After years, years and years and then some more years, Walkercan1000, now Killa Dog, has NEVER, EVER mentioned he had a blog. Interesting, isn’t it?
*****
Edited at Feb 23 2017 17:30 to add the following image so readers can decide on whether Killa Dog was obviously joking about having a blog:
It’s a possibility, if one really wants to believe that he jokes with himself and those wearing the same team jersey.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1098372670314463232
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @regretkay @Joysetruth and 26 others
Did you miss the part about hotel cleaners? If a cleaner has decomposing pork tissue stuck to her shoe which is then deposited on floor, suitcase is put on floor then in wardrobe, dirty clothes dumped on floor then in wardrobe....you follow?
4:03 pm - 20 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1098639852382367744
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @FragrantFrog @regretkay and 27 others
Another nugget from the Frog...Are you sure you're not The Gurn with that statement... ? Pork stuck to a shoe.. Cremains scattered next door, then wafted into 5a... ? I bet that happened when the curtains whooshed... 🤦#McCann
9:45 am - 21 Feb 2019
*****
Does Jules not realize that she’s ridiculing NotTextusa? Remains were not scattered next ddor but were in the backyard, according to NotTextusa, that is.
We quoted NotTextusa in our post “The reliability of the cadaver dogs”:
https://textusa.blogspot.pt/2018/01/the-reliability-of-cadaver-dogs.html
“But then again we are before a SCIENTIST. One who has invented not only the “Playful but endlessly patient airborne molecule thesis” but also that of the “Maddie’s graveyard theory”, whereby apartment 5A lies, behold, on an ancient medieval graveyard:
To a very direct and specific question: “If only gas and only airborne contamination why was the scent detected in the backyard? It’s open air, impossible for airborne molecules to remain floating there.”
Insane, the scientist replies:
“Well, why do you think? Might interest you to know that it’s impossible to field walk in this country without finding small pieces of human bone, due to centuries of ploughing disturbing medieval graves. Consequently, it finds its way into the topsoil very readily. Try thinking outside the box for a change.”
All is scientifically explained, so says Insane.”
In response to this particular passage, NotTextusa in his blog on Jan 28 2018 confirms all that is said:
“Which it is”
And if Jules is full believer in NotTextusa’s cadaver scent theory, whereby the cadaver does not leave any physical scent emitting source meaning the scent was just wafting for months in apartment 5A, can she please then explain why her own “Cremains scattered next door, then wafted into 5a... ?” is ridiculous?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yIOyi9BpRO8/VXS1nx7G9ZI/AAAAAAAAMA4/hVXqzqIfozQ/s1600/Insane%2B990.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k0LfK6t2n04/VXS2EakCmeI/AAAAAAAAMBI/QY8K7bdJJ5I/s400/Insane%2B988.jpg
To us it’s ridiculous, absurd, ludicrous and other synonyms but to Jules it should be perfectly reasonable…
By ridiculing (rightly so) the Frog, isn’t Jules just ridiculing NotTextusa and also herself?
https://twitter.com/Louise42368296/status/1099041105994280961
ReplyDeleteLouise @Louise42368296
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @FragrantFrog and 42 others
There’s none so blind as those who will not see 🙄cxx
12:19 pm - 22 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1099041897132236801
SheLLxx 💯 #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @Louise42368296 @FragrantFrog and 42 others
And never is that a truer word xx
12:23 pm - 22 Feb 2019
*****
And we agree FULLY with Silverdoe.
Comment received that we have censored:
ReplyDelete"Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Lost blog":
the thing is Jules is an anti "poseur". She poses as the anti she wishes us to think she is'nt and then in then with not textusa blog mode she shows the pro (censored) she is....simples
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 22 Feb 2019, 22:41:00"
Oh i am looking forward to killas blog, has anyone got any links to it? or killa just might post his link on twittet.
ReplyDeleteperonally i think he hasn't just another tactic these mccann supporters use, he wants you to ask him: ''where is it? ect, because we all know hes a mccann suporter so people are interested in what bull hes writing, believe me he has no blog, whens he ever gonna get time to write it ( someone else probably has) hes on twitter 24/7, i would just ignore it, but i wont i probably will have an opinion on his new tactic.
message to killa, if its confirming the swinging, im all ears.
DLP
Killa a blog??? Never! He manages to tweet over and over again the same old rubbish. He’s got nothing of interest to say, just repeats the mantra. Imagine a whole page of rubbish in a blog. Certainly no truth will ever come from his mouth. Although I’m sure he knows the score.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/DavidHuddo/status/1099226285384052736
ReplyDeleteDavid Hudson @DavidHuddo
Replying to @NancyParks8 @Louise42368296 and 42 others
Nancy, you obviously have no idea of what the word “evidence” means in the context of a legal case. It does not mean proof. Proof is determined by the OPINION of 12 based on the “evidence” (for and against) presented to them. IMO the evidence in #McCann case = conviction
12:35 am - 23 Feb 2019 From Bromley, London
*****
Very interesting tweet and loads of food for thought.
Do replace the words “by the OPINION of 12 based on the “evidence” (for and against)” for “by the CONVICTION of the court based on the evidence (for and against)”. In Portugal jury cases are very rare.
As we all know, there are those, namely JBLittlemore, Frog and BourgeoisViews, who are trying very hard to obfuscate people about the case with their legal and scientific jargon about they say is mandatory for something to be considered proof in a court of law.
They forget a simple and deterministic detail about it that: it is the court that decides what is proof and what is not proof.
That’s where reasonable doubt comes into play. The court is the only legitimate place where evidence becomes proof. And the court is the only place where legitimately is determined what is reasonable to doubt and what isn’t.
Portugal had recently a case of a man, Pedro Dias, who killed 4 people and was on the run for days until he gave himself in by calling the TV cameras.
All evidence pointed towards him but even so he thought that by inventing an alternative and to him plausible version of events the court would not be able to convict him.
The court heard his side of the story (like we now have to hear the versions from JBLittlemore, Frog and BourgeoisViews and what according to them are all the legal and scientific constraints) and heard the prosecution’s version (like we have to read and decide for ourselves) and found Pedro Dias guilty of all charges.
Not comparing crimes in question but simply saying that what some are say will not stand in a court is up to the court to decide if it stands or not.
For example, there is no scientific corroboration about Keela alerting to blood. But the Portuguese courts, found that such scientific corroboration wasn’t needed, that the reliability of the dog was beyond reasonable doubt as proof that it was blood so it considered that a PROVEN fact.
So let them speak. Let them say whatever they want to say. Just ignore.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1099304937605992448
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @DavidHuddo @NancyParks8 and 42 others
Evidence is a witness saying they saw a specific person at a certain place & time. Proof is having the specific person on CCTV at place & time.
5:48 am - 23 Feb 2019
*****
No, both are evidence. What is proof is determined by the court and only by the court.
If the court determines that “witness saying they saw a specific person at a certain place & time” is truthful beyond reasonable doubt, then it considers it proof.
If on the other hand, by absurdity, “having the specific person on CCTV at place & time” and the court suspects the image has been tampered with and so there’s reasonable doubt to consider it truthful, then it will consider it not to be proof.
Proof as legally binding is only what the court determines.
All of us use the word “proof”. But it is used to express our personal opinion. Something we think that if presented to a court of law, that court would deem it as proven.
For example, when we say that the 3 Hynds couldn’t possibly have consumed the 13 bottles of wine, 4 waters and 2 juices as written up on the Tapas reservation sheet proves that the sheet contains false information, the word “proves” is not used in a context outside a court. We use it because we feel that in a court that would be considered as proven but only a court would be able to state that as such.
https://twitter.com/MrDelorean2/status/1099317408832073731
DeleteMr Delorean @MrDelorean2
Replying to @DavidHuddo @NancyParks8 and 42 others
In law, a preponderance of evidence and a lack of evidence to the contrary would be regarded as proof.
In this case there was no evidence against the McCanns and plenty of evidence to the contrary, as the legal summary makes clear.
#mccann
6:37 am - 23 Feb 2019
*****
1st paragraph, absolutely correct. Up to the court to decide beyond reasonable doubt.
2nd paragraph the usual absurd praising of the exquisiteness of the gold on the fabric of the Emperor’s new clothes expected from a pro.
As far as I can see from reading on the subject, Portugal does not have 2 different standards of proof as in UK.
DeleteBeyond reasonable doubt - standard of criminal proof.
Balance of probabilities - civil court proof.
As far as I can see, only some US courts will allow alerts as evidence. There seems to be more acceptance in US as dogs can be trained on body farms, which are not allowed in UK.
DeleteAs yet, we don’t have human body farms.
As I read, Portuguese judges assess the reliability and acceptability of evidence and 2 levels of proof do not exist in Portugal.
Dogs’ findings would not be used in UK courts. They are only used as police intelligence, to direct their searches.
@22:26
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-17270117
The law is different in Scotland.
Please ignore like the meaningless legal twaddle from NotTextusa below (from his blog):
ReplyDelete“Not Textusa29 January 2019 at 18:22
Thanks guys :D
Just a side note - I see that (censored) Carla (censored) is off on one again. Specifically this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DyGKcDuXgAEMqkv.jpg
So let me explain
The court found as proven that the dogs detected human blood and cadaver scent in the specified locations. That is hardly a surprise - the dogs both alerted to their target scents. However, that is where it stops. As the judge herself explained, the purpose of the hearing was not to determine the guilt or otherwise of the McCann couple - they were not the ones on trial. So that 'proven fact' asserts that the dogs reacted to their trained scent. No evidence was presented with respect to the accuracy of those alerts or their source. No forensic specialists presented evidence for either side, so the evidence has been neither contextualised nor challenged. Yes, both dogs alerted - however, the samples recovered did not meet the evidential threshold required to identify the provenance.
And no amount of red-faced screeching from Carla (censored) will change that.
And while we are at it, an alert in a specific spot does not constitute proof that a body has rested in that spot. Textusa is too (censored) dimwitted to understand even the most basic biochemistry, but corpses do not collapse into a pile of goo at the moment of death like something off Buffy the Vampire Slayer, nor do they secrete purified cadaverine as that (censored) would have people believe.
Really, the two of them should get together - it would save spoiling another pair.”
****
As said, one should stop giving any oxygen to nonsensical and imagined legal constraints referred but please do note how NotTextusa keeps to the theory that Jules has ridiculed above.
“Corpses do not collapse into a pile of goo at the moment of death like something off Buffy the Vampire Slayer” is absolutely spot on.
What NotTextusa forgets is that between the moment the corpse collapses and the time it takes to become “a pile of goo” there’s a process that has to start sometime. And that time is at the moment the body dies, its cells stop being oxygenated.
It’s in this this macabre path of becoming “a pile of goo” (civilised people call it decomposition process), that this “goo” starts to be processed because, as Not Textusa says “Corpses do not collapse into a pile of goo at the moment of death like something off Buffy the Vampire Slayer”.
It is easily to understand that at the beginning of this process this “goo” is produced in quantities that only the highly sensible nose of a dog is able to detect its presence. But it is there.
That secreted “goo”, or as NT has also called “purified cadaverine”, is what the body leaves behind on the surfaces it has had contact with. What the dog signals and has constituted PROVEN fact by the Portuguese courts.
We inform readers that we have just edited the post to add a picture.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1099349390710444033
ReplyDeleteAndy Fish @AndyFish19
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @xxSiLverdoexx and 4 others
Hiya, Karen. I saw plenty of big round tables in the various eating establishments we frequented & used!
So does that mean because BRT's existed, then no swinging events were taking place or vice versa?
(Lost the plot with all that Textusa nonsense to be fair on #McCann )
8:44 am - 23 Feb 2019
*****
Mr Fish,
Please quote us where you have said that the absence of the BRT means, by itself, that there was swinging.
Don’t worry, we won’t be waiting for your answer. We know cowards never reply.
https://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1099378848838414337
DeleteAndy Fish @AndyFish19
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @ZaneZeleti and 3 others
Of course that Textusa oddball is on here, copying & pasting tweets over 24/7 & then writing "anon" comments to back her/him self up & not allowing comments to challenge their bullshit!
All part of the McAgenda on #McCann
#Spade
#Whimpering
#Mari
#China
#Idiots
10:41 am - 23 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1099381852727635969
Andy Fish @AndyFish19
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @ZaneZeleti and 3 others
Well they certainly don't respect Goncalo or the PJ files with all their constant reams of shite to subtlety try & discredit it all!
& Textusa (as you'll be watching like a hawk as you're not on Twitter), then piss off you complete loon!
Almost as worse the #Bennett on #McCann
10:53 am - 23 Feb 2019
*****
Cowards will always be cowards.
While we wait for Mr Fish to reply like an adult to the challenge put to him by us of providing the quotes where we have said that the absence of a BRT is the proof of swinging, we would like for our readers to note that he’s just one of some (fortunately the list is shrinking by the day) who uses defective logical deduction, deliberately, to try and prove they are justified in mocking the swinging theory.
DeleteThe Big Round Table was not related to swinging, as should be obvious to anyone with the ability to reason.
The table was related to the neglect alibi. The neglect alibi was related to creating an opportunity for abduction.
Swinging is not related to the table, neglect is. Without the table there cannot be neglect. Without neglect there cannot be an abduction. It’s in this narrative the BRT that never existed fits.
The death of Maddie was not related to swinging. By this we mean that her death wasn’t caused by a swinging event, however we believe that it may have been an accident related to a disagreement about where to be that night in such an event between David Payne and Kate McCann.
The decision to cover -up of the death and the disposal of Maddie’s body is what we say was related to swinging.
https://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1099388386979147777
DeleteAndy Fish @AndyFish19
Textusa. As night follows day, then I just knew you would copy & paste my tweets over (at least I managed to finish them this time) to your poxy blog!
