”

The article in the paper edition of the magazine:

“Kerry Needham, 44, whose son Ben went missing in 1991 backs the McCanns’ bid to clear their names. She says: 

“Jodie Marsh has no idea how she would react to this situation - she’s not the mother of a missing child.

Nobody has a clue what they’d do until they’re thrown into a situation where they’re living daily with the nightmare of having a child go missing.

Of course, anyone - including myself - would  be digging the dirt with our bare hands if we thought it would find our child, but I’d also be fighting to clear my name against any false accusations.

Gerry and Kate have every right to ensure they keep their reputations intact.

Their other kids will read these reports and may very well ask why their parents don’t defend themselves if they didn’t do so. I’ve been very lucky with the support I’ve had and only receive the odd negative comments, but even those few remarks devastated me.

The McCanns have had to fight to beat off critics from every direction, which is horrific.

They’re in a no-win situation-if they ignore such accusations, people will say they aren’t fighting them because it’s true. On the flip side, when they fight back some people say it’s because they have something to hide.

I know what it’s like living with the pain of wondering whether you will see your child again-every day is a battle. Jodie doesn’t have the right to judge.””

Do note that the right clearance of name comes in the sub-heading. In bold.

One has to wonder where Maddie and Ben are in all this as it all seems to be only about the adults.

This article isn’t about missing children but reputational damage.

Kerry Needham comes in defense of the McCanns against Jodie Marsh but lets Katie Hopkins boast about the millions she has reached dissing them.

Jodie has no right to judge but apparently for Kerry Needham Katie Hopkins does.

The difference? One, Jodie, speaks about cadaver odour and the other, Katie, doesn’t.

One, Jodie, reaches via Twitter hundreds of thousands but is less threatening than the other, Katie, who reaches millions via Twitter, Daily Mail and radio show

One, Jodie, had to be stopped, the other, Katie, is allowed to continue uncontested.

We have told readers that we think that the Ben Needham case is interlinked with the Maddie one, and this seems to be evident.

e. Karen Matthews

Lastly we had Karen Mathews.

This seems to be a good thing as it seems to compromise the McCanns.

What people are not, in our opinion, realising is that by using the Shannon Matthews case the other side is turning the spotlight on the McCanns with a slight nuance, also to their friends, the other T7. And by containing things to this group, leaving all others out.

First, let’s be very clear. Between the 2 cases, there’s only 1 thing in common: abduction. That’s it.

Saying they share ‘staged abduction’ is false.

It’s like comparing Inspector Calls with Hamlet just because they are both plays. The only thing both these plays share is they are performed on a stage, all else is different.

Just like between Shannon Matthews and Maddie McCann all outside the word abduction is different.

One was planned, a conspiracy, the other was a reaction, a cover-up. That alone separates totally the waters between the two cases.

But the other bigger difference is the social status of those involved.

When one refers to ‘others’ being involved in the Shannon case, can it be minimally compared with the ‘others’ involved in the Maddie case?

We don’t think it can. We don’t know who the ‘others’ may be in the Shannon case but we are willing to bet anything that they aren’t staff of a tourist resort, a staff of a tour operator, a community of local ex-pats nor the police, government, media and judicial system of a nation.

The ‘others’ in the Shannon case, are more than likely to be her pals.

By pointing the finger at these ‘others’ while accusing the McCanns of neglect, it’s just being made clear that it’s intended that things are to go no further than the T7, the McCann peers in neglect.

f. Discrediting Hopkins, Williams-Thomas, Marsh and Matthews

But what we want to point out is the calibre of the people involved in pushing the message of neglect.

They are being used but one of their use is their ‘unpleasantness’, in the lack of a better word.

Katie Hopkins is like using a gnarling Rottweiler to convince people that dogs are cuddly, Mark Williams-Thomas is as laughable as is theory and Karen Matthews a convicted woman of a crime against her own daughter.

As we said, we think Jodie got involved by accident but with all due respect to the woman, her followers are more interested in seeing either parts of her body or what clothes she’s wearing to cover it.

To counter-balance this, we have Kerry Needham, an altruistic Kate McCann in the Missing People Choir and helping a Missing People marathon runner and Gerry McCann wanting to save £60 million in the struggling NHS.

It’s like comparing sweet, sweet oranges with rotten apples, isn’t it?

The idea being to accept that the McCanns were indeed neglectful but one has to look at the kind of people who seem to be bothered with a mistake made by the couple.

Yes, they say, it was a huge mistake with very and unquestionably serious consequences but it was just a mistake. Nothing we haven’t heard before all these years.

5. Legal threat

There are two vectors not mentioned in Louise Roberts’ article

The first, the 6th one, is the resurfacing of the legal threat.

Up until the Katie Hopkins article 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, it was absolutely forbidden to say anything bad about the McCanns in the British media.

By then ‘allowing it’, we now realise, the Daily Mail seized the leadership in what appears to be an anti-McCann campaign that we now know to be something other than that.

If until that article things had to be said by reading between the lines, since then thrashing the McCanns became more overt.

But with the Supreme Justice Court ruling, the time to read between the lines is definitely over as it took carpet from right under the feet of the ‘innocent-look’.

It’s a reality that the issue is still under contest but as we have explained, it’s not only flimsy but is as useful as jumping off a plane tied to an anchor instead of a parachute.

But legally, the Supreme Justice Court decision was halted and the McCanns retain, for now, their ‘innocent-look’ and as we have seen, Kerry Needham has come out to defend that what the McCanns are doing is rightfully clearing their name.

So in theory, the McCanns retain their legal basis of having been cleared to sue, even though even they know it won’t last long.

The other side started this vector by immediately ‘warning’ that anyone publishing Mr Amaral’s book would be sued and making sure that we all knew that they had the vicious Carter-Ruck on a short leash.

That was before the content of the Supreme Justice Court was known.

Since then we have seen death and covering-up of her death associated with the McCanns without them reacting.

We know that death serves the narrative pursued and the cover-up thing can be dealt with, outside the courts by discrediting Mr Amaral, the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court and the entire Portuguese judicial system.

So, to allege, that one is afraid to speak because of legal implications is one big red-flag because to speak badly about the McCanns is exactly what is intended, short of providing any sort of evidence that links the McCanns to Maddie’s death.

Associating death with the McCanns only on the internet if you please, where that has already happened for years and where for years it has been duly ignored.

And there’s no better way to convey that this fear is real than by stating that one has been a victim of this threat:

Another way to make people feel real this fear is to have Mark Williams-Thomas and ITV's This Morning hosts repeatedly say that they all are bound legally to not speak any further.

Another way to make people feel real this fear of legal threat is to have Mark Williams-Thomas and ITV’s This Morning hosts repeatedly say that they all are bound legally to not speak any further.

Slightly off-topic but still within legalities, we hope the reader has noticed that in the Closer article, the one where Kerry Needham appears to defend the McCanns specifically against Jodie Marsh and no other, that the magazine does not say a word about having, we imagine, exercised censorship against Jodie Marsh

We say we imagine because we are deducing the national magazine that Jodie says that has pulled unexpectedly her intended article to be the magazine Closer as it’s there she writes.

She probably thought that anything she would say would be published and probably decided to  refer to the cadaver odour in the article she wrote thinking it would, and we know it would, further bash the McCanns, and it got, evidently pulled by the magazine.

If the article had been pulled for reasons of external pressure, we would expect that the magazine would say something like, our legal department advised us not to publish latest article by Jodie, but says nothing.

That’s self-censorship, the most hypocritical kind of censorship, the complicit kind, especially when it involves justice for a little British girl.

6. Upstanding citizens

The other vector the article Louise Roberts’ article doesn’t mention, is of course, the regaining of the ‘innocent –look’.

We have spoken extensively on how this was done on our post last week “The complaint”.

But we are not listing it here only because we have listed all others but because this week there was a slight nuance, the making of the McCanns examples of citizenship.

We had Kate and her Missing People Choir participation in Britain’s Got Talent, and her helping raise the staggering amount of £2,000 for an unknown marathon runner for Missing People as well.

We said, and do maintain, that this was to make Kate seem busy with worthy popular causes until when the next fiscal year starts in May.

But now they have come up with the Professor McCann, the NHS wonder-doctor.

This was in the Daily Mail – the ever fascinating Daily Mail – article by Stephen Matthews, published Feb 27 2017 10:29, updated that day at 10:52 “Madeleine McCann's father warns thousands of heart patients are undergoing needless surgery, which is costing the NHS £60m a year, due to an inaccurate test

“Thousands of patients could unnecessarily be having surgery due to an inaccurate test, a heart doctor has warned.

And needless operations performed because of the exam may be costing the NHS £60 million a year, says Professor Gerry McCann.

The cardiologist, father of Madeleine who has been missing since May 2007, led a team of researchers from the University of Leicester.


Professor McCann plans to search for a more accurate way of deciding which patients with AS should undergo surgery.”

We placed as a comment in our last week’s post a Facebook post from Marian Greaves about this subject in which she says:

“So delving even deeper, I did eventually find the research paper which was published 13th Feb 2017. However it threw up lots of interesting facts, it was based on a two year study as part of his fellowship. Now fellowships are post-doctoral research grants to become a professor, you undertake research supervised by other eminent academics and then present it in a lecture to gain a professor post. This is exactly what this piece of work was for, he didn’t lead it, he was tagged on the end of 21 other leading academics in the field to assist with the research for experience. There was no remit in the abstract or the study or conclusion to look at costings to the NHS of doing unnecessary surgery. Those permutations came from Gerry on his blog on the Uni site where he did two statements as press release on the study.”

Gerry doesn’t exactly have a leading role in this, does he?

We can only imagine how happy fellow academics felt when they saw his name all over national news as being the leader and future reference for this research.

When we went to school these people had a name but will refrain from saying it here.

This obviously puts pressure on the government to not make a move against the McCanns in times in which the NHS is struggling financially.

What should be understood is that this is also done to contrast with the likes of Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh and Karen Matthews.

Repeating ourselves, the idea being to accept that the McCanns were indeed neglectful but one has to look at the kind of people who seem to be bothered with a mistake made by otherwise upstanding citizens.

This allows for the McCanns, in their faded away life, to not be social pariahs.

7. Verb ‘to take’

If one really wants to point the finger at the McCanns there are many ways to go about that without having to say explicitly that Maddie was not abducted, one just has, for example, to quote Mr Amaral.

Or use the ‘vanished’ or ‘disappeared’ used by the MSM even before the Katie Hopkins article of a year ago.

And never, under any circumstance and for obvious reasons, imply there was an abduction.

The verb taken is to be used only when used together with the word body, as in where was the body taken, or in who took the body. And evidently, in this last instance, when not implying it was by a European human trafficking gang who did it.

To stop the lie that there was an abduction is the reason why Mr Amaral has suffered all these years, so to support that lie is then to totally disrespect the man and all he went through.

One must not forget that whatever is written is not for those who are familiar with the case but for those who will fall for the blood not being human and that Mr Smith was not wearing glasses.

These people do not have any capability to read between lines. When Kate Hopkins says that we will never know what happened to Maddie they will take her for her word.

Now is the time to expect people to read all literally.

