Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue III
In the tradition of our “comments continue” posts, and having the “comments continue” post almost reached 199 comments, this one has
been put up to allow us and our readers to continue to comment on the
case.
As the number of comments on the previous post has reached 200 comments, we are bringing this comment from there over to this new post, as it would become less visible than the other comments:
Anonymous14 Jan 2020, 13:45:00 Update on Gamble v shazbat2008. No comment on what the school is doing about the matter yet. The school shut be shut down until this serious safeguarding issue is addressed. The school is an unsafe space if staff do not understand they should not have colluded in this type of activity.
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor @shazbat2008 · 10m Just an update to all those who have replied to my tweet details of a letter sent via my disabled son's school. I emailed every partner at solicitors this morning at 9am with questions about the context of the letter and why it was delivered .. nothing back so far... #mccann Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor @shazbat2008 · 13m Replying to @s4r4h4d4ms and @EsMiluLatvijuxx I am awaiting since 9am a reply to an email I sent to every partner at the solicitors, so far nothing back......
Comment received in our previous post, which we are bringing it over:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Sade, Zora McCartney, Shell, Isabelle McFadden and Ben Thompson are the worst ones for making socks and cloning and sending each other messages of fb profiles and criticising the appearance of members and their children. Screenshots saved as proof, as Shell would say. Only when Ben Thompson, Isabelle McFadden and Sade were in the firing line for passing photos around, did they make an issue over Sade's child's photo, to prevent people reporting them to fb. The photo in question was taken from a story in the press, so had already been seen by thousands. Some of the gang were fallen out at the time, and a photo of Zora McCartney at work was passed around by at least two males to use against her if she did not leave Sade alone. One of the males DMd the photo via one of his fb socks to his known self before release. The worst comments about the cheap dress were not made by Rebecca or ES, but by someone in their own clique. Sade knows who it was but forgave them and went on to use an even more revealing pic as a joke on herself. Proving Ness correct that it is impossible to know who to trust.
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 2h Here's a few..
Take a look at Bugsy ( @TheBunnyReturds ): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturds?s=09 Take a look at Bugsy ( @TheBunnyRetruns ): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyRetruns?s=09 Take a look at Tealtraum, andyfish19 & TheBunnyReturns ( @GetRealFools ): https://twitter.com/GetRealFools?s=09 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 2h Take a look at Bugsy ( @TheBunnyRelurns ): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyRelurns?s=09 Take a look at mccann jam ( @preserve_truth ): https://twitter.com/preserve_truth?s=09 Take a look at Enough with the drama Shell ( @DramaShell ): https://twitter.com/DramaShell?s=09 Ness ������������ @nessiestressy · 2h These have all been cloned as well Jules ? How do they get away with it ffs �� 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 2h Disgusting Ness..Some of the ones of Shell have been taken down but she will have screenshots of them..One was done of Sade too.. �� Ness ������������ @nessiestressy · 2h I've not seen Sade on here for ages. Is this why ? 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx Replying to @nessiestressy
@EricaCantona7 and 7 others Sades a tough lady..It would take more than some loon making fake accounts to get rid of her.. She also had pics of her 8 year old daughter passed around in a group chat..Imagine someone passing your kids pics around in a group to be commented on.. �� 2:33 PM · Jan 14, 2020·Twitter for Android 5 Likes Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 · 1h Replying to @Jules1602xx
@nessiestressy and 7 others I heard this too. How would it even occur to someone to do that? It's bad enough to adults but kiddies should be firmly off limits. I've seen some horrible comments about a dress she wore but I suspect that was down to the account author not being able to wear to such a dress 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 1h Sade knows the case inside out.. Very knowledgeable.. It makes you wonder.. �� 1 more reply Ness ������������ @nessiestressy · 2h Replying to @Jules1602xx
@EricaCantona7 and 7 others That's disgusting. I'm actually lost for words at this and you just don't know who you can trust on here. 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 1h Absolute loons mate... Ness ������������ @nessiestressy · 1h You’re not kidding. I can see why ppl protect their tweets and really vet those who follow them. I understand why now. 00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������ @Jules1602xx · 1h They used Shells Nans pic on one fake account.. Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 · 1h They what? More replies julie colson @justjulescolson · 2h Replying to @Jules1602xx
@nessiestressy and 8 others They must be a load of nonces �� #weidos
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 17:42:00”
Comment received in reply to a comment from our previous post, which we are bringing it over. We have also censored for the reasons we have done so lately, suspicion of being goaded:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Well said Anonymous14 Jan 2020, 09:11:00
@shazbat2008's tweets don't come close to being as defamatory as The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II and @Michael80282175 tweets about Jim Gamble. Why have they not received letters? Is it because they are friends of NotTextusa, Walker, Jules, Hamilton and Trotter who drive people off the McCann tag? Ponce has threatened to travel to his place of work to challenge Jim Gamble face to face. (Censored).
Michael @Michael80282175 · Jan 11 Replying to @Caesar2207
@MichaelaTrotte6 and 47 others WELL MICHAELA ANY TRUTH IN THIS RVSP Gerry McCann was convicted for child sex abuses in 2002, although the evidence has been hacked and emptied from the case file by someone who has access to the National Sex Offenders Register, namely Jim Gamble though the CEOP mainframe Michael @Michael80282175 · Jan 11 Replying to @InezShooter
@MancunianMEDlC and 47 others UTTER TWADDLE JIM GAMBLE MAY KNOW, BUT IS NOT HELPING FURTHERING ANY TRIAL , HIS THREATS CONFIRM THIS Michael @Michael80282175 · Jan 11 Replying to @PhilipTann1961
@janamb and 46 others IT WOULD BE NICE TO GET ANSWER TO THESE ALLEGATIONS FROM #JimGamble Gerry McCann was convicted for child sex abuses in 2002, although the evidence has been hacked and emptied from the case file by someone who has access to the National Sex Offenders Register, namely Jim Gamble
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · Nov 8, 2019 Still waiting for the postman. #wrongname #jimbel. = saying things Jim Gamble doesn’t agree with. #profiteer Jims solicitors are busy preparing papers for half of @twitter if we believe his daily announcements & vieled threats @PoliceServiceNI #harassment #trolling #doxing
See new Tweets Conversation The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II I wondered if I should attend one of these safety on the internet seminars I’ve heard about,stand up & introduce myself to Jim & ask him why he’s been stalking me & threatening to dox me.i May also ask him about Brendas right 2 safety on the internet wouldn’t that be Gr8 #mccann 9:34 AM · Sep 27, 2019·Twitter for iPhone 8 Retweets
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · Aug 13, 2019 Replying to @turaffetamer
@MancunianMEDlC and 3 others Maybe Jim didn’t want his real motives delved in to
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · Aug 10, 2019 Replying to @ritajeswnt and @CarmenRose610 There are some similarities & the appearance of Jim Gamble has not done the investigation any favours. he is a gold digger who attaches himself to these cases
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · Jun 24, 2019 Replying to @EmmaJJW Jim’s scared of his past being exposed
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 18:44:00”
Comment received in our previous post, which we are bringing it over:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Textusa, I have a question for you if you don't mind answering. Why do you think it is that Jim Gamble goes after people on Twitter but seems to leave the blogs/forums etc. alone? As far as I can see much worse has been written about him elsewhere such as in the CMoMM arena. That place is replete with filth and false accusations. Why then, in your opinion, have such gathering places been left alone?
