Friday, 12 January 2018

Gemma O'Doherty

We were not going to publish anything this week. Simply for personal reasons.

However, we could not let pass without giving an opinion, however short – and it will be very short – about Gemma O’Doherty’s investigation to be published in the Village Magazine later this month.

About the magazine we would like to highlight what a reader of ours has said about it:

Anonymous 10 Jan 2018, 16:39:00

I think it's important to point out that Village Magazine is a professionally printed magazine which is available in retail outlets, news-stands, etc. It has been around since 2004 and prides itself on investigative journalism. And attempts to sue it have been made on numerous occasions. Please see:

About the investigation itself we will say that we consider it an important event and will not say anything further so as not to influence it in any way.

We would like to make it very clear that we think that Gemma O’Doherty is an absolutely independent journalist – from what we have read about her, we think that is something she’s very proud of – so we are, again to be very clear, not implying she’s playing any game within the game.

We will just say she’s a mass of air about to flow through the board.

She can be from a gentle breeze that will simply refresh the pieces on the board to a full tornado that will throw them all about.

What sort of flux of air she will be, we will wait to see if it will be Hurricane Gemma or a passing breeze.

What we have seen is some quickly reaching for scarfs and coats. That, we must say, has pleased us.


  1. It's interesting to note that since Gemma has been tweeting the pro's seem to be very upset especially because they are not been allowed to post their vies as Gemma is blocking them all, hence some new accounts have been created to defend.

  2. I do hope that you are right about Gemma O’Doherty being absolutely independent. If so, her investigation can only serve the Truth. However, so few journalists have shown independence in the Maddie case that it might be preferable to remain agnostic on this matter until we get to know more from Mrs O'Doherty.

    1. We will keep watching and will wait for the publication of the article(s).

      Then we will express what we think about it. Not only what we will think about it but what we do think about it now - at a time when we do not know its content(s) - and have expressed offline between ourselves.

      There are reasons that make us try to keep as motionless as we are able to on this issue.

      We won't even say if we're optimistic or not.

      We are just out with our wind measuring gadgets ready to measure from breezes to force 5 hurricanes.

      And, as your scepticism - to which you are evidently entitled for the reasons you have expressed - suggests, simply measure a windless day if that is to be the case.

  3. The only real winds that will do damage is if OG and more importantly the PJ solve the case,March is rapidly approaching,will a new tranche of monies be asked for an approved? remember from Hogan Howes one last line of enquiry to Rowleys small number of enquiries what will the next mouth piece bring to the party one wonders.

    1. We all know the list of Prime Minsters Blair, Brown, Cameron and now May who seem to have given their personal touch to the case, I single out May as being somewhat different, backed into a corner by Cameron & Brooks, and she (May) had like other home secretaries refused a review.

      BUT ! Enter stage right, as in Cameron's cabinet, is Ester McVey now in May's cabinet. Must be deemed the darling of the Tories, lost her seat at the last election, then stood again & won a safe Tory seat, now back in cabinet.

      If ever there was any intrigue about the McCanns touch on Government, and that has to be said across the board, Labour & Conservative (Tory) there can be nothing quite like having a former director of the FUND Limited and best friend at the centre of government.

      Who says there will not be another round of funding, irrespective of the needs of the tax paying nation! (see highmyope 1955 below)

  4. I wonder if OG will be wound up if/ when a major disaster occurs. "A good day to bury bad news" could happen; how can the police, home office and all the rest admit that a large sum of public money (enough to provide end of life care to approximately 3,000 patients) has been spent and nothing has been achieved? Or will the long-suffering British taxpayer be told what has been happening and what chance there is of solving the case?

    1. Hi to highmyhope 1955,I do not wish to sound dispondent,but on money costs to the Tax payer,One billion pounds has been spent by UK Government in the still unsolved Murder of Daniel Morgan 31 yrs ago 10 March 1987,Eh Rupert,do any of your former employees know or can help the Metropolitan Police Service,solve this case?

    2. And highmyope 1955 there has been no major disasters since 2011 that would have allowed them bury bad news. people believe that this case will be solved because SY have stuck in there for going on 7 years. How can you still suspect that it's all part of a scam to absolve the McCanns

  5. It looks like the pro Mc Twitter world has gone silent. The calm before the storm?


    1. Blood-soaked body of 'James Bond-style' private eye who conned the fund to find Maddie McCann out of £300,000 is found at his Surrey mansion

      EXCLUSIVE: Mystery surrounds the death of private detective Kevin Halligen, 56
      His body was found at a Surrey mansion and police have launched a probe
      Halligen took over the private investigation into the McCann case in May 2008 but was later accused of conning the family fund out of £300,000

      By Steve Anderson For Mailonline
      PUBLISHED: 15:24 GMT, 13 January 2018 | UPDATED: 15:50 GMT, 13 January 2018

      The blood-soaked body of a private detective who probed the disappearance of Maddie McCann has been found at his Surrey mansion.

      Mystery surrounds the death of Kevin Halligen, 56, who is said to have presented himself as a 'cloak-and-dagger, James Bond-style spy' - with police confirming to MailOnline today that a probe has been launched.

      Halligen took over the private investigation into the McCann case in May 2008 but was later accused of conning the family fund out of £300,000.

      It is believed he was found at the home of his long-term girlfriend. There is no suggestion that she was involved in his death.

      One former colleague told MailOnline: 'The house was covered in blood but apparently that was from Kevin falling down so much.

      'His body is now in the morgue. The police are looking into it.'

      A spokesman for Surrey Police said today: 'We were called to an address in Cobbett Hill Road, Normandy, Guildford, on Monday following a report of a man in his 50s having been taken unwell, who subsequently died.

      'The death is being treated as unexplained and a file will be passed to the coroner's office in due course.'

      Another source told MailOnline: 'He died at his girlfriend's place near Guildford, a miserable pathetic death caused by alcohol.'

      The McCanns hired Halligen's firm in a bid to boost the search for Maddie after failing to come up with any plausible leads one year after she went missing.

      They agreed a £500,000 fee with Oakley International, which was described by a source close to the family as 'extremely secretive' but 'absolutely the best'.

      Kate and Gerry McCann were initially impressed by Dublin-born Halligen, believing he 'was in a different league' to other private investigators.

      He boasted of employing ex-FBI, CIA and Special forces officers while offering undercover surveillance and intelligence gathering in Portugal.

      The detective even said he could provide satellite imagery and details of telephone traffic from the night Madeleine disappeared.

      But within a year, questions began to emerge about Oakley and Halligen in particular.

      Researchers claimed that the firm had not looked into hundreds of calls made to a special hotline - while specialists found that their bills were unpaid.

      The promised satellite images also allegedly turned out to have been grabbed from Google Earth.

      Six months into the highly-paid assignment, the McCanns were growing increasingly concerned about Halligen.

      A family friend said: 'He had this sense of cloak-and-dagger, acting as if he were a James Bond-style spy.


    2. (Cont)

      'The McCanns found him hard to deal with, because he was forever in another country and using different phones. He promised the earth but it came to nothing.'

      The contract was terminated early after £300,000 had been paid to Halligen.

      MailOnline understands that relations broke down after the detective's team discovered he was enjoying a lavish lifestyle, staying in the best hotels and eating at the top restaurants in London - all at the expense of the Find Madeleine fund.

