Last week we left for analysis and consideration a debrief about Operation Task, which was, if we are to believe that document, a Gold police operation set-up to handle the Maddie Case.
We published the debrief without comment to allow our readers to form their own opinion about it.
In the comment we have said that “this report [is] not only interesting but also one very important document to be understood in both its intent and meaning”.
So, it was our intent to write this week about it.
However, we think it’s more opportune at this point in time to register here what we consider to have been a very relevant event in the Maddie case: the demise of the Woman-in-Purple (WIP)
WIP’s erasure is present and pressing, the debrief, however important and it is, is past and can wait for another week.
We have dealt now with WIP in two posts, one called “Woman-in-Purple” and the other “Fat-shaming”.
In the first one, in May, we showed not only the lack of credibility of Jenny Murat but as we said that then the idea was also to separate the waters between WIP and Jane Tanner.
Tanner was supposed to be at Tapas when Jez Wilkins says he saw her outside the building where apartment 5A is located wearing a purple top, so a story had to be made up that he didn’t see her but a completely different woman, one who was, according to Jenny Murat, slight and with a plum, not purple, top.
We would like to note that this personal commitment to perpetuate the hoax by Jenny Murat is something we have yet to see addressed by some of Murat’s supporters on the internet.
We would really like to know if they think Jenny was being truthful or not.
If they think she’s being truthful, then did she see WIP when she was heading for the supermarket or when she was returning from it? If they think it was on the way there, why do they think she says it was when she was returning and if they think it was on the way back, then why do they think she said it was on the way there?
And since she thought this woman was suspicious as she even took notes, why didn’t she report this woman to the PJ when giving her statement?
And if they don’t think she’s being truthful, then why do they think that is so?
The honest ones will answer, the others we know will pretend they haven’t read this.
In the second post, two weeks ago, we showed how the WIP had been upgraded into wanting her to look like Jane Tanner.
This upgrade relied on the Tapas staff guaranteeing her alibi, and that in turn would ‘force’ not having seen her but her doppelganger who would also be the woman Jennifer Conroy had seen at the Varna Airport on May 25, together with a child she alleges looked like Maddie.
Note that Jenny Murat continues to be used to corroborate the existence of this fictional character, only now nothing is said about her being slight or she was wearing plum.
Purple, the colour described by Jez Wilkins, is the one that must now be driven into people’s mind.
We said this happened because the other side was trying to show government how, in their opinion, there was a way to archive the case based on what was in the PJ Files.
3. The WIP and the Todorovs
After having made her debut in May, the WIP resurfaced with the Daily Mail article by Neil Tweedie, published Nov 03 2017 at 22:05, updated Nov 4 2017 08:27 “The TWO vital Maddie questions: Why didn't the Met quiz the McCanns again and who was the woman in purple?”
People will remember that then all the public attention was focused on the sex pest list (does the reader still remember it?) and in our “Fat-shaming” post, published on Nov 10, we made the association between it and the WIP.
To be clear, we think that the sex pest list had nothing to do with the Maddie case but we do believe that the resurfacing of the WIP was a consequence of the sex-pest list.
Then, in our researches we found the Todorovs by checking OC staff list for Bulgarian employees.
We immediately discarded the possibility of the WIP being Luísa Todorov. For the reasons we have expressed in a comment in our last post:
“Textusa 19 Nov 2017, 13:51:00
About Pillowman's fantastic detective work, let us just say that we came across the Todorovs the minute we started doing research about Woman-in-Pink.
It was an easy process to look at the only Bulgarian on OC staff list.
We didn't think then they would be named for the reasons we have expressed above: naming them kills the Woman-in-Pink [my mistake, why I wrote pink instead of purple escapes me] theory.
We remind readers that Pillowman has been given by the British Broadcasting Service, via Richard Bilton, the same credibility that BBC has given to Sir Paul Stephenson, Simon Foy, Jim Gamble, Clarence Mitchell, José Sócrates and Robert Murat, just to name those who came immediately to our mind.”
But to our surprise, a satisfying one we must say, we saw that Luísa Todorov was said to be the WIP.