If you want to have a 'debate', then get yourself (not socks) on here & discuss..
& don't hide behind said poxy blog? #Loon
11:19 am - 23 Feb 2019
*****
Stop diverting. Provide the quote.
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1099645811670044672
ReplyDeleteKaren Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns @LoveTextusa and 6 others
And regardless of whether Andy was out of order or not , he's not wrong about Text. Poor Julie got dreadful abuse just for posting a picture of the BRT , the things that lot have said about her are appalling
4:22 am - 24 Feb 2019
*****
We feel we should remind readers of what “poor Julie” has said on NotTextusa’s blog.
Jules/Julie has alleged or at least by the using the term “I wouldn’t put it past” that Textusa has made a false report to the police and has terrorised the daughter of another team member.
Perhaps she would like to elaborate or withdraw that remark? Or she should bear in mind that after this case has been finalised, however it may be finalised, she may have to account for that allegation and prove it to be true.
Against incontrovertible proof that an incident was reported to the authorities and with the stalked girl as a witness.
What incontrovertible proof? The <10 pixel image of a nondescript police report that could have come from anywhere?
DeleteAnonymous 24 Feb 2019, 16:14:00,
DeleteYes, that report. The police have it on a scale 1:1.
And the girl's experience by her own is also incontrovertible. Is it because she's Portuguese that you've become so callous about what she was subject to?
https://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1099710665399386115
ReplyDeleteAndy Fish @AndyFish19
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @anotherviv and 41 others
China. You're an avid Text supporter aren't you. So do you think M died when K & P were in the middle of a shag, stored the corpse at Murats, then Smithman went on a dummy run with a decoy etc... & everyone in PDL were in on it, to cover-up swinging, as per the Text?
#Mccann
8:40 am - 24 Feb 2019
*****
Andy the coward, who demands facts but runs away when asked to provide facts himself, is now deliberately misinforming.
We have made it very clear that we believe that Maddie died in the middle of an argument about where Kate was requested to be that night.
In this very post we have explained that and Mr Fish has shown very clearly that he reads our blog and yet he persist on putting off people by saying we say “M died when K & P were in the middle of a shag”.
Others, like him, also use the same tactic to throw people off the swinging theory. The fact they need to do that just shows how scared they are about the swinging theory.
"...& everyone in PDL were in on it, to cover-up swinging"
DeleteOne thing has been established, no one in Luz (outside the VERY FEW chosen) was searching for Maddie on May 4.
And from the images we have seen, only ONE Luz resident was part of that "VERY FEW chosen, and that was Robert Murat.
Must correct ourselves about what we said in our comment above.
DeleteForgot about Dave Shelton the other British immigrant, resident of Luz who also participated in the searching.
Basically half of those helping were guests, Neil Berry and Raj Balu and the other half British immigrants, Robert Murat and Dave Shelton. Quite the crowd.
One of the most ridiculous tweets about the case:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1099730388136747008
SOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC
Replying to @strackers74 @Louise42368296 and 43 others
It is all to spread confusion .. Swingers Paedo's Abductors Neglect .. So you don't concentrate on the Parents.
9:58 am - 24 Feb 2019
*****
It is ridiculous because:
Paedo’s – attention on who but the parents and the Tapas group?
Abductor – attention on who but the parents and the Tapas group?
Neglect – attention on who but the parents and the Tapas group?
Why put swinging theory together with these?
Swinging is the only theory that puts the focus not only on the parents and the Tapas group, without taking it off them, but also on others outside them.
https://twitter.com/thetruthnessie/status/1099764823485833217
ReplyDeleteVanessa Jackson @thetruthnessie
Replying to @Joysetruth @BourgeoisViews and 43 others
Even when things are clearly pointed out to him he still keeps going on. Even when we’ve explained everything he still has to argue then he wants to know why we think what we do. It’s just draining.
12:15 pm - 24 Feb 2019
****
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1099997968227291137
BourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews
Replying to @thetruthnessie @Joysetruth and 43 others
I ask you how you know what uncorroborated dog alerts mean. I ask where the facts can be found that prove your claims. I already know why you think what you do. You want to blame the #McCann parents for Madeleine disappearing.
3:42 am - 25 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1100014582318407680
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @thetruthnessie and 43 others
Ask the PJ ... or look in the PJ files .. you’ll find all that you need to know about the facts of the dogs in there. The PJ accepted their evidence & that is a fact.
4:48 am - 25 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1100016262585950209
BourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @thetruthnessie and 43 others
The PJ don't answer my question. So why do I have to accept uncorroborated dog alerts as evidence just because you refer to the fact that the PJ think they prove something?
4:54 am - 25 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1100016812987764736
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @thetruthnessie and 43 others
Because the Portuguese justice do & this is their case. So though luck.
4:57 am - 25 Feb 2019
*****
China Doll showing how simple it is to shut dog-dissers up. It is really simple.
I'm really dissapointed with the rumour now being ''i wouldnt be suprised if tex stalked one of the teams daughters, how would you feel jules if i said that about lets just use Ben T as an example because hes a blogger that you like? yes no? well anyway because i know its true about the teams daughter, what a vile thing to say, its very disturbing how you all hate the team.All because of swinging.
ReplyDeleteDLP
I always wondered why the officer interviewing JT asked about “mackling” tables together.
ReplyDeleteIf a person said “We all sat around a table”, why would anyone who didn’t know the tapas or hadn’t seen a photo of the table, ask that question?
They would assume the table described existed?
IF the officer had seen a photo of Tapas, then I understand why she would have asked.
To me, it seems there was some doubt by LP officer about the table story.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jules999x/status/1100137488096641025
ReplyDeleteProving the point about how big a table for 9/10 would be. Compared to this. (Awful taste in decoration )
Also trying to maintain link with table and swinging.
Anonymous 27 Feb 2019, 11:26:00,
DeleteThank you, we have already explained that in our comment at 23 Feb 2019, 18:58:00 table myth = neglect = abduction:
“The Big Round Table was not related to swinging, as should be obvious to anyone with the ability to reason.
The table was related to the neglect alibi. The neglect alibi was related to creating an opportunity for abduction.
Swinging is not related to the table, neglect is. Without the table there cannot be neglect. Without neglect there cannot be an abduction. It’s in this narrative the BRT that never existed fits. “
That is one of the tweets from Jules from her alleged holiday (reason apparently why she closed one of her Twitter accounts), all very interesting to read:
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1100010160674795522
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @regretkay and 29 others
Wish you was here arr Kaz.. You too Shell & Sade... @EricaCantona7 @xxSiLverdoexx @SadeElisha86 ... @JBLittlemore
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0QFZtZWkAATAEl.jpg
4:30 am - 25 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1100024035608543232
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @JBLittlemore @EricaCantona7 and 29 others
Afternoon JBL... :) Funnily enough, last night we put some on the bill, to be paid at the end of the week.. As is normal.. We all know that my friend.. :) Having a brill time.. Wish you was here!!! ;)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0QSBMfXcAEyMIh.jpg
5:25 am - 25 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1100054752291942401
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @regretkay and 29 others
No skirt but it has a runner.. 🏃🏃🏃:)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0Qt86LWoAAyTkY.jpg
7:27 am - 25 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1100137488096641025
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Went to get food tonight.. Soon as we walked in and was invited to sit at a #BRT with 8 chairs with skirts, I knew straight away it was a #swinging convention...
Absolutely morto'd... 😫
@JBLittlemore
@xxSiLverdoexx
@xxSiLverdoexx
#McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0R5M-nXQAUqyPn.jpg
12:56 pm - 25 Feb 2019
*****
For example, noted the effort to distance herself from Portugal during these “holidays”. But that’s just one of many details to be noted.
Another, of course, is how ready she is to publish images only not of those she says she has that would prove the existence of the BRT and so own the blog, as she has promised she was going to.
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1100439457512210432
ReplyDeleteBourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @Caesar2207 and 44 others
I do ask how anyone can guess the meaning of uncorroborated dog alerts. So what if you think that's disrespecting the dogs?
8:56 am - 26 Feb 2019
*****
Straight out of JBlittlemore’s school of thought.
Other graduates from this “Uni”: NotTextusa, Mr Thompson and Andy Fish.
… and because it is the topic of this post:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/PollyGraph69/status/1100486539891609601
Debbie Lee Perry @PollyGraph69
Replying to @MancunianMEDlC @McCannFacts and 43 others
Anyway killa wheres this blog you have? surely you wanna share it with us i mean after all thats why people write them, any links yet? #mccann
12:03 pm - 26 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/McCannFacts/status/1100686316638007296
Killa Dog 🌐 @McCannFacts
Replying to @PollyGraph69 @MancunianMEDlC and 43 others
My stats are stunning. All about child abduction and how it’s done. If you can’t find it, tough. #mccann
1:17 am - 27 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/PollyGraph69/status/1100689646219071489
Debbie Lee Perry @PollyGraph69
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @McCannFacts and 43 others
Why would someone write a blog? then not promote it?
1:30 am - 27 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/McCannFacts/status/1100694766419886080
Killa Dog 🌐 @McCannFacts
Replying to @PollyGraph69 @EricaCantona7 and 43 others
Ask Nottextusa? #mccann
1:50 am - 27 Feb 2019
So along with non existent e-mails and photos from Jules, we now have a non existent blog. There's a pattern emerging here!
DeleteIn their determination to ridicule 'swinging' etc. the gang have taken a wrecking ball to everything they have defended before, but are too stupid to realize that doing it not only they have imploded but they have polished the 'swinging' theory so that now it shines as bright as it never did before...
ReplyDeleteSo the girl was followed - that happens all the time. The fact is, it's got nothing to do with Madeleine, or you would be shouting it from the rooftops
ReplyDelete“Happens all the time” ? Schoolgirls get followed by men all the time? It’s not the norm to follow and intimidate young school girls as they walk home from school! In fact it’s so very disturbing, that when men do, it is taken very seriously by the powers that be.
Delete“Shouting it from the roof tops” perhaps her parents have been, the police were informed and statements taken. Textusa wrote on the blog about it, and has since received a threat.
What do you think they should do re; shouting from the roof tops. Who else do you consider needs to be shouted at?
Would you like to have another go at completely missing the point? There is no doubt it’s an appalling thing - but if there was any evidence it had anything to do with the Madeleine case Textusa would be shouting it from the rooftops. Yet he has not shown any evidence at all. Are you really that daft? It’s a con.
ReplyDeleteYou agree the girl was followed, “so the girl was followed” you also state THE FACT IS (my caps) it’s got nothing to do with Madeleine, how would you know this?
DeleteHow do you know there is no evidence? Can you show evidence it’s a con? Do you consider yourself that important that evidence must be shown to you?
Anonymous28 Feb 2019, 13:17:00
ReplyDelete"No doubt it’s an appalling thing" is not something "that happens all the time".
What evidence would you like to be shown?
Inane ‘rooftops’ comments and to use Maddie in the same breath! Repugnant. Pretending to care yet not caring at all.
ReplyDeleteAll I’m seeing is a lot of spluttering and no evidence that the incident was anything to do with Madeleine.
ReplyDeleteUnless you explain why you maintain it’s connected, I think we can all assume you are simply making it up - not the incident, but the link.
That’s pretty disrespectful to everyone, us included
Anonymous 28 Feb 2019, 15:17:00,
DeleteYou are basically accusing a person of taking advantage of a traumatising experience that a young girl endured to win sympathy points and you demand respect?
That this evidently sick individual then convinced 2 other people to agree with the publication of 2 posts about it. 2 people who must be evidently sick as well.
What do you care about what such a person has to say? If we thought you were capable of doing what you accuse us of doing, we wouldn’t care for anything else you had to say next because we wouldn’t believe a single word you had to say, so why do you want any explanation from us?
By the way, who is "us"?
More spluttering ��
DeleteThere is nothing at all to suggest this is anything to do with Madeleine, is there? The more you splutter and gaslight, the more obvious it is
Textusa did say that the man never spoke to the girl, so unless he was carrying a placard, I can’t see how he makes out that it was anything to do with the case or this blog either.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 28 Feb 2019, 15:50:00,
DeleteYour words speak more about you and about the Maddie case that they do about any of us.
Imagine your child reading your words above. The girl has. And has read every single word published (and unpublished) about what has been submitted to the blog about the incident.
You want to know who the first person who thought it was related to the blog? The girl while it was happening because only that made any made sense of what was happening to her.
More spluttering. No evidence whatsoever.
DeleteWe have asked you what evidence you expect. We wait for your answer.
DeleteNo, you don’t get out of it that way.
DeleteWhy don’t you tell us what evidence there is?
Thank you for confirming who you are. It was quite obvious.
DeleteSo no evidence, then?
DeleteThe evidence and reasons why we are certain that the stalking had to do with the blog have been presented to the authorities.
DeleteThis is not a game. This is something very serious, taken seriously.
However. comments people like your and from the rest of “us” are being used to help corroborate the case that the blog is really bothering some to the point of stalking a minor with the intent of closing the blog via scare tactics.
Scare tactics by people who simultaneously accuse us of having forged a stalking to win sympathy points and say we have NOT been “shouting it from the rooftops”.
“You are basically accusing a person of taking advantage of a traumatising experience that a young girl endured to win sympathy points”
ReplyDeleteYes
This current Textusa post is about a "Lost Blog" is it not? A blog that Killa Dog mentioned he supposedly writes, away from his unique input on Twitter. The stalking reference, coming as it does, is off-topic but is obviously written to aggravate and distract. The stalking came at a time when there was yet another push to close down Textusa's blog - a blog which is certainly about Madeleine McCann - unless one is living in a cave; or so blind with hatred not to care. To try and separate the two is just disgusting game playing.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101052523929047040
ReplyDeleteChina doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @lindale70139487 @strackers74 and 41 others
Linda, I’m convinced that the swinging did happen because everything that I read in the Textusa blogs fits like a jigsaw puzzle.