      Colleagues said that far from being an expert in undercover operations, Halligen was 'out of his depth' with 'no experience of such investigations.'

      There is no suggestion that any former associates are involved in the death of Kevin Halligen.

      After being sacked from the McCann investigation in 2009, Halligen was arrested in the UK and extradited to America on fraud charges for an unrelated case

      He pleaded guilty to defrauding Trafigura, based in the Netherlands, who had hired him to help free two company executives arrested in Ivory Coast in 2006.

      He received about $12 million to provide 'security, intelligence and public relations'.

      Trafigura gave Halligen an additional $2.1 million to 'hire lobbyists and influence officials in the United States on Trafigura's behalf'.

      The next day, Halligen used nearly $1.7 million of that money to buy a large home with a swimming pool.

      The Washington Post reported at the time: 'Owners of Washington restaurants remember him spending thousands on long, boozy days and evenings. He traveled everywhere in a chauffeured Lincoln.'

      One restaurant owner said he and his staff called Halligen 'James Bond' because of his stories of spy derring-do and his habit of tossing around huge sums of cash.

      His fraud conviction carried a maximum of 20 years in prison, but under federal sentencing guidelines he would serve no more than 41 months.

      As he had been in custody awaiting trial for 42 months, he was freed and deported, returning to his birthplace of Dublin.

      In 2014, Kevin Halligen made a rare public appearance, agreeing to be interviewed for a Channel 5 documentary - The McCanns and The Conman.

      He denied that he misused money raised to find Madeleine. Answering claims that he spent the money on first class travel, luxury hotel suites and a chauffeur, he said: 'It is gross distortion of what was actually happening.'

      A source close to Kate and Gerry McCann said they had terminated their contract with Oakley international at the end of 2008 and had not had anything to do with Kevin Halligen since.

      'Clearly this is now a matter for the police and the Coroner's office,' the insider said.

      The hunt for Madeleine McCann continues, more than 10-and-a-half years after her disappearance.

      A team from Scotland Yard has been probing the case since 2011 at a cost to the British taxpayer of more than £11.3million. Portuguese police have lead status in the investigation.

      In October 2017, the Home Office allocated an extra £154,000 to Scotland Yard to pursue a 'critical line of inquiry' and extend the search to the end of March 2018.


    4. Suspicious or natural causes? So many people associated with helping the McCanns seem to have an unfortunate outcome. Why did Mcs never try to get their money back?



      Link for company Halligen involved with - Sir John Walker on the list

      Would these people be taken in by conman?


    8. MAYBE!



  7. It all sounds very suspicious, interesting to read the comments on both articles, the Daily Mail goes on to mention OG and says that Portugal has the lead status.


    Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    Blood-soaked body of Dublin-born #MadeleineMcCann private eye found at his Surrey mansion. This case gets murkier by the minute. My investigation in @VillageMagIRE will be published in next month’s edition with new revelations and questions
    1:16 pm - 13 Jan 2018

    1. It's the 'new revelations' bit I'll be interested in.


    BBC have caught up!


    Another investigator who died from alcohol related condition

    Not foul play according to the documentary maker

  12. Once again, the coherency of Insane and his legal threats:

    Michael Walker@walkercan1000
    Halligen was broke, no one sues a man of straw. Get real #mccann Trolls.
    7:19 am - 14 Jan 2018


      The myth about Halligen being impoverished, going on the run... He lived at the same address in Surrey years ago.
      His then business partner, Tim Craig-Harvey, now denounces Halligen as a liar and alcoholic.


    Exton was hired by Halligen but complained that he wasn’t paid for his work.

    1. According to "Madeleine", Exton was not the only one whose work wasn't paid. Kate MC is very careful not to charge Halligen, she blames the firm Oakley.
      (Of course) she doesn't say a word about the way the debt issue was resolved.


    Gemma O'Doherty‏@gemmaod1
    These two precious girls, whose lives were so cruelly snatched from them, have been failed utterly - by the police, the media and by those who clearly have questions to answer about their disappearances.
    It’s time the public came to their defence #MadeleineMcCann #MaryBoyle
    2:43 pm - 14 Jan 2018
    24 Retweets 34 Likes

    1. Certainly putting her reputation on the line.

    2. Why "precious" ? Are there girls who aren't "precious" and if so what are they instead ?

  15. She is clearly trying to generate some momentum.

  16. Oh dear, after a strangely prolonged period of deep introspection (also known as calling for help and/or receiving instruction on what the hell is there to be done), Insane in his Walker persona came back, in a feeble attempt to give the impression that life continued to be ‘normal’.

    But Gemma O’Doherty tweeted something that couldn’t be clearer: “whose lives were so cruelly snatched from them” when speaking about Maddie and Mary Boyle.

    No question now that, although we don’t know yet the details of her narrative, it will include a dead Madeleine McCann.

    Insane, reacted:

    “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
    Replying to @nowayjomo @BoyleLance and 2 others
    I think @gemmaod1 is just using the #mccann case to provoke reaction to the Boyle story. I don't, for one minute, consider her to believe the shite she's posting about Madeleine. In itself it's a form of abuse.
    5:12 am - 15 Jan 2018

    And then, exactly 2 hours later:

    “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
    It's laughable to think that some unemployed "journo" thinks she has anything to add to the #mccann case. Just a joke. Some "people" will do anything to generate an income.
    7:12 am - 15 Jan 2018”

    Well, if Insane is right and it is through Maddie that O’Doherty seeks to bring attention to the Mary Boyle case, then we wish her the utmost success.

    It will mean that she will have uncovered with her article the Maddie cover-up publicly in such a transparent way that people will be curious about what she has said about Mary Boyle.

    1. The despair is really starting to show. Anyone following Insane/Walkercan1000 on Twitter knows that he tries to mock the translation of the PJ Files, perpetually asking where are the official translations (as if a nation had to have official translations of its judiciary processes in other languages).

      However, he could ask his friends Kate and Gerry McCann to make public the translations they allegedly paid £100,000 for, even though they are as official as the ones publicly available on the internet.

      He jests about the subject, like in tweets like this:

      “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
      LOL. The BBC is a broadcasting organisation. It doesn't approve or validate any unofficial Troll translations of documents. It has no power or authority to do so. Hilarious. #mccann
      7:02 am - 15 Jan 2018”

      But 39 minutes later he tweets this:

      “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
      Replying to @dreamdigital Please read the police files re #MadeleineMcCann . Halligen did NOT connect #Podesta s to #McCann case. The e-fits produced were of ONE man seen by two members of Smith family. … … Resemblance is to PJ detective. #pizzagate #QAnon
      7:41 am - 15 Jan 2018
      1 Like”

      The above tweet is but a repeat of one he tweeted earlier:

      “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
      Please read the police files re #MadeleineMcCann . Halligen did NOT connect #Podesta s to #McCann case. The e-fits produced were of ONE man seen by two members of Smith family. Resemblance is to a member of the Portuguese Police. @PetMikRan @yournewswire #mccann
      6:20 pm - 14 Jan 2018
      1 Like”

      Twice now. Twice he has recommended people “read the police files re #MadeleineMcCann”. Which police files?

      And it shows how sloppy he’s getting because of the Gemma O’Doherty article. He recommends reading in the files something that is not there, the e-fits!

      The ones SY only made public in 2014 (and everyone wondered then why they were had been so secretive for so long).