Note, we consider to have been a satisfying surprise the fact that WIP was given a name and certainly not by the fact that another powerless person was dragged into the case.
We evidently weren’t happy for Luisa Todorov, who has to face her neighbours in Almadena. Hopefully, they will dismiss the story as the rubbish it is.
But it is factual that James Murray has named the WIP in his exclusive Express article “Madeleine McCann: Police hunt waitress believed to be mysterious 'woman in purple'”, published, Sun, Nov 19, 2017:
“Waitress Luisa Todorov, 58, is believed to be the mystery woman seen by two witnesses standing outside apartment 5a of the Ocean Club from where Madeleine was taken 10 years ago.”
4. Scratch WIP
Please note that Murray confirms that this resurfacing of the WIP had to with what we said as he also links her with the Varna airport sighting:
“In August 2007 a British woman reported seeing a child who looked mile Madeleine at Varna airport in Bulgaria, but the information was very sketchy and did not check out.”
This is rather specious as it implies that this sighting happened in August 2007, when it happened in May and was only reported in August. Completely different to see and report something immediately from seeing it and then reporting it 3 months later.
But what is relevant is that this Varna sighting was considered to be “very sketchy and did not check out”. Or in other words, not credible to put it plainly.
With giving WIP an identity – invented just like the character itself, we would ask Luísa Todorov to not even bother to go look in her wardrobe to see if she has any purple top – and with the Varna sighting dissed, the WIP is now officially dead.
Plus, taking into consideration the age difference between Tanner and Todorov, no one now can even think of suggesting they could have been mistaken one for the other.
So, whoever Jennifer Conroy saw, thought she saw or dreamed of seeing, is simply not the same woman Jez Wilkins saw loitering about outside building 5 on the evening of May 3 2007.
One relevant consequence with have scratched the WIP character out of the plot is that it leaves things before May 2017, when WIP appeared: Jane Tanner outside building 5 alone in the chilly May 3 evening when she says she was at Tapas.
5. The response
The other side responded with 3 articles:
- The Mirror article by Martin Fricker, published Nov 19 2017 at 17:48, updated at 19:47 “Mystery 'woman in purple' sought by Madeleine McCann police identified as waitress” where it is said:
“A criminologist claims to have identified a mystery woman being sought by British police in connection with Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.
Now criminologist Heriberto Janosch Gonzalez claims to have identified the woman as Bulgarian waitress Luisa Todorov.
Spanish criminologist Gonzalez, who has investigated the case for 10 years, is convinced Luisa is the mystery woman.
He said: “I have been combing through all the police files trying to identify who the woman in purple could be.
“It has been widely reported that Yard officers are in Bulgaria.
“Examining all the known statements it seems highly likely the police are seeking the Todorovs.
“They are the only known people with a clear link to Bulgaria.
“I have been unable to trace them in Portugal and believe they could have moved away.
“It is widely known that many workers at the Ocean Club were made redundant so it is possible they went to Bulgaria seeking work.””
- The Daily Mail article by Gareth Davies and Thomas Burrows, published Nov 20 2017 07:30, updated at 08:05 “Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are scouring Bulgaria for a waitress they believe could be the 'woman in purple' last seen outside her apartment”, that says:
“Heriberto Janosch González, who has been investigating the case for 10 years, is convinced Mrs Todorov is the mystery 'woman in purple'.
He said: 'I have been combing through all the police files trying to identify who the woman in purple could be.
'It has been widely reported that Yard officers are in Bulgaria.
'Examining all the known statements it seems highly likely the police are seeking the Todorovs. They are the only known people with a clear link to Bulgaria.'”
- The article in the Mirror by Martin Fricker, published Nov 23 2007 at 22:04 and updated at 22:10, “I'm not Madeleine McCann case "woman in purple" insists waitress after criminologist's claim”.
“After a criminologist identified Luisa Todorov as the mystery women police are said to be searching for, she claims to have "no idea about" any such person
A criminologist claimed to have identified Luisa Todorov as the mystery person police are said to be searching for.