Aside from that, today's events instigated by Mr. Gamble have somehow made me want to join Twitter, despite whether he's right or not in this latest online drama I have to say, I do have the impulse.
One thing he's definitely not right about though, is Madeleine's missing status. Madeleine is not now and never has been missing. Not in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 or any year thereafter. The missing 'out there' part of this is the biggest lie of all.
"I know because I was there" (or words to that effect). Who said that? And where exactly in the global village, was there? As the words were spoken whilst standing directly outside the Portuguese courthouse it certainly does make one wonder.
There, over there, not here, there.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 18:55:00”
We don’t think we can really answer why Gamble pursues some people and not others but it’s an interesting question. Any speculation we prefer to keep between ourselves.
We imagine that you meant to say “Madeleine is not now and never has been missing. Not in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 or any year thereafter” instead of including the year 2003 as she only disappeared in 2007.
And we also agree that Maddie was not abducted in 2007 and the whereabouts of her remains in whatever form it was decided they would become, is known.
Comment submitted to the previous post and brough over:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
The state of this solicitor! @shazbat2008 having been a school governor does not give any solicitor the right to use members of school staff to get a child to play Pony Express in Jim Gamble's Wild West twitter scenes.
Hope school staff are now suspended awaiting discipline for having interfered in shazbat's son's school life, over what is a personal argument with his mother. This matter is external to any work she has done previously for the school. Schools must be safe places with trustworthy staff, dedicating themselves to education. Schools can't be used as playgrounds for adults to point score and humiliate parents into submission.
Why are Ponce and Not Ben Thompson suddenly keeping their heads down over this, after spending months goading Jim Gamble into losing his sh*t? Is Spartacus dead? Not a whimper of anyone calling themselves Spartacus this time. No offers to meet Jim Gamble at his place of work to give him a piece of their mind. No word about him being unmentionable things today or yesterday. No mention of him cleaning out CATS files. Nada.
Good luck to @shazza2008. Read whatever Isabelle McFadden writes for you very carefully, before allowing her to organise another publicity trip for herself.
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor @shazbat2008 Libel Update..The solicitor upholds the right to the content and means of delivery via my son as they were informed of my governorship by their clients.... I resigned late last year btw. I've replied explaining I publically posted the letter and I'm reporting them to SRA. 2:56 PM · Jan 14, 2020·Twitter for iPad 6 Retweets 28 Like
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 20:13:00”
I don't believe a word of it. This letter story may have held a bit of water until she spun the yarn of it being slipped into her son's bag at school. I know the school and there's no way they would have done that. He could have made a paper aeroplane out of it and thrown it over the fence for all they knew. It's all attention seeking piffle in my opinion.
No matter. The school handed over the letter to an autistic child, not to the mother or other guardian. And besides, I've gone back over her Twitter account to mid December last year and I can find nothing related to Jim Gamble.
Caveat emptor on this one I'm afraid, this is SOBS as far as the all-knowing child protection aficionado is concerned. He's following a procedure to shut people up, just like the McCanns and co have done so effectively over the years.
Lest we forget, Brenda Leyland died and he and his buddy, Brunt, have not faced up to the consequences of their actions yet. But nevertheless, anyhow, what the deuce and thank the lord, there's still time as the fat lady hasn't even started to sing yet..
If Sharon Taylor was lying about the letter in her son’s bag, that would be very silly because the solicitor named is a genuine Belfast firm and would be made aware.
It seems she has made a complaint against them and made these claims publicly, so we’re inclined to believe the story is true.
What may have happened is a poor decision by an admin person to put the unknown contents letter into the son’s bag rather than post it to the mother.
The solicitor most likely expected it to be given directly to the mother.
It was a bad decision by the solicitor, seems to have been done because it had not been established where the mother lived.
Jim Gamble may have taken action against her as she addressed him directly on twitter. This was a challenge he had to respond to but he didn’t opt for anything other than a warning, rather than initiating defamation proceedings.
We would have expected a cease and desist letter to be sent as the initial stage, with instructions as to what tweets should be deleted, as the first warning stage.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1217496559933411328 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Max_____xxx and 38 others I'd like him to show which tweets I'm supposed to have deleted.. Then I'll explain to him s l o w l y how Twitter works... 🤓
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOVqqwXWsAMo3sG.jpg
5:19 PM - 15 Jan 2020
Picture attached is a screengrab from a part of a comment in our blog:
“Textusa13 Jan 2020, 12:18:00 It’s interesting to see that Jules has deleted almost all her tweets in which she demeans physically “Mario”.
That is very interesting, isn’t it?”
Interesting that Jules leaves out of the screengrab the rest of the comment out, namely this:
“We say almost all as because there were so many, she let escape a couple, which we expect will be deleted soon:
https://twitter.com/strackers74/status/1120377938581520384 Elaine Strachan @strackers74 Replying to @Jules1602xx @bitconfused90 and 43 others Well Textusa she ain't 😂😂😂 6:24 PM - 22 Apr 2019
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1120378417831129090 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @strackers74 @bitconfused90 and 43 others Oh I know that.. She's not an old short arse wanker.. Lol 6:26 PM - 22 Apr 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1159151416709189633 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Ben doesn't write the NT blog.. Ben isn't Walker either.. neither is NT Walker.. NT is NT, Ben is Ben & Walker is Walker.. But Textusa is a short arsed tool called MARIO.. YES MARIO.. #McCann 6:16 PM - 7 Aug 2019”
Does Jules really expect people to believe that she has only referred to “Mario” in demeaning physical terms twice? Seriously?]