      Can Insane recommend where we can find the files from where SY took the e-fits from to show them to the world?

    2. If there was any doubt about a translation, he only has to ask Textusa! Or the Portuguese person he says he knows and show us all where the translations are misleading.

  17. Supporters repeatedly denigrate the translation of the PJ Files, but never ever illustrate their insinuations with an example.
    They also refer regularly to the alleged professional translation paid by MF, i.e many donators (no such invoice in the accounts though), in an attempt to suggest that the MCs' knowledge of the PJ Files is accurate whereas the sceptics' one isn't since they draw their knowledge from unprofessional translation.
    As if the MCs had a good reason to keep for themselves the true meaning of the PJFiles.

    1. Anne Guedes,

      He is recommending that we all “read the police files re #MadeleineMcCann”.

      We just want to know what files and where we can find them he recommends us to read.

      He's either recommending people to read something that doesn't exist or that they can't access, which is daft, or he's acknowledging the translations available online as they are worthy of being recommended by him.

    2. And one has to wonder what files he showed to the FBI agents he alleges to have done in some sort of lecture he alleges he gives.

      Was the audience exclusively made up of Portuguese speaking FBI agents?

      "Michael Walker‏@walkercan1000
      I showed a group of FBI agents (at a lecture, don't forget my spring tour) the PJ files. They were horrified at the PJ incompetence and absolutely astounded about Amoral, his conviction and prison sentence. "No wonder the #mccann abductor was not apprehended".
      8:47 am - 10 Jan 2018
      1 Like"

    3. Walker is just a wind up. He was taking the piss out of this and this If you read what has gone before his tweets he uses this tactic quite a lot.

    4. Anonymous 16 Jan 2018, 12:40:00,

      The question is NOT to whom he has shown the files to (and frankly the salt we put in every 'report' claiming direct contacts about this case with legitimate authorities (PJ/SY/OG/FBI etc.) is more than just a pinch) but WHAT files he alleges he showed and where we the public can have access to them as he does recommend us to read them.

      If we can't because they are privileged information, then we would like to know why he then has such a privilege.

      That is what we would like to know.

  18. Out of all the pro's on twitter walker is definitely the one to watch.

  19. "Do not publish" Anonymous at 15 Jan 2018, 20:09:00,

    Thank you for that interesting piece of information!


    Good question.

  21. Insane/Walker seems so keen to push the "abducted by paedophiles" narrative that he's added a link to a Daily Mail article suggesting yet again that Portugal is a haven for peadophiles. He's forgetting of course that one notorious paedophile who resided in The Algarve was none other than Clement Freud, one time dinner party host to the McCanns. In Kate's own words: 'Thank God for people like Clement who kept us smiling.'

    1. Anonymous16 Jan 2018, 13:09:00,

      We think you mean this recommendation:

      "Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
      Before ye go to bed, something to think on Sunbeams. XXX
      6:49 pm - 15 Jan 2018"

      One of the many great services the Daily Mail has rendered to Maddie’s memory.

      By the way, the content of the article is about the Casa Pia case. In Lisbon.

      Unlike with the Maddie case (thanks to an obstructing UK) the Casa Pia case was investigated, people were charged and sentenced to prison.

      It’s interesting to note that while he recommends an article with clearly biased intentions against truth, then when he, as he frequently does, asks for a quote from Pottinger about having being paid by the McCanns for a PR campaign, and is shown an article where there’s indeed a quote stating that very clearly (in direct speech) he replies that it’s just an article so not to be believed and asks again for the quote.

    2. And by the way he ignores the massive ongoing inquiry in England and Wales whilst posting that link to 2007 Daily Mail article about Portugal, who as we just said dealt with the Casa Pia scandal and had perpetrators brought to justice.

    3. Hi Textusa, perhaps walker1000 believes that Nigel and cohorts do not exist in"Blighty",as a close associate Big Jim(former CEOP) Operation Ore had concurred,Men were guilty of Paedophile access to these web site,traced by"Credit Cards",some of these men committed suicide,then big Jim has appeared on BBC2 News Night,stating the viewing of"Images"is a lesser degree of Criminality,but never repented on disclosing the"Identities"from Operation Ore,He(Jim)then went to the Philipines Under Cover of CEOP accessing Brothels for underage Girls,was it a secret that this Country had hidden from activity of child abuse?
      Here in the UK,the Metropolitan Police Service,had chose Not to pursue child hood prostitution in and around the suburbs of London,where most of the girls were"disappeared"from the Care Home system,Modus Operandi consistent to Bryn aly,Estyn,Kincora,Dunblane,Elm Guest House,Islington,Lambeth,Richmond,Gangsters from the 1960's with connections to Lord Boothby and a Boxing Coach teaching in Private schools?

    4. Walker/Insane has no beliefs, he's either paid or someone has information on him like they had on Nigel.

    5. If paedophilia was the big secret behind the cover-up would Walker be promoting it?


    Gemma O'Doherty‏@gemmaod1
    What was Gerry McCann laughing about a few days after his daughter #MadeleineMcCann disappeared?
    6:59 am - 16 Jan 2018
    5 Retweets 14 Likes

    1. Perhaps,Gerry,was having another glorious day,when he was summond to Portugal PJ over the payment to release Madeleine from her captors in Amsterdam,sucking on Lolipops,cracking jokes memroabilia about football,whilst "Your daughter is allegedly,missing"?


    “Madeleine CaseTweets@McCannCaseTweet
    Replying to @strackers74, @may_shazzy, and 2 others
    So is today #crazymccannquotes day? "Those who are implicated, will be implicated " ~Kate #McCann Kate making threats, butto whom?
    2:56 pm · 16 Jan 2018

    This is getting tiresome. REALLY tiresome.

    That quote attributed to Kate McCann was never said. We have said it before and will keep saying it as many times as we have to, so as to stop a myth.

    It came from OUR BLOG.

    Those were words used by us, interpreting the fact that Kate McCann was reported saying that the truth about Maddie was in the Algarve.

    She never said that.

    Please stop saying she did!

  24. Hi Textusa. Have you noticed that Gemma is following JillyCL, Isabelle M & @Tealtraum who were all early supporters of the Malinka project? She has also recently followed @DSJThankyousam . Presumably the REAL Fireman Sam writer. I find all this a bit worrying.

    1. Anonymous 17 Jan 2018, 10:48:00,

      All we can do is wait and see what Gemma produces.

      On January 9, she has asked for assistance on FB:

      “Gemma O'Doherty
      9 January at 11:37 ·
      I will soon publish details of my investigation into the Madeleine McCann case including inconsistencies in her parents’ accounts of what happened and some of their bizarre behaviour, the Donegal links, and how the British media have failed Madeleine and the public by refusing to ask hard but very obvious questions.
      It is my belief that Gerry and Kate McCann have questions to answer about their three-year-old daughter’s disappearance. If you can assist me, please send a DM. Thanks.”

      We can only imagine that many – we all know who – have jumped at the opportunity to either try their bid for fame or to clutter things up for her.

      We have not offered our services. We trust her reputation as a journo and we are certain that in her research she will find us and if it’s the case, we will answer any question she may want to ask us.