Can I ask you what makes you think paedophila?
1:32 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1101053329814245377
SOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @lindale70139487 and 41 others
The friend Doctor bathing the kids ?? The other friend Doctors. Reporting The Friend Doctor G #McCann to the Police ??
1:35 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101055573502636032
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @MancunianMEDlC @lindale70139487 and 41 others
Didn’t happen. The Gaspars statements were highly questionable. Trying to push the paedo angle to take people away from the truth.
1:44 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1101055974662639618
SOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @lindale70139487 and 41 others
Gasper statements are with the Police .. FACT ...
1:46 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101056314028052481
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @MancunianMEDlC @lindale70139487 and 41 others
Yes they gave statements, it doesn’t make them fact.
1:47 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1101057628904587264
SOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @lindale70139487 and 41 others
Would you let a Strange Man Bathe your kids ??
1:52 am - 28 Feb 2019
*****
“Would you let a Strange Man Bathe your kids ??”. That is a key question. Unacceptable, we all shout.
And yet the Gaspars let that happen. Allegedly that is. Allegedly they let a man who, allegedly, had a revolting conversation with another man regarding an infant daughter of one of them in front of one of the Gaspars, and the Gaspars, allegedly, let one of those 2 men bathe their children.
Note, not only did they do that but they also kept in contact with the McCanns socially after this holiday. One can only conclude, if one is to believe in what they said that the Gaspars saw NOTHING wrong with the conversation between David and Gerry, as the Gaspars also thought perfectly natural what we all think unthinkable and that was to have a strange man bathe their children.
What does that make the Gaspars?
Repentant paedos? Repentant paedo collaborationists? Repentant paedo enablers? One of these they must be if we are to believe them.
People who knew that infants were being raped but only thought a line was crossed when a child died? Because, it seems, if a child had not died, they would have kept quiet or is there any other explanation for their silence between witnessing said conversation, allowing said bathing and Maddie’s death?
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1101203768211922946
DeleteJules ♡ @jules999x
So now the Gaspar couple were in on the 'hoax'...
What a load of shit... #McCann
11:33 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1101204317560885249
SheLLxx 💯 #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @jules999x
Apparently so Jules. It's worrying how they are now discrediting someone who'd known k #McCann for twenty years.
It mustn't have been an easy statement for them to make...
11:35 am - 28 Feb 2019
*****
So the Gaspars knew the McCanns for 20 years. When did the Gaspars find out that the McCanns were paedos or had paedo friends?
It had to be after the Gerry/David convo because the Gaspars continued to see the McCanns socially after that…
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1094740922942803968
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
BTW Carla - I'm hoping to obtain some enhanced footage of the BRT featuring guest appearance from Martin Brunt. Watch this space. #mccann
3:32 pm - 10 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1096090475461857282
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @EricaCantona7
My contact is on it. Hope to have something back one way or the other within the next week, :)
8:55 am - 14 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1096091035120357376
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @FragrantFrog @Chinado59513358
Looking forward to it, LG
8:57 am - 14 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101054585005850624
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Has it been posted yet? Have I missed it?
1:40 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101191637932355584
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358
My source was unable to obtain the original copy of the programme so you've missed nothing.
10:45 am - 28 Feb 2019
*****
… and the Frog does a Jules on all of us! Why are we not surprised?
BTW, why was KLS looking forward to it? We thought she, who publishes every which table as THE BRT, had seen all she needed to see, so no further evidence of its existence was needed, right?
We imagine the Frog thought, as we did, that Brunt had used indeed a big table (oval in the case) as a prop and that she could show images of it somewhere.
DeleteUnfortunately for the Frog, as we showed, Brunt did not even use a prop (we have given as a plausible possibility him not having a prop to use because he was unable to find a big table with a similar top to the one supposed to be used), so he played around with the images to pretend he was sitting at one.
As we have also said, it would mean absolutely nothing if there had been a prop.
But there wasn’t even a prop. No prop, no pretendy big round table, no BRT. And that’s why source “source was unable to obtain the original copy of the programme”.
Now a question… why would the Frog have access to “the original copy of the programme”?
After having a high-resolution version of the Event Esplanade picture and having the Cristaluz picture, now she has someone who can access “source was unable to obtain the original copy of the programme”. The Frog has rather VERY GOOD connections in this case, hasn’t she?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101198406259798016
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358
I was after a clean copy of it with the correct resolution.
11:12 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101202845397893123
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog
You said earlier that it was the original copy Frog. #friendsinhighplaces?
11:29 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101203250202710016
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358
You think Sky only had one copy of the TV documentary?
11:31 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101208577946120195
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog
You yourself said it was the original copy.
11:52 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101209596629315585
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358
It's from an archive. I don't know if it would have been the original but it would have been a TV copy rather than an uploaded video.
11:56 am - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101210505144909824
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Now who on earth would have one of those?
12:00 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
The Frog is assuming she has connections with someone who has access to Sky News video archival. Isn’t that so interesting?
And isn’t it also interesting that the same source could not find a copy with the “correct resolution”? Because if there’s a copy, as there should be (Frog even says there are more) in Sky News’ video archive, then that copy would be accessible to someone claiming to have access to that same archive, would it not be the case?
It seems it was not. Either Sky News has a “correct resolution” copy but won’t give it to the Frog’s source or Sky News destroyed all the copies of such a sensitive documentary or the “correct resolution” version shows with even more clarity that there was indeed image fudging and so the Frog’s source “cannot” access it. We will leave it up t the reader to decide which was the case.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101190940092497920
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Caesar2207 @BourgeoisViews and 46 others
If death occurred in 5A why did the dog also "alert" in the garden, on the patio, to the rental car & inside the rented villa?
Why did Morse not alert to D'Andre Lane's clothes & the settee in his home?
10:42 am - 28 Feb 2019
*****
Frog could you please provide a link as to where the dogs alerted “inside the rented villa”. Thank you.
BTW, why are you describing the alert in the backyard as “in the garden, on the patio” making it appear there were more than one alert there?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101224633800581122
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
For Textusa. Do the 2 separate alerts mean a person died in the rental villa? #mccann
https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8
12:56 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
Could you please indicate at what time in the video do these separate alerts happen? Thank you.
By the way, we are supposing you are referring to this:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
“6.36pm - The dog Eddie, who detects cadaver odours, "marked" the area of a cupboard in the living room. On checking, the dog was indicating a pink soft toy belonging to Madeleine McCann.”
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101238294204026881
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
For Textusa....Just run the video for 2 minutes...#mccann
1:50 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
Seen it. It is what Martin Grime says: cuddle cat.
No person has died in rental villa. Unlike in apartment 5A where someone has and that death is still unaccounted for.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101246676344414208
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
For Tex. Can't reply on blog. Eddie did not alert to CC (Grime went to wrong cupboard first). So why does 1 alert beside wardrobe in 5A mean a death occurred there but alerts in villa beside a cupboard don't? #mccann
2:24 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
That is a question you must address to Martin Grime. What is in his report is what matters.
You see, the dogs don’t tell us anything. They communicate with Grime, he’s the expert. He tells us, as the subject matter expert, what the dogs have told him.
In the case, he has said the alerts were to cuddle cat.
Not getting into a JBLittlemore discussion with you on this. You don't agree, tough luck.
The Portuguese courts took his expert opinion as enough to consider proven the blood and cadaver scent in 5A and the Scenic and the rental villa was not mentioned in any way in this aspect.
"1 alert beside wardrobe in 5A mean a death occurred there"
DeleteYes, no correlation was made by Martin Grime between the location of the alert and an object that was there that could have contaminated it. Only a body could.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101249897897119746
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CarlaSpade
Are you claiming Eddie only alerts to a general area - as in, "well I can smell the odour from here Guv but I'll leave you to find the exact source?"
2:36 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
You do understand that you have just thrown out the window all the hard work from JBLittlemore, NotTextusa and Mr Thompson (and BourgeoisViews) with that simple phrase, right?
(Frog, your side is supposed to say the dog alerts do NOT mean location!)
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101230252078977024
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
More
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @EricaCantona7 and 41 others
And we all know what the Pied Piper did when the villagers upset him....
1:18 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101231017153695747
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog @EricaCantona7 and 41 others
No, perhaps you’d like to enlighten me Frog. Just to be clear.
1:21 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101231451129942017
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @EricaCantona7 and 41 others
He took away the children. Did you abduct Madeleine?
1:23 pm - 28 Feb 2019
[Tweet liked by Karen Lowe Sanders]
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101232729352519681
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @FragrantFrog @EricaCantona7 and 41 others
Did you fall on Madeleine & kill her by accident?
1:28 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1101232914354921472
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @FragrantFrog and 41 others
What a ridiculous question
1:29 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
Why is KLS ONLY upset with China Doll’s question after LIKING Frog’s one? Interesting, isn’t it?
Just for the record:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101237336380190721
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @EricaCantona7 and 41 others
Why would I have fallen onto Madeleine? Was your ego resting there to trip me up?
1:46 pm - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1101232804539457536
ReplyDeleteKaren Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @Joysetruth @Chinado59513358 and 41 others
Dolt says there was no table large enough for the T9 to sit at, therefore they lied about actually eating in the Tapas. ( this is despite several witness statements to the contrary )
1:28 pm - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Joysetruth/status/1101235053839949825
familaw @Joysetruth
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Chinado59513358 and 41 others
Right. But didn't the staff, other guests, the T9 say there was a table/tables? I don't see any agenda to lie about it but I don't think they were there every single night, I think that's to dumb down the level of neglect and they went off to further diners
1:37 pm - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1101235196454731776
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @Joysetruth @Chinado59513358 and 41 others
Yes exactly
1:38 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
According to @Joysetruth “the staff, other guests, the T9” have LIED because they say the T) were at Tapas EVERY night and that conflicts “I don't think they were there every single night, I think that's to dumb down the level of neglect and they went off to further diners”.
And KLS agrees.
It’s called the “Kelly’s syndrome”. Nick/Anon and Silverdoe have made the same mistake.
I wish they'd make their bloody minds up. So the tapas staff didn't lie but the T9 WERN'T at tapas every night as stated. Arses and elbows.
DeleteMakes one wonder if the Tapas staff really were Tapas staff, or were they merely individuals acting out a part for the benefit of the abduction hoax? The more that time goes by it seems evident that it was like Robert Murat said 'an inside job'.
DeleteWere there any independent witnesses in this case? Somehow I don't think so, it's all too scripted accompanied by really bad acting. Why did anyone ever believe in abduction? It's just way too obvious there was no such event took place.
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101241858762727425
ReplyDeleteChina doll @Chinado59513358
Well that’s enough fun for tonight 😄... Wind em up n watch em go as my dear old granny China used to say.
A very wise lady she used to be too. Goodnight & sweet dreams. 😍
2:04 pm - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/grand___wazoo/status/1101376678977302529
The Grand Wazoo @grand___wazoo
Replying to @Chinado59513358
Glad you enjoyed yourself. Why do you constantly evade my question? Who were the VIPs swingers in PDL which you claim are friends with #gordonbrown s brother Andrew & Gerry #mccann , the swinging which you say is connected to the coverup of Madeleine’s death?
11:00 pm - 28 Feb 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101437084273905664
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @grand___wazoo
And where exactly did I claim that Gordon Brown’s brother was mates with Gerry?
#waiting!
3:00 am - 1 Mar 2019
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101441666601361410
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @grand___wazoo
At no point did I say that any VIP’s were mates with Gordon Brown’s brother Andrew or Gerry McCann.
In fact YOU seem to know more about it than I do.
Shill.
3:18 am - 1 Mar 2019
*****
Interesting for the @grand___wazoo to bring in Gordon Brown brother Andrew into the swinging theory, totally out of the blue and unprovoked.
We had no idea China Doll had ever mentioned such a thing and she confirms that fact and we will be waiting as well for @grand___wazoo’s answer. We doubt there will be one, cowards nevre answer, only ask.
And talking about asking, to @grand___wazoo’s demand to know who were the VIPs swingers in PDL, we can only say this:
https://twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1098036029242535936
Madeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
Replying to @regretkay @FragrantFrog and 26 others
We don’t know??? Maybe they [the Moyes] are being safe and playing good guy bad guy? People are obviously afraid of McCann Mafia tactics
5:46 pm - 19 Feb 2019
Even if China Doll knows who they are, we recommend she play safe. Or is it a he as she’s just one more who is supposed to be us?
https://twitter.com/grand___wazoo/status/1101546908114452480
DeleteThe Grand Wazoo @grand___wazoo
Replying to @Chinado59513358
If it weren’t you, it was one of your swinging promotion crew. I will have a look when I’ve time, either way, you promote probably as fact.
10:17 am - 1 Mar 2019
*****
The coward replied as cowards always do: if it wasn’t you it was someone else but as you probably promote it as fact, I’ll accuse you from the hip anyway.
And then pretends he’s here for the truth about Maddie.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101269573267935232
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Textusa. Do you have a cite for the PJ asking the Dutch owners of the rental villa if anyone had ever died in it? #mccann
3:55 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
No, we don’t.
Why would there be one?
The physical emitting source for those alerts was identified by Martin Grime, the certified subject matter expert, to be the cuddle cat.
The cuddle cat is an easily movable object so where it was when alert given is not deterministic as to where it got contaminated. Unlike a wardrobe or a floor that cannot be moved about, which were the locations alerted to in apartment 5A.