8. The history of negligence

We have explained in detail all there is to know about negligence in the Maddie case in our post “The Narrative of Negligence”.

We strongly recommend new readers read it and those who have, to do it again.

But to understand the true importance, and brilliance, of the move now being made by the other side, one has to understand how they are using the PJ Files against us.

It may now seem that we are going to do a “we-told-you-so” moment or that we’re claiming glory for being the first in something but we are not.

What we are doing, and it’s important that readers fully understand that is a “we-said-it-and-look-at-what happened” moment.

We were the first to debunk negligence. We did it in our post “THE CHARGE WILL BE :::::SIMULATED NEGLECT TO PROVE ABDUCTION

We then said “What is it ? holding a group of Doctors who have let themselves be villified for neglect when in fact neglect did not take place.”

Few will remember the criticism we suffered for making such a statement.

The McCanns could not have been not neglectful because the Tapas staff said they had been there, and as they were part of the good guys they could not be questioned. The McCanns had been neglectful, full stop.

By the way, in that post we only involved Dianne Webster and Russel O’Brien, so well contained within the T9 as then, not even we suspected that anyone present outside the T9 could have been involved.

But people ridiculed us because even though we may have been right about that night, there were all the other nights when the T9 had been neglectful, so what we said was to be ignored.

But the real heavy fire upon us came when 9 months later, and still completely alone on the negligence debunking front we wrote the post “In an Emergency call 112, when in a HOAX call 211” in which we questioned and debunked the existence of the Big Round Table.

By showing that such a table never existed, we were clearly saying that there had been no Tapas dinners, which meant the staff was complicit (or, to be precise, others besides the T9 were involved in the hoax) and so there had been no negligence, at least by them abandoning the kids while at Tapas.

Then, the possibility was raised of them having abandoned the kids at the apartment (false) while they had dined at Chaplin’s near the Church (true).

This meant over-egging negligence as such gross felony could not be passed as being within ‘responsible parenting’.

Just to clarify, we, in the blog believe that the T9 did have dinner at Chaplin’s and other restaurants that week and that the kids were looked after in one of the building 5 apartments. But, as we will stress later that now is not the time to push personal theories, we fully accept that others disagree totally with us.

What we want to highlight is that in 2010, when we implied that the McCanns had not been negligent, all hell descended upon us.

We got hit really hard, and I, Textusa, in particular, saw myself immediately ostracised and made to feel like a pariah within the “Maddie world”.

And that was done by the people claiming to know the PJ Files extensively. And they did know them.

Between March 2011 and October 2011 we wrote 12 posts where we debunked as phoney the documents known as the Tapas Booking Sheets, showing, quite clearly, we think, that the Tapas dinners were as much a hoax as the abduction. And that clearly showed there had been no negligence.

As the pariahs we were considered, we continued alone on the non-negligence front.

4 years had passed since Maddie was abducted, and the sole voice debunking negligence was smothered by those saying they were pursuing the truth.

We are not playing the victim and we are not calling these people hypocrites. The negligence was so well ingrained that they resisted anything that went against it.

That’s what we want to highlight. It is very hard to take away negligence once it has settled in.

And we also want to highlight how the PJ Files help promote and perpetuate the negligence hoax.

Because the people we have mentioned above, were both familiar with the files and we think genuinely wanted to find the truth about what happened to Maddie.

For one to understand that there was no negligence one has to read attentively the PJ Files.

Lose time with them. Cross-reference statements with statements, documents with documents and statements with documents.

That is something that a layperson will not do. Nor is it reasonable to expect they will.

To a beginner, who will evidently go first to the statements of the T9, negligence is there.

The T9 in their statements confess to negligence and the Ocean Club staff confirm it.

Hope reader now understands how they have turned the files against us.

Yes, the dogs are in the files and are damning to the McCanns but to find that out means reading the files.

9. The McCann trial

And all this takes us to the McCann trial. The one that is going on.

If one is to ask anyone if they think the McCanns are guilty, they will say, hell yes!

Of what? Of abandoning their children every night to go out and get drunk, they will say without hesitation.

Ask the same everyone what is it that angers them the most about the McCann case, and they will say, the fact that the parents got away with it.

Got away with what? With abandoning their children every night to go out and get drunk, with again, not the slightest hesitation.

It is sad, but true to say, that people are not looking for justice, they just want the McCanns to be punished and be punished for neglect.

They do think that the parents are involved in Maddie’s death but they won’t provide an opinion about that because they feel they don’t know enough it.

However, there’s one thing they are certain of, there’s one thing they do feel they know enough about and are not afraid to express their opinion on, and that is the McCanns were negligent and should be punished.

So, why not punish them? Why not take them to court and satisfy the public on that and only on that?

So we are now having a popular court, in which the public is judge, jury and executioner.

For the prosecution, Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh (taken off the list due to ‘personal problems’ as in problems because her mouth went too far) and Karen Matthews.

For the defense, Drs Kate McCann the choir singer and marathon fund-raiser and Gerry McCann the NHS money saver.

Kerry Needham is a defense witness for another trial, that’s ongoing in real courts, about whether the McCanns were formally cleared or not by the Portuguese justice system.

A completely separate process and not to be confused with this popular tribunal.

The popular court is now assembled. The crowd jeers the pair in the dock.


a) Were the McCanns neglectful on the night of May 3 2007 in Praia da Luz?

b) If proven guilty of neglect, is that the main reason for the minor Madeleine Beth McCann to have been taken from the apartment?

Guilty, chants the crowd! Guilty! Guilty!

No one wants to hear that one should at least hear the defendants… they’re guilty, they’re guilty, shouts the mob.

That’s what we are reading in the comments on newspaper articles and on the various Facebook groups and forums.

The pitchforks have been handed out, the gallows are getting the final hammering as we speak and even the refreshment stands are struggling to supply the ever increasing demand.

We will ignore the more vitriolic comments but would like to highlight those like “I dislike profoundly the woman but agree 100% with her”, “Who would have thought I would ever agree with her, but I do, she’s absolutely spot on” and “Finally, someone who has the courage to speaking the truth!”.

Only it’s not the truth.

To associate courage to the spreading of untruths, seems to us hardly appropriate.

And we, of all people, know how hard it is to unconvince someone who has been convinced of neglect and is now filled with satisfaction on witnessing the McCanns finally getting it.

To expect people who believe that the blood signalled by Keela is not human and that Mr Smith wasn’t wearing glasses to not take neglect at face value, is unrealistic.

But to believe they will do is very much being a realist. And the whole point of this exercise.

This way, the other side can turn to the government and say, see, the people are now quenching their thirst in seeing the McCanns punished, so now is the ideal time to blame it all on them to have given a window of opportunity for Maddie to have been killed in apartment and her body taken by that infamous but illusive European human trafficking gang.

In their defense they will say that if one looks at things properly, the McCanns and the T9 will have been punished and the British elite will remain protected and unharmed.

The only victims will be Mr Amaral, who is Portuguese and nowhere near being part of its elite, so is an understandable and acceptable casualty and Brenda Leyland who can be considered a collateral victim.

10. The government

One must recognise that to react to the Supreme Justice Court ruling with discrediting Mr Amaral, with discrediting the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court, with discrediting all those that seek the truth by calling them greedy and/or morbid, with discrediting to their own benefit those who they are using to promote neglect, with reinstating legal fear, with ensuring that the McCanns stop being in the public’s eye, with promoting neglect not only by turning the PJ Files against us but fundamentally by creating a mob and have it release all their vitriol and anger against the couple and so create a false sensation of achievement of justice while safeguarding that the McCanns continue socially protected and with accepting death to allow for a Ben Needham finish by pinning it on an European human trafficking gang is pretty remarkable and outstanding.

And all in under a month.

If it wasn’t for the Jodie Marsh incident, without a glitch.

Add to this, the “Elvis & Operation Grange fan-club” corner of the internet has finally spoken.

Not from the usual perch but like a cuckoo by using another bird’s nest:

“As I've said many times before there is no such evidence in the public domain and therefore no paper or broadcaster will lay themselves open to damages and costs.”

The evidence in question was about someone trying to claim “that the McCanns were involved in some way with the death of the child then obviously they will have to provide evidence that they are speaking the truth”.

The person seems to say that the PJ Files, that are in the public domain, have no evidence proving that the McCanns were involved in some way with Maddie’s death.

We disagree. The majority of our posts are based on those PJ Files.

And, we would say, so does Mr Amaral disagree, as he wrote a book based on those files to claim that indeed the McCanns were involved in disposing of Maddie’s body.

Taking into account that the last time we heard from this corner of the internet, this pigeon had his chest all filled up with air taunting the McCanns and saying all was going fine with Operation Grange, this would be worrying, as it would reveal that the government seemed to be walking the path laid out by the other side.

Fortunately, as far as we could ascertain,  this character has long been cut off from the inner circle of those in-the-know.

We believe his silence and his words above reflect the position of someone who is waiting to see where the ball falls so he can say I told you so, rather than someone in possession of true knowledge.

Like we said last week, we think the government and the other side haven’t reached an agreement.

We say this based on thinking that if the government was on board with the other side, there would be no need for the desperate move that was the complaint, provoking a second and even clearer decision from the Supreme Justice Court about the fact that the McCanns had never been cleared.

What we think is happening is at this point in time is the government playing like the PJ did when the Met was literally on its hands and knees in Luz in 2015.

This time, the other side is SY, trying to convince the government.

It has indeed paved the way for the government to decide on the European human trafficking gang, as we hope to have shown clearly in this post, but the decision, like it happened in Luz in 2015 with the PJ, is up to the government to make.

Please, please note we are not saying we think government is on our side.

We are saying that we think government is, like the PJ in Luz did with SY, watching the other side on their hands and knees doing all the hard work, arms crossed and with quite a tedious look.

We do hope, that the government will do the same as the PJ did back in 2015 and that was to tell SY to, as the Portuguese say, go comb monkeys.

We do have to say that bringing in the NHS and its financial difficulties into this issue seems to us quite a desperate move and quite an antagonising one. Not seeing this generating any sympathy from the government.

11. What can we do?

First thing is to understand what is going on and we hope to have helped with that with current post.

If we are correct in our assessment, it means that a major effort is being made to convince the government to decide for the “Third Option”, Ben Needham style.

If it needs convincing, then it’s because it’s not convinced.

If it’s not convinced what we can do is present our arguments, in a civil manner, as to why it’s in the best interest of all to go for truth.

The first and most obvious is that only truth will put an end to this farce.

We remind government that we lived between 2008 and 2011 without Operation Grange. Government must realise that ending it on a farce will hardly mean we all go home and call it a day.

Then we would like to say one word to the government: Hillsborough. It’s self-explanatory.

We would also like to ask government if they have ever heard of the Emperors who came before or after the Emperor made famous with the tale “Emperor’s New Clothes”?

No, because no one has. Only that Emperor is ridiculed and will forever be the one to be ridiculed.

And with Maddie if government insists in perpetuating the farce, a little boy, somewhere, sometime will point to the Emperor and say “Look, he’s naked!”.