Criminologist Heriberto Janosch Gonzalez recently named the woman as Luisa, who now uses her maiden name Camara on social media.”
Note how all 3 articles are very clear in stating that the link between Luísa Todorov and WIP has been made solely and exclusively by the ridiculous and embarrassing Pillowman. His foolishness.
Not, according to them to be mistaken for the real WIP, the one seen at Varna airport, the one who looks really like Jane Tanner, the one who was seen by Jez Wilkins and Jenny Murat in Luz.
The latest article by Fricker even goes as far as showing a picture of Luísa, which we will not reproduce here out of respect for her, and one can see that she’s not fat or wobbly. So, clearly a different person, they’re saying. Or begging.
What they seem not to have realised is what we have already mentioned, and that Murray is quite specific in saying the Varna sighting is useless: “In August 2007 a British woman reported seeing a child who looked mile Madeleine at Varna airport in Bulgaria, but the information was very sketchy and did not check out.”
Time to quote Monty Python on the parrot sketch: “'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!”
All the other side has to do is replace the he for a she and parrot for WIP and the above is quite correct.
Begging to bring back to life something that is so clearly dead just shows despair. The lack of any other options. The WIP is their last line of defense.
It is not up to the other side to decide on whether the WIP is dead or not. If whoever has the capacity to decide has decided the WIP is dead, then the WIP is dead. That simple.
6. Archival variations
Having understood the case and seeing the impossibility of coming out with any different solution we have repeatedly maintained that Operation Grange could only have one of 2 outcomes: archival or truth.
A scapegoat was never an option.
Putting the blame on anyone, no matter how poor and powerless they may be, would always indicate that facts could be checked and any path outside the truth cannot afford any kind of fact checking.
Archival has two options, the mythical or the shambolic.
The mythical archival is what the other side has pursued relentlessly.
Explaining it, it would be to find a vague someone who cannot be found and put the blame of taking a dead Maddie with him/her/them.
That’s why we had the bungled burglary. Burglars who took Maddie and albeit with the best efforts of the British police, could not be found. No one would be pinpointed; no fact could be checked (outside what is in the PJ Files) and a “mythical someone” would have been the whodunnit.
That’s why we also had the human trafficking gang who, let us repeat the above, took Maddie and albeit with the best efforts of the British police, could not be found and, yes you guessed it, no one would be pinpointed; no fact could be checked (outside what is in the PJ Files) and a “mythical someone” would have been the whodunnit.
And that’s why we had the WIP. A Jane Tanner doppelganger, seen by Jez Wilkins at Luz on the evening Maddie disappeared and allegedly by Jennifer Conroy at Varna airport – please forget Andy Redwood said there was reason to believe Maddie never left apartment alive – and could not be found. Again, no one would be pinpointed; no fact could be checked (outside what is in the PJ Files) and a “mythical someone” would have been the whodunnit.
The bungled burglary has been discarded, the human trafficking gang as well and now the WIP has met her doom.
With the falling of the WIP, the last of the “mythical someone” has gone.
That’s the relevance of having killed the WIP theory.
That leaves, in terms of archival, only one option: the shambolic one.
The option that means Operation Grange would close without any conclusion.
No conclusion whatsoever after having spent so many years and so much money, after Whitehall having been being convinced of the existence of compelling evidence and of the importance of a key-witness who would finally solve the case.
A conclusion without a conclusion except the one that concludes that Operation Grange has chased windmills, has made a mockery out of Scotland Yard and a fool out of the nation.
It would be the UK pretending that the entire world doesn’t know that they’re protecting the McCanns. Including the British public who have paid for this farce and who will bear this shame.
It would be officially accepting that Britain has the most incompetent and over-spending police in the world.
To knowingly erode the credibility of the UK in times when the exact opposite was not only convenient but an absolute necessity.
Oh, and it would also be assuming that the UK is willing to accept the shameful exposure when truth finally arises.
The exposure of all those now involved in the hoax and which history won’t fail to register because the evidence will continue to be available for all to see and not stored away in some secret safe somewhere.