It’s totally logical for there to have been investigated if a death had happened in 5A and totally logical not do the same with the rental villa. For the exact same reason it would have been absurd to have a cite for the PJ asking the gym owners if anyone had ever died there:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101265309992923142
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CarlaSpade
Yet it never occurs to you Eddie was alerting to something other than CC in the villa....which is why the PJ took all the clothing to the gym for further testing....
3:38 pm - 28 Feb 2019
The dogs alerted there, didn’t they? So why didn’t you ask for a cite about death in the gym?
Because even you know that would be absurd as it’s obvious the alerts there are linked to objects and not the location where those objects are at the time of the alerts. Same thing with cuddle cat in the rental villa.
Just because in your head you’ve created the idea Eddie alerted to something other than to which is mentioned in his report by Martin Grime, the certified subject matter expert, it doesn’t mean Eddie alerted to what you imagine he alerted to.
But the fact that Martin Grime, the certified subject matter expert, does not state in his report what you imagine to be an alert is certainty that it wasn’t one.
To answer this:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101268751113162752
“Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CarlaSpade
So you believe what Grime said rather than what Eddie really alerted to? That makes a lot of difference when considering evidence (or lack of it) against a suspect.
3:51 pm - 28 Feb 2019”
Yes, absolutely and totally. Grime is the dog expert, he’s the one who knows the dogs and has the qualifications to know how to interpret the dog’s reactions. As we have said, Eddie talks to Grime and Grime talks to us. Eddie does not talk to any us in those images.
It’s arrogant to thinking one, without any qualifications, is able to interpret what Eddie does better than a certified subject matter expert does.
It would be like being certain of what foreigner said in a language one does not understand based only on that person’s body language. One can indeed see, or thinks one can see happiness, sadness or anger but only after having a certified translator present will one know with certainty if those emotions matched the words that were really said.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIn this case Grime is the certified dog translator. So, yes, we will trust more in what Grime has to say than in our eventual perception of what the dog does or doesn’t in the video. By the way, to be clear, our perception matches that of what Grime says than in what you’ve concocted.
It’s interesting to see how some seem to believe that they know more than the experts on the expert’s respective fields.
Some seem to think they know more about Eddie and Keela than Martin Grime and, as we have seen, some seem to know more about legal requirements of the Portuguese justice system than the Portuguese justice system itself. And we won’t get into the ECHR, we just hope that by 2030 we will stop hearing the McCanns are going to put in a process in the ECHR.
Lastly, your question seems to imply that Martin Grime would have an agenda against the McCanns.
That would be a serious accusation in itself but you seem to fail to realise that what you are defending here contradicts that.
A location related cadaver scent alert in the rental villa would be as damning to the McCanns as the alert in the Scenic was.
In fact, together with the alert in the Scenic, a location alert in the villa would be much more damning as then there would have been 2 alerts outside 5A directly related to things the McCanns only touched after Maddie disappeared and not only 1.
So, if there was the minimal possibility for the alert in the rental villa to have been location related and not object related, that would have been in Martin Grime’s report. Not because of an agenda but because of the implications of what that would mean in terms of implicating the McCanns.
To have come to the conclusion that the alerts in the rental villa were only related to the cuddle cat and not to the location itself was certainly very well thought out.
It did not benefit or hinder the McCanns, it was only what it was and that only proves that Martin Grime acted with integrity.
By the way, we hope you do see how your “which is why the PJ took all the clothing to the gym for further testing” together with your “well I can smell the odour from here Guv but I'll leave you to find the exact source?” totally obliterates NotTextusa’s theory on cadaver odour.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101527821036474368
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
For Textusa I didn't ask if PJ had checked if anyone died at gym because the dogs reportedly screened the floor area BEFORE clothes were laid out. Why didn't Eddie alert to those clothes back at the villa - they came out of box marked sala (living room) where Eddie barked #mccann
9:01 am - 1 Mar 2019
*****
Ask Grime. Have already informed you that we will not engage in a JBLitlemore debate with you.
We would speculate that the levels of concentration needed of molecules emitted into the air from where they were when at the villa was not enough to trigger off the dog’s nose. And when they were spread out in the gym, those levels of concentration were reached and the dog reacted accordingly.
We can be wrong, we can be right, only Martin Grime will know.
Taking the decision of spreading the clothes from the villa in the gym after the dog had been in the villa just shows why he is a certified subject matter expert, which you aren’t.
The fact that the dog does not alert to the clothes in the villa but does when they are in the gym completely floors Mr Thompson’s thesis that the alert in the backyard in August was due to a similar phenomenon as to having smoked a cigarette there in May.
Unless shown otherwise, we believe that there needs to be a level of concentration of molecules in the air for the dog to react.
The clothes inside the villa would have emitted a superior concentration level of molecules than the concentration that could possibly be left after someone smoking a cigarette in an open space months before, as well as knowing that a recently deceased body would never emit an odour with the intensity of a cigarette.
The dogs did not react to the clothes in the villa but reacted to them in the gym. The only explanation we can see to justify this is for there to have been an existing differential of levels of concentration of molecules released into the air. In the villa this level was not enough, in the gym it was.
Bottom line: Martin Grime considered valid the alert to the clothes in the gym and did not raise any problem because of the fact that the clothes had not been signalled in the villa when the dog there.
That tells us that represented no problem in validating the gym alerts. He’s the certified subject matter expert.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6761819/Scotland-Yard-ask-extra-cash-hunt-Madeleine-McCann-going.html
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6763579/amp/Netflix-launch-Madeleine-McCann-documentary-month.html
ReplyDeleteVery interesting thread about the Gaspars:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1101203768211922946
Jules ♡ @jules999x
So now the Gaspar couple were in on the 'hoax'...
What a load of shit...
#McCann
11:33 am - 28 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1101213427308158977
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
I know!
Here’s a question for you Jules, why did the Gaspar’s wait until a child had died before they reported their concerns to the police? Don’t living children matter that might be being abused???
12:11 pm - 28 Feb 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1102208892489080832
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358
So, according to you and your gang, the Tapas staff and MW staff, all the guests, most of PDL, Mrs Fenn etc were all in on the hoax, that wasn't enough so they drafted in the Gaspar couple too.. ?
Seriously..?
#McCann
6:07 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102222202345345026
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
You didn't answer the question. Don’t you understand it? Do i need to rephrase it?
7:00 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1102224601835364352
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358
Don't come cocky.. Did you not understand my reply...
How would Mrs Gaspar know Madeleine was dead at that time...?
You've no idea what's happened regarding the Gaspar statements...
FYI too, people can't be sued for making a police statement...O.k...?
#McCann
7:09 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102231609703628802
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
Oh & that’s probably why that statement was made.😊
7:37 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102227468788871168
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
So I’ll rephrase,
Why would someone who believed that their friends were paedos not report them at the time, & instead carry on holidaying with them & allow them to bathe other people’s children?
7:21 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1102228778447720449
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358
What seemed odd at the time became odder after Madeleine went missing and Payne was there....? Mrs Gaspar should have raised concerns at the time...We aren't all programmed the same... Did the Gaspar couple holiday with the Paynes again after that...?
7:26 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102230716698542080
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
Not behaviour that I would describe as “odd” ... more like deeply disturbing, & any normal persons reaction would be to protect the other children in the group by telling the other parents what had happened. Especially because of their bathing routines.
7:34 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1102231216001089536
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358
It's a pity her hubby didn't hear the same... Here's hoping it was looked fully into...
7:36 am - 3 Mar 2019
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102252129358675974
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
Oh he did see it according to his statement. So why wouldn’t they discuss with each other such a worrying display that they BOTH supposedly witnessed? Why would they continue to let the men bathe theirs & the others children?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0v8d3ZW0AEud4t.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0v8d3YWwAENS0F.jpg
8:59 am - 3 Mar 2019
[Attached picture #1 says the following:
“I remember thinking whether he looked at the girls in a different way from me or from the others. I imagined that maybe he had visited Internet sites related to small children. In short, I thought that he might be interested in child pornography on the internet.
During our holidays, I was more attentive at the bath times after hearing Dave saying that.
During our holidays in Majorca, it was the fathers who took care of the children baths. I had the tendency to walk close to the bathroom, if it was Dave bathing the children. I remember telling Savio to took care to be there, in case it was Dave helping to bathe the children and, in particular, my daughter E. I was very clear about this, as having heard him say that had disturbed me, and I did not trust him to give bath to E. alone.”]
[Attached picture #2 says the following:
“I remember that when I saw this gesture I immediately thought it to be in very bad taste, independently of the context of the conversation they were having. We were sitting around a white plastic table in the villa. I don't know if anyone else saw the gesture, apart from my wife Katherina. After this gesture, we did not notice any others and as far as I know, the gesture was not repeated.
We never commented on this gesture during the rest of the holiday and I thought no more about it.”]
*****
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1102255729841446912
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0v_vJIWoAEEyON.jpg
9:13 am - 3 Mar 2019
[Attached picture says the following:
“During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne.
I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue. This happened during a meal, at the end of the day in the villa, I do not remember the time or the date, but we would usually dine between 19.30 and 21.00 every day. I think this happened in the middle of the holiday.”]
*****
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1102256242653884416
China doll @Chinado59513358
Replying to @jules999x
And your point being?
9:15 am - 3 Mar 2019
*****
Jules brings up an obvious but very important point, the Gaspars, when they allegedly give their statements don’t know that Maddie is dead. The dogs had not yet been to Luz, and in mid-May, the abduction hoax was in full blast.
And that is a very interesting point that is ignored. Why? Because in the case Maddie had been “merely” abducted, the similarities between the Majorca and Praia da Luz holidays would be such that they render the Gaspars’ statement absolutely ridiculous.
The question that has to be asked is why did the Gaspars react after the Luz holiday when they didn’t react after the Majorca one?
Let’s establish facts. Let’s abandon names and treat people by letters.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIn Majorca, woman A hears man B and man C having a conversation. Says woman A about that conversation in particular:
“I do remember seeing [man B] use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue.” Man B and man C are talking about man C’s child, an infant then.
If this is not taken as disgusting the moment it’s happening, we don’t know the meaning of disgusting. Jules thinks it’s just odd apparently. And that it took time to become… odder.
We know from woman A that after hearing this convo, which makes her very uncomfortable – we would be more than uncomfortable but each one is who each one is – she’s disturbed but allows man B to bathe her child as long as her hubby D did not leave man C alone while him doing that.
What is described above is a woman A who although disturbed has no real problem in accepting that man B and C have an arrangement in which they abuse sexually an infant and one of the men, C, is her father.
Isn’t this replicated in Luz? Man B and man C are there and there’s not a slight indication of them having fallen apart. They continue to seem besties.
So, taking into account that in Majorca she saw no need to act, why would then she act about Luz if the what was happening was, worst case scenario, the same, the exact same: man B and C having an arrangement in which they abuse sexually an infant and one of them, man C is her father?
In fact, she was the only person to know that man B would be the last person who would abduct Maddie as, after all, he had a nice arrangement going with man C, didn’t he?
Why on earth would man B abduct? Why would he spoil this sick arrangement he had with the girl’s father (isn’t that what is implied was happening in Majorca?) and abduct the girl?
As we said, if we are to believe in the Gaspars’ statements, then the girl would have to been abducted by someone other than man B. After all, she would not have been going through anything worse than she had in Majorca, and woman A, knowing that did nothing.
In fact, we know she continued to get along socially with man C’s family… or abandoning letters, that after this incident which so alarmed Mrs Gaspar, they continued to socialise with the McCanns:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Gaspar.htm
“As I have already mentioned, I was only with Dave and Fiona on one occasion, after Majorca, and I have not spoken to them since then. In the last two years, we have met, as a family, with the MCCANN, every now and then. This mainly happens on the children's birthdays, a time when we meet up.”
What on earth made the Gaspars go to the police after the events in Luz?
We only have their word for it that they all holidayed in Majorca together. Personally, I don't believe a word of it, I believe it was an invention to fit in with the abduction hoax.
DeleteIndependent witnesses, what independent witnesses? The entire lot of them were involved in this gargantuan scam from the very beginning.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101813148028465154
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Caesar2207 @Chinado59513358 and 46 others
No it doesn't- as demonstrated by the number of false positives & negatives seen in testing. During real deployment, results cannot be accurately determined unless tangible evidence is found.
3:54 am - 2 Mar 2019
*****
Frog,
Can you please provide a link to the “number of false positives & negatives seen in testing”?
Thank you
PS: Is it anything different than what was said in this post?
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-reliability-of-cadaver-dogs.html
https://twitter.com/Caesar2207/status/1101794643774263296
ReplyDeleteCaesar007 @Caesar2207
Replying to @FragrantFrog @Chinado59513358 and 46 others
Frog I categorically disagree with your twaddle. Both human recovery k9s alerted to what they were trained to do, it's then up to the humans!! to interpret their findings...That's how it works #mccann
2:41 am - 2 Mar 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1101915216814751744
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Caesar2207 @Chinado59513358 and 46 others
Stop copping out. There is zero reason why a UK cadaver dog would NOT alert to decomposing pig's blood.
10:40 am - 2 Mar 2019
*****
Frog,
Could you please explain why there was decomposing pig's blood in the 5A’s living room, bedroom wardrobe, Scenic, Kate’s clothes (and Sean’s t-shirt) and cuddle cat?
Thank you
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1102386733008736256
ReplyDeleteSheLLxx 💯 #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @regretkay @Joysetruth and 46 others
See I don't keep a theory - Not a set one, I think that helps.
Wise advice I was given early on.
Facts mean the truth.
Keep it simple.
Don't fall down the conspiracy route.
I try to keep to those rules. We're all different though :)
5:54 pm - 3 Mar 2019
*****
Never commit to a theory. It could be the butler, the maid or the gardener. Even if all points to the greedy wife, just keep on the butler, the maid and the gardener. Just keep the debate going endlessly until it tires people about and they go away.