Then, the media will rush back to look at all pictures and find, hypocritically appearing surprised, to ‘discover’ that the Emperor was always naked and the ridiculing campaign will begin, and government, you will be that targeted Emperor.

And food for thought and establishing a parallel with the current situation, one has to ask, was it the Emperor who decided to walk around naked pretending he had clothes on, or was he advised by others that doing so was the best option? And who ended up being ridiculed, the Emperor or his advisors?

Also, in case the Supreme Justice Court does not arrive in time, it will arrive and it will confirm that the McCanns were never cleared.

About smearing the Portuguese justice system, let us remind you that the smearing campaign against the PJ – by repeatedly to the point of nausea calling them blundering cops – did not work well in the past, did it?

Lastly, if we are calling it a farce it is because it is a farce.

If one takes into account the following definition of farce “a comic dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations” then it only isn’t because it’s not comical.

And talking of credibility we do think that if the Maddie case continues to be ‘farced up’, it will make worse the already existing credibility crisis British policing is facing.

It’s not us saying it, it’s Sky News in the article by Enda Brady, published Marc 02 2017 “'Red flag' warning from watchdog over 'national crisis' in policing”, where it’s said “The police watchdog says victims are being let down and criminal cases shelved as forces fail to carry out basic functions”.

And ITV ranks the various forces in the article published March 02 2017 “Police 'crisis': Find out how your force is performing

It shows that the Met requires improvement. We don’t consider humiliating it publicly before the entire globe as helping it in that.

And evidently we are not the only ones calling it that, the entire world knows it’s a farce.

It’s cringing making to speak about Maddie anywhere in the globe because of that and it’s up to the British government decide whether this situation that shames the country continues or if a full stop is put to it.

On a personal level, what we must do is show that we are not a mob.

That we do not want the McCanns responsible for anything more, or less, than what they are accountable for, and neglect is not a part of it.

That we are not falling for the public crucifying of the couple and the other side can take their rotten tomatoes back to where they got them.

We have the advantage of knowing the files with details, so let’s use that knowledge.

We would like to point out, again, that this is not the time to propagate personal theories.

As the reader will see, we are not proposing that swinging is the reason for the hoax. The time now is to unite around the fact that there was no neglect.

Without neglect the truth that there was no abduction is outed.

So when one reads people writing mob-style comments, one should respond.

But always with reason and never emotionally. Leave aside and condemn personal comments about the couple. This is not about whether we like them or not but about justice.

One should bring up the dogs, especially Eddie.

With neglect, in this alternative fact world we live in, the dogs can be ignored but take away neglect and there’s no way that can happen.

Readers can leave suggestions in comments which will be welcomed.

This way we can show government that we are here and not falling for the trap the other side has put in front of us.

12. Media

A very long post, so just a very short paragraph to the media.

We see you continue to publish evident fake news. We will refrain, due to decorum, to tell you where we last saw your credibility.

Your doing.

13. Conclusion

Again, very short.

Negligence is their last line of defense.

It’s up to all of us to do our part with reason, logic and patience.


  1. "Reason, logic and patience". The best we've read in looooong time. Thank you for that.

  2. What if.. Hello Textusa Sisters the child suffered a serious injury she was sedated and left to sleep subsequently woke up her sibling found her behind the sofa 'Maddie, Maddie' crying for all that time for help the parents return fail to resuscitate and disaster!

    1. Anonymous 3 Mar 2017, 10:05:00,

      We don't believe minimally for that to have been the scenario and if you read the blog you'll see why. We believe children were looked after.

      If we read you correctly, you are proposing that Maddie first suffered and accident, as serious as one that would cause the blood spatters behind the couch, on the walls and curtains.

      Then the McCanns would have cleaned up the apartment, Would have got ready for dinner, sedated and leave a seriously injured child to die.

      Sorry, that’s not neglect, that’s manslaughter.

      We have no knowledge of a “'Maddie, Maddie' crying for all that time for help the parents” episode or similar.

  3. Wonderful post, Textusa. Moving, too. It would break your heart to see so many deliberate distractions and vile covering up in this case. Than you for shining a light in the darkness!

  4. A truly brilliant post Textusa as always. You have made the situation crystal clear to 2.5 million readers of your work . Madeleine did not die because she was neglected - she was not on her own when she died. I am confidant that Portugal will make sure to respond to the ``complaint`` very soon and then lets see what the fall out will be.

  5. I believe the twins were in another appartment with other children watching videos and MBM was alone in 5A, possibly already deceased. The time line written by R. O'Brien says " Jerry 9:10 - 9.15 in tv room + all well"
    Then he writes " ? did he check".
    I take that to mean Jerry went to the tv room but there is a question as to whether Jerry checked the appartment where MBM was supposed to be.

    1. Unknown,

      That's not a scenario of negligence but of abandonment of body.

      Neglect implies the abandoned individual is placed in a situation in which s/he can suffer harm. To suffer harm, one has to be alive.

    2. Exactly, there was no neglect - I don't think any qualified doctors who have done a stint in A&E would be unaware of the dangers of leaving little children alone, even for a few minutes, especially in a strange place in a foreign country.
      As for "it was just like dining in your back garden ", he must think we would all be so stupid to believe that as we all have garden dining tables far removed from the house on the other side of a swimming pool and a public road with open access to an unlocked patio door.

  6. Pudgy fingers deleted your comment su! Apologies! Here it is, copied from the mailbox:

    "su has left a new comment on your post "The McCann trial":

    The very best to date.

    Posted by su to Textusa at 3 Mar 2017, 11:33:00"

  7. Don't understand Mr Amaral believes Maddie dies in the apartment he also believes in neglect and she was alive up till the 3rd.
    I have read your posts always I am a armchair detective so I really don't know a lot only what I read so I cannot believe that Mr Amaral would not have leaked that the neglect was false,i also in my opinion that Maddy died in the bathroom read some where a long time ago a article about the bathroom Would not know where to find it now,
    Another thing I cannot understand is why Kerry Needam is all of a sudden on the Mccanns defence after all the search for her child has come to a end with a conclution I would not agree with I know Kerry knows more than she says so maybe she has been told let Bens case be put on the back burner until we have sorted out the McCann case.

    1. Anonymous 3 Mar 2017, 12:33:00,

      Mr Amaral seems to have been kind and giving the benefit of the doubt but he said a reconstruction was needed.

      That would have shown how ridiculous the story was.

      Mr Rebelo tried to arrange that and was thwarted.

      Mr Amaral was constrained by certain witness statements supporting neglect.

      We can't speak for Mr Amaral but wonder how he would have proceeded if allowed to continue the investigation.

      Two notes.

      One, we are not armchair detectives, if you consider yourself one, it's up to you.

      As we've said before, we consider ourselves armchair journalists. We are doing what the media hasn't, won't or can't.

      Two, we would never associate the verb 'to leak' with Mr Amaral. But that's us.

  8. O, that forensically irremovable cloud of suspicion!

  9. Textusa
    You have truly excelled yourself this time.
    A fascinating post that lays bare the lies and the cover ups.It is clear now, more than ever before , that there's a highly disciplined campaign to feed the negligent lie to the public.
    Whilst that, for the majority of those following this bizarre case is highly disconcerting, it is nevertheless, quite illuminating to see how they work, how clever they think they are and how stupid they view the public.
    Backed by MSM (and yes, good on you Textusa, for your admonition directed to them,) they have swung into full time "Let's play neglect, neglect neglect card", as a lie repeated often enough soon becomes the truth to many.
    No neglect=no abduction.
    So impressed with how you've linked the connectors together with clear explanations.

    To be honest, I'm ashamed to be British.
    The lies and the cover ups, protecting the Establishment Élite, are innumerable, must protect, no matter what and in so doing, denying a little girl justice.
    What have we sunk to?
    What have we become ?
    Those who are corrupt, seeking to satisfy their own ends, lie so much and so often that it is becoming harder and harder to find any semblance of truth in the misty haze of lies.
    I pity those who are fooled by the media and the spin.
    These are the people who need to be made aware of the truth.

    I admire your work greatly Textusa and also your unswerving pursuit for justice for a sad little girl who had no chance to live or have a voice of any kind!

  10. Wonderful in the extreme. It's been a long , hard week of wondering what's indeed relevant and why ,for me, so heartfelt thanks for this brilliant post. Great advise too which I'm off to be most active in taking.
    Aileen Peebles

  11. Who is orchestrating all of this Textusa?
    It is quite complicated to bring all of the media involved together to tow the party line and push home neglect. Are they all in on it together.
    Is the reputation management company still being paid by the McCanns to do it? I still don;t undertsand why the media is generally so compliant

  12. Hi Textusa,

    Wonderful piece - couldn't agree more once you point it out - Thank you.

    Given what you have outlined as being the current strategy (the negligence uprising and the files turned against us) is it now more important than ever to get something very solid and official from Portugal? - Once and for all and arguably for the first time since 2008 - would like to hear your views on this if possible?

    Portugal's establishment, to most, seems quite publicly acquiescent over the past 9 years as regards defending it's reputation, the case, the evidence. (note .. publicly/officially) That is up until the recent report from the Supreme court, albeit too loose-ended. Do you think that without a strong statement or response - that is a fire-walled off to ambiguous debate, to press translation, liking to a bold listing of facts that clearly calls out what the parents are NOT cleared of - your insightful prediction as to the sorry fate of future, evidence based arguments against negligence will be facilitated more easily?

    Think we really need to hear something firm from Portugal - sadly this is unlikely, Diplomatic relations don't operate like this in reality. Do you have thoughts on the impending Supreme court response, content or otherwise?


    1. GP,

      This is at the political level. Any action taken by Portugal, without previous coordination with the UK, would have serious diplomatic consequences.

      This, in our opinion, is totally up to the British government to decide.

  13. Thank you for that.

  14. Excellent post today ladies, FANTASTIC to have you back on fridays.

    1. Anonymous 3 Mar 2017, 14:43:00,

      Oh no, we apologise in having mislead our readers that we are back on Fridays!

      We are still in our 'watching-game mode', we would like to make that clear.

      What happened is that during the last month and up to 2 days ago there was activity that we felt justified that we write about them.

    2. Sorry ladies, I did not mean to imply that you were back permenantley, just that it has been nice to have your updates and thoughts on this great blog on its usual friday.

  15. Thank you again Textusa,now ,once again we are waiting for a Portuguese Court decision ,but this is the one that will,"allow", hopefully,the tangled web of years and years of lies and cover-ups see the light of day !!!

  16. Thank you for your enlightening posts Textusa I'm new to your blog, its all starting to make sense now. I am someone who doesn't normally comment and hasn't even got a Facebook account but since the article recently in the Daily Mail about mccanns 'not cleared' I have been reading everything I can, watching Richard D Halls documentaries, YouTube interview clips etc.
    I believe the majority of the UK public don't believe the Mccanns (body language, the things they repeat) but many like me have stayed silent. What I'm trying to say is there may be thousands or millions like me who have been silently witnessing, becoming knowledgeable who will not believe the "neglect, trafficking" theory that MSM will put out to close down this case, I just hope that the real truth comes out soon.

  17. Picked this up from Lorraine Holden’s FB page.

    When corporate affairs are jeopardised, corporations close ranks. Washington Post decided tp do an article on the Internet world of Maddie McCann.