      About the possible narrative that she will come to defend, let us bring over to the blog the comments in one of our posts on FB:

      “Linda Wrafter : Let’s hope she doesn't go down the neglect/abduction route

      Maria Santos: If she goes down the neglect but links the parents directly to her death - which seems she is by mentioning sedation as she has - the I'm fine with it. It will be the start of the unveiling of the truth.
      If she goes down the neglect path to justify abduction then I'll will react in the exact same way I did when Katie Hopkins insisted on blaming the McCanns' neglect for Maddie having been taken.
      And if she goes the Hopkins way, then hopefully the social media will react in the same manner it did with the Sergey Malinka's stunt.
      But all is speculation. I believe her to be a truly independent journo, publishing on what I also believe to be a truly independent magazine, so let's just wait and see.

      Linda Wrafter Fingers crossed x”

      It seems, from what she has published up to now on social media that she is pointing all the fingers she can towards the McCanns and implicating them in Maddie’s death.

      If that is indeed the narrative, that’s all we want like we said in our post “Maddie’s Pandora’s Box”.

      All we want is, once the McCanns implicated in her death for whatever reason, for the 6 questions we have put on that particular post to be answered:

      1. Why did the case take so long to solve?
      2. Under what circumstances (who, why, when, where and how) did Maddie die?
      3. If Maddie died in the apartment, why was body taken away from it?
      4. If Maddie died in apartment and body taken away, where was it taken to between 10pm – 4am and subsequently on the following hours and days?
      5. What happened to Maddie’s body and who and why helped for that to happen?
      6. Who protected the McCanns and why were they protected the way they were?

    2. Was the "Malinka's stunt" aimed to promote the neglect/abduction theory or only to discredit the police without promoting any particular theory?

    3. Anonymous 17 Jan 2018, 18:17:00

      We would say that it was the second option as we explained in the following comment:


    What a clever dog to learn how to look after the guy without any training.


    Revisiting a brilliant comedy series, came across this clip, which we recommend our readers watch, especially after 1:34.

    Remember the sex pest list?

    We would say it sums up the participation of some, not to say many, politicians (and other relevant figures of the nation) in the Maddie case in a very few seconds.

    1. Is anyone else going through the entire series, fascinating.

    2. Su if people only knew it's not the work of fiction but a documentary they are watching, only thing that slightly changes is the colour of the party holding the reins.


    This article has this headline:

    Caso Manuel Vicente: “Não estamos a tratar com um angolano qualquer”
    O ex-vice-presidente de Angola deveria ser julgado naquele país, defende o ex-bastonário dos advogados…!

    Which translates into:

    The Manuel VicenTE: “We are not dealing with a common Angolan”.
    The ex-Vice President of Angola should be judged in that country, defends the ex-Head of the Lawyer’s Order…”

    Without making any judgements about the case – also because we know little about – let’s just list what we know as facts:

    The ex-Vice President of Angola, Manuel Vicente, is accused of corruption by the Portuguese Justice system, a crime which is alleged to have happened within its jurisdiction.

    The current President of Angola, João Lourenço, has demanded that this trial take place in Angola. He has explicitly said that if Portugal doesn’t have this goodwill gesture towards Angola, there will be economic repercussions as Angola could change its priorities within Europe with other countries other than Portugal.

    We will not say we agree or disagree with the trial happening in Angola – as Marinho e Pinto defends – as although the crime did happen within the Portuguese jurisdiction, Portugal and Angola are members of the CPLP community and some legal experts have expressed an interpretation that within this agreement the trial can indeed take place in Angola.

    What we would like to highlight is Marinho e Pinto’s sentence: “We are not dealing with a common Angolan”.

    So, according to Marinho e Pinto there are 2 justice systems one for the common [Angolans] and another for the exceptional [Angolans, in which Manuel Vicente is included].

    We remind our readers that Marinho e Pinto, then Head of the Lawyer’s Order, nominated an assistant to help Marcos Aragão Correia, Joana Cipriano’s lawyer, in the trial in which she accused 5 PJ Officers of torturing her and in which all of the accused were exempted of having committed this crime by the court.


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    When Kate McCann made her 10pm check on the children, she said she found their bedroom door open ‘quite wide’ and not as they had left it. She then says she went to close it. Did she do so without checking on the children first? #MadeleineMcCann
    2:34 pm - 19 Jan 2018

    1. Our post from May 2009:

  29. Sigh, another critic trying to discredit us by putting in our mouths what we haven’t said:

    “Andy Fish@AndyFish19
    Replying to @Meadowuk, @1matthewwright1, and 3 others
    No false alerts. And I don't go along with yet another 'Textusa' theory, in which a deceased Madeleine was stored in Murats car either! If (IF) cadaver was alerted to Murat then he would've been nailed! By everyone & probably about now be coming out of prison too! #McCann
    10:19 pm · 18 Jan 2018”

    Let’s clarify what we have said in our post about this subject in our post “Cadaverine” (our caps):


    “Once decided to risk the simulation of an abduction three things were perfectly clear:

    1. The body had to be taken as soon as possible out of apartment to a safe house;

    2. The apartment could not show any vestiges of a dead body ever having been in there;

    3. A second location after the safe house, to be decided, had to be found in order to take the body as far away as possible from the area during that night, as it would be too risky to have the body nearby the next day when police would be there searching for the girl. This meant, inevitably the involvement of a car.

    The body had to be taken out of 5A to a safe house as soon as possible to give time for Gerry to go on his walk around town and be seen at Tapas.

    The safe house had to be nearby because once the alarm sounded their movements would be under observation so anything outside a reasonable “search perimeter” was not acceptable.

    The safe house would have to belong to someone who could be trusted;

    Also if things went wrong, the body would have be near enough to be retrieved and placed somewhere it could be “found”. Somewhere near enough to make the scenario of Maddie walking out by herself credible. The only problem would be to justify the lesions but as a lost resort an insane murdering patsy could be “found” even if never caught.

    The choice of Murat's property as the safe house seems to be the most logical choice to make in our opinion.

    But the fact the body could not be nearby the next morning, implied immediately, the need for the use of a car, even if when decision made, its destination was uncertain.

    So most likely a car, PROBABLY FROM THE RESORT, was taken to Murat's property and parked there before the alarm waiting for the moment to be used.

    It's in this car we think the body was kept while in Murat's property. Not in the house.

    Once that car left the property it would have taken all cadaverine vestiges with it, making it unrealistic to expect Eddie to mark any cadaverine.”


    So, we have NEVER said that Maddie’s body was transported in Murat's car.

    In fact it was of the reason we presented as to why although Eddie did not signal anything in Murat's property that doesn't mean Maddie's body was not there for a short period of time, inside that vehicle (car or a van).

    Saying we said Murat's car was used is lying, misleading people about what our opinion about a certain issue is and fool people that way away from our blog.

    To after all these years lying to protect the cover-up of a death of a little girl, asking these people to have morals, decency and shame would be asking them to have something which they have proved for so long that they haven't.

    1. On the same subject, in our post the "Game continues", in the comments section when replying to various accusations made against us by JillyCL at the time:

      "Textusa1 Oct 2017, 12:01:00
      Reply #5

      “The Murats' cars were investigated by Eddie Cadaver Dog. ZERO alerts, just as there were zero alerts to anything Murat related”

      As we have said repeatedly, the dogs to not give false positives.

      But they do give false negatives, or to be specific, evidence may be there but for some reason dogs may miss it.

      With this are we saying, or have we ever said the dogs missed forensic evidence at Murat’s? No.