*****
But we rise to the challenge and to it we say, no problem!
Will show them immediately after Jules shows the pictures of the BRT that she said she had and that on Jan 19 last year she said she was going to own the blog with them. It will be one year on Sunday. Only 3 days to go. How time flies!
It does work both ways, Jules. Note, no use of demeaning physical epithets against you, as only juvenile idiots do that throughout their entire lives.
Oh, wait, you deleted that tweet, didn’t you? No, we’re not talking about either of these 2: https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1069334006691446785 https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1034062133720440832
Now we’ll just sit back and watch how your friend will relentlessly continue to push you into the line of fire. It’s so funny.
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1219003942413197313 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 So Textuser’s daughter was caught by Short Arse himself slutting it in the back streets of Lisbon with the boys + the crafty wench quickly tried to blame her predicament on #McCann supporters following her.And he fell for it.Y else would she be in a dirty dog shit stained alley? 9:09 PM - 19 Jan 2020
If anyone in here has children - imagine if this was written about your daughter - please tell us what your response would be and how you would feel ! And imagine how your daughter would feel if she read it !
Wow, what a sick creature to conjure up such an imaginary scenario. Maybe this is how his mind operates. If this is the type of supporter the McCanns have, all is lost.
To add to my earlier comment about him being drunk, he’s become a bit of a joke of late and not getting the attention he wants, so has to become more outrageous to be noticed. Sometimes, when people go completely over the top, it’s a sign they’re about to crash and burn, so don’t be surprised if he is ”banned” and morphs into yet another twitter persona.
Does McF agree with Ben T that M‘s body wasn’t carried in the car? Eddie was alerting to blood, according to many. Blood which could have been shed by a living person as he wasn’t trained to alert only to cadaver blood, according to some.
Anne doesn’t seem to have a high opinion of Perlin’s offer. She is right, of course, that finding M’s DNA in the boot wouldn’t prove anything, as Keela could have been alerting to blood from any living person who had used the car, as could Eddie (if one believes that Eddie alerted to blood shed by the living because he wasn’t trained on cadaver blood only) M’s clothing transported in the car could have shed skin cells as the FSS were unable to determine the cellular material which yielded the 15 markers. If Eddie’s alerts are accepted as an alert to cadaver odour only, there a compelling case for a body to have been carried in the car. If Eddie’s alerts can be dismissed as alerts to cadaver odour only, then all Perlin could prove was that M’s DNA was present, but not that a body was carried in the car.
https://twitter.com/milesbetter73/status/1219386556449984519 Anthony miles @milesbetter73 Replying to @FragrantFrog @Esjabe1 and 3 others Please note.....you’re therefore suggesting that there was a dead piglet in mr and mrs #mccann s apartment? 🙄🤔🤷 10:29 PM - 20 Jan 2020
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1219390148015808519 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @milesbetter73 @Esjabe1 and 3 others Nope (although I don't exclude PJ wiping a cloth over a decomposing pig & then applying it to certain surfaces related to McCanns). 10:44 PM - 20 Jan 2020
*****
Great stand-up routine by the Frog! What a comedian!
As if pig farming is not a business and pigs are left dead lying about to rot…
Plus, why go to the trouble of finding decomposing pigs? Why not just use blood? After all, according to the Frog and the gang, Eddie alerts to any and all blood, so wouldn’t that be in this ludicrous and absurd scenario the simplest option to take by the 2-bit police TV show police that the Frog is apparently convinced that the PJ is?
The Frog appears to be Brit and living in the UK. Is this how she thinks the Brit police solves cases?
Do you mean that this that the following that is SUPPOSED to have happened could NOT have happened because it would be absolutely ridiculous if someone even attempted to pull it off as reality as it would be too far-fetched? http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/11/dna-bar-code_1.html
“In our last post, Remarkable Marksmanship, we saw that the DNA found in 7 out of a possible 15 stains in the corner of the living room of apartment 5A came from more than 1 person.
This is according to FSS Final Report, signed by John Lowe, that is in the PJ Files.
John Lowe doesn't give any differentiation or connection as to who these people may be, with the exception of one, CG.
FSS tells us that we have 3 single-DNA stains: stain 1 from unknown male, stain 4 from an unknown female and stain 9 from CG, a 2 yr old boy.
As we showed in our Superkid post, it's near impossible for CG to have contributed to stain 9. The only way he would have contributed would have been for someone to have planted his DNA there and that would have absurd implications.
So let's forget about CG for the moment and consider only that the male from stain #1 is not the same male from stain #9.
We know that stain #4 is from a female.
We also know that stain #15 is from, at least, 3 people, 2 male and the other unknown.
That means that, at least, 3 people, 2 male and 1 female, contributed with their DNA to 10 out of the 15 stains.
10 stains because 7 are multiple-DNA and 3 are single-DNA.
So this would be a possible scenario for 3 people:
One can, obviously juggle the Pickles, Plaskitt and Birtwhistle names around, as long as one respects the singularity and differentiation of stains 1, 4 and 9 (stain 4 being from a female and stains 1 and 9 from different males).
But as we said, FSS hasn't made any connection between these stains, so each stain could come from a different person:
As the saying goes, 2 is company 3 is a crowd, so we can say that, according to FSS, a crowd from 3 to 18 people left their DNA in an inaccessible corner of the living room in apartment 5A.
Remember that we're not taking into account all 15 stains but only those 10 that FSS said had DNA. (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UkJKNPX0CnM/UnD-0IL6fjI/AAAAAAAAHFI/yrjpyirOxSU/s400/Vampire+Party.JPG)
Having come to the conclusion, on our DNA is... DNA post, that the DNA found in those stains could only have come from blood (or cerebrospinal fluid but that we'll leave that one out for now until opportune to bring it in again) then we have to say that in that particular, inaccessible corner of the living room of apartment 5A, Vampire Parties surely must have taken place!!
We see no other explanation to justify the enormous variety of samples albeit all being tiny, minuscule and invisible to the eye!
A new myth is born: it was vampires who abducted Maddie!!”
*****
We agree with you, it’s absolutely ridiculous. But if the PJ was walking around with a cloth contaminated with planted blood from multiple sources, all would be explained.