    Its content is idiotic and for that reason we’re not bringing it over to the blog. What we would like to bring over is the comment put in by her and her husband.

    The article:

    The response:

    Lorraine Holden
    53 mins ·

    Mine and my husband's response to this ridiculous article in the Washington Post.

    What stands out most about this short, and rather biased article, is the incessant use of the word 'trolls' to describe anyone that doesn't share the opinion that two people could indeed be responsible for the events that lead to their young daughter's death and the subsequent cover-up that followed. Whilst it's true that, to many, the thought of such an act can be deemed 'unthinkable' by most, that does not, in itself, set in stone (turned or un-turned) the unequivocal certainty that the act is impossible or improbable.

    There has been insurmountable proof throughout time that we, as a species, are capable of anything, should a situation present us with unimaginable choices. To label a group of people - that have a genuine belief in an event such as this - 'trolls' is to purposely and arrogantly undermine their vested interest to see an end to this long and complicated journey. Not for the reasoning of wanting to see Kate and Gerry McCann brought to justice for the sake of frivolous satisfaction or some blind journey of spite and vengeance, but to see justice for a young girl that deserves peace and accountability.

    The word 'trolls' has become synonymous throughout the internet to describe those that only wish to cause grievance and offense for the sake of their own 'jollies'. Though it is true that there are many people out there that carry this over-used term well, this is not the case for the largest percentage of the so-called anti-McCanns. In fact, there are those few on each side of the argument that could be called the same, but for some reason, it is only the people that have utter belief in Kate and Gerry's involvement that are slurred in such a dismissive and vulgar way.

    So, let us get to the facts and the evidence. Firstly – and most importantly – these ‘trolls’ are not basing their theories on unsubstantiated opinions, without rhyme or reason. They are basing them on the official Portuguese Police files, that due to Portuguese law, “once a case is shelved or solved, must be released into the public domain”, which was indeed done in 2008, and is where all the factual information into the case is readily available.

    Within these official files, one can read for themselves every statement that the McCanns and their friends made during the investigation and where one can clearly see the many inconsistencies within the aforementioned statements. One can also watch the video evidence of the highly trained British Police dogs that, in over 200 case searches, had never alerted to a false positive or been discredited in their findings, or professionally since. The dog handler’s statements are also accessible in the police files. Both the blood and cadaver alerts were only found – out of every apartment and car that was searched – with that of the McCanns. The most conclusive being that of Kate McCann’s clothing, Madeleine’s toy (cuddle cat) and a T-shirt belonging to one of the children. These were confirmed to be cadaver only alerts, as no blood was present.
    In reference to both cadaver and blood alerts, these were found behind the sofa in the McCann’s apartment and in a car hired by them three weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance.


  18. (cont.)

    According to John Lowe’s report, from the FSS in Birmingham, the blood alerts were deemed as inconclusive. Although he claims to have found 15 markers to Madeleine’s DNA (proving the blood dog absolutely correct), he then states that there are 37 components, which did seem to muddy the waters.

    Although forensic science has not been entirely infallible in the past, this does not explain the cadaver dog’s findings. Someone definitely died in that apartment and the Portuguese investigation did a thorough background check on apartment 5A and it was concluded that no one had died there prior to the McCann’s arrival in Portugal.
    Without the DNA evidence to back the dogs and the McCanns (and friends) refusal to cooperate with the Portuguese investigation or partake in a reconstruction of the night’s events of May 3rd, having fled back to the UK, the Portuguese investigation had nowhere else to go and the case was shelved.

    The McCanns – despite inaccurate belief – have never officially been cleared of involvement in their daughter’s disappearance, and there is serious doubt over there having ever been an ‘abduction’. To date, no evidence has ever been found to confirm this.
    If you read their own words, watch their own behavior and look at the evidence presented, there is definite cause for serious doubt as to their unaccountability in Madeleine’s disappearance, and if this makes me a ‘troll’, then so-be-it.

    Be careful not to label people ‘trolls’, just because you do not agree with what they are saying. It is a knee-jerk reaction thrown carelessly out by those who only have a narrow-minded view. It also undermines the legitimacy and the qualifications of the people that use it. Take a moment to read the facts that are presented right in front of you.

    To finish, as for people refusing to give you interviews, I can only assume that you have not spoken to some of the nicer and more eloquent minds that have looked into this case, but then with the litigious nature of the McCanns and the way journalists tend to twist people’s words, is it really any surprise. Especially when you consider these same journalists are themselves afraid, it seems, to print the facts that I have shared with you here today.

    1. Brilliantt response. May it be read widely.

  19. Textusa, thank you. Brilliant.
    Only truth will put an end to this farce.
    All this is about Justice.

    ANONYMOUS 13:40 I read always the comments posted on TEXTUSA. I like very much yours.
    I agree with you.
    It is very touching when you say you are ashamed to be British.(I was also ashamed when internals criminals affairs (and others) sullied (sully)my country.)And I have been ashamed all these years with the Madeleine McCann "case" :
    because the numerous Prime Ministers of my country (and there was a lot since 2007) never did anything (à ma connaissance)in this WORLDWIDE affair. For me, reading your comment, I see a good and intelligent Britain as many others, wanting the truth. I wish Theresa May can read you and hear your feelings.
    We are WITH THE TRUTH and PROUD of it.
    I am proud of TEXTUSA. Yesterday I read again : "Ca suffit, Enough is enough." by TEXTUSA 13 APRIL 2009 that give me an idea.
    Merci encore, Textusa. A Citizen of the world.

  20. I have no doubt that the McCanns' neglect is being deliberately emphasized by the recent media activity, but do doubt if anything other than the public belief in the abduction of a live child is the aim. To accept that Madeleine may "not have left the apartment alive" (I know Redwood did once touch on this) is to accept that Mr. Amarel and the P.J. were 50% correct in their findings (1.The minor Madeleine McCann died in 5G and (2) her parents simulated an abduction and hid her corpse.) With Mr. Amarel being allowed to comment on the case in the future, it would be foolish to have the public believe that there is ANY truth in anything he might say. Also, to accept her death at the hands of her abductors will lead people to speculate on how this may have happened. That inevitably leads to the only place blood was found - behind the sofa. How likely is it that intruders would kill a child behind a sofa? Once sofa is mentioned it is impossible to forget that cadaver odour was also found in this place. There was too much publicity of this at the time. The public will question how long she would have had lay there for this and whether abductors would really delay to clean up blood and choose leave with a dead child while two live ones were nearby? I don't think it will wash. I believe the pushing of neglect is to make us doubt the veracity of the parents regarding the frequency of checks on the children. "If they are so neglectful they probably left the kids unchecked for hours"- that I believe is the message we are meant to get. The conclusion will be that Madeleine was abducted, the dogs were "unreliable"(they probably wont be mentioned at all) and that any ongoing investigation is up to the Portuguese, while the British will retain a working relationship and file it under cold case, still open, pending further developments.

  21. Ty Text for the share of that ridiculous Trolling piece in the Washington Post,showing us once again only us unbelievers are trolls.

    Love your blog again this week,but I totally disagree as you know about the neglect not neglect debate,but unfortunately and I feel not been considered is the fact it's already out there and strongly believed,this being the catalyst for most people's outrage it must be said. So if Sy are going to use it they will and us debating the fact won't stop that.

    There's,like abduction absolutely no evidence the children were babysat and not one resident of the ocean club saw children being moved day or night. For me people being sick dosen't prove babysitting the same as the Gasper statements don't prove paedophilia. Just my thoughts :-)

  22. Mark Williams-Thomas radio interview

    He refers to sisters, not twins
    Ben case mentioned
    CM interview is an old one and not a response to radio interview
    Neglect promoted
    Investigation by PJ dissed

  23. Faked negligence = fake abduction.

  24. The Mirror echoing the Washington Post article:

    Madeleine McCann's parents subjected to 150 abusive tweets a DAY from online trolls

    Psychologist Dr John Synott has carried out the first study of its kind on trolls and found their “whole existence relies on social media accounts”

    ByTom Pettifor
    18:35, 3 MAR 2017

    Up to 150 abusive tweets about Maddie McCann’s parents are posted by online trolls every day, researchers have estimated.

    Psychologist Dr John Synott has carried out the first study of its kind on trolls and found their “whole existence relies on social media accounts”.

    He is calling for to end the right to anonymously troll strangers on Twitter.

    Dr Synott said: “Most trolling behaviour has a lifespan of a couple of days. This has gone on for ten years, and you cannot see it ever ending. That is the legacy of the McCann case.

    “In the physical world there are repercussions. You couldn’t get away with saying these things in the street. But in the virtual world there are no consequences.”

    Three-year-old Maddie disappeared from the family’s holiday apartment in Portugal in 2007. Twitter trolls blame parents’ Kate and Gerry and discuss the case constantly.

    Dr Synott has been interested in the McCann trolling ever since he first saw it at work in about 2012.

    He said: “It was somewhat organised, it was repetitive, but the volume of information was the real surprising thing.”

    The University of Huddersfield researchers want pseudonyms which enable cyber trolling to be prevented from being used on Twitter.

    Dr Synott said: “It is encouraging to see ministers have called the major social media platforms to Whitehall to demand they do more to protect people online from cyber bullying and trolling or face sanctions.

    His study published in Computers in Human Behaviour has been featured in an editorial headed ‘The dark side of social media’ for the prestigious journal, Nature.

    It reinforces newly-revealed UK Government plans to curb cyber abuse.

    Dr Synott said: “We found there were between 100 and 150 abusive comments on Twitter, Facebook and McCann messageboards every day.”

    Dr Synott is now planning to extend the research by analysing the pro McCann camp.

    1. What we find fascinating about this article is that it has inserted a video with the title "KATE McCANN SPEAKS DURING CHARITY FUNDRAISER IN MIDST OF COURT BATTLE"

      And it's from her cycle run in 2015.

      On one hand, quite a cheap shot in misleading but on the other, it does show quite a despair, doesn't it?

      Couldn't they get something slightly more recent?

    2. Pathetic indeed

  25. Someone is really TELLING Hopkins:

    The Arrow_7‏ @TheArrow_7
    @KTHopkins Proven no neglect-scent of human corpse on items/in areas only associated with #mccann-matching dna found in some same places!!
    06:53 - 3 Mar 2017

    See the picture attached of a doc that seems from PJ Files that says "there are indications, in practice and in facts, of the crime of murder"

    Is this true? First time I'm seeing the M word in the files this explicit!

    1. Anonymous 3 Mar 2017, 21:22:00,

      As far as we could find, the quote is from here:

      "It follows from this investigation that there are indications, in practice and in the facts, of the crime of murder such as defined in ArticleQI310 of the Penal Code."