To those accusing the butler be supportive as if you really think it was the butler. Do the same with maid and gardener. Never commit to one. One has only had 12 years to think so it’s way too early to say which one thinks did it.
But don’t ever let anyone speak of the possibility of having been the greedy wife. Ever.
Basically, just keep the discussion going and don’t have a theory but attack one, and only one: the swinging theory. All else can be, but never, ever the swinging theory.
Use and abuse the name of Mr Amaral, Madeleine and PJ if need be. Claim their honour as your own. Use the words “truth” and “fact” to their extreme. Claim them as your own.
When asked to reply to fact, divert and distract and above all play the victim.
Accuse anyone defending the swinging theory of ignoring facts but when asked which, do not reply.
https://twitter.com/DuarteLevy/status/1102506606284206086
ReplyDeleteDuarte Levy @DuarteLevy
Tive a oportunidade de colaborar com o canal australiano neste trabalho sobre o caso Maddie, sem nunca tentar influenciar a opinião final da equipa que nele se empenhou. São...
https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/04/10/43/maddie-podcast-episodes-what-happened-madeleine-mccann
1:50 am - 4 Mar 2019
*****
Anyone who uses Duarte Levy as a source risks losing all credibility:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/06/exposing-swindler-truth-about.html
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/06/clean-slate-exposing-swindler-part-ii.html
In the early days of the case Duarte Levy claimed to have in his possession 24 photos of the Tapas dinners (which would certainly have captures and shown to the world the BRT) but he has never shown them to date, even though defied to do so – not by us but by pros.
Interesting how the pros then – when no one doubted the dinners – knew he didn’t have anything to show.
Speaking of Joana, do any readers here know if she is OK please? She hasn't tweeted since the middle of December and I can no longer find her facebook account.
ReplyDeleteI'm a friend of Joana's on facebook, and I can assure you she's still there!
DeleteComment received that we have censored:
Delete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Lost blog":
That's good to know. Thanks for that. I noticed a maritime photographer trying to contact her on Twitter yesterday saying they (censored).
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 4 Mar 2019, 17:13:00”
We have censored your comment because our “clutter-alarm” fired off immediately after reading what “maritime photographer” had to say.
Hope you understand.
Interesting comment from Ironside on one of the 2 posts above on Joana Morais’ blog:
Delete“AnonymousTuesday, June 30, 2009 6:28:00 pm
Hard to see exactly what was his game with the photographs...In my opinion they never existed .
17 August 2008
Vile fantasist ties to sell ‘dynamite’ Madeleine McCann pics
Exclusive by James Millbank
Maddie McCann’s parents are “devastated and furious” over a cruel bid to cash in on their anguish.
Grasping Duarte Levy demanded £50,000 for photographs he claims implicate Kate and Gerry in their daughter’s disappearance.
The 23-stone Frenchman said the “dynamite” pictures showed Kate had changed clothes suspiciously the night Maddie vanished.
Advertisement
Despicable Levy also made the ludicrous claim that the 24 photos he was peddling cast doubt on what Gerry and one of the couple’s Tapas 7 pals told Portuguese police.
Levy, who said he had close links to the cops, bragged outrageously: “These photos are a bombshell and will force the Maddie case to be re-opened.”
The People refused his offers to sell the pictures – and told the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell of Levy’s preposterous claims.
Mr Mitchell branded Levy “a con man and fantastist”.
He said: “Kate and Gerry are angry and upset that he is seeking to make money out of Madeleine – it is a disgrace.
“They are no longer suspects and he should not be trying to tarnish their reputation. We thank The People for exposing this man.”
A People investigator met Levy in a Brussels hotel last week. Levy said: “I will sell the photos to the highest bidder. I got hold of them through my contacts.”
Levy – who is in his 40s and claims to have homes in Spain, Belgium and London – said he had sold pictures and stories about Maddie for tens of thousands of pounds.
He said his new photos showed doctors Kate and Gerry, both 40, dining with their friends in Praia da Luz the night Maddie, then three, disappeared 15 months ago.
Levy claimed that Kate and one of the Tapas 7 changed their clothes.
He also alleged: “The photos were taken between about 8.10pm and 10.15pm and they show that the time lines made by Gerry McCann and another Tapas 7 friend are wrong.
They are dynamite.” Levy cruelly scorned Kate and Gerry’s belief that Maddie is still alive. He said: “I believe she died in that room during an accident and then her body was moved to a flat in the town where it was kept in a freezer.”
The claim is categorically denied by the McCanns and police produced no evidence to support the theory. Levy said the pictures were taken by a Spanish tourist whose camera was later stolen.
He claimed a police source tipped him off after officers found the camera, which he then bought legally.
Levy also tried to convince The People that a well-known British legal firm offered him 600,000 euros (£512,800) for the photographs.
Bizarrely, he said he refused because the lawyers would not agree to his demand that the police should have copies of the pictures.
He also offered The People recordings he claimed to have of the McCanns’ financial backer, double-glazing tycoon Brian Kennedy, in a private meeting with Portuguese police.
Mr Mitchell last night said he did not know if Kate changed her clothes and added: “If she did, so what?” He said: “It is no big deal that Mr Kennedy met the police.
“He is interested in all – aspects of the investigation. He is a very hands-on person.”
A friend of the McCanns, of Rothley, Leics, said last night: “They have nothing to hide. It appears the Portuguese police are using Levy to leak negative material.”
‘Photos of couple are a bombshell…I will sell for highest offer’
IRONSIDE”
Duarte Levy says he has 24 photographs of the Tapas dinners and doesn't produce them.
DeleteDianne Webster says she has photographs of the Tapas dinners and doesn't produce them.
Jules says she has photos and mails that prove the existence of the BRT and doesn't produce them.
Isn't there a clear pattern above?
Yes, I think I do. It's probably for the best not to publish I agree. I've found J on Facebook now.
DeleteWant a medal.. ? Freak...
DeleteNo, thank you.
DeleteWe just want you to publish the photos and mails you said you have and you said on January 19 that you were going to publish them to own the blog. That was 45 days ago and we're still waiting.
When are you going to do that?
You've seen the photos of a BRT...Why do you keep pretending you haven't...?
DeleteWe cannot see photos of something that never existed.
DeleteThe photos we have seen are not of the BRT but the point is that ALL published photos of tables pretending to portray the BRT were not by you.
We want to see YOUR photos and YOUR mails that you said you were going to publish so why do you keep pretending you haven't...?
So you're saying the photos of a BRT are not really photos of a BRT...?
DeleteNo. A big round table is a big round table. There are many big round tables on the internet. You want pictures of BRTs? Here are some:
Deletehttp://dreamehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/classic-round-dining-table-for-8-ornamental-dining-room.jpg
http://dreamehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/elegant-round-dining-table-for-8.jpg
http://dreamehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/elegant-brown-round-dining-table-for-8.jpg
http://dreamehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/round-dining-table-for-8-outdoor.jpg
http://dreamehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/rattan-round-dining-table-for-8-1024x900.jpg
http://econosfera.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/terrific-8-seater-round-dining-table-and-chairs-8-person-square-dining-table-round-dining-table-with-brown-chairs.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c6/21/64/c6216416999d7cde493f12b52b448338.jpg
https://furniturerama.co.ke/image/cache/catalog/products/dining/_DSC5654.5a-600x600.jpg
https://www.duatloseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/round-dinner-table-circular-dining-table-for-8.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/HK_Admiralty_%E5%A4%AA%E5%8F%A4%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4_Pacific_Place_mall_basement_Peking_Garden_Restaurant_interior_Nov-2013_round_table_cloth_cover.JPG
http://www.theatlanticgrille.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Small-Private-Dining-Room_DomMiguelPhoto3173B2.jpg
https://www.competitiveedgeproducts.com/assets/images/8880301-07.jpg
http://www.ivchic.com/data/img/awesome-6-seat-dining-table-dimensions-dining-table-size.jpg
http://www.ivchic.com/14343/ideas/awesome-6-seat-dining-table-dimensions-dining-table-size/
https://cheekybeaglestudios.com/img/dining-room-table-dimensions-for-12/16_dining-room-table-dimensions-for-12_dining-room--awesome-dining-table-size-in-room-dimensions-from-attractive-dining-room-table-dimensions.jpg
Enough BRTs?
What we want to see is a picture of THE BRT, not of a BRT. The Big Round Table that the Tapas 9 used and that you say you have pictures and mails of and that you said you were going to publish. When are you going to do it?
You're missing the point... The point is a pic of a BRT is shown in the Tapas.. Just because you say it was put in on the 4th doesn't make it fact...It's been proved a BRT was in the Tapas in 2007 which is what was stated.. A BRT was not put in there because Kate McCann had read your blog..
DeleteBefore we reply with more detail because what you say is relevant, please quote us where we have said it was "put in there because Kate McCann had read your blog.."
DeleteThank you.
You want me to go through all of your blogs to find quotes you've made...?
DeleteYes. You made and allegation, you have to back it up.
DeleteOtherwise people will start to think that you just say things from the top of your head...
About lying for strangers:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1102366388004577280
SheLLxx �� #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Chinado59513358 and 45 others
Mrs Smith's files not in there too - But Stephen Carpenter lied. For any reason, hands up on this thread who'd lie during a missing child case for ANYONE let alone someone you don't know in ANOTHER COUNTRY with stricter laws? Would ANYONE here do so? For any reason?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0xkGujXcAAxYSC.png
4:33 pm - 3 Mar 2019
[Picture attached says the following:
“Carolyn Carpenter
Rogatory interview not included in DVD:
2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the Detective's statement evidencing the interview.
Carolyn Carpenter page 18”]
*****
https://twitter.com/strackers74/status/1102536163703877633
Elaine Strachan @strackers74
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @EricaCantona7 and 45 others
I can't imagine a scenario where I would; no. Unless my family's life was threatened then I wouldn't know til it happened but going on what we can prove; no.
3:48 am - 4 Mar 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1102537729353662464
SheLLxx �� #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @strackers74 @EricaCantona7 and 45 others
I would for my family, if as you say, their life's threatened, not for strangers. It's what doesn't make sense to me.with the case, Why others think it would be that easy for people the McCann's didn't know from Adam to do so.
3:54 am - 4 Mar 2019
*****
Silverdoe answers all that needs to be answered about why so many lied with these words: “I would for my family, if as you say, their life's threatened”.
Because to those who were saw themselves from one moment to the next risking being outed as swingers without any responsibility or involvement on their part for that to happen, it literally meant that their reputations could be very seriously damaged.
These people just did what Silverdoe said she would if in similar circumstances, they lied and collaborated with those who lied.
This was the first layer of liars.
But these people didn’t lie for strangers, they lied for themselves. They lied because they felt that their and their family’s everyday lives would suffer significantly as a natural consequence of a seriously damaged reputation back home.
Then there was a second layer of liars, the friends and families of those from the first layer.
Here again, no one lied for strangers but for friends and families. Please note that in both these layers we’re talking about social statuses going from the upper middle-class people like the T9, continuing up the social ladder through the upper class and ending in the social classes above these, the very, very important people that were there.
Them, their families and their friends and no one lied for strangers.
Favours were collected, strings were pulled. It can be easily seen that a powerful network of liars was setup in which no one lied for strangers. The bigger number of VIPs and the more importance they had, meant the bigger were the tentacles of this structure.
Lastly, the third layer of liars, those who lied for strangers. There are 2 groups. The first the poor, victims of an extreme power imbalance and had no choice but to lie.
The other group we call them vultures. Those who quickly realised that it would be beneficial to them to lie. To help the 2 layers of liars above. But if it can be said they did lie about strangers and for strangers, these strangers were not the McCanns or the other T7 but people who could benefit them and their career.
We think this is very easy to understand.
Actually what I said was in no way other than if my families life were in danger would I lie to the police full stop let alone in another country - You're no better than Bennett twisting peoples words.
DeleteWhere's the VIP?
Don't give me that class nonsense, you're waffling AGAIN.
Good to know you approve of others doxxing on here though. To allow that comment of someone saying they were combing J facebook? DISGUSTING. Reported.
About laws being stricter in Portugal:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1102533303159132160
SheLLxx �� #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @Joysetruth @EricaCantona7 and 45 others
Me too Joyse and in Portugal their laws are stricter too.
3:36 am - 4 Mar 2019
Based on what does Silverdoe make this statement on this tweet?
Oh, still stalking I see.
DeleteWeirdo.
Based on Portuguese laws of course. Do your own homework.
Silver, why is it stalking to refer to publicly available tweets, meant to attract attention to the content of the tweet, but not stalking to follow and comment on a blog that you dislike?
DeleteWould you say that about Brenda Leyland's tweets and the dossier then?
DeleteWas that all justified?
It was disgusting too.
Silverdoe,
DeleteBrenda Leyand’s tweets were public. There is nothing wrong in collating tweets and we will give you 2 examples related to her where we will prove that point.
If the dossier was collated with public information, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact we believe that many similar dossiers are kept and updated constantly. What is said in public is public and can be used publicly.
However, the problem was not the collation but the fact that Brenda was not given a chance to reply to what she was being accused of by Brunt and Sky News. We watched to a disgusting imbalance of power between a citizen and a major news media.
You are absolutely free to reply. If you think your replies will be censored here, you can reply on Twitter where we cannot control anything you say.
For example, when we accuse you of not replying to the question if the Hynds drank what is in the PJ Files said they did, you have the full opportunity to answer. No one is able to stop you. It’s your choice not to reply, don’t put the blame on us.
So do not even try to compare the use (and that is the point) we give to your PUBLIC tweets to what Sky News has done with Brenda Leyland’s ones.
Let’s now speak of Brenda Leyland’s tweets in the context you mentioned them.