So, according to you, the PJ officers walked around with 2 contaminated cloths, one with blood from whomever (to produce the above and only in that particular location) and another contaminated with dead pig (much more generous in terms of spreading). All is explained, finally!
Have you considered participating in “Would I lie to you?”. Have seen some participants there unable to defend much less ludicrous stories without being able to keep the straight face that you seem to be able to.
First of all, a person could spit at a wall, wipe nasal discharge on a wall, or cough up fluid from their lungs which lands on a wall. All would leave stains with the individual's DNA & these stains would not have been visible under Luminol when PJ did forensics on 4/5/07. The apartment was re-let to 3 different families between the time the McCanns vacated the apartment & the time the dogs arrived. Grime himself was unaware that 5A had not remained sealed in the intervening period. There was no way of knowing how long any of the unidentified stains had been in situ, bar CG's. The (presumed) blood which Keela found was entirely fortuitous - under the floor tile, under the boot carpet & on a key fob handled by multiple people. Turning to Eddie's sole alerts...can you explain why PJ chose to do NO forensics whatsoever on any of the items it was suggested were contaminated with cadaver scent? Why elect to not take all necessary steps to prove the death hypothesis, unless there was something to hide? It hasn't escaped my attention that all evidence PJ tried to use against the parents was suggestive rather than definitive.
How does Frog know whether or not Grime was aware the apartment had been occupied by other families? He makes no comment in any of his statements. What difference would it have made if he had been made aware? I’m sure a lot of other crime scenes where the dogs were used would not be as they were at the time a homicide occurred. Other people may have subsequently been at the crime scene in intervening months or years.
The dogs had no concept of occupants. They just did their respective jobs. Amaral writes in his book that his team were deterred from asking for items of clothing at the time. As I understand, by the time Grime arrived, the clothing had been washed, so it may have been decided not to test unless indications of blood had been found. Why cuddle cat wasn’t seized or tested, only the PJ can answer. In hindsight, the PJ would probably have acted more decisively in the face of interference from different sources.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm (Apartment 5A, 2nd paragraph) What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief. -----------------------------------------------------------------
Grime's interpretation of Eddie's alert beside the wardrobe may have been affected by an erroneous assumption.
Frog, you didn’t answer how you knew that Grime didn’t know the apartment had been occupied by 3 families after M disappeared. If the source of the cadaver odour still existed in the apartment, the mere act of Grime entering the apartment could have caused some movement of air with the odour. He was moving round, accompanied by other people, opening doors. So he would expect some air movement. The source still existed and Eddie showed where it probably emanated from - behind the sofa. Of course, some argue that was an alert to blood, not cadaver odour. Did the odour drift to the closet or was the source also there? More likely the latter in my opinion.
Now it's historic remains... So far, Frog has suggested cremation remains scattered in the garden of 5A or B, the PJ using a decomposing pig cloth to set the Mcs up, and here, it’s completely unproven historic remains under the apartments.
Here's a quick question for you. Does this blog believe Boris Johnson will go for the unveiling of the truth in this case? Or do you think he'll be like the virtually blinkered rest of them and choose to look the other way because he, perhaps, lacks the necessary inner strength and insight? Frankly, I'm not entirely sure our current PM has the bal*s to take on the McCann battle and see it through to its rightful conclusion. Which is, of course, the complete recovery of Madeleine McCann's earthly remains from a location known to many & hidden in plain sight..
The answer to your question is very simple: whatever it is he believes to be to his advantage.
What that “whatever” means only he knows, or rather he will know at every decision point the issue will require from him to have.
We’re not avoiding answering the question, we’re being very pragmatic. His decisions will be made on the basis of what he feels will score him more points and may or may not contradict any and all decisions he may have made in the past.
One thing one cannot accuse the man is him lacking courage. Whether one agrees with him or not, he has had the courage needed at every point in time to take the decision he best felt would benefit him. No reason to think this case will be for him an exception.
They all know the truth. The whole truth. The fictitious story line fake truth and the real, actual, indisputable truth. They know the inner workings of the fairy tale and they know precisely where Madeleine is. They all do, each and every last one of them. No wonder Mrs. Gaspar appeared so nervous when approached by S. Poulton for an interview. If the woman's scared, too bad, she still has time to tell the truth, and as a doctor paid for by the British taxpaying public, she should. Anyhow, whatever her decision the truth's going to come out in Jim Gamble's lifetime. Rest assured, if it's on Gamble's mind it's manifestly guaranteed.
What Majorcan holiday would that be? The script is as outrageously predictable as it ever has been and you, my dear, should tell the truth and shame the devil. How do you sleep at night knowing all you know and living with the paedophile lies? You really are a disgrace to your profession, your country, to children's rights and to the laws of two lands. Shame on you, woman!
For anyone still confused about this simple case, I highly recommend people read Stephen Carpenter's witness statement and Textusa's .. All the world's a stage (3/3) re the same subject matter. The files contain what is essentially 'their story' with the exception of Carpenter's one and only valuable clue. Pay close attention.
Do you remember Textusa, way back in the day, Kate's mother said Kate had told her it was an accident. "It was an accident Mum, it was an accident." Maybe it's an inside secret these days that people have come to terms with. Perhaps the PTB know there was no ill intent and it's pointless dredging up the agony for the sake of punishing them for hiding a body under duress.
Maybe there'll be no official ending, perhaps the only ending we'll see will be an unofficial, on the internet only conclusion? Goncalo talked about there being no political will, I still don't see it, do you?
Its a hard one to call for sure,just what justification is there for circa £12 million for one investigation only to come to no conclusion.( Has any one seen a spread sheet confirming that expenditure).Some call it a cover up,these happen behind closed doors not under the glare of the world's press whilst on your hands and knees digging up the Portuguese countryside.I don't think there'll be any call to justify the cost,after all were're told the Home Office fund it with a special grant.
Save for a confession I don't think it'll ever be closed,just not enough evidence to bring a conviction without reasonable doubt imo.
The trouble grange and its makers have is the exit strategy,do they declare they have evidence Madeleine left 5a alive or not? if not where does that leave the not under suspicion McCann? if they do what happened after?
It doesn't matter what the Home Office say, it's all taxpayer's money no matter how special the grant is.The people must demand accountability and whatever Grange are doing they're certainly not doing their job.
It could have been all over in a day if they actually looked over there instead of indulging the press and the power looking in the exact opposite location to where they should have looked on day one.