      And it says "TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH BY ANNA ESSE" which links to this blog page:

    2. Hi Textusa,brilliant post and based on your observations.
      Alison Saunders(CPS)has meetings with PJ Authorities-No conclusion reached,but continue with Operation stGange-Defamation Trail?
      2008,Mr Goncalo Amaral write the book,"Truth of the Lie" McCann's take Civil Action 2009.
      2010-11, David Cameron via Home Office set up Operation Grange,Remit Abduction?
      2017 31 January,Supreme Court Ruling,finds against the McCann Family,they launch an appeal February 2017,new PR Campaign begins,Clarence back in the picture.
      The UK Government another-"Hillsborough"moment,cannot seem to detach themselves from this case as they became embroiled in it at it's conception-why?
      The UK Government must have Covert Inteligence Officers implicated as part of this "Cover Up",which begs a question,what where they doing in Portugal 2007,Warner Leisure?
      February 2017,Sir Bernard Hogan Howe retires not solving the Madeleine McCann disappearance,he knows more than he has blurted out to LBC,"Murdered-er missing child"?

    3. We have found the origin of this:

      In Portuguese:

      "Nos presentes autos condutas susceptíveis de vir a integrar od crimes de homicídio de profanação de cadáver p.p pelo disposto no art.º 131º e 254ºdo C Penal

      Assim, é de considerar que existem indícios que consubstanciam uma forte suspeita de, no interior do veículo que os MCCANN utilizam, aí se encontrarem, elementos de prova (instrumental e direta) da prática de crimes objeto da investigação dos autos, de resto, suscetíveis de se revelar fundamental importância para os objetivos do inquérito.

      Por conseguinte, acolhendo a sugestão da Polícia Judiciária, autorizo, ao abrigo e com observância do disposto no artº 101, a realização de busca para apreensão de objetos e outros elementos de prova relativos ao objeto destes autos:

      - na viatura Renault modelo Scenic, com matrícula 59-DA-27"

      Our translation:

      "In the present proceedings [autos], behaviours that are susceptible to be included in the crimes of homicide and of desecration of a corpse are being investigated as by the provisions of art.º 131º and 254º of the Penal Code.

      Thus, it must be considered that there are indicia that consubstantiate a strong suspicion that, in the vehicle used by the MCCANNs, in there are, elements of proof (instrumental and direct) of the practice of the crimes investigated, of fundamental importance to the objectives of the inquiry.

      Therefore, accepting the suggestion from the PJ, I authorize, under and in compliance with the provisions of artº 174º, 176º, 178º and 267º, all from the Penal Code, the search for seizure of objects and other elements of proof related to the object of these proceedings:

      - in the vehicle Renault, model Scenic, with licence plate 59-DA-27"

      Or, translating from the legalese, we are investigating possible homicide and possible profanation of body and is it's suspected that vehicle has evidence of that, it's authorised the seizure of vehicle to be searched.

      In our opinion, it says nothing that's damning in any way to the McCanns, as it's a valid justification to have had the Scenic searched.

    4. Anonymous 4 Mar 2017, 13:48:00,

      Cannot explain why, but your comment only appeared today in our "waiting moderation" box. Thus tardiness of publication.

      Our apologies.

  26. Bringing over Karen Danczuk’s tweets from last night:

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    And now they're exploiting Shannon Matthews to get a story in the paper? KD
    Karen Danczuk added
    Daily Mirror@DailyMirror
    Maddie McCann's parents 'were nearly tricked out of £25,000 by Karen Matthews …
    00:35 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    They drugged Maddie just like Matthews did, left her in a room alone, like Matthews did. They're not innocent by any stretch. KD …
    00:43 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Exactly because they're Dr's it ok they drugged & left daughter alone to get drunk. Someone on council estate wouldn't get away with it KD
    Karen Danczuk added:
    Sean Bhoy @sean_bhoy67
    @KarenDanczuk if I done what they done I'd be hung drawn n quartered
    00:47 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    And how strange is that? She went away without a hairbrush or toothbrush but the others did? Her grandmother even said she'd been drugged KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    jamie templey @jamietempley
    @tomlinsonrob1 @KarenDanczuk police found no hairbrush or toothbrush belonging to maddie that would have shown drugs in her system FACT
    01:02 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD
    01:33 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Money my friend. Anyone who tries to give an alternative view on it are gagged. KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Adam @adamuk17
    @KarenDanczuk I don't know how they've got away with it for so long
    01:38 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    I'm not back tracking and why don't you prove to me she wasn't drugged? Prove me wrong? Why was there no DNA of her in apartment? KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Norman Thomson @TormodRuadh
    @KarenDanczuk you haven't backed up your previous statements. Backtracking and looking to draw a line under the conversation now.
    01:41 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    I am glad you have no contact with my boys. Your profession & you defend 2 parents who left 3 under fours alone to get drunk is worrying. KD …
    01:44 - 5 Mar 2017


  27. (cont.)

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    You've stated she wasn't so you prove it? Please prove me wrong  The thing is, I can't be proved wrong and you know it. KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Norman Thomson @TormodRuadh
    @KarenDanczuk you've stated she was, prove it. You stated grandmother statement that she was drugged by parents, a lie.
    01:50 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Yes you are, you're trying to prove she wasn't but can't prove me wrong - so thank you. I can't be proven wrong  KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Norman Thomson @TormodRuadh
    @KarenDanczuk You made the statements. I'm not trying to prove anything, only asking that you back up your claims. You haven't, thanks x
    01:59 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    I'm taking info that's in the public domain so I can't be. If I was the first to say this publicly without evidence I could be. KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Shelley bobs @NantwichGirl
    @KarenDanczuk Karen please be careful. The mcCanns are not adverse to suing people who say unsubstantiated things about them in the media.
    02:00 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Don't recall ever saying they murdered her?? Please show me? KD …
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Este Tweet está indisponível.
    02:03 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Just type McCann in the search on Twitter. Everything I've said and others is all over Twitter and online. KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Callie @carolinebhunt
    @jamietempley @tomlinsonrob1 @KarenDanczuk interesting, but where did you get this Information from?
    02:27 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Maybe they should have all the "liable stuff" removed from online then. They could do that, then people wouldn't read it like me &comment KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    lee williams @leedslee_lw
    @KarenDanczuk you have stated they drugged their daughter to go get drunk and said this was fact.. that is certainly libellous
    02:47 - 5 Mar 2017

    Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
    Not wanting to be harsh lovely, and I have to say, the ones who really suffer from parents mistakes are the children. Trust me I know. KD
    Karen Danczuk added,
    Karen Bleakley @bleakley_karen
    @KarenDanczuk aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives
    03:14 - 5 Mar 2017

    1. Interesting to see Mr Twitter being his usual self against Karen Danczuk:

      Karen Danczuk‏ @KarenDanczuk
      That's disgusting. Being raped by my brother as a child is not enjoyable you absolute sicko. KD
      Karen Danczuk added,
      Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
      @KarenDanczuk It's in the public domain that you enjoyed your brother's company?
      10:34 AM · 5 Mar 2017

    2. Hi Textusa,aka Michael Walker @walkercan1000,still being funded from the"Find Madeleine Fund"on behalf of the Family,remember those photos of you and Gerry,with a phone,paddling in Prai Da Luis May 2007

    3. 15:33
      Are you calling Textusa Michael Wright?????

    4. Anonymous 5 Mar 2017, 18:58:00,

      We didn't take it that way at all, but rather as Anonymous 5 Mar 2017, 15:33:00 making a connection between Mr Twitter with well known photos of Gerry by the rocks in Luz...

  28. More misleading information from the Sun.... One might imagine from the headline that this man might not be alive if it were not for Gerry Mc Cann -

    ``MCCANN'S MEDICS Madeleine McCann’s dad Gerry led team of top heart doctors to save life of ex England footballer ``

    He was fitted with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), a small device which treat patients with dangerously abnormal heart rhythms.

    The former player was resuscitated on stage, where he had been making a presentation, by three medics who were among the crowd.

    It is not known if Gerry, 48, who co-incidentally lives in the same village as The Birch in Rothley, Leicestershire, carried out the hour-long operation but he was on hand to advise.

    How do Gerrys colleagues allow this rubbish to be printed - or are they all having a laugh behind his back?

    1. It most certainly is known that "Gerry" did not "carry out the hour-long operation"!!! He is a cardiac diagnostician, not a surgeon of ANY sort. He is not a F.R.C.S. ( Fellow Of The Royal College Of Surgeons)

    2. That’s an outrageous piece of crap even for the sun!

  29. Savior 'on hand'. In case you need him to resuscitate ... errm ... some ... errm ...body. Strange wording vis-à-vis this 'advisor'. If I was a non-suspected Mr. McCann I would urge the MSM to stop these nonsensical publications right now. Even the lowest among us must have 'had it'. Too much illusionists in this circus. Time for the dog act where the crowd is waiting for.

  30. About the Sun latest medical story:

    Leicester City legend Alan Birchenall saved by nurse
    14 January 2017
    From the section Leicester

    A nurse has described how it took four shocks with a defibrillator to revive Leicester City legend Alan Birchenall after he collapsed on stage.

    "The Birch", 71, was at the Leicester Mercury Sports Awards when he suffered a cardiac arrest on Thursday evening.

    Lisa Fereday, who was attending as her daughter was nominated, said Mr Birchenall's first words were, "Wow, what just happened?".

    His charity work has included putting defibrillators in public places.

    Ms Fereday went to help after Mr Birchenall collapsed while presenting awards.

    She said: "I started chest compressions and asked for the automatic defib to be brought to me as soon as possible and someone ran for that.

    "When it came I attached that and was able to deliver a shock for his arrhythmia which was pivotal in saving his life.

    "After the fourth shock he came back round and was breathing for himself again and the first thing he said to me was, 'Wow, what just happened then?'."

    Dr Douglas Skehan said: "He has had so many messages of support I have warned him not to respond to too many - but he is overjoyed by the response."

    Mr Birchenall is in a stable condition and is expected to have an operation this weekend but is due to be out of hospital within days.

    He played for youth clubs before he was spotted by Sheffield United. He went on to play for Crystal Palace and Chelsea.

    However, the majority of his playing career was a six-year spell with Leicester City.

    He made 163 appearances and scored 12 goals for the club.

    Fans are planning to show their support with a phone light display during Saturday's game against Chelsea.

  31. All MSM spin, no research. Gerry McCann is NOT a surgeon and it seems he's now allowing himself to be called professor on the back of other people's efforts.

    1. Although it is not himself bigging it up,he doesn't appear to have debunked it either,pride comes before a fall.

    2. The correct proverb is : Pride goeth before DESTRUCTION (my capitals), and a haughty spirit before a fall.

  32. From Lorraine Holden's FB page:

    Lorraine Holden
    1 hr ·

    Facts about Mr Dr Professor now apparently God McCann

    Marian Greaves wrote this............ok here to debunk this myth, he could not possibly have had anything whatsoever to do with that mans treatment let alone led this life saving stuff, he is now a Professor that lectures, he is ONLY an honorary cardiac consultant ie not on the payroll, not on the pay roll means you cannot go near a patient as you are not insured, the ONLY thing he could have done was advised on the results of the mri scan but even that is doubtful what is MORE probable is that in his capacity as a lecturer he is the one who teaches the doctors how to diagnose from an mri scan, so he is being attributed to being god like again with that, bear in mind also the doctor who spoke to the press was Doug Skehan who was his previous boss and a director of the fund for many years, pass me the sick bucket.