      What we have said is that there’s the possibility of the body having been in Murat’s property and not having left a single trace of its presence there, so nothing there for dogs to signal.

      We raised the possibility of A VEHICLE (not Murat’s car) parked in Murat’s driveway, having been used to keep the body between 21:30 and around 04:00.

      We even go as far as saying that if that car was indeed used and was found, it would have been very likely for the dogs to not have detected anything in it because there would no residues to be detected.

      We justify this statement with the absence of a 3rd site in apartment 5A that the dogs didn’t signal: the place where the body was cleaned before being put in the closet.

      Only 2 locations were signalled by the cadaver dog, the living room behind the couch and the closet but of these only one was signalled by the blood dog, the living-room.

      If people believe that body was taken from living-room floor directly to closet, then why didn’t Keela signal blood there? We say that happened because the body was taken somewhere else before in the apartment and cleaned up.

      In that spot the body left no residue because it did not touch directly its surface or taint it with blood.

      No residues or forensic evidence was left there and so dogs did not signal it.

      A body may be present in a place and not leave any residue.

      Dogs detecting SOMETHING means that body was there (like in 5A and Scenic) but detecting ZERO in a place doesn’t rule out a body having been there like JillyCL tries to make us believe."

    2. Which dog "detecting ZERO in a place doesn't rule out a body having been there" ?
      I hold that a cadaver dog not alerting in a place rules out a body having been there (if the body's PMI was less than 2/2,5 hours), unless the body was wrapped in many thick airtight plastic bags.

    3. Anne Guedes,

      We have deleted the comment form Anonymous at 20 Jan 2018, 12:23:00 and we're not publishing your reply to him/her at 20 Jan 2018, 12:55:00 because we don't want to go into a debate on whether the dogs are reliable or not.

      We all know they are. Only disgusting people covering-up for the death of a 3 yr old try to create doubt over that out of self-interest.

    4. Anne Guedes,

      We have presented our arguments in our post “Cadaverine” linked above.

      Even if you were right, and we don’t think you are, you do not disprove our point. If the body was placed inside a car/van parked in Murat’s property, and that car/van was not on the premises when EVRD dog was there, then he would not signal anything and yet the body had been there.

      But what we would like to know is do you believe the body was transported DIRECTLY from where it lay by the window in the living room to the closet?

    5. I'll go driving in my car,its not quite a Jaguar.Figure out who possibly called this guy and its clearer.

    6. Textusa, I don't figure out unless vaguely and I'm open to any reasonable hypothesis. Let me just observe that after an hour the (particular) scent of somebody who just died is not yet overwhelmed by the (universal) scent of death. Adela Morris and Rita Martinez, whose research was precisely on when and how dogs can discriminate live scent from post-mortem scent, hence the minimum PMI for detecting cadaver scent, said clearly that only one dog reacted to a 85' PMI, whereas all (5) dogs reacted to PMI between 150' and 180'.
      Since Eddie detected cadaver scent as soon as he was in front of 5A's open door, it seems to me that MMC was likely not removed from 5A before 2,5/3 hours after she died.

    7. Anne Guedes,

      We are in full agreement about the time – 1H25 /2H30 to 3H00 – it takes for the cadaver scent to develop and be produced in enough quantity to contaminate a surface in order the dog is able to pick it up and signal it.

      We agree so much to the point of have interrupted a discussion we were having with an Anonymous (who doesn’t know to identify himself for us to recognise) about death happening at around 21H10/21H20 as for the alarm to have been given at 22H00 doesn’t allow time for that scent to have developed where Eddie signalled it.

      We place accidental death happening around 18H30 and body being removed from the house at 21H10/21H20. That gives 2H40/2H50 for the body to have been inside the apartment.

      However, the question you put is not about the time it took for the scent to develop as Eddie’s signalling establishes that the body remained in the living-room the sufficient time for the scent to have developed.

      We think we can say that you agree with us that location is where Maddie died. The location where her body stood from the moment she died to at least the time required for the scent to develop.

      A location in which we also hope you agree was tainted with Maddie’s blood as per the blood spatters that were detected AFTER there having been a thorough cleaning done by people with medical background fully aware they were committing the crime of obstruction of justice and also fully aware of the likelihood of the house being forensically examined after the hoax started.

      So, hopefully we agree that the body laid surrounded by blood in the living-room at least for the time it took for the cadaver odour to develop.

      Where we seem to disagree with you is what happened after. You say that wherever the body went, it had to leave a “cadaverine footprint” that Eddie would necessarily signalled.

      Thus, our question on whether you believe that her body was transported DIRECTLY from the living-room to the closet, as Eddie only signalled those 2 locations inside the apartment.

      Note that above we said they were fully aware that the apartment would be forensically examined but as we said in our post “Cadaverine”, we see no reason for them to suspect that a EVRD dog would be brought in, so we consider that their main worry was avoiding blood being found in the apartment. Again, and it’s important, we are before a group of people with medical background and not people educated on fictional scientific police TV series.

      For the body to have been in the closet with the absence of blood it must have been cleaned. And we think redressed, not because of respect but out of pure pragmatism of avoiding further contamination of blood on whoever was to transport her.

      The question we put to you is where do you think the body was cleaned?

      If you do, was it in that cramped space of that corner of the living-room (at the same time that exact location needed to be thoroughly cleaned) with all the blood around her, or was it, as we think it was, taken to another location in the apartment, where the body was laid on a surface – such as a shower curtain, or more than one – to avoid blood contamination, which by coincidence equally avoided the contamination by whatever fluid produces the cadaver scent, which made that location not to be signalled by Eddie although the body had been there?

    8. You are right, Textusa, I didn't answer your question and realized it after I sent the post !
      Allow me not to answer directly again (but this time being aware of it !) for you to know what my vague (and perhaps far from reality) ideas look like.
      Whether the body was transported directly or not from the living room to the closet I have no idea.
      We don't know for sure whether the blood found by Keela was MMC's.
      We don't know for sure whether MMC bled before dying.
      About cleaning (if the body was supposed to be found as the victim of abduction, what kind of cleaning are you thinking of ?) and where I think the body was cleaned. The answer is simple : the ocean. But fatum decided another way.
      Observe that the VOCs, in Morris/Martinez experience, could enter swiftly into the porous pad that had been put on dry skin. In the MC case the VOCs had to find, so to speak, porous material, like paint, wood, to penetrate. This difference in adsorption (not to be confused with absorption) occurs also in the inverse phenomenon (the resorption) which occurs when warm air makes the VOCs dissipate again.
      According to MG, the VOCs emigrated through draughts from the closet (where the body was kept) to the living room (where it was not, but where death might have occurred). Note that the first place that Eddie alerted to was the closet, likely the centre of the scent cone.

      I think that the GNR tracker dogs didn't find the last trail of MMC (carried away), because the PMI implied cadaver scent and the tracker dogs wouldn't follow it.
      It seems likely to me that the body was removed just after the alarm was launched.
      I'm convinced that MS is a gentleman and that he and his family really crossed somebody (Smithman) carrying dead MMC.
      Smithman understood immediately that he'd need an alibi for that precise moment, so he looked at his watch and read 22h03. He also knew that when the ocean would bring back MMC, the day after probably, the body would be cleaner than any cleaning process would achieve, but that would be of no help since at least one element of the S family would remember crossing a man with a MMC look alike. And it would be extraordinary if none of them gave some description of him. So Smithman knew that the ocean project had fallen.. into the water as we say in French. He had almost no time left and he had to take a decision that would be crucial for the rest of his life and of his loved ones' life.
      You have to admit that he was rather successful since 10 years after even SY seems to have failed identifying him !