Goncalo Amaral said the ground was too hard for digging at that time of year, so if he's right, Maddie's most likely not in Portugal. Somehow, I just have a funny feeling that dear Debbie was right. I don't know, there was something special, insightful and unique about Debbie.
She had high levels of emotional intelligence and always gave off a good vibe. She fought for truth and justice for Madeleine right up to her tragic passing. Madeleine, Debbie and Brenda will never be forgotten by people who do genuinely care.
There isn't enough interest for any one to demand anything,the longer its gone on the interest has waned.One thing if it was to be closed quietly there have been plenty of opportunity's with the recent votes in the commons taking the headlines.
I don't know of this Debbie so can't comment on any theory she may have had.
You're absolutely correct in that interest has waned. Nevertheless, £12 million plus the rest of our money and the money of other nations chasing the ace in this fraudulent affair is something which must be addressed. If the people won't demand it, then this one person most certainly will.
Prevention of the lawful and decent burial of a dead body is an offence under the common law of the United Kingdom. The offence is infrequently charged. As a common law offence, it is trialable only on indictment and can be punished by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both.
I haven't cited the Portuguese side of this because I don't believe it's relevant. It would be sheer madness to leave Madeleine buried over there where no-one could keep a watchful eye over her gravesite IMO.
Good luck with the first point,the amount of time FOI's are fobbed off,I suspect there won't be much joy in it for you.
It may well be illegal in the UK,but its essentially a Portuguese case,they couldn't produce enough evidence to bring any one to court back in 2007,if it wasn't there then,its not there now.
It seems it was Gerry who referred to a “disaster” and Kate who said “‘she’s gone” but we can’t find a direct quote where Kate says “it was an accident mum”.
Unless anyone can find a link to the source, it can’t be proven that Kate described it as an accident, although we believe it was, as we have stated in the blog
Don’t worry, we won’t ask you that question, for now. You have brought the elephant into the room, so there’s no need to say anything more, for now, on the subject of what expected evidence of swinging anyone would expect to find in Praia da Luz when Maddie disappeared.
However, we will ask you one question: if, according to you people, swinging is legal (as it is) and no one could care less about who does or who doesn’t swing, then why are you going off the deep end because of us alleging people are swingers? After all, according to you, we are not offending anyone, when we say they are swingers right?
a - The McCanns acted alone and alone have been able to control the entire British Establishment.
b - The McCanns did not act alone and were helped (if you believe in this option, please detail who you believe helped and what proof you have to prove it).
c - There was no cover-up, the McCanns are telling the truth.
How about you address the fact that you dismissed a claim because you couldn't verify it, but when you make a claim you expect everyone to believe it without a shred of evidence.
You seem to have misunderstood us. We want to know what YOU would expect.
So please set aside for a minute what we have said (or not said) and just tell us all what is the EVIDENCE that YOU would have expected to find of swinging.
You seem not to know how debates go. A child screaming on its back in the middle of a supermarket aisle in an attempt to get sweets, it’s not debating why said sweets should be bought but just being a child throwing a tantrum. You do know that, right?
You cannot say that something is “without a shred of evidence” when you are asked what you would expect that evidence to look like and you refuse to answer.
You are criticising something because according to you it has according something fundamental missing but when asked what would that fundamental thing would be, you refuse to answer. By doing that you are being as mature as the child in the supermarket aisle. But as you are an adult, way more pathetic than that child whose tactics you so well imitate.
He’s evading answering the other questions about the Mcs and what he believes. At least we know anon doesn’t believe the Mcs were involved in a cover up of death.
You said this: "We think this story needs to be treated with caution as there is no other source we could find to verify it."
You are being asked to explain the double-standard. You demand verification for anyone's theory but your own. You then defend the fact that there is no evidence to support your theory by claiming that there would be no evidence of swinging, because of what you seem to regard as the terror of exposure.
It's the ultimate cop out, like claiming a theft was conducted by an invisible man to explain the lack of witnesses.
- state what you consider would be evidence of swinging you would expect to have been found in Praia da Luz. If you can’t, or if you agree with Anne Guedes that there wasn’t any expected to be found, shut up. By the way, you are absolutely correct when you say “there would be no evidence of swinging, because of what you seem to regard as the terror of exposure”, as swingers are indeed terrorised of being exposed.
- state what option of comment at 25 Jan 2020, 20:16:00 you subscribe.
By the way you are wrong when you say “there is no evidence to support your theory” as our theory is based on many other things than swinging. Which ones? Read the blog.
Madeleine McCann parents taking legal action against Portugal over disappearance
EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann vanished from her family’s apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz while her parents dined in a nearby tapas bar in 2007
By Jerry Lawton 21:02, 3 FEB 2020 UPDATED21:03, 3 FEB 2020
Portugal may soon have to pay Madeleine McCann’s parents compensation over her disappearance.
Kate and Gerry McCann are taking legal action against a ruling by the country’s supreme court.
The McCanns’ legal action stems from a feud with former detective Goncalo Amaral, 60, who led the initial police hunt for Madeleine and in a best-selling book later accused the couple of covering up her death.
The couple, both 51, later successfully sued Mr Amaral for libel arguing his claim Madeleine was dead was hampering their global search for her.
But the decision to award them damages and costs totalling £436,000 was overturned on appeal on the basis the former detective was entitled to express his opinions under freedom of speech.
That decision was ratified by Portugal’s Supreme Court – the highest authority in the land.
Now the McCanns are hoping to appeal against that judgement in the European Court Of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.
A judge is to assess their case within the coming months.
A spokesman for the European Court of Human Rights said: “Before the end of the year there will be a preliminary examination by the court regarding the admissibility of the application.’’
If the McCanns win the Portuguese nation may be ordered to pay them a cash settlement.
A source close to the UK police probe into Madeleine’s disappearance said that could fuel 'resentment’.
“The disappearance of Madeleine has already cost Portugal,’’ they said.
"Tourism was badly affected afterwards.
“Now the possibility of having to pay money to a couple who – in many locals’ eyes – left their child to fate while they went out could cause resentment.’’
Then-three-year-old Madeleine vanished from her family’s apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz while her parents dined with pals in a nearby tapas bar in 2007.
The couple were unavailable for comment yesterday.
All that has to be said is said when see this story breaking in the Daily Star. If it weren’t for the social media, only cats would end up reading it during their toilet breaks, and even that would only happen a few days from now.