    1. Is it the case that Dr Gerry's much vaunted Professor status is in fact just a ruse to keep him away from any actual patients? Tracey Kandohla can claim he is engaged in ground-breaking research, while he is actually just teaching groups of students in the good old NHS tradition of "see one, do one, teach one". Even our Tracey finds it quite difficult to big up cardiology as an exciting glamorous specialty.

  33. And, also from Marian Greaves, a very interesting post:

    The world and his wife has been forced to witness that Kate and Gerry McCann are the perfect couple over the last 10 years. They are yin and yang to each other, like twins wear matching clothes, repeat each others version of events, complement each other perfectly, in every sense of the word.

    So here is an interesting one to show this is true, remember that Kate said no comment to her arguido questions except one. Well Gerry answered all of his but only one he said no comment to, enlightening:

    "--- When asked if on any occasion Madeleine was injured, he says he has no comment."

  34. Is it me or some of McCann videos have been whooshed? An example of this:

  35. Another not available:

  36. Anonymous 23:59 and Anonymous 0:03, both videos are available for me (PT). It is funny, yes, that they were not capable to produce any picture of MMC with CC, whereas so many exist of KMC with CC.
    It always touches me when I hear Eddie barking and I think I know why. The total lack of mean intention, just doing his job to please his handler, sometimes I wish we could be as pure as that.

    1. Yes, the Cuddle Cat toy, apparently Madeleine would take it everywhere, even to bed at night, yet, lying Kate tells the world she used to take it to work with her!!!
      And as you say, they have never produced even ONE photo of Madeleine with her favourite toy.
      One of my boys had a favourite teddy bear which he slept with every night and cherished it so much, that he still has it now (aged 25) and we have 100s of photographs of him with the teddy - it was like a part of him.

      As usual, the McCanns get found out on so many lies, it's untrue - literally!

  37. I'm in the UK and both the aforementioned videos are available.


    Karen Danczuk sparks fury with astonishing Twitter attack on parents of Madeleine McCann

    The former MP's wife accused Kate and Gerry McCann of "having guilt" in an explosive social media rant on Sunday

    By Gemma Mullin
    6th March 2017, 11:17 am
    Updated: 6th March 2017, 12:16 pm

    KAREN Danczuk has sparked fury with an astonishing Twitter attack on the parents of Madeleine McCann.

    The ex-wife of MP Simon, who shot to fame through her sexy selfies on social media, accused Kate and Gerry McCann of “having guilt” in an explosive social media rant on Sunday.

    She tweeted: “Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD”.

    Furious followers questioned where the 33-year-old, who recently revealed how she was sexually abused by her own brother as a child, where she was getting her information.

    One said: “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

    Rob Tomlinson warned: “Wow, strong accusations without any facts. Be careful what you say Karen.”
    The McCanns, who are subjected to 150 abusive messages from Twitter trolls every day, were on holiday in Portugal when three-year-old Madeleine went missing in May 2007.

    Gerry and Kate had left their three children – including toddler twins Sean and Amelie – sleeping in their apartment while they dined at a nearby tapas bar with friends.

    The McCanns and their friends left the restaurant roughly every half-hour to check on their children.

    When Kate returned to check on the kids about 10pm that evening she discovered that Maddie was not in her bed and was missing.

    Jodie Marsh recently launched a similar Twitter attack, slamming the McCanns while apparently watching investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas being interviewed on This Morning about the case.

    The model, 38, blasted: “In my opinion it’s all going to come crashing down for the McCanns….”.

    She added: “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…..”

    Karen, who was married to Labour MP Simon Danczuk for three years, first came to public attention because of her stream of sexy selfies on social media.

    She’s been in the headlines more recently after speaking out about the abuse she received at the hands of her brother.

    Karen’s older brother Michael Burke was convicted of eight rapes against three different victims, including his sister, on November 30 2016.

    He collapsed in court after he was found guilty of a string of sex attacks over an 18 year period between 1992 and 2010.

    Karen exclusively told The Sun how her ‘monster’ of a brother robbed her of her childhood after years of abuse.

    The 33-year-old gave evidence in court that helped put Burke behind bars, but admitted on an appearance on Loose Women that she “felt guilty for doing it”.

    She bravely waived her right to anonymity to talk about being raped by her brother between the ages of nine and 11 to encourage other survivors of sexual abuse to speak out in supports of ITV’s Never Too Late To Tell campaign.


      Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
      @TheSun When you say this tweet has sparked fury, do you mean overwhelming agreement? KD
      Karen Danczuk added,
      Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk
      Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD
      04:08 - 6 Mar 2017

    2. We hope readers can read through this.

      The first thing we want to point out is that it comes from the Scottish Sun and not from the Sun itself. It’s as if it’s a rebuttal of something but done discreetly so as not be as noticed.

      The second thing is that the article contains a screengrab of one of Karen Danczuk’s tweet. This means they had access to her account and wanted to show that.

      However, the main accusation made by Karen Danczuk is that the McCanns drugged Maddie. This was ignored. As was ignored the no DNA in the bedroom. Also ignored ref about hairbrush and toothbrush.

      As readers know, we disagree that Maddie was drugged but whether they did or did not isn’t the point at the moment. The point is Karen Danczuk accused the McCanns of that and the article ignored it.

      Anything related to linking the McCanns to Maddie’s death is ignored.

      But neglect is highlighted.

      In fact, one may think that it would be the main objective of the article.

      Or it was about the veiled legal threat “Rob Tomlinson warned: “Wow, strong accusations without any facts. Be careful what you say Karen.””

      We don’t recall seeing such a tweet, but we do remember this one:

      “Shelley bobs @NantwichGirl
      @KarenDanczuk Karen please be careful. The mcCanns are not adverse to suing people who say unsubstantiated things about them in the media.”

      In fact we think the updating of this article was to tone down the legal threat, which we think was quite more explicit.

      No, this article has the objective, in our opinion, is to allow Karen Danczuk to backtrack: Oh look how Karen Danczuk has accused the McCanns of NEGLECT! To which Danczuk replies, oh, yeah, yes I did!! They are so, so NEGLECTFUL!!

      And all accusations she made about them being involved in Maddie’s death are forgotten…

    3. Yet another having a go at Neglect.
      It may be genuinely held belief, but it adds to the pile of twitter users like Katie Hopkins.
      Actually, people who believe M was taken because she was left and who attack parents fit the troll definition more closely, because they are attacking innocent but stupid parents.
      Those of us who don't believe M was abducted or wandered off, are expressing our feelings about a massive injustice which goes beyond those immediately involved.
      Feelings which the SCJ considers valid.

    4. Anonymous 6 Mar 2017, 15:02:00,


      Promoting negligence while at the same time discrediting its promoters so at to downplay it.

      The lie of a negligence that never existed, becomes the 'truth' of a horrific mistake.

      And let's force the debate only around that: was it really, really negligence or was it just a big, enormous mistake?

      Either way, it allows the window of opportunity for those evil men to have seized the chance...

      Cunning and ingenious one must recognise.

    5. "Innocent but stupid parents". "Stupid" because unlike their acquaintances, they left a door unlocked (an euphemism for slightly open) ? Their stories about that sliding door are totally incoherent.
      There's no reason to suspect Fiona Payne when she states (rog) that KMC was worried about leaving that door open for Madeleine to be able to get out and look for her parents (staggering ! The child ignored where they were ! The fact that the group didn't react reveals a lot about their relations with the MCs). KMC was uncertain but actually didn't ask for opinions !
      This issue was related to the supposed crying episode, the "passing remark", if it occurred again and if by chance MMC discovered she was stuck indoors, that would be worse.
      I've a feeling that Fiona (consciously, unconsciously I'm not sure) told that because she wanted to show how her friend was a careful mum (which I'm sure she was). What could KMC's sudden anxiety imply if not that the door was normally locked ? (as supported by GMC's first statement).

  39. This tweet was called to our attention:

    “Annienonymous2‏ @annienonymouss
    Would anyone have a link to the newspaper article where K8 #mccann states "those that can be implicated" ...T.I.A
    2:32 PM · 1 Mar 2017

    It seems people are searching for origin of this quote. We think it's from us, suggesting this is what Kate was implying with something she said and it was not something she actually said
    We feel we should clarify that it seems to have come from the “Tide Change” post and not a newspaper article and it's not a quote from Kate:

    “From article #3 [article from the Sun by Antonella Lazzeri, published Feb 20 2016 “Kate McCann: 'I physically can't rest without knowing where Maddie is'”]:

    “Kate, from Rothley, Leicester, said she feels Maddie is still in the Algarve as that's the place she feels "closest" to her daughter.”

    To sum up the message of the 3 articles: I want closure, the twins are ready and what happened to Maddie in Praia da Luz is to be disclosed.

    Very simple, very direct, very straightforward and very objective.

    And what happened to Maddie is really all that happened to her. From the death to disposal. Thus the near Praia da Luz and not only Praia da Luz.

    All those who are to be implicated will be implicated.”

    Our words, not Kate's.


    Karen Danczuk ‘could face legal action over string of cruel tweets attacking parents of Maddie McCann’

    Her shocking outburst against Kate and Gerry "is worthy of being investigated by their lawyers", their friend said

    By Tracey Kandohla and Gemma Mullin
    6th March 2017, 6:10 pm

    KAREN DANCZUK could face legal action over cruel tweets attacking the parents of Madeleine McCann, a close pal revealed today.

    Her shocking outburst against Kate and Gerry “is worthy of being investigated by their lawyers”, their friend said.

    The couple who face the heartbreaking 10th anniversary of their daughter’s disappearance in weeks, are said to be “angry and upset” by the growing number of public rants they are subjected to.

    The former wife of Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk said Maddie’s parents “have guilt” in a brutal in online post yesterday.

    She tweeted: “Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt!”

    The McCann’s friend: “People need to remember that the family’s lawyers are kept fully informed of all social media and broadcast remarks which are malicious and libellous.

    “Their representative is fully aware of what Karen Danczuk and others are posting.

    “If anything is believed to libel them it is immediately brought to the attention of their top lawyers Carter-Ruck.

    “Kate and Gerry still get angry and upset by some of the wicked things said about them. And they worry their 12-year-old twins Sean and Amelie who use the internet may see them too.”

    Furious followers questioned where the 33-year-old, who recently revealed how she was sexually abused by her own brother as a child, where she was getting her information.

    One said: “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

    The McCanns, who are subjected to 150 abusive messages from Twitter trolls every day, were on holiday in Portugal when three-year-old Madeleine went missing in May 2007.

    Gerry and Kate had left their three children – including toddler twins Sean and Amelie – sleeping in their apartment while they dined at a nearby tapas bar with friends.

    The McCanns and their friends left the restaurant roughly every half-hour to check on their children.

    When Kate returned to check on the kids about 10pm that evening she discovered that Maddie was not in her bed and was missing.


  41. (cont.)

    The source close to heart doctor Gerry and ex GP Kate, both 48, from Rothley, Leics, added: “Any posts that are really offensive or a lie are prima facie defamatory and will be flagged up to lawyers so they can take action if necessary.

    “These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and simply rehash all the old rumours. They seem to believe talking about Madeleine’s case helps raise their profile.”