Soon after – we think even before she took her own life – we saw a full list of Brenda’s tweets made up to prove that she had not been in any way the vile troll the media were accusing her of being. This list was made up with the intent of defending Brenda. Who made this list up, was s/he stalking her tweets? No, it was giving them the use to defend Brenda and promote TRUTH.
At the same time or little after another collation was made by various people – and to this day we can see some samples of it – of PUBLIC tweets that were vile, violent and threatening to Brenda. This list was made up with the intent of defending Brenda. Those making this list up, were they stalking the disgusting pros by publishing their tweets. No, they were giving them a use to defend Brenda and promote TRUTH.
If you can’t understand the concept that something done publicly is public with all its advantages and disadvantages, then stop using social media. Or, in the case of Twitter, protect your tweets. In the case of Facebook, adjust your privacy settings.
Brenda has absolutely nothing to do with the use we give to your PUBLIC tweets. We use them to defend and promote TRUTH. Leave poor Brenda Leyland out of this.
The blog is not compiling any dossier and when you publish the tweets from you and your gang we are not doing a Brunt doorstepping.
But on the other hand, when Jules comes on the blog to read the stalking post, then tweets, accusing one of us o making up the event / setting up another team member’s daughter/ filing a false police report, your absolute and complicit silence about it shows that you find that quite acceptable and isn’t stalking.
Double standards.
Double standards indeed on YOUR part as always.
DeleteIt's okay for your followers to use Brenda unjustifiably but when someone else does returned it's wrong? What YOU have been doing to innocent people is no better than what was done elsewhere, I'm not the first to say it, I won't be the last.
I have no problem with you using tweets, it's the MANNER in how you use them that is the issue here, something that is obviously escaping you as usual.
Get back to what you claim to do, research, I'd respect you more-ish for that at least, instead of this obsession.
I speak for NO ONE other than for myself here. I want to make that clear.
What you are doing is always crossing a line that should not be crossed.
Free speech is one thing, copying tweets is another but then it becomes harassment and cyber stalking. That is so wrong.
The back and fourths are one thing, between here and twitter where they're linked by YOU. Facebook stalking however is quite another, I'd never dream of doing such a thing. This goes too far, end of story.
Where have we said that it was "okay for your followers to use Brenda unjustifiably"?
DeleteYou've allowed the comments....
DeleteAre you okay with it then if you complain of your family members being innocent but it's okay if it's someone else's for any reason, let alone over a bloody email?
Silverdoe,
Delete“You've allowed the comments....”
The only comments we have allowed in this post about Brenda Leyland are from you. Are you criticising us for allowing your comments?
And why did you weaponise poor Brenda Leyland by invoking her name? No need for you to have done that.
“Are you okay with it then if you complain of your family members being innocent but it's okay if it's someone else's for any reason, let alone over a bloody email?”
Are you seriously comparing the stalking of a girl who has absolutely nothing to do with the case with us demanding for Jules to put her money where her mouth is?
We didn’t invent the fact she said she had photos that proved that the BRT existed. She did. We didn’t invent the fact that she said that she had mails “to follow”. She did.
We are only asking her to follow up on what she said. For her to prove she was telling the truth, that’s all and you are comparing that to a girl being stalked in the middle of the night when returning home? Again we ask, seriously?
To be clear, when you said “okay for your followers to use Brenda unjustifiably” you were lying.
“What you are doing is always crossing a line that should not be crossed.”
Did Jules not cross a line with her very serious allegations about falsifying a police report?
On that there's no concern whatsoever from you for a minor’s ordeal. Why haven't you said something about that?
Outing one of us fully... if that’s not stalking AND threatening to dox then nothing is!
DeleteSilverdoe, are you going to say something about the comment from Anonymous 5 Mar 2019, 14:05:00?
NO Innocent person should be stalked, doxxed, harassed, in any shape of form. You've held your own text and you have pushed and pushed and pushed others - How do you expect people to act when you won't be reasoned with?
DeleteWhy is it my fault what someone else says?
I am saying and speaking as I said for myself alone. You don't have to reply or like me or allow my comments do you? Or others?
You've put a police report that should stay private on social media, goes with the territory, as you said it does apparently with everything on social media, if you don't want criticism don't accuse an innocent person of something they haven't done. You imply so much and yet what proof do you have of anything you say? You do long posts knowing that you're saying one thing, meaning something else.
You started these games with others. Reap what you sew but my point is this. You don't get to play the game your own way text. That's not how LIFE goes. And here, you're screwing with peoples life's - Get that through to your skull. It's wrong. YOU are wrong. Stop thinking of your ego for once. Enough. Leave an innocent woman be. You're no better than the ones who hounded Brenda. Far from it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSilverdoe,
DeletePlease clarify "don't accuse an innocent person of something they haven't done". Who have we accused and what haven't they done?
Please list where this has happened: "you're saying one thing, meaning something else."
Thank you.
Text, you are your own worst enemy.......Good luck.
DeleteThis has nothing to do with Silverdoe. You're happy to show Jules that people are stalking her fb profile thanks to you, so I'm happy for someone to out you. I believe it's called Karma? What say you Textusa?
DeleteSilverdoe certainly is batty! Stalking and harassment are definite criminal offences, so either she doesn't care that alleged crimes are taking place, or she's involving herself during a police investigation. Which is it?
DeleteJules. at .5 Mar 2019, 17:25:00,
DeleteYour “Where is my very serious allegation...? You do chat some shit... This is a blog you knob...Get a grip of your life for God's sake..”, goes together with this tweet of yours:
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1096093858000240641
00The Jules... 🕵️♀️ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @jules1602x
So disgusting yet so true.. 😁Try shutting messenger down before taking SS and posting.. There are no stakes..Nobody is sinking.. Nobody is paid..It's Twitter you idiot.. Get a grip of your life FFS...
#rumbled
#moose
#McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DzYbjKQWkAAzF61.jpg
9:08 am - 14 Feb 2019
[Picture attached is a screengrab of this tweet:
https://twitter.com/Chinado59513358/status/1095700871919353857]
Then we said “Jules seems to think that because it’s Twitter, there’s no civil or criminal responsibility involved in what one says there” and now we say as well, that you seem to think that because it’s a blog, there’s no civil or criminal responsibility involved in what one says there”
Your serious allegation is this published on NT’s blog:
“Jules..17 February 2019 at 10:57
I think Tex has to be the most disturbing person I've come across whilst debating this case..
I would go as far to say that he himself set up a daughter of 'one of the team' being followed..I really do believe he would stoop that low.. “
The girl stalked girl is real, as real as any other girl. She, unlike “Textusa”, is not a heteronym.
You have clearly accused one of the authors of this blog of setting “up a daughter of 'one of the team' being followed..”
If this is not a serious allegation to make, we don’t know what serious is.
She was and is the only victim in this stalking incident. A victim who has to put up with allegations like yours and other vile comments about her ordeal coming from your side of the fence.
Anonymous 5 Mar 2019, 17:26:00,
DeleteWhat say we? We say we let your words speak for themselves. And be registered here.
We inform you that night starts at 18H00 in late November. At what time the incident happened is something that we have informed the authorities, and will not reveal publicly.
DeleteYou asked what serious allegation you made, we have shown it to you.
We have also said that the first person to say that the blog it was blog was related was the girl. When it happened. In one of the reconstructions at certain point she said "it was here that I saw that it was about you, not me".
At 15.54 you said 'middle of the night'
DeleteSo no proof then...Thanks for clearing that up...
Between 18H00 and 07H00 is in "the middle of the night".
DeleteWe used the expression intentionally because the time the incident happened and what she was doing are part of why it is related to the blog. We used it to make it clear that it was fully dark, not to be confused with dusk in case we used a different expression.
You do realise that by saying that the stalking had nothing to do with the blog contradicts your serious allegation, whereby you have clearly accused one of the authors of this blog of setting “up a daughter of 'one of the team' being followed..”
If it was set up, as you have accused one of us of having done, then it had to be blog related.
Oh dear, someone got a bee in their bonnet?
DeletePlease clarify how I would get myself involved in an ongoing investigation genius within the context I meant?
You're just digging yourself a bigger hole now Tex...A minor walking alone in the 'middle of the night' ?
DeleteA minor understanding what this blog is all about..?
A minor saying she was stalked because of this blog..?
Seriously...?
You do realise a minor stops being a minor only when she turns 18, right?
DeleteAll we can tell you is that the authorities when the incident was reported did not find it odd in any way the fact the minor girl was walking alone, from where she had come from and to where she was going to, at that time of night.
Batty silverdoe, you don't appear to sign out with your nom de plume anymore, why's that, inconstancy perhaps?
DeleteAnyone reading here can see that you're the one with the bee in their bonnet, with your multiple identities and lunatic comments (including those you delete)
lol okay as opposed to someone who hasn't got the balls to speak in one name - Anon......
DeleteThe comments on here about the young daughter of a Textusa team member who was stalked are utterly vile.
DeleteThere’s no sympathy for her or her parents ... quite the opposite in fact.
It seems that they’re actually trying to pin the blame on the parents by implying that they allowed her to walk home alone in the middle of the night! .. 6pm -7pm is Dark in November & teens do walk home from school or part of the way at least.
This from all accounts was very traumatic for the young lady.
Have some respect!
P.S Anon - Either you refresh this page every minute or your text, both are creepy but I deleted that other comment of mine pretty quickly...
DeleteWhy don't you name my other identities?
Oh get over yourself... Have you seen the comments where innocent people have been accused of stalking a 'minor' with absolutely no proof... This blog is disgusting.. You've all lost the plot or been brainwashed...Threre is no 'team' you fools..
DeleteThe middle of the night is the middle of the night, not 6-7pm..
Who said it was 6-7 pm?
DeleteP.S the middle of the night is between midnight and 4am you TWAT...
DeleteI didn’t really know what a “Troll” was until i discovered the pair of you.
DeleteYou’ve come on here plainly to disrupt & blacken the teams name & years of dedicated hard work.
You should both hang your heads in shame!
You’re absolutely disgusting both of you.
I’ve followed this blog for quite a while now & found it to be very insightful & most of all respectful to little Madeleine.
You pair don’t seem to know the meaning of respect.
There is no 'team'...How many more times 🙄
DeleteThe last of HTFM hanging in there?
DeleteThe time of the stalking is irrelevant – but the intention behind the stalking is…to frighten a minor….to get to the parent. So, the issue is with the parent. Sort out that issue first, like an adult, via the blog….
DeleteJules,
DeleteIf there's no team then how is this possible: "set up a daughter of 'one of the team' being followed.."?
You can prove that? Yes? Oh and whilst your doing so, show us the photos of THE big round table (not A big round table) oh and you might as well put up those emails too.
DeleteThen you won’t have to keep on saying “how many more times ��” Go on show us! Shut us all up eh.
That depends how you read my comment...
DeleteHave you any footage of a BIG ROUND TABLETOP being rolled into the Tapas on the 4th...?
I repeat - Why now? Why would, after 10 years this happen now? And do people really think that an insignificant blog holds enough significance for such things? Is there without a doubt proof the incident was to do with the case or is that being implied?
DeleteWhy are people saying elsewhere it is connected when it may not be and other innocent people could be affected by that claim?
See? See how life's are being affected here? So wrong on every level.
Do one Carla...
Delete"Who said it was 6 - 7pm?"
DeleteAnon 19:24
Further to that, Textusa said the middle of the night, then tried to put the "middle of the night as being some time between 6pm and 7am.
Would you say most people get home from work "in the middle of the night" at 6pm? Or that people get up for work "in the middle of the night" at 7am.
Would you say you watch Emmerdale "in the middle of the night" at 7pm?
Or Eastenders, "in the middle of the night" at 8pm?
Would you say you watch the 9pm movie " in the middle of the night"?
Would you say the 10 O'clock news aired during "the middle of the night"?
Would you say you go to bed after the news " in the middle of the night"?
Will you put these questions to your readers Textusa, or knowing it will show you to be wrong, will you hide the comment? I'll save it just in case.
Jules,
DeleteNo I haven’t any footage. I never said I had .... who’s Carla?
😂😂😂
DeleteAnonymous 5 Mar 2019, 20:17:00 and Jules who finds the stalking of a minor amusing,
DeleteYes we would (and did) if we didn’t want to reveal publicly if we were coming home from work, if were watching Emmerdale, Eastenders, the 9pm movie or the 10 O'clock news or if we were going to bed after the news.
It will be up to the authorities to determine if there’s any discrepancy between what is in the report(s) filed and “in the middle of the night”.
I certainly hope that Textusa has saved ALL of your comments.
DeleteTextusa, I would just like to extend my best wishes to the team member & their daughter who were the victims in that stalking episode.
I should imagine it has caused a great deal of upset & worry for them.
Please take heart that the people who have come on here to intentionally disrupt & try their best to spread hate for you & the blog are very much in the minority.
I’ve never commented on the blog before, but on seeing their horrible comments I felt compelled to do so.
Best wishes. X
I find nothing amusing about anyone being stalked...I find it amusing that you decided to put what must have been a terrifying experience of a minor, on a blog, when a police investigation is under way.. It's almost as if you're warning the perpetrators off.. I also find it amusing that you accuse others with absolutely no proof...I also find it amusing that you won't acknowledge proof that a BRT existed...You've said Kate McCann reads your blog numerous times.. You've also gone as far to say that Kate McCann takes your blog that seriously that she reacted in her book..
DeleteActually you'd say morning, noon, night, the middle of the night is ''I got woken in the middle of the night by the phone...''
DeleteWhat would be revealing saying any one of them other than....?
Jules,
DeleteFor that reason, we are not giving any details and are being purposefully vague in the little we have said other than to say “middle of the night” and having clarified that we meant night from 18.00 to 07.00 as it’s when it’s dark in late November.