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    Why did #McCann private investigators fail to make the most basic of inquiries before announcing a so-called major breakthrough in the case which apparently came to nothing?
    3:32 am - 20 Jan 2018


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    Kate recalls being upset by Gerry the night before #MadeleineMcCann went missing. The next morning, Madeleine asked her parents why they hadn’t come when she and Sean had been crying the night before. They left their children alone again that night and Madeleine was ‘taken’
    5:16 am - 20 Jan 2018”

    The picture included in this tweet is that of 2 pages of Kate’s book with the following passage highlighted: “It also meant that the time between our last check of the children and our return was longer, closer to forty-five minutes”.

    1. The trouble with the alleged crying episode is that nobody heard any crying on Wednesday night.
      It's like the alleged open shutters/window, nobody saw them open on Thursday night.
      Words, words, words..


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    Why does Gerry McCann get so angry and walk out of an interview when he is asked to comment on the blood that police found in their apartment? #MadeleineMcCann
    9:20 am - 20 Jan 2018

    1. Hi Textusa,they could always ask Justine Maguiness,as Justine was the PR rep heard on the video.Justine then worked her way up in the House of Commons to be the right hand side of Mr John Bercow,Speaker of the House,before Justine fell from grace?
      Kate and Gerry did not see eye to eye on certain parts of PR with Justine and had to fight her corner for PR funds paid into her account,for work undertaken.
      what people fail to understand is how or why did Two Doctors have access to these strange powerful people(Matrix type)to call on in your hours of necessity?

  33. Gemma now following Mark Souster and Dois galoes on Twitter. No comment.


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    Death of 3-year-old Sherin Mathews, whose body was found by a cadaver dog, inspires #SherinsLaw in Texas which would make it a crime to leave children at home alone. Her father has been charged with her murder
    10:34 am - 21 Jan 2018

  35. We have deleted a comment. As we have said the in following reply to Anne Guedes who also submitted reply to that comment which we also didn’t publish:

    “Textusa20 Jan 2018, 13:07:00
    Anne Guedes,
    We have deleted the comment form Anonymous at 20 Jan 2018, 12:23:00 and we're not publishing your reply to him/her at 20 Jan 2018, 12:55:00 because we don't want to go into a debate on whether the dogs are reliable or not.
    We all know they are. Only disgusting people covering-up for the death of a 3 yr old try to create doubt over that out of self-interest.”

    We now have reason to publish the deleted comment. It was this one from our pet-stalker Insane, now under the guise of an anonymous:

    “Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Gemma O'Doherty":
    "As we have said repeatedly, the dogs to not give false positives."
    On what basis are you making that claim?
    (You're wrong, incidentally, but you have stated it as fact several times)
    Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 20 Jan 2018, 12:23:00”

    The reason we are now publishing this deleted comment is because, very out of character for Insane, he has provided in a new comment a link with which we suppose he intends to make a basis to his claim reflected is his words “You're wrong [about dogs not giving false positives], incidentally”:

    “Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Gemma O'Doherty":
    "As we have said repeatedly, the dogs to not give false positives"
    I asked where you got this from, but you deleted my comment.
    Your claim is untrue. I assume that's why you deleted my comment, which makes you a dishonest coward, incapable of backing up a claim
    For the record:
    Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 20 Jan 2018, 20:18:00”

    Since his blog has blundered away together with his NotTextusa persona and also because his Twitter presence has deflated – most likely because of the upcoming Gemma O’Doherty article which is making him show evident signs of worry – to a pitiful parroting of copying and pasting, we guess he now has a bundle of time on his hands and he has find some way to try and distract his worries away.

    So, Insane went and researched the internet. That place where one can always find sites where it’s stated with absolute certainty that black is white and alongside other sides that guarantee with doubt that white is black. So, naturally he found a site discrediting the EVRD dogs AKA Cadaver dog.

    Please note we are not devaluating the internet as fortunately the vast majority of sites are reliable and a very useful source of information. Just saying that if one wants to find what one wants to find, one will end up finding it.

    So, like a 2 yr old toddler showing his parents how successful he was being with his potty training, Insane submitted the link above, all proud of himself.

    The site is not exactly a scientific one. In fact, in its banner it says “Death/Scent – Exploring the weird & wonderful world of fragrance & funerals”.

    And in it Insane found an article that disses the cadaver dogs. It says things like “When cadaver dogs were first scientifically evaluated in the 90s their success rate in one study was only 57%, that is just a hair above chance” and “Improvements in training helped cut down on handler-induced false positives, where the dog gave a positive reading because its handler unconsciously gave the dog cues that they thought the location was right.”

    And even suggests that the dogs are so unreliable that modern technology is bound to replace them in the future.

    In fact, before we pick on a few things on this article, it’s intent it’s very clear: dogs bad, tech good.

    That, basically encapsulates the reason why there is an article somewhere in the plethora of articles in the internet, which Insane was able to find.

    We will follow with some pearls from this article, with which, Insane, once again, has made an arse of himself.

    1. Reply #1.

      We will start with this phrase:

      “Sometimes dogs indicate the scent of human remains when none are there”

      First, in which circumstances did the dogs alert to human remains where there were none? Do note that, like Insane so often does, the article just says it’s so. It doesn’t provide any basis to this claim.

      How is it possible for it to know where human remains are NOT present? We see only one way: baiting.

      Bait the dog with another substance and he signal it. So, indeed a false positive… or is it?

      When can this baiting happen? In training.

      To Insane, so there’s no doubt what we mean by training:

      That stage the animal has to undergo before he’s certified to execute the task for which he was trained for.

      Means that if a dog provides a false positive DURING TRAINING, he’s responding to other stimuli that he has wrongly associated his reaction to others than those intended.

      A dog does not cheat. A dog reacts to a stimulus. The error is in the training, not in the dog.

      And there are dogs that have a nature that makes it impossible to be trained. Nothing wrong with their noses but with a personality inadaptability to what is required from the animal.

      If a dog is not deemed reliable during training he obviously is not certified.

      To illustrate this, let’s use a quote from the article “While anecdotal evidence shows dogs finding bodies buried under meters of soil, concrete, and even under water…”

      Let’s place this unreliability alleged by Insane not on a crime scene but on a humanitarian one. An earthquake for example. That would mean a dog signalling a corpse under rubble, efforts being made, an expenditure of human, material and time resources, to remove that rubble to find nothing.

      Would that hypothesis be remotely acceptable? No. Insane knows that, he just pretends he doesn’t.

    2. Reply #2

      From Insane’s submitted link:

      “or they [the dogs] send the search party off track due to the scent of a dead rabbit in the woods”

      Really, dead rabbits? Where and what circumstances, one should ask if one really wants makes the effort to overlook how falsely biased commercially this article is, and what a fool of themselves is making whoever wrote this crap. It doesn’t say, just says it and one is supposed to swallow it as truth, from an article designed to discredit cadaver dogs in favour of recent technology that will eventually replace them or as the article states very clearly, “fine-tuning the instrument used to train cadaver dogs, which might one day replace them altogether”

      And this from the same article that says “What they found was that the closest animal analogue to human decomposition was the pig, not chicken. 8 compounds (ethyl propionate, propyl propionate, propyl butyrate, ethyl pentanoate, pyridine, diethyl disulfide, methyl(methylthio)ethyl disulfide and 3-methylthio-1-propanol) were distinctive among human and pig remains and not present in other animal remains”.