    Ms Danczuk posted a series of tweets after it was revealed Kate and Gerry had nearly been tricked into giving £25,000 from the Maddie Fund money to Karen Matthews, who faked daughter Shannon’s kidnap.

    The 33-year-old, who found fame by posting selfies of herself, has even been blasted by some of her followers for her rant against the McCanns who say there was no evidence for her claims.

    Three year old Maddie vanished from a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz in May 2007.

    Kate and Gerry’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today: “We are aware of Ms Danczuk’s comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.”

    Jodie Marsh recently launched a similar Twitter attack, slamming the McCanns while apparently watching investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas being interviewed on This Morning about the case.

    The model, 38, blasted: “In my opinion it’s all going to come crashing down for the McCanns….”.

    She added: “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…..”

    1. It really seems that the Sun has reacted to our comment at 6 Mar 2017, 13:43:00.

      Not going over, as we have already done that, of what Karen Danczuk said and is ignored in this article, we would like to ask one question:

      Reading just what is written in this article, that Karen Danczuk has, allegedly, accused the McCanns of having "left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out", in what way is it different from what was claimed by Katie Hopkins against the McCanns?

      If there is no difference, as apparently there isn't, why was not a similar action taken against Katie Hopkins?

    2. Karen did say more than leaving the children alone in other tweets which Sun didn't publish.
      Maybe Katie Hopkins stuck within certain acceptable parameters of neglect but Jodie and Karen overstepped the mark?

    3. Anonymous 7 Mar 2017, 10:19:00,

      Agree fully.

      BUT, and that's what we want to highlight, a reader who gets the news only from the MSM on this issue, someone who doesn't either have Twitter or if has doesn't follow the #McCann (which we would say would be the majority of the population), to them the papers have said that all 3 have accused the McCanns of the same thing: neglect.

      There, as has been reported in the MSM, Katie Hopkins has not kept to more acceptable parameters, to use your words. She has been equally libellous.

      So under this perspective and solely under it, Katie Hopkins should have had the same threats or put downs as the other 2 had, and fact is she hasn't.

      Now, putting Twitter into the equation, you’re absolutely right.

      However, something does not fit right with Katie Hopkins.

      Either she’s afraid of “them” and so is being very careful but that implies that these people remain powerful and will succeed in never allowing truth to surface, and that makes her efforts not only hopeless but helpful in promoting neglect or,

      “They” aren’t going after her because they are afraid of her but that makes it not understandable such constraint.

  42. Lets have a wild guess.....Katie was allowed to say it!!
    Nah couldnt be that one....could it??


    1. It looks pretty much like some entity exhorted those virtuous but malicious ladies (unless they were bitten by some kind of bee), having in common to be ignorant of the case, to accuse the poor MCs of neglect, whereas it is so obvious that they're careful parents.
      The truth is out there.

  43. It is no wonder that the larger MSM entities are not commenting, preferring I think to wait until there is something definite.

    1. Also my opinion as a former journalist (in another country, not familiar with tabloids of that kind).

  44. I am wondering whether the MSM is playing one big clever game, on one hand the MSM look like they are supporting the Mccanns but in reality the MSM is drawing peoples attention to Twitter, Facebook and to YouTube to look at the information that is already out there, you only have to look at social media and see the real facts of the case that are often quoted by the public to get the message out there.

    Personally I don't believe anyone will be sued by the Mccanns but this is just my opinion.


    Madeleine McCann's parents 'are set to sue' Karen Danczuk over cruel tweets saying they 'have guilt' over their daughter's disappearance

    Youngster went missing during family holiday in Portugal ten years ago
    Repeated investigations have failed to find out what happened to her
    MP's estranged wife launches attack on the parents online following report

    By Richard Spillett for MailOnline
    Published: 13:08 GMT, 6 March 2017 | Updated: 06:10 GMT, 7 March 2017

    Madeleine McCann's parents are planning to sue Karen Danczuk over cruel tweets accusing them of having 'guilt' over their daughter's disappearance.

    Ms Danczuk, the estranged wife of Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, has come under fire after her explosive tweets regarding Kate and Gerry McCann yesterday.

    She tweeted: 'Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD'

    Sources close to the family have revealed that the couple, who face the 10th anniversary of their daughter's disappearance in a matter of weeks, are aware of the comments as are their lawyers.

    The McCann's friend said: 'People need to remember that the family's lawyers are kept fully informed of all social media and broadcast remarks which are malicious and libellous.

    'Their representative is fully aware of what Karen Danczuk and others are posting.

    'If anything is believed to libel them it is immediately brought to the attention of their top lawyers Carter-Ruck.

    'Kate and Gerry still get angry and upset by some of the wicked things said about them. And they worry their 12-year-old twins Sean and Amelie who use the internet may see them too.'

    The friend added: 'Any posts that are really offensive or a lie are prima facie defamatory and will be flagged up to lawyers so they can take action if necessary.

    'These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and simply rehash all the old rumours. They seem to believe talking about Madeleine's case helps raise their profile.'

    Ms Danczuk posted a series of tweets about the McCanns after seeing a report that they had nearly been tricked into giving £25,000 from the Maddie Fund to Karen Matthews, who faked her daughter's kidnap.

    The mother, who found fame by posting selfies of herself online, claimed that 'someone on a council estate' would have been treated differently

    But the 33-year-old was criticised by some of her 72,000 followers, with many pointing out there was no evidence for her claims.

    Ryan Lamb‏ tweeted: 'They've lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.'


  46. (cont.)

    Karen Bleakley‏ wrote: 'Aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives.'

    And another Twitter user added: 'Are you telling me they haven't been punished. They live every day suffering. Stop judging!'

    The McCanns were having tapas with friends close to their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal on the night in 2007 when Maddie disappeared.

    Maddie and twins Sean and Amelie had been left asleep at 8.30pm in the ground-floor apartment, while Kate and Gerry dined in a restaurant 180ft away.

    The parents checked on the children throughout the evening, until Madeleine's mother discovered she was missing at 10pm.

    Local police and a £13million Scotland Yard inquiry failed to unearth any significant clues as to where she went.

    The McCanns, who are said to get around 150 abusive messages every day, have not commented on Ms Danczuk's tweets.

    Following a similar attack on them by model Jodie Marsh recently, a source close to the couple said: 'Kate and Gerry won't be saying anything to fuel this whirlwind of nonsense. They don't want to give these peoples' egos even more exposure.'

    Kate and Gerry's spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today: 'We are aware of Ms Danczuk's comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.'


    Mulher de deputado inglês fala em "culpa" dos McCann e é insultada

    Maddie McCann desapareceu da Praia da Luz, no Algarve, há 10 anos e até hoje não foi encontrada.

    Karen Danczuk, mulher do deputado trabalhista Simon Danczuk, comentou no último domingo o célebre caso do desaparecimento de Maddie McCann e acabou por ser criticada e insultada pelos compatriotas que a seguem na plataforma.

    Tudo começou num primeiro tweet em que Karen Danczuk sugere que, independentemente de quem for culpado pelo desaparecimento da criança, o casal McCann não está isento de culpas

    “Quem disser que os McCann estão inocentes, lembrem-se que deixaram três crianças com menos de quatro anos para saírem. Seja como for, têm culpa”, escreveu.

    Karen Danczuk, mulher do deputado trabalhista Simon Danczuk, comentou no último domingo o célebre caso do desaparecimento de Maddie McCann e acabou por ser criticada e insultada pelos compatriotas que a seguem na plataforma.

    Tudo começou num primeiro tweet em que Karen Danczuk sugere que, independentemente de quem for culpado pelo desaparecimento da criança, o casal McCann não está isento de culpas.

    “Quem disser que os McCann estão inocentes, lembrem-se que deixaram três crianças com menos de quatro anos para saírem. Seja como for, têm culpa”, escreveu.

    Nunca ficou provado o que aconteceu a Madeleine McCann nem a criança foi encontrada desde que desapareceu da Praia da Luz, em 2007.

    O assunto, no entanto, divide opiniões em Portugal e no Reino Unido.

    No Twitter de Karen Danczuk, houve quem a acusasse de insensibilidade e quem recorresse a termos mais insultuosos. Tratam-se de tweets de que o Daily Mail dá conta mas que, entretanto, já foram apagados.

    Saliente-se que houve também quem se colocasse ao lado de Karen nas críticas. Um seguidor sugere que se os McCann fossem um casal que recebesse apoios sociais ou o ordenado mínimo teriam sido “vilipendiados” e “castigados”

    Ao passo que outra seguidora alerta Karen para que “tenha cuidado”, que os McCann a poderão processar.


    Karen Danczuk launches astonishing attack on parents of Madeleine McCann claiming they have "guilt" over disappearance

    The selfie queen ex-wife of MP Simon Danczuk faced a backlash over her comments about Kate and Gerry McCann leaving their young children alone

    ByPaul Byrne
    02:03, 7 MAR 2017
    Updated07:03, 7 MAR 2017

    Selfie queen Karen Danczuk has launched an astonishing attack on the parents of missing Madeleine McCann .

    The estranged wife of MP Simon Danczuk accused Kate and Gerry McCann of “having guilt” for leaving their children alone.

    She tweeted about claims Karen Matthews , who faked her daughter Shannon’s kidnap in 2008, tried to con the McCanns out of £25,000 .

    Danczuk ranted: “Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD”

    The McCanns have never been charged with any offence in relation to Madeleine’s disappearance in May 2007.

    British police suspect the youngster, then aged three, was snatched by traffickers when she disappeared from the family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

    Mrs Danczuk, 33, best known for her selfie snaps, came in for criticism from some of her 72,000 followers.

    Ryan Lamb tweeted: “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

    And Karen Bleakley wrote: “Aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives.”

    The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell last night dismissed the claims.

    He told the Daily Star: “We are aware of Ms Danczuk’s comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.”

    Mrs Danczuk took to Twitter in the wake of weekend stories claiming the McCann’s were nearly tricked out of £25,000 by kidnap lie mum Karen Matthews.

    Police advised the family not to hand the money over.

    Matthews, 40, was later jailed for the abduction of her own daughter Shannon, aged nine, in Dewsbury, West Yorks, in 2008, a bid to claim reward cash.


    Madeleine McCann's parents dismiss astonishing attack from 'selfie queen' Karen Danczuk

    “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

    ByPaul Byrne
    08:17, 7 MAR 2017

    The parents of Madeleine McCann have dismissed an astonishing attack from Rochdale's 'selfie queen' Karen Danczuk.

    The estranged wife of MP Simon Danczuk accused Kate and Gerry McCann of “having guilt” for leaving their children alone, the Mirror reports .

    She tweeted about claims that Karen Matthews, who faked her daughter Shannon’s kidnap in 2008, tried to con the McCanns out of £25,000.

    Danczuk said: “Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD”

    The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell last night dismissed the claims.

    He told the Daily Star: “We are aware of Ms Danczuk’s comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.”

    The McCanns have never been charged with any offence in relation to Madeleine's disappearance in May 2007.

    British police suspect the youngster, then aged three, was snatched by traffickers when she disappeared from the family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

    Mrs Danczuk, 33, best known for her selfie snaps, came in for criticism from some of her 72,000 followers.