L
We have not given time of incident, we have not said from where she was coming nor where she was going.
We have explained why we have said what we have about the incident: the safety of the girl, her family and rest of team members.
We have never played the victim. When we first made it public we didn’t say with certainty that it was blog related. We only said that after 3 reconstructions. Why we are of that opinion is only for us and the authorities.
Then we let the issue lie. We didn’t touch it. We even didn’t realise we had been again threatened during the New Year by Killa. Only after Killa threatened again did we react again.
We cannot be accused of milking this cow unless you want to accuse us of having coordinated all with Killa.
Tonight, it was you who brought the issue not us. We accused you of making a serious allegation against us. You asked for proof, we showed it to you.
You have contradicted yourself and proven that your allegation was completely baseless. First you said that it wasn’t related to the blog when in the allegation you said clearly that it had been set up by a member of the team against the daughter of another and then not satisfied with this contradiction, you said there was no team.
You had an opportunity tonight to retract your serious allegation. You didn’t, instead you reinforced it by nit-picking an intentionally vague “middle of the night” to suggest that it all was made up.
And now after disrespecting totally the girl you have the audacity to say “what must have been a terrifying experience of a minor”. Yes, it was, you can believe it was and every single word you and your friends wrote about it she has read them.
And her assessment when it was happening that it was blog related has only been confirmed by the reactions of you and your friends, time and time again.
As said above, you asked we provided. Now your turn.
Please publish the photos and mails of the BRT that you say you have (that you sent to JBLittlemore via “pigeon” after all pictures known to date had been published) and that will prove that the BRT exist.
If you have proof, as you say you have, of the existence of the BRT why are you asking for proof that it doesn’t exist?
Ò Silverdoe, vai pentear macacos.
Delete"Yes we would (and did) if we didn’t want to reveal publicly if we were coming home from work, if were watching Emmerdale, Eastenders, the 9pm movie or the 10 O'clock news or if we were going to bed after the news."
DeleteNo, you would have just said "in the evening".
I notice you didn't publish my comment asking if it's common practice for the police to hand out copies of witness statements for use on blogs?
Any reason you didn't want to answer that?
Have you retracted any of your allegations..My allegation holds as much weight as yours..
DeleteAnonymous 5 Mar 2019, 22:31:00,
DeleteThe parent was not a witness, the parent was the complainant representing the minor.
The parent asked for a copy of the participation and was given one. Don't think said copy would be given if not legal.
But why don’t you ask Silverdoe? She’s an expert on Portuguese law.
Jules,
DeleteYou said “almost as if you’re warning the perpetrators off.”
Of course that’s that’s what we’re doing!! That was the point we made at the time we wrote about the stalking.
Why wouldn’t anyone do whatever they could to prevent a repeat?
Would anyone simply wait for it to happen again and do nothing?
To bring it to attention in this situation is the best form of protection.
Anonymous 5 Mar 2019, 21:35:00,
DeleteThank you so much for your comment and apologies for this late show of heartfelt gratitude!
For the record, another person who finds the stalking of a minor very funny:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1103052704564346892
SheLLxx💯 #MMJC @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @jules999x @JBLittlemore @EricaCantona7
And apparently I now have multiple I.D's now too 😂😂😂10pm - Evening or middle of the night?
2:00 PM - 5 Mar 2019
*****
To be very specific, she finds we having used “in the middle of the night” to be intentionally vague in order to protect a details of the ordeal to be hilarious.
given those who seem to be promoting Mark Saunokonoko (bugsy,mcfadden et al)should we be wary of his work??
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 4 Mar 2019, 23:29:00,
DeleteApologies for the late reply but yesterday was the day to show how desperate people can become when they have to defend that there was no swinging involved in the cover-up of Maddie’s accidental death. People when desperate throw away any and all moral compasses and lose all decency.
The irony about what happened yesterday is that these people, published and unpublished, anonymous or identified, are the same who then question why people would lie for the “McCanns”, when the obvious answer to that question is just “all we have to do is look at you…”
Another reason for the lateness of the reply had to do with us wanting to be more knowledgeable about them before giving an opinion, even if only an early first impression.
We shouldn’t condemn or approve the podcast, only suggest people listen and form their own views. That’s what we are doing.
Mark S does draw attention to many anomalies and until we’ve listened to everything, we won’t make a judgement.
It follows the PJ files in that it narrates events of leaving children unattended. Of course, we expected the podcaster as a journalist to be careful, do the same as Mr Amaral has always done and follow the neglect narrative as he is protected by sticking to events described by witnesses in PJ files
He has used people like PeterMac who have credibility because of their background in the police but up to where we have listened the early death theory hasn’t been mentioned so far or the pool photo.
Peter McLeod does make some very pertinent points about the impossibility of taking a child through the window.
Some of those promoting the podcast will have to accept there are contributions from people whose views on other aspects of the case they don’t agree with.
We have to assume that those like Mr Thompson who refer to JH forum as a cesspit yet promote the podcast have presumably accepted there are contributions from people they aggressively disagree with. In this, we will also be curious to know what Blacksmith’s take on the podcasts will be.
We are paying attention to some who are promoting it. We have already have spoken of Duarte Levy but there are also Mr Thompson, Isabelle McFadden and Sonia Poulton.
For example, we will be curious to see how McFadden will reconcile her “neglect is their alibi” position that she’s held together with others like JillyCL with the podcasts.
So far, on what we’ve heard, we can’t criticise Mark S for his presentation but as said will have to listen to the full episodes.
The only negative comment we’ve made so far about the podcasts was about Duarte Levy and that was to say that his contribution reduces the credibility of the podcast.
But as far as we have got there has been no mention of him in podcasts and we do wonder if he’s doing his usual pretending that he was involved.
Mark S has named some people he will be speaking to in future podcasts and Duarte Levy has not been mentioned. However, he does seem to refer back to people already interviewed, so it’s possible next podcasts will expand on interviews already given.
We all need to listen and register where we agree or disagree with the content and only then come to a conclusion.
Brilliant tweet:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/strackers74/status/1102860788627324928
Elaine Strachan @strackers74
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @regretkay and 46 others
Say OG closed with no result & Amaral then wrote his 2nd book & said he now believed it was before the 3rd? Would everyone change their minds then? A second book, imo, would hardly re-regurgitate the same findings. I believe that he may not have the exact same opinion. #McCann
1:17 am - 5 Mar 2019
*****
What if Mr Amaral publishes a book in which he gives his theory about what really happened and it’s different from what the Tapas 9 have said happened – which is basically what “A Verdade da Mentira” is about?
Then what will some say if in a future book in which he would detail why his opinion evolved, changed, whatever?
https://mobile.twitter.com/jules999x/status/1103042481879478273
ReplyDeleteIs this it? The promised table!
Look at the ground area it takes up.
Who would dine around a table like that? It’s for drinks and maybe snacks. And how to attach a skirt? Lolol
It’s like the homage one found at the tapas, only smaller.
One other issue that was left behind yesterday was the accusation made against us by Silverdoe (who else?) of having allowed “others doxing on here” because we allowed a “comment of someone saying they were combing J facebook”:
ReplyDelete“xnorabattyx5 Mar 2019, 02:55:00
(…)
Good to know you approve of others doxxing on here though. To allow that comment of someone saying they were combing J facebook? DISGUSTING. Reported.”
****
“DISGUSTING”, in caps, even said Silverdoe. And said that she had reported us!
To dox is to “search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the Internet, typically with malicious intent.”
It seems that Silverdoe is not aware of how a well-known name in the Maddie case Joana Morais’s name for very good reasons.
We cannot see how someone mentioning her name is to dox her.
Did she mean stalking rather than doxing? With Silverdoe one never knows…
As can be read above, the comment exchange was simply someone being concerned about JM because of her silence and not finding her on Facebook and a friend of hers replied.
One person said she’s a friend of JM and the other was trying to re-establish contact, so how possibly can be read in this exchange as spying on JM? It’s baffling.
The person who was concerned received a reply saying “I'm a friend of Joana's on facebook, and I can assure you she's still there!”. The person who asked the question confirmed that s/he had found it. So the blog, who has 6 readers – 2 of which are Chinese bots – revealed via comments that Joana Morais has a FB page. Only since 2008.
What has Silverdoe reported? And to whom?
Maybe she should report Joana Morais as well:
https://twitter.com/K9Truth/status/1022999968351772672
Canine Truth @K9Truth
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns @xxMichellesxx and 5 others
Speaking of whom, has anyone been in touch with Teddy recently? #McCann
5:19 pm - 27 Jul 2018
https://twitter.com/JoanaAMorais/status/1023046290597400577
Joana Morais @JoanaAMorais
Replying to @K9Truth
Yes. He's fine. :)
8:23 pm - 27 Jul 2018
https://twitter.com/K9Truth/status/1023251149640609792
Canine Truth @K9Truth
Replying to @JoanaAMorais
Obrigad :)
9:57 am - 28 Jul 2018
We ask the person who said she’s a friend of JM, if s/he speaks to her, to let us know if JM is concerned about this exchange, which Silver has reported (still wondering to whom).
Silverdoe has posted this reply to this comment:
Delete“xnorabattyx has left a new comment on your post "Lost blog":
I didn't say I'd reported THAT specifically - I for one HAVE gone through your past comments. Just saying :) And it was J - Not JM.
Posted by xnorabattyx to Textusa at 6 Mar 2019, 19:53:00”
Fortune would have it that less than 20 minutes later an Anonymous decided to reply to this comment as well, providing us with the perfect reply to Silverdoe’s comment above:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Lost blog":
What the fuck are you on about now, you mad wanker?
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 6 Mar 2019, 20:11:00”
Sometimes Karma has perfect timing.
Unpublished Silverdoe at 6 Mar 2019, 21:17:00,
DeleteYou really don’t have the minimal sense of self-awareness, do you? Your inaptitude in that aspect is so fascinating that it makes you the only person we question if you are really a shill.
But by all means do continue to believe in what makes you happy.
By the way, and to make it very clear, when we talk about you it doesn’t mean we’re talking to you.
Hi again. I'm bemused to read this. What on earth is Silverdoe on about? I'm the person who was asking after JM, purely out of concern because she hasn't tweeted in a few months. I don't use Facebook much so couldn't find her at first when I looked there. I can assure Silverdoe that I hold Joana in the highest regard as one of the people who has genuinely put in the effort and the hours for Madeleine's cause (rather than pointless bitching and attention seeking on Twitter) I wouldn't dream of stalking or "doxxing" Joana. I just wanted to know that she was OK.
DeleteUnpublished Anonymous at 6 Mar 2019, 23:13:00,
DeleteAre you speaking to a specific person from Justice admin by any chance?
Anonymous 6 Mar 2019, 22:13:00,
DeleteThe FULL explanation of what Silverdoe meant to say in case you missed it and according to herself is in our comment at 6 Mar 2019, 21:10:00:
"I didn't say I'd reported THAT specifically - I for one HAVE gone through your past comments. Just saying :) And it was J - Not JM."
If you can make any sense of what she means, congratulations.
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1103053961001619456
ReplyDeleteJules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @JBLittlemore @EricaCantona7
Ah but did you know Kate McCann takes them that serious that she felt the need to react in her book... 🤦
2:05 PM - 5 Mar 2019
*****
She has already said the same in her comment at.5 Mar 2019, 21:39:00:
“(…) You've said Kate McCann reads your blog numerous times.. You've also gone as far to say that Kate McCann takes your blog that seriously that she reacted in her book.. “
We ask Jules to say where we are wrong in this post:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/03/proof-that-kate-mccann-reads-textusa.html
(This after we have asked her this and to which she - as usual - has not replied:
Textusa5 Mar 2019, 12:54:00
Before we reply with more detail because what you say is relevant, please quote us where we have said it was "put in there because Kate McCann had read your blog.."
Thank you.")
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1103451937368956935
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Dr_WhoDunnit @nowayjomo
Where's the direct quote from Smith saying he stood by his statement? (Use of lying Irish journalist not acceptable as bona fide source) #mccann
4:26 pm - 6 Mar 2019
*****
The fact that it was taken out of Bilton’s BBC documentary the bit that said the Smiths had changed their minds.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1103758802745258004
DeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Textusa.
At whose request was the "change of heart" remark taken out of Panorama? #McCann
12:46 pm - 7 Mar 2019
*****
Frog:
https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2018/02/maddie-did-the-bbc-bend-the-truth/
“The BBC even went as far as to make this claim. In a ‘Panorama’ programme broadcast in May 2017 to mark the tenth anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance, presenter Richard Bilton told viewers that the Smiths had changed their mind about seeing Gerry McCann and now believed they had seen someone else.
In recent weeks, I have spoken to Martin Smith at his home in Drogheda. He told me he continues to stand by everything he said to police in 2007. At no point did he withdraw his statement or change his mind about the sighting.
He is frustrated by media claims that he now says he was mistaken; and remains “60-80 per cent” convinced that the man he saw that night was Gerry McCann.
After the BBC programme was broadcast, Martin contacted ‘Panorama’ and informed them of their inaccuracy. But the broadcaster failed to correct the record despite its public service remit.
Last month, I asked the BBC why they had wrongly suggested the Smith sighting had been withdrawn and if they were willing to correct their error at this late stage.
I received a reply acknowledging that they had indeed broadcast an inaccuracy. They agreed to update the ‘Panorama’ programme on their iPlayer to reflect the correction. They say the mistake was made in good faith but they have failed to explain how they came to make such a fundamental error and why they did not check if their story about the Smiths was correct before they aired the programme.”
If you know differently, then please do enlighten us and put up a link to prove it like we have.
Thank you.