      Trained on pig and the dogs find rabbit says this incredibly NOT reliable article. We refer Insane to our reply above.

    3. Reply #3

      Again from Insane’s submitted article:

      “likewise, trainers have tried improving accuracy by using human analogues like chicken carcases or isolates of cadaverine and putrescine (you might remember them from our indole post). No one asked, however, does rotting chicken smell like human decomposition? Any animal tissue produces cadaverine and putrescine, so do tools like this really help?”

      EVRD dog trainers are portrayed to be really, really stupid.

      As we saw before, the article, not us, says that it has been determined that pig and human share 8 compounds differently from all other animals but yet the trainers insist on using “chicken carcases or isolates of cadaverine and putrescine”.

      And all, apparently, to see them end up finding rabbits???

      Note how the article tries to scrap any and all importance that dogs may have with the final words of the paragraph “so do tools like this really help?”

      Don’t these words just sound like music to Insane? They do. Unfortunately for him, they are as ridiculous as he is.

    4. Reply #4

      Again from the same article:

      “Decomposition, however, changes with time, weather, and the state of the body upon death. Unlike drugs or explosives, we are asking cadaver dogs to find one particular decomposing thing in a big old world full of decomposing things.”

      Decmposition is decomposition. It’s a chemical process of enzyme transformation. It does not depend on any of the things above. The only one that may affect its speed is temperature. Note, it affects the speed of the process, not the process itself.

      Note, the words above are so stupid that they contradict the entire objective of the article: promote the supposed technological gadgets.

      If they were to be true, it would mean that a body had to be found, then determine the time of death, the weather from that moment until the moment the body was found, realise the state of the body at the moment it was found, so that these parameters can be introduced into the machine so it could find the body that has just been found.

      The operator of such machine should be careful when introducing the data, allow for the time he intended to find the body, in terms of weather and state of the body because what is now is not what will be 2 hours later, or at any time in the future. The only constant is the time of death, once determined upon finding the body to be found.

      Only evil and ignorant people like us cannot follow such crystal-clear logic.

      Note how the paragraph disses the dogs, again.

    5. Final reply

      We won’t waste any more time.

      This article offers absolutely no credibility. It’s not even specious because it doesn’t limit itself to twist truthful data but invents lies such as dogs sending search parties after rabbits.

      It is filled with scientific jargon but it’s just like mouthwash that doesn’t cure bad breath, and we would ask Insane to turn his face away, and publish what he has to say either in his blog (sorry, forgot he can’t as his NotTextusa persona defends the dogs) or on his Twitter account.

      Insane, by the way, we find you repulsively disgusting not because you try to discredit what is impossible to discredit which is nature, in this instance in the form of the noses of dogs.

      We find you repugnant because of the disrespect shown to the death of Madeleine Beth McCann by your incessant dedication in the cover-up of her death.

    6. Apologies, but just a annex to the replies.

      Above we have just said "... either in his blog (sorry, forgot he can’t as his NotTextusa persona defends the dogs)" and that is wrong.

      He only trusts Eddie.

      He doesn't trust Keela, the blood sniffing dog.

      We are still waiting from him to tell us what does he think Keela signalled in apartment 5A.

    7. Unpublished Not Textusa at 22 Jan 2018, 19:16:00

      Please provide link to where you got the table you have provided so we can publish your comment.

  36. It seems Insane is having problems finding Martin Grime:
    Michael Walker@walkercan1000
    Chief Inspector, LOL. Funny, I can't find any trace now of Grime and his remarkable Pork sniffing dogs. Why is that? #mccann
    12:39 am · 21 Jan 2018
    “Michael Walker‏ @walkercan1000
    "Hello, is that 118 118? I'm trying to hire Grime and his remarkable dogs, can't find them anywhere". "Hello, is that Google? I'm trying to hire Grime and his remarkable dogs, can't find them anywhere". #mccann
    5:16 pm - 20 Jan 2018”

    If he looked at Martin Grime LinkedIn, he’d see he was a visiting fellow of Staffordshire University, at the department which teaches forensics.

    Formerly with FBI.

    And thanks to him, now that we know how remarkably distinct from others and similar to each other are in terms of decomposition pigs and humans, all can see how ridiculously stupid he sounds when he tries to discredit the dogs by using the word “pork”.

    1. Desperate times call for desperate measures, dissing and insulting highly trained intelligent creatures which have now proved beyond worldwide doubt how clever they are, whether it be crime or natural disasters they are used for. The public have seen them used so many times now used for so many things reliabably saving lives and sadly finding bodies that you'd think they'd give their heads a shake wind their necks in and stop with the overt desperation. Not only does it just draw more attention to how clever the dogs are it shows them as stupid is as stupid does and highlights how a mans best friend really does have a much higher IQ than the groupie bunch who are so morally bankrupt they can only be rotten from the inside out. Shame on all who are involved in this you are a disgrace to humanity!


    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    In the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance, friends and family members said the McCanns told them the bedroom shutters had been tampered with. Why did the McCanns later retract this claim? #MadeleineMccann
    2:38 am - 22 Jan 2018

    “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    In the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance, friends and family members said the McCanns told them...
    2:50 am - 22 Jan 2018

  38. So that our readers can keep track, up to now Gemma O’Doherty has published the following tweets on the Maddie case:

    02:54 - 07-Jan-18 (08:54 GMT - 07-Jan-18)

    02:59 - 08-Jan-18 (08:59 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    03:10 - 08-Jan-18 (09:10 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    03:36 - 08-Jan-18 (09:36 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    03:49 - 08-Jan-18 (09:49 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    04:02 - 08-Jan-18 (10:02 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    04:34 - 08-Jan-18 (10:34 GMT - 08-Jan-18)

    22:39 - 08-Jan-18 (04:39 GMT - 09-Jan-18)

    22:41 - 08-Jan-18 (04:41 GMT - 09-Jan-18)

    22:45 - 08-Jan-18 (04:45 GMT - 09-Jan-18)

    12:15 - 09-Jan-18 (18:15 GMT - 09-Jan-18)

    15:59 - 09-Jan-18 (21:59 GMT - 09-Jan-18)

    12:54 - 10-Jan-18 (18:54 GMT - 10-Jan-18)

    03:51 - 10-Jan-18 (09:51 GMT - 10-Jan-18)

    02:54 - 11-Jan-18 (08:54 GMT - 11-Jan-18)

    13:16 - 13-Jan-18 (19:16 GMT - 13-Jan-18)

    14:43 - 14-Jan-18 (20:43 GMT - 14-Jan-18)

    18:59 - 16-Jan-18 (00:59 GMT - 17-Jan-18)

    14:34 - 19-Jan-18 (20:34 GMT - 19-Jan-18)

    03:32 - 20-Jan-18 (09:32 GMT - 20-Jan-18)

    05:16 - 20-Jan-18 (11:16 GMT - 20-Jan-18)

    09:20 - 20-Jan-18 (15:20 GMT - 20-Jan-18)

    10:34 - 21-Jan-18 (16:34 GMT - 21-Jan-18)

    02:38 - 22-Jan-18 (08:38 GMT - 22-Jan-18)

    02:50 - 22-Jan-18 (08:50 GMT - 22-Jan-18)

  39. Thanks for the record of the tweets.


    Shared via the Google app
    See request at the end.
    If it’s true, was a family used?
    If it’s true, they aren’t likely to come forward.