    Ryan Lamb tweeted: “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

    And Karen Bleakley wrote: “Aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives.”

    Mrs Danczuk took to Twitter in the wake of weekend stories claiming the McCann’s were nearly tricked out of £25,000 by kidnap lie mum Karen Matthews.

    Police advised the family not to hand the money over.

    Matthews, 40, was later jailed for the abduction of her own daughter Shannon, aged nine, in Dewsbury, West Yorks, in 2008, a bid to claim reward cash.

  50. About the eventual McCann v Danczuk, and irrelevant if it ever happens, we would like for someone to tell Karen Danczuk that she should issue, as soon as possible, an apology to the McCanns.

    She has clearly accused them of having drugged Maddie and there is absolutely no evidence that substantiates that.

    1. I concur, and so should others no matter what their beliefs.

      She is oh so wrong with her outrageous assumptions.

    2. Who is supposed to suggest an apology ?


      14th sep 007

      The daily telegraph reported that a french newspaper called France Soir died of an overdose of sleeping tablets. see link above.

    4. France Soir isn't exactly a tabloid. Guilhem Battut seems to have been informed that MMC had been likely sedated, the thesis of GA. The news was transformed or interpreted as overdose by the media around.
      I couldn't find the France Soir article on line, but a lot of articles that start with "France Soir said..."

    5. AnneGuedes 7 Mar 2017, 19:45:00,

      We were suggesting for someone on Twiiter to recommend that to her.

      As far as we know, she has deleted the tweets but they are in the media articles.

      We think that something like "on reading better the PJ Files, I've come to realise that there's no evidence about the McCanns drugging Maddie, for that reason, my apologies."

      We all make mistakes and this should serve as a lesson to all those who spread things that are not fact as fact.

    6. Anonymous 7 Mar 2017, 20:09:00 and AnneGuedes7 Mar 2017, 21:39:00,

      However credible France Soir and the Telegraph may be, anyone drugging Maddie is not on the PJ Files and that is what matters.

    7. Also, didnt KM think the twins had been drugged, she checked their breathing with a hand on their backs. recommended drug testing weeks later. did FP also confirm this. Also I remember seeing the police officers carrying the twins that night and wondering how they could have not been awake. Did the Mccanns aso not suggest that maybe all 3 children had been drugged.

    8. re 20.09

      reported MBM died NOT the newspaper France soir ;)

    9. Anonymous 7 Mar 2017, 21:53:00,

      However that may be interpreted, Karen Danczuk mentioned Maddie and not the twins.

    10. Seems crazy to me that an abductor would sedate the twins (who they were not taking) and not the child they were taking, who would most likely wake up due to being disturbed at some point during the abduction, ie when first being picked up, or when going from inside to outside. How do you quantify KM`s concern for the twins being drugged and not think that she must also think that MBM had been drugged/sedated also. Now it may not be in the PJ files (im afraiD i dont know either way), but we do know that KM had these concerns and that they were also voiced by FP.

    11. Why would you drug kids who are already sleeping like logs ?
      But those who saw them found that their sleep wasn't normal. A GNR stated so. Their mother, who surely knew very well how her kids slept, was obviously concerned. FP, a practising anaesthetist, noted but suggested nothing, as she said nothing when her friend announced that the patio door was left open for MMC be able to go out and look for her parents. Guess who is the dominant one !

    12. People should know by now to be more discerning when it comes to the so-called accuracy of newspaper and media in general reports.

    13. Blaming for neglect is easy. Hence its success. Any story that makes you feel good because you wouldn't do what's at stake is bound to be preferred to any truth that disturbs you, forcing you to face reality.

    14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    15. AnneGuedes 8 Mar 2017, 14:33:00,

      Agree fully with you.

  51. Well,whatever the crack is with McCann's and msm personally for me it all for shutting these sites down greater controls on what any family should be made to put up with because of free speech blah blah, its already led to one suicide. "Trolls" we're called and every time these idiotic celebrities spout of in come the "Trolls" many share the factual information,loads insult but the majority now is bloody neglect who gives a shit whether they did or didn't your wasting your time and your breath and I for one am sick of it and quite frankly ready to Jack the lot,I was basically called a pro the other day because I believe neglect ffs. My point is this they admitted it's none worldwide they admitted and if the Portuguese and Sy decide they can use it to get them off the hook for the death and concealment they know they've done,then they will and all we will do is show outrage,just like any other cover up that's ever gone on in this world.
    What your actually doing right now those jumping on these pathetic msm comments section is giving all the ammunition they need for another nice little dossier of the more juicer "Trolls" for someone above us and should be adhered to enough is enough.
    No neglect=no abduction quite frankly no one gives a f##k

  52. As you know we disagree with you.

    We think the effort of debunking neglect is of capital importance.

    Without it nothing in their story adds up.

    1. For this an authentic time-line is required.

  53. Installing a neglect-narrative may become a new way to cover up a crime / an unwelcome accident with children as victims. If Mr. and Mrs. McCann get away with this, they have set a precedent that will cause severe headaches for police and judiciary.

  54. We would like for readers to note how the Ghoul Tour Man, has reported the SJC ruling:

    “February 2017 saw a lot of hot air re Madeleine McCann. Loose Women debated the Supreme Court decision to refuse to hear the McCanns appeal, and…”

    The SJC heard the McCann appeal but said this way, all those visiting his blog – and the media has facilitated for this to happen - will be further convinced that the Portuguese justice system is biased against the McCanns.

  55. Dear Textusa, in a word :
    There is a B.T and a A.T. = Before Textusa and After Textusa.
    Heartfelt gratitude.

  56. What reason would the McCann's have to sedate their children?

    1. To put an end to the sedation issue:

      Kate says on her “Madeleine” book (pages 75 - 76):

      “"Had Maddie been given some kind of sedative to keep her quiet? Had the twins too?"

      "I reported my fears that all 3 children could have been sedated."”

      On the PJ Files there is no such report, and we believe that if it ever existed – which we don’t think it has it would be there.

      There is nothing in PJ files to prove if the twins were sedated by anyone as no contemporaneous tests were carried out.

      To be noted is the she didn't take the twins to hospital to check.

      Was this to fit in with the alleged tea stain on Maddie’s pj top was all about, a possible previous attempt at drugging by an abductor?

      Note also that Kate implies that drugs may have been used by a third party and not by them.

      What Karen Danczuk is saying or suggesting is that it was the McCanns who sedated Maddie.

      Obviously nobody knows if she was sedated or not, let alone who might have done it. We are of the opinion – and it is just our opinion – that she wasn’t.

      We in the blog believe that sedation was only used, and without any harm to any of the children, on Thursday evening/night, after Maddie died and the sedation was done with the purpose of having the children asleep and out of the way while the adults thought of a way to get out of the predicament they were in.

      The suggestion that Karen Dancsuk should apologise was in the spirit of advice if she was legally pursued for her tweets.

      But if expressed as her opinion only, is this not covered by free speech?

      Maybe that is the clarification she needs to make, as Gerry once said he had no problem with people purporting theories.

  57. "We better deal with this now because if we do not, some other Taoiseach will be standing here in 20 years saying, “If only we knew then and if only we had done then”.

    These are Edna Kenny's words yesterday regarding Tuam.....Theresa May take note

    1. Anonymous 8 Mar 2017, 11:38:00,

      We are certain you mean Enda Kenny and Not Edna Kenny :)

    2. Ha ha I almost gave him a sex change

  58. Ladies,

    Can u assist there anything in the files or anywhere that would let me know if the McCanns had access on their own to 5a AFTER the Police arrived and the following morning??

    1. Anonymous 8 Mar 2017, 16:57:00,

      As far as we are aware, and will evidently stand corrected, the apartment was not sealed between the end of operations that night and PJ returning next day to get the T9 and take them to Portimão for statements

      Kate McCann in her book seems to say clearly that apartment was not sealed:

      Page 79:

      “The next thing I knew, the PJ officers were heading for the front door. I felt another surge of panic. When I asked them anxiously where they were going, they said they had finished for tonight. They told us we could take whatever we needed for the twins from the children’s room. . Rather more frantically, I tried to establish what would be happening next and for the remainder of the hours of darkness. The only answer the officers gave us was that they would come back in the morning. Pressed as to when, they said it would be after nine. And with that they were gone, leaving us to our own devices. It was incomprehensible. Surely that couldn’t be it for the night? The sense of helplessness and agitation just kept intensifying.”

      Page 80:

      “We probably could have stayed in our apartment, but who would have wanted to? Looking back, it’s inexplicable, of course, that we should ever have been left in what was now a crime scene. We shouldn’t even have been allowed to take things out of the children’s bedroom. Mark Warner had prepared another flat for us on the first floor of an adjacent block, but Gerry and I were in no condition to be on our own. We couldn’t look after ourselves, let alone the twins. So the staff put up two extra cots in Fiona and David’s apartment and we carried a sleepy Sean and Amelie into their sitting room. But I needed to keep them close to me. I lowered myself down on to the couch with Fiona. She took a twin from me and we both sat there hugging my children. Holding one of my babies provided me with some much-needed comfort, albeit fleetingly.”

    2. Not sure how the contents of this book can be relied on considering the history of rubbish and lies coming from these people. Is there anything else anywhere that shows that the room was not sealed?

  59. As usual i take my hat off....many thanks!!

  60. This comment has been removed by the author.

  61. Sorry, I had to delete, too many typos. Here it is again :
    KMC is dreaming, by no means they could have stayed in 5A. The PJ (Victor Martins and João Barreiras) arrived (at about 0:45), they were horrified by the state of the crime scene, they immediately asked John H. through Emma K. to assign another flat to the MCs, in order for J. Barreiras to do his work. One hour or so later, when the dogs arrived, the new flat (4G) was ready and a GNR took the twins there. Kate left 5A with Fiona. GMC remained and made his first statement (see PJ report). At about 4:00 am, the two PJ officers left after having locked 5A's door and asked 2 GNR to guard the flat. This is when GMC asked the way to the church and KMC whether the roads had been blocked. The MCs decided to take the twins to the Paynes' flat. The 5A was't yet properly sealed, but it was guarded and nobody could get in.

    1. The lies just seem to come so easily seem to pour out of kmcc she must have done a lot of blinking when she wrote her garbage.

    2. Thank you AnneGuedes 9 Mar 2017, 01:51:00,

      Vitor Martins is quite clear about that:

      "Refere ainda que, ao sair, o apartamento foi fechado à chave, ficando o espaço preservado pelos elementos da GNR que se mantiveram nas imediações do local"

      "Refers further that, upon leaving, the apartment was locked, being the space preserved by the GNR elements who were maintained in the immediate proximity of the place.”

      So we stand corrected, the place was indeed sealed and no one could just simply walk in and much less spend the night there.

      Media reported Gerry coming out with belongings on May 5th, so maybe they were allowed back when photographs were done?

      They did have to collect clothing and other items not taken with them on the night of 3rd.

    3. Fingerprints were only taken inside as apartment was sealed.

  62. brilliant post yet again, thankyou textusa
    Debbie Lee Perry


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.