Unpublished Jules at 7 Mar 2019, 20:53:00,
ReplyDeleteYou still have to:
1. Answer if you believe in Spottyman;
2. Quote us where we have said that the round table pictured on May 4 and that appears in the event esplanade picture published first in a CMTV documentary and then by the Frog, was put there that day because of Kate McCann;
3. Say what we have said wrong in this post:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/03/proof-that-kate-mccann-reads-textusa.html
4. Publish the photos and emails that will prove the existence of the BRT that you say you have and that you said you would publish. We are still waiting. 47 days since you said you were going to own the blog.
Until then, you can take your sick humour elsewhere and continue to collect pictures of round tables for 8 from around the world.
We have noted this:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/carlaspade
“Caution: This account is temporarily restricted
You’re seeing this warning because there has been some unusual activity from this account. Do you still want to view it?”
We understand, not being twitter users, that there are a number of reasons why the message above would appear
We hope that her account hasn’t been temporarily restricted because of views expressed on the Maddie. IF it was because of that then we express outrage and indignation.
But as we said, we will wait to see if there’s a link between this and the Maddie case and so we will be paying attention to what happens next.
Account no longer restricted:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/CarlaSpade/status/1103803693097500672
But restriction linked to the Maddie case.
Why aren't those accusing the T9 of being paedos, of being FM, of killing Maddie out of scientific experimentation never reported?
It only shows how the swinging theory scares and it scares because all by now know it's the truth no matter how much they desperately praise whatever the Emperor wears...
"CTF’s sighting wasn’t mentioned ANYWHERE on the net (except the in the PJ Files where we found it), BEFORE we did on our Thanksgiving post in 2010.
ReplyDeleteTextusa’s Thanksgiving post, in November 2010, was the only difference about CTF’s sighting between the time the “Cutting Edge” was made, in April 2009 and Kate’s book’s being published in 2011.
We got our information from the PJ Files and nowhere else, because it wasn't anywhere else at the time.
This proves that Kate McCann reads this blog. And that she takes it seriously. So seriously that she felt the need to react to it in her book."
This is all completely wrong.
The information was always in the PJ files, so it was always available to the McCanns. The translation by Ines went online in August 2009, long before you wrote anything about it, in November 2010.
God knows why you think it escaped the notice of everyone else
No, I have mail exchange with Pamalam at the time, asking about CTF's statement. Why it was missing.
DeletePamalam even put up a note of acknowledgment of me having pointed that out. She has since taken that acknowledgement out.
When I wrote the post, I checked very carefully if anyone had mentioned that man. Yes, it was in the translations but no one gave him ANY IMPORTANCE.
So much so that he was "missed" in the documentary. The man was in the translations then, so why was he missed?
It was after the Mockumentary that I pointed out that it was very suspicious that a man was seen exiting the Oldfield's apartment the afternoon Maddie disappeared and NO ONE talked about him (at the time it dodn't cross my mind Kate would write a book).
To this day we see little, or any reference, outside us mentioning that the e-fits made up by CTF are missing and why we haven't seen them to this day and we haven't seen anyone point out how hard Leics police tried to make CTF change her mind about that e-fit. Now, why would they do that?
"The information was always in the PJ files, so it was always available to the McCanns."
DeleteSo why was it not included in the 2009 Mockumentary? You have just proven our point.
Total rubbish. The translation was published more than a year before you wrote anything about it and was widely discussed. Everyone had access to what you had access, including the McCanns. I can't understand why you are trying to claim credit for something you imagined.
DeleteSo easy for you to say that now, isn't it?
DeleteUsed to play the same game in high-school. No, it was middle-school. Do you want to me us to hand-over our lunches and pocket money?
By the way, we were hated by your kind then as we are hated now. Why THEN, no one pointed that out?
DeleteDefensive, much?
DeleteThe whole point is that you are claiming the credit for the inclusion in Kate's book of an incident which was freely available in the files and had been much discussed for two years prior to the book coming out, on the basis that you mentioned it in a post. Ridiculous.
Yes, pages, pages and pages about it. In fact only 2 things dominated the internet then: Nick Townsend and CTF-man. Hundreds, no thousands of pages of it.
DeleteBy the way, have you read the post? Where do we say the info was not there? It was but no one spoke of it. And after we did, there continued to be no discussion about it because then orders were that anything Textusa said was to be ignored, pretend Textusa didn't exist.
We were the first to be surprised with that extra star in Kate's book. We think that the post does convey that surprise.
Basically, you are saying the McCanns combed through the files and for the 2009 Mockumentary (where Kate appears to be looking attentively at docs clearly from the files) decided to leave out CTF-man, a man, according to you, everyone was talking about.
Then, in 2011, out of the blue they decided to include him. As a homage to the discussions they ignored back in 2008-2009. Yes, that really makes sense...
Silverdoe is very offended. It seems the words that were directed to the blog to which we put a “forward” in her direction have offended her. Because she’s a lady, or so she says.
ReplyDeleteSo those words directed at Textusa would be fine, directed at her are offensive.
Yet, she promotes NotTextusa who uses vile misogynistic explicit language against the female readers of the blog but, in that case, it’s fine. Only when it’s against her that it’s offensive.
Silverdoe is something that is genderless: a hypocrite.
And the hypocrisy continues, now with Jules. They went to pick up a post from 10 years ago. Imagine that!
This:
https://twitter.com/jules999x/status/1104014113565491204
Jules ♡ @jules999x
Replying to @Chinado59513358 @xxSiLverdoexx and 2 others
Who wrote this...? http://textusa.blogspot.com/2009/04/word-to-future-porn-star-or-not-even.html
5:40 am - 8 Mar 2019
The post is dated April 6 2009.
That posts uses strong, harsh and even vulgar language. Intentionally. And even though there are many things I regret to have written, this is not one of them.
The context is simple, this actress was set to play Kate McCann in the Mockumentary. The idea was to dissuade her from doing so. Right or wrong I decided that the frankest way to convey to her how wrong she was, was to use strong, harsh and even vulgar language. To show her how disgusting, repugnant and revolting it would be if she participated in the project.
I was not alone, the internet then was united against the upcoming Mockumentary.
The post has 2 comments, one in favour and one against. In favour:
“Joana Morais7 Apr 2009, 03:41:00
é assim mesmo!”
Joana Morais, according to Jules and Silverdoe must be a horrible person.
The result, was that the actress did not participate. The pressure the internet put on her seems to have worked. I am proud with the little bit I contributed for that.
Then, when it was confirmed she did not participate in it, I acknowledged and praised her decision:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2009/05/word-to-very-very-wise-woman.html
“Ms or Mrs Lisa Donovan,
I’ve addressed you, on April 6th, in a post called “A word to a future Porn Star, or not even that”.
A strong title that set the tone in which I adamantly criticized you for your appearance in a documentary, now known as The Mockumentary, that was aired yesterday.
You do not appear in it.
I’m assuming that you, for reasons that only you know, took a wise decision and decided to have no part in that circus.
If my words helped you in any way, it would make me very happy, but you’re the only one that merits all the wisdom in that decision.
So, where criticism was due, compliments are now owed. Sincere congratulations.
Let me finish by saying that you’re living proof of that what happened that night happened like we, who say Maddie died in that apartment, say it did.
You have, inadvertently shown the world, and on tape, how the McCann use and abuse people and how they manipulate the information they convey.
Hope you have the greatest of successes personally and professionally.
Congratulations.
God Bless”
This is what Jules and Silverdoe don’t mention.
A half-truth is worse than a lie, say the Portuguese. Someone who cherry-picks truth intentionally to deceive is more than a liar, that person is someone profoundly repugnant.
If someone was playing Hitler in a movie with the objective of glorifying him, promoting Nazism and whitewashing his crimes against humanity, we would continue to be proud to use "violent abusive language" if that helped stop his participation in such a vile project.
ReplyDeleteSame would go with someone playing Myra Hindley with the objective of whitewashing her crimes.
What is NotTextusa's excuse for the use of violent abusive language against the blog and it's readers?
We did not see any reaction from Silverdoe or Jules when Mr Thompson called nonce a member of our team.
Unpublished Jules at 8 Mar 2019, 18:48:00,
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about the admin of Justice For Madeleine FB group?
Reply
ReplyDeleteTalking about Joana Morais here is an interesting post from her blog from September 2008, about the book “A culpa dos McCann” (Guilt of the McCanns) by Manuel Catarino with preface by Moita Flores
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2007/12/guilt-of-mccanns.html
“Kate and Gerry belonged to the same group. She is snob, he is more sociable. But Kate according to what a colleague told the British newspaper The Mail on Sunday begun to loose the irritating superior air and turned into a bohemian. She went to bars, drinked beer and amused herself until early morning. She graduated without problems. The book of the end of the course, in 1992, recalls her as one of the most popular of the medical school of the University of Dundee. It was known by the suggestive nickname of Hot Lips.
(..)
The complicity between the four couples fuelled the rumours that they engaged themselves in an exchanging sexual game known as swing.
The insinuation emerged for the first time in an English blog and ran world. The Criminal Police also became interested, though with prudence in the sexual secrets of the McCann’s. The issue would only have interest to the investigation if the exchanges of partners surpassed the group of friends.
If the swing was open to other men and women, the author of the abduction could just as well be one of presumable sexual partners of Kate or in a far fetched theory, his wife, who for various reasons could feel despised.”
And being promoted by one of the gang:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/Irissykes14/status/1103602463192596480
To show how respectful NotTextusa is towards women, in a language that apparently neither Silverdoe nor Jules find offensive as they are tireless in promoting him:
ReplyDeletePost from his blog, published on Saturday, 27 January 2018 and called “Barking Mad” he ends with the following:
“Honorable Mention
For outstanding fuckwittery beyond the call of duty, comes this feeble offering
“[quote from our blog] Lesly Finn28 Jan 2018, 04:10:00
Yes you were right first time, Textusa.
"Searches of squares contaminated with the scent of the control (alive) subjects, ilicited no signals from any of the cadaver dogs."
So the dogs did not react in any way to surfaces that had been in contact with living people, and reacted ONLY to those that had been contaminated with deceased human tissue/substances.
A very interesting and well-constructed piece of research [end of quote from our blog]”
No, she [Textusa] WASN'T right first time, you fucktard [Lesly Frances Finn]. The dogs recorded false positives where they reacted to UNCONTAMINATED squares.
Seriously, some of you people need to consider making time to attend school at some point and not just to empty the bins.
Lesley, dear, don't comment on things you don't understand. Leave it to the grown-ups.”
https://twitter.com/ericson_niklas/status/1104118664289271810
ReplyDeleteNiklas Ericson @ericson_niklas
Replying to @FragrantFrog @grand___wazoo and 48 others
Why became all these people involved and jetted off for pdl within days?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D1KeDkGX0AAKP6m.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D1KeEBNX4AEWD8h.jpg
12:36 pm – 8 Mar 2019
[Pic 1:
“Clarence Mitchell, Head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit: According to the reply to a Freedom of Information request, he was appointed on Sunday 6 May to head up the government’s PR support for the McCanns, but he did not travel to Portugal until 22 May 2007
The government set up a very high-powered liaison committee on Tuesday 8 May under the Chairmanship of Matt Baggott, Leicestershire Police Chief Constable. It consisted of representatives from a wide variety of government departments and agencies. The government has refused to answer FolAct questions about who those agencies were.
Government Ministers Gordon Brown (Chancellor of the Exchequer) and Margaret Beckett (Foreign Secretary) spoke to Gerry McCann in the first week. Tony Blair, Prime Minister, did so later.”
Pic 2:
“Government officials
Robert Henderson — British Consul for the Algarve — immediate (persuaded Portuguese Police to allow the McCanns to wash clothes before seizing them)
John Buck — British Ambassador to Portugal (Lisbon), arrived immediately
Angela Morado — British Proconsul, arrived immediately
Liz Dow, British Consul rom the Embassy in Lisbon, arrived immediately
Andy Bowes, British Embassy Press Officer, arrived immediately
Sheree Dodd, Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Other staff from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
British Police Officers
Glen Power, British Police Liaison Officer for Portugal, arrived 5 May
An Analyst’ (unnamed) from the National
Policing Improvements Agency, arrived 4 May
Detective Chief Superintendent Bob Small, Leicestershire Police
Two other police ‘family liaison’ officers from Leicestershire Police”]
*****
Whoever was pulling the strings was able to muster all these people but apparently they weren’t able to overcome an accidental death by sedation.
Because, apparently, even though they had all these people come in to help them, they couldn’t possibly convince the Social Services not to take the twins away.
Nor, apparently, they were not able to ask the Portuguese authorities to keep to the maximum discretion the results of the autopsy held in Portugal and for the couple to be referred to anonymously just “a British couple” who unfortunately lost a child in a home accident in possible future press releases, even though they were able to muster the following people from the list above:
- Robert Henderson — British Consul for the Algarve — immediate (persuaded Portuguese Police to allow the McCanns to wash clothes before seizing them)
- John Buck — British Ambassador to Portugal (Lisbon), arrived immediately
- Angela Morado — British Proconsul, arrived immediately
- Liz Dow, British Consul rom the Embassy in Lisbon, arrived immediately
- Andy Bowes, British Embassy Press Officer, arrived immediately
- Sheree Dodd, Foreign and Commonwealth Office
- Other staff from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
.
They could bring all those listed in the tweet but could not do any of the above. Interesting, isn’t it?
For reasons that we will keep to ourselves, we feel that this is the right time to recommend our readers to revisit this post:
ReplyDeletehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2014/10/sys-significant-moves.html
Unpublished Anonymous at 11 Mar 2019, 15:51:00,
ReplyDeleteYou are paying attention, aren't you?
Your reaction was very informative. Thank you.