12 hour later it was echoed in the Mirror: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-parents-taking-legal-21424524
What an upgrade 😂😂😂!
Seriously, going from the Daily Star to the Mirror bypassing the Express, is indeed a remarkable upgrade 😂😂😂😂😂😂!
Maybe we can expect to see it in the Sun soon? Other than the DS and the Mirror, no one, even the gutter press seemed to care much about this apparently stale news.
But it isn’t exactly stale as it contains a couple of nuggets that may be overlooked.
Before we get to those 2 nuggets, let’s immediately correct Jerry Lawton because it is important to correct him. We will one day dedicate a post about how the Maddie case opened the floodgates to what is today’s world of shameless deceit. For now we consider that it’s the duty of every reasonable person to set records straight and expose any and all tactics of repeating a lie until it becomes perceived as truth.
Jerry Lawton states falsely that “The couple, both 51, later successfully sued Mr Amaral for libel”. They never sued him for libel, a recurring lie that we exposed back in July 2014, more than 5 years ago but it still keeps making the rounds to this day, as this article clearly shows. http://textusa.blogspot.com/2014/07/no-longer-libel-so-dont-call-it-libel.html
They sued Amaral for damages, not for libel. Not once have the McCanns denied during this process in Portugal that what Gonçalo Amaral stated was false. They only have alleged that due to the presumption of innocence they enjoy, he shouldn’t have said what he said and because he said it they felt they had suffered damage and so they sued him because of it.
DAMAGES because he supposedly didn’t respect that presumption and NOT because he was supposedly libelling them.
An OBVIOUS tell-tale sign that it was about damages and not libel, was the fact that the proceedings took place in civil court and not in a criminal one. Libel is a crime in Portugal, so if it was libel it would have to have been in a criminal court. Any self-respecting journalist does minimal researching, and a minimal research would show this clearly. We will leave it up to the reader to judge why Lawton, a journo who has followed this case for such a long time insists in confusing damages with libel…
The Portuguese courts ruled that the presumption of innocence they enjoyed was not enough reason for him to have been silent and did not give reason to the couple.
This libel v damages thing has been corrected by us time and time again but no matter how many times we clarify this, we expect to clarify it again in the future many times as well. To those helping in this farce on “both” side of the fence, please don’t complain about the state of affairs that the world is currently in, as you have contributed with your small but valuable share to help things to be what they are.
The nuggets, which in our opinion makes this not to be old news as it apparently seems to be.
The first nugget is this one: “A spokesman for the European Court of Human Rights said: “Before the end of the year there will be a preliminary examination by the court regarding the admissibility of the application.””
Yes, we knew that the McCanns had submitted a process in the ECHR. What’s new in this article is that Lawton gives an update on the state of the process: he is clearly stating that it hasn’t even got over the hurdle of being ADMITTED by the ECHR.
To those stand-up comedians saying that the McCanns have a process in the ECHR, what they hide is that the application may never be admitted in the ECHR. It has been submitted years ago and it has not even been admitted. It’s not us saying it, it’s Jerry Lawton. And it will be a PRELIMINARY examination at the end of this year, 2020. After that, we are supposing that a decision on admissibility will be taken further into the future.
It is NOT in the ECHR, it’s in its admin services and that’s it. This is not word play. There’s a huge difference between a process being in the ECHR and one attempting to get into the ECHR. The McCann process is ATTEMPTING to get into the ECHR. It’s clearly not there yet and it may never be.
To get as far as a case being considered for admissibility, as what is exactly what the McCanns have been able to achieve so far, all that is required is for the paperwork to cover all the information required, within the timescale.
Even IF considered admissible, the next stage could be a rejection of the case as unfounded. The point being, it hasn’t even reached the stage where it can be rejected!
Basically, what Lawton is saying in this article is that the McCanns are 2 people who submitted their names to the UK Athletics, showing a desire to compete as marathonists in the Olympics and have been bragging they’ve won gold without even having ever been called for regional trials!
That, in our opinion makes this new news. And as a corollary to this news, even if accepted, it could take years to be heard. IF this is true, by the way.
IF this is true, Operation Grange will continue until a decision on admissibility is reached, in our opinion, thanks to the McCanns, this ECHR shadow will be looming over the case and the perspective of a decision negative to the McCanns from the ECHR after an archival of the case in the UK and will be a harsh rub of salt in this already fetid, fetid wound in the country’s flesh. To avoid this, we think it would be just simpler to let the case remain open ad nauseam and simply not talk about it.
The second nugget is in the title: “Portugal may soon have to pay Madeleine McCann’s parents compensation over her disappearance.”
Where is Gonçalo Amaral in this? Nowhere. As we have repeatedly said, the case in the ECHR was NEVER against him but against Portugal.
Even in the unlikely case of the application being admitted and having a rule in favour of the McCanns, Gonçalo Amaral will NOT have to pay a single penny to the McCanns.
The battle of the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral has DEFINITELY been lost. The McCanns a few years ago started a new one against Portugal.
Jerry Lawton, with this article is showing how wrong are the stand-up comedians who have been saying that Gonçalo Amaral is going to pay all that is due when the ECHR gives the couple reason. Lawton with this article is just showing how pathetic these INCOMs are. INCOMs as involuntary comedians. Involuntary but hilariously funny.
And the likelihood of having a decision against Portugal? We will just say that we will be unpleasantly surprised if the case even gets admitted. More surprised IF admitted, IF it doesn’t get rejected.
The reader will understand what we think the odds are of the possibility that the McCanns will win anything against the state of Portugal…
Hi Textusa I am sure that the McCanns will be successful in the ECHR simply because Amaral breached his duty of reserve. For the benefit of your readers who are confused about the way Portuguese justice has dealt with very recent defamation claims, would you be good enough to explain its handling of Ana Gomes v José Pedro Aguiar-Branco compared to Ana Gomes v Isabel dos Santos. TIA.
Please say what you have just said contradicts in whatever way what we have stated in the comment.
As we are accused for using too many a word, we will sum up what we said: - The process has not been accepted by the ECHR. It has been submitted but lacks being admitted to this day. - The process is against Portugal and not Gonçalo Amaral. Whichever result and whenever it happens, the McCanns will NEVER receive ANY money from him because of this process and that was the intent of it all, was it not?
Please say where what you say contradicts these FACTS. TIA.