People lose importance with time, and the stranglehold will have to loosen up sometime. It’s inevitable, and one has to look back and learn from history that for each one who is remembered for having done good, a hundred rotten apples pass the test of time.
With the loss of power comes the loss of influence.
Then people will read and not be threatened by the libel menace we were acutely subject to back in 2008/2009. Strength will come in numbers and people will comment more and more and even if they continue to insist wrongly on negligence, there will be one common denominator: the shameful UK.
And pages like Wikipedia will start to lose credibility if it continues to perpetuate evident and blatant falsities that everyone knows to be lies.
History is cruel, as it usually ignores all the good one has done or tried to do, to focus on what one has messed up. And the Maddie case is one huge mess that will forever be associated with the UK.
Which names will be associated with that utter disgrace, is now being decided by those who through their current and present actions will determine on which side of the fence they will fall, if the good or if the evil.
The irony will be that those who will be exposed for wrongdoing – in case truth is now not outed – most of them were not even in Luz on May 3 3007.
Let’s take Hillsborough as an example. Were those exposed the ones at the stadium or the ones who covered up for them?
But, they are now the ones shaping their own heritage, so they will be the only ones they will be able to blame for the way they will be remembered by history.
David Cameron, to mention a name, has missed his opportunity and we all know on which side of the fence he was sitting and will be remembered for when this case is studied by criminal and law scholars as well as debated and commented on by the public in the future as the result of the natural curiosity that famous crimes always generate.
7. The sex-pest list
A little over 20 days have passed since the sex-pest list made its appearance. And as it came, it went.
That tells us that in these days sex scandals sell a whole lot less than they used to.
The current political volatility is absorbing our attention totally. 2 weeks ago, Theresa May was hanging on by her fingertips and she’s still PM and showing no signs of leaving just yet.
Never the expression of what is true today may not be true tomorrow has been more apt than presently.
Also, outside politics, with so many and such serious sex-harassment allegations coming forward, the sex-scandals involving consenting adults have taken a back seat. No one is really paying attention to them.
And lastly, the rhythm we get fed information is such that it’s really hard to keep pace with it all.
This to say that the shooting-star that was the sex-pest list in the scandal sky was just a stripe among so many others that appeared momentarily.
The sex-pest list has shown that if the Maddie sex-scandal was to be outed, people would be infuriated but in terms of personal damage would be like a wave washing up on the shore. It would come, wet feet, some would gasp in surprise how cold it was but the reaction would be gone to be followed by another brought by the next wave.
The near-circle of those outed would be the only ones remembering but we imagine that this same circle we imagine already knows the truth and has likely gone out of their way to stop it from being known by others.
We don’t think that it is because of outing swingers that the truth in the Maddie case remains hostage.
We think it has much more to do with what is contained in the Operation Task debrief than anything else.
The Maddie case now seems to lack PR and spin with its story presentation and is rapidly becoming a national bad and sick joke.
The Decision Makers need to act quickly to end the farce and the only decision being to prosecute all those involved and risk the almighty repercussions, or archive and face ignominious and severe criticism for wasting time, money and precious police resources on wild goose chases.
It’s been like watching a snowball rolling down a hill, picking up in size and momentum, or the unravelling of a knitted sweater by a playful cat.
When the likes of Bell Pottinger and Hanover conducted their PR, the stories could be spun, but by the time we got to the 3 Bungling Burglars, the show became like a tragic opera performed badly by an amateur company, as the audience began to titter when they were supposed to cry.
The opera company being the media.
And now we have the Non-Bulgarian woman in purple, the audience is becoming hysterical with laughter.
With her death on stage, the play has simply run out of characters.
Taking the opportunity of the remake of the Murder on the Orient Express, maybe now is a good time for a Hercules Poirot to summon all to the restaurant carriage?
Note, WIP did not die of natural causes. Someone very clearly has announced that this character stopped having any place in this play.
About Sergey Malinka’s book we will wait and see on which side of the fence it will fall, and then and only then will we see if he’s a man of integrity or just another Colin Sutton.