    1. Anonymous 22 Jan 2018, 14:45:00,

      Thank you. It's really an odd request to make:

      "●WERE you the family recruited by Halligen to help the Maddie investigation or do you know them?

      If you do, contact the Daily Star newsdesk on 02028 612 7373 or email"

      What a snowball of national ridicule this case has become...

  41. Can someone please explain what is the point this pro (and Malinka’s Twitter pal and Walkercan1000’s tweets liker) is trying to make, besides claiming illiteracy and an extraordinary lack of intelligence?

    “Green Leaper@FragrantFrog
    Cadaver dog gets it wrong but with a positive outcome. This shows why you should never prosecute solely on cadaver alerts. (link:… #mccann
    4:32 pm · 12 Jan 2018”

    The complete link is:

    It says:

    “Whisenant said the outcome was better than he expected. Batten said she was prepared to hear Taza bark, her alert that she had found someone dead.
    “When I got up to [Taza], she was staring him in the face wagging her tail,” Batten said.
    She thought at first that Jones was dead, Batten said, but when she bent closer she saw his eyes fluttering and yelled for Whisenant.”

    It clearly states that Taza, an EVRD dog, did not give the alert for finding “someone dead”.

    So that Fragrant Frog can understand: “said she was PREPARED to hear Taza bark” BUT when she arrived the dog “was staring him in the face wagging her tail”.

    It clearly states that dog didn’t alert to cadaver scent.

    So, no matter how one tries to twist this, this has nothing to do with an EVRD dog doing its task but of a dog (yes, FragrantFrog, an EVRD dog doesn’t stop being a dog) saving the life of a man:

    “Taza went into a creek, came out and was working the creek bank when she reacted sharply, Batten said.
    “All of sudden, she did a head snap. She took a sharp left’’ and ran to an old hog pen between two houses, Batten said.
    Batten said Taza was nose-to-nose with Jones with her tail “going 90 miles a minute.””

    And to use such a wonderful example of a dog’s potential to try discredit EVRD dogs is beyond words.

    Indeed, intelligence has limits but stupidity is endless.

  42. Hi Textusa,

    Trying to anticipate a "tornado" scenario from Gemma's investigation, do you see any possibility to have the McCanns brought to justice without exposing Operation Grange as a long-term farce?

    1. Only the PJ can do that if they have the evidence,not of the OG farce mind.
      I'll be done with EAW's and then it will have to be water tight and some more.

    2. Anonymous 22 Jan 2018, 17:55:00,

      We won’t anticipate scenarios until we read what Gemma O’Doherty has said she would produce.

      The we’ll either praise or criticise her, and only from then will we be able to assess scenarios.

      But there are facts that are undeniable.

      One, is that O’Doherty is making the pros uneasy. Quite clearly. Not the pretendy uneasiness we witnessed with Malinka.

      Two, the MSM (include in it, the McCann spokesman as well, please) has not reacted the way it did with Malinka. In fact, it hasn’t reacted at all. The only threatening message we have seen her receive was from a transparently sock Twitter account named after Gonçalo Amaral that warned that his lawyers would be watching.

      Malinka, says he’s going to accuse the PJ of torture when questioned by the investigation led by Mr Amaral and the “Gonçalo Amaral” remained silent. But Gemma O’Doherty says she’s going to write about Maddie and this twitter is suddenly worried.

      Why haven’t the McCanns said, like they did with Malinka, that their lawyers would be watching? The answer to that is very simple: to that they would have to use the MSM and the last thing, it seems, the other side wants, is to see this on the MSM. They were comfortable to see the Malinka thing there though.

      So, up to now, factually this O’Doherty investigation is very, very distinct from the Malinka stunt.

      Third, lest our readers forget, let us remind our readers of Nigel Nessling. He showed very clearly that the protection is not what it used to be. As we said in a post, every single collaborationist has a bus parked with his/her name on it, and under which they will be thrown under mercilessly if required.

      About the effects, also as we have said before (evidently the full truth would be what would please us the most) we will be satisfied in seeing the McCanns directly linked to Maddie’s death/disappearance.

      Then, like we said about Ben Needham in our post “The road of no return and apologies” we will repeat about Maddie: If Maddie is dead, can you please give us the details?

  43. Yes I've noticed how the pro's seem to try to discredit Gemma but no one seems to pay them any attention anyway. Also, a certain pro's online presence on twitter seems more offline at the moment, makes you wonder why, I guess the daily mail article which stated that Portugal has the lead status might be the reason.

    1. Just being an optimist... but could their silence at the moment be because they are busy destroying information from their computers?

    2. I don't know, I imagine if things were to come to a head it would be prudent to make all the arrangements for any eventuality, protect the children from the media, etc.

  44. “Gemma O'Doherty‏ @gemmaod1
    In the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance, friends and family members said the McCanns told them the bedroom shutters had been tampered with. Why did the McCanns later retract this claim ?"

    I wish not to be a bird of ill omen, but "why did the MCs later retract this claim ?" isn't right. The MCs were much too careful to retract anything. The only kind of retractation was made by Clarence M to RTÉ on October 25 2007, likely because the broadcast of Channel 4 Dispatches "Searching for Madeleine" cleary stated that there had been no breaking-in.
    The jemmied shutters/window, being spectacular, had almost immediately the destiny of rumours, the MCs were the only ones who could put an end to it, but renouncing to such an unexpected gift required heroism. And they're no heroes.

    1. Hi Textusa,Rupert's,cohorts,stalwarts have close affinity to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann,his News Corporation being the first Broadcasters to break the Abduction claim!
      Then take into account the sudden influx of David Cameron,Rebekah Brooks,Andy Coulson,Leveson,Bell Pottinger,Martin Brunt,esq,yes you would be batting on a very sticky wicket,Operation Grange?

      Does anyone think Cressida is about to reveal the ineptness of the past Five year closer to solving the case,with One final scenario from Sir Bernard Hogan Howe,Bungling Burglars,then woman in Purple,when Redwood stated looking for Two Males and the Exton E-fits,kept away from the public for Five years,eh Gerry,Walker1000,Prai Da Luis paddlers??

  45. Gemma O’Doherty has twitted that Maddie was "failed utterly" by the police. It looks like Gonçalo Amaral agrees with that according to an interview he gave to CM last year:

    These words about the direction of PJ seem particularly relevant:

    "You do not get rid of a senior police officer to defend a couple suspected at the very least of child neglect, which led to the disappearance. It was almost a lack of respect to make the decision that it was an abduction and make it public. That was not looking at the investigation objectively. If this investigation ever comes to an end and if it proves that the parents have nothing to do with the case, that's fine."

  46. Unpublished Anonymous at 6 Feb 2018, 14:45:00,

    We are not publishing your comment because we will provide in due time our opinion on that particular subject which, apparently, is significantly different from the one those who you are recommending have.


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.