You think the McCanns will win, we think they won’t. Both yours and ours are mere opinions which have to be respected in equal manner.
Now, why are you doing a Lawton?
You know perfectly well that there is NO DEFAMATION in the entire process and yet you persist in trying to convey the idea that there was.
The biggest drawback comedians have is that they basically work with one-use-only material. They cannot tell the same joke to the same audience twice and even when they repeat a joke to different audiences it may turn out that there will be people present who have heard him say the same joke previously. In fact, the concept of “same audience” has been thrown out the window with YouTube. Nowadays, if a comedian wants to succeed, a joke can only be used once.
You are a comedian persisting on the same joke, over and over again. The only people laughing are the “comedian’s family” sitting in the front row and they are doing so out of solidarity, if not pity. The rest of the audience applauds with facepalms.
We are not familiar with the processes you mention nor are we going to be just because you suggest. As you speak of "defamation claims", we are not seeing any connection with the McCann v Amaral process, as you KNOW, WAS not about defamation nor was it claimed to be.
Lastly, you do realise that calling the attention to Isabel dos Santos works very much against you, don’t you?
Textusa I am fully aware the Mccanns' submission has not yet been considered. I am also fully aware that their case is against the State of Portugal whose Appeal/Supreme Courts chose to undermine their own laws when declaring that the duty of reserve should not apply to `Amaral. If there was no defamation involved (the tort) then why did the Portuguese courts have to legally determine which human right (Article 8 or Article 10) should take precedence when considering the McCanns' claim for damages? May I suggest you read ECHR judgements A. v Norway & Prunea v Romania.
Textusa Do you understand that the plaintiffs had the option of going down the criminal court route against Amaral & co. but that action would not necessarily have achieved the desired outcome of removing the book & video from the public domain?
The civil liability for defamation is dealt with in a civil court, not a criminal court. You still haven't addressed the issue of why the Portuguese Court needed to address the prevailing human right - Article 8 v Article 10 - - when determining their judgement.
Article 8: Respect for your private and family life https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-8-respect-your-private-and-family-life Article 10: Freedom of expression https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/y-ddeddf-hawliau-dynol/article-10-freedom-expression
What has this to do with defamation?
Let’s look at the definition of defamation: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defamation
“Definition of defamation law : the act of communicating FALSE statements about a person that injure the reputation of that person : the act of defaming another : calumny defamation of character a defamation lawsuit”
What is it that you don’t understand about FALSE? Whenever has the spreading of falsehoods EVER been protected by courts? Isn’t that just a contradiction in terms?
That only makes sense to someone who was shameless enough to suggest that the PJ went around looking for uneviscerated dead pigs to contaminate some cloth to then incriminate the McCanns…
What you are implying with your suggestion of defamation present in Art. 8 v Art. 10 is that the courts weighed these rights one against the other knowing that Amaral was spreading of falsehoods about the McCanns. Why on earth would any court do that? Oh wait, Portuguese courts. Maybe they went looking for dead uneviscerated pigs too?
The fact that YOU show that they considered freedom of speech means that the court assumed as fact that there was nothing to prove that what Gonçalo Amaral had said was false. You are proving yourself wrong. You have proven that there was defamation.
One does not need to lie to disrespect the privacy of another person’s personal life. The most common example is the publication without authorisation of nude pictures. It is TRUE the pictures depict that person; it is TRUE that person posed nude when the pictures were taken. There are no lies involved in this obvious and blatant disrespect of private life. Just scumbags being scumbags.
The court simply weighed a POSSIBLE disrespect by Amaral when seen what he said against the presumption of innocence the couple enjoyed. Nothing said about Amaral lying or defaming.
The court was very clear, the presumption of innocence is not a declaration of innocence. Nowhere has it been said that the couple did not do it, only that it hadn’t been proven to date that they did it.
Claiming innocence based on a presumption was not sufficient and that meant that the court admitted as possibly true what Amaral said – so clearly there was NO DEFAMATION – and CONCLUDED that he had the absolute right to say what he said under his right of freedom of speech.
It's an irony that's obviously lost: All the litigation under the sun tells us nothing about what happened to Madeleine McCann. It's an obscene distraction, but then it's meant to be.
The ECHR case I linked to IS Portuguese. Retribution or restitution - the difference behind a decision to go down the Criminal or Civil route. In a Civil court the 2 parties start out as equals.
For the benefit of your readers, would you please post your interpretation of Articles 483 & 484 of the Portuguese Civil Code (re.defamation) and also advise under which jurisdiction Amaral sued Marcos Aragao Correia for defamation. TIA.
“In the appendage to the CRIMINAL process for defamation against Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer, Gonçalo Amaral defends that the accused suffers from a ‘pathological imbalance with traits of social dangerousness.’” (…) Addendum to the CRIMINAL Process for Defamation Against Marcos Aragão Correia, 16 June 2009 Addendum to the CRIMINAL Process for Defamation Against Marcos Aragão Correia Joana Morais (…) Mr Prosecutor, Gonçalo Amaral, the offended party with the capacity to constitute himself as an assistant, and better identified in the files, comes forward to APPEND the following to the CRIMINAL complaint that was presented against arguido Marcos Aragão, under the rights of petition and of probatory intervention: (…) As you know, I’m the lawyer of Leonor Cipriano, the Portuguese lady that was brutally tortured by police officers of the Portuguese State. This torture, as you also know, was proven by a Jury Court, and its verdict was confirmed by the Appeal Court. In the sequence, two police officers were convicted for torture-related crimes, one of them Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral, the leader of the police team, who was convicted for perjury to a 1 year and 6 months suspended jail sentence, because it was proven that he knew since the moment of the crime that Leonor Cipriano was tortured by the police, but he lied, saying that she wasn’t. Nevertheless, after the jury verdict, the Portuguese State accused me of CRIMINAL libel for writing a report dated before the beginning of that same trial, where the testimony of Leonor Cipriano about the torture she suffered was divulged. A university teacher, President of a Portuguese association (ACED) that has divulged the report, was also accused. Despite the efforts to prove that the accusation was illegal, the Portuguese State has notified us on 23 December 2011 for us to be judged by a non-Jury court for CRIMINAL LIBEL against the already convicted Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral! (…) The hearings will take place at the Court of Faro’s Second CRIMINAL Circuit and Gonçalo Amaral demands compensation in the amount of three thousand euros from Marcos Aragão Correia, as well as from the arguido António Pedro Dores, the head of the Association Against Exclusion through Development (ACED). (…) Process Number: 87/08.8JAFAR 2º CRIMINAL Court Common Process (Singular Court) Author Public Ministry Plaintiff Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral Arguido Marcos Teixeira da Fonte Aragão Correia Arguido António Pedro de Andrade Dores Judgement or final hearing 09-02-2012 9:30 and 28-02-2012 14:00 (…) Former Judiciary Police (PJ) inspector Gonçalo Amaral – who investigated the disappearance of Joana, the daughter of arguida Leonor Ciprinao – has criminally sued Marcos Aragão Correia and António Pedro Dores, because they publicly alluded to the alleged torture that Leonor Cipriano was a target of during the Joana case’s questioning stage.
*****
What is it that you don’t understand about the word CRIMINAL?
Artigo 483.º (art.º 585.º CPC 1961) Fixação de prazo para a apresentação de relatório
1 - Quando a perícia não possa logo encerrar-se com a imediata apresentação do relatório pericial, o juiz fixa o prazo dentro do qual a diligência há de ficar concluída, que não pode exceder 30 dias. 2 - Os peritos indicam às partes o dia e hora em que vão prosseguir com os atos de inspeção, sempre que lhes seja lícito assistir à continuação da diligência. 3 - O prazo fixado pode ser prorrogado, por uma única vez, ocorrendo motivo justificado.
1 - O resultado da perícia é expresso em relatório, no qual o perito ou peritos se pronunciam fundamentadamente sobre o respetivo objeto. 2 - Tratando-se de perícia colegial, se não houver unanimidade, o discordante apresenta as suas razões. 3 - Se o juiz assistir à inspeção e o perito puder de imediato pronunciar-se, o relatório é ditado para a ata.
Won’t even bother translating. But readers who will run it by Google translator will have a laugh.
No, we won’t be giving you our interpretation of these articles. 😂😂😂😂😂
We inform you that we will no longer reply to you on this subject.
The undeniable fact is the case against Gonçalo Amaral was in a civil court, where there was no need for the McCanns to give evidence on oath and was for damages.
To suggest that a crime was judged in Portugal in a civil court is to call incompetent all those who were involved in the different levels where legal decisions were taken. What a really pathetic suggestion to make.
We’ve had enough of this distraction.
In the comedian analogy, at this stage, not even “your family” sitting in the front row are pretending to find your jokes funny.
One thing to say is the frog goes on about articles 8 and 10,now its not known just what the McCann/Healey V Portugal is all about unless of course frog is???????????
I can only suggest you re-read the 27/4/2015 court judgement, where you will find the references to articles 483 & 484. For your benefit, here are the wordings in English of the 2 articles in the Civil Code.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1225588143480594432 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog For Textusa. (as you won't publish my reply) Just so the world can see both the Portuguese #mccann judge of 2015 & I have made a laughing stock of ourselves re. Art. 483 & 484, can you explain what this section of the judgement means? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQIp4NZWoAIPs-n.jpg 1:12 AM - 7 Feb 2020
[“investigação Nessa forma de resolução do conflito entre os direitos revela-se a ilicitude da conduta do réu Gonçalo Amaral para os efeitos do artº 484º do Código Civil. III. Aqui chegados, há que percorrer os demais pressupostos da obrigação de indemnizar, prevista no artº 483º, n.º1, do Código Civil, determinando, em primeiro lugar se o réu actuou com culpa e , na afirmativa, se da sua conduta resultaram danos que tenham no seu comportamento a causa adequada. O juizo de censura pessoal que ao réu pode ser dirigido parece”
Our translation: “investigation In this way of resolving the conflict between rights reveals the illegality of the defendant Gonçalo Amaral's conduct for the purposes of article 484 of the Civil Code. III. Having arrived here, it is necessary to go through the other assumptions of the obligation to indemnify, provided for in article 483, no. 1, of the Civil Code, determining, in the first place, whether the defendant acted with guilt and, if so, whether from his conduct resulted damage that have in his behaviour the appropriate cause. The judgement of personal censoring that may be directed to the defendant seems”]
***** https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225590670473207809 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @FragrantFrog Coward Textuser (Mario Santos, immigrant living near Lisbon) only publishes what he wishes. His kiddie blog carries zero weight and zero credibility. It’s regarded as a joke. #mccann 1:22 AM - 7 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1225602320848838656 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 Apparently the joke is on me. Presumably there's no difference between a Procedural Code & a Civil Code.... 2:08 AM - 7 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225667120698019840 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @FragrantFrog You’ve boxed him in. His only response is no response. He ain’t the brightest. Apparently he got caught submitting comments to his own blog anonymously. 😂😂😂 #mccann 6:26 AM - 7 Feb 2020
*****
Frog,
It’s interesting to see you interacting so amicably with someone who uses IRA quotes to threaten and denigrate girls. But then we know that you, Jules and Walker are a tight little group who know each other even though you pretend you don’t.
Apparently, all is fair with you lot, and that doesn’t surprise us. The more Walker and the BRC, Karen Lowe Sanders badmouth us, the more they show how right we are, the stronger they make our case. So, with all honesty, may they long continue to use their filthy mouths against us.
Then, we did not say we weren’t going to publish your comments. We said we wouldn’t reply to them. We are breaking that as, as you have shown, we have made a mistake and would like to acknowledge it to our readers.
Also, we did not say the joke was on you. Neither did we say you are a joke. We simply compared you to a cringeworthy comedian on stage telling jokes that no one finds minimally funny.
Our mistake, was indeed to confuse the Procedure Civil Code (Código DE Processo Civil) with the Civil Process Code (Código DO Processo Civil). One letter makes the entire difference and when we did click on the articles in question we found what we found.
Interesting that you didn’t provide any links initially. But it shows how indifferent we were to your challenge, as we will always be towards anyone who obsessively tries to prove the unprovable, tries to prove that red is blue, tries to make be what everyone can see is not.
It’s clear that defamation is a crime in Portugal, and because it is a crime it is dealt with exclusively within the criminal justice sub-system of the overarching justice system. You can hold your breath as much as you like, that will not be altered. It’s totally your choice if you persist on making a fool of yourself.
You have now provided the links to the articles in question (by the way, you made a mistake in copying links and, unlike you, will not even attempt to say that it shows you can’t tell articles apart, as mistakes do happen to anyone). https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621111/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621112/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
You have also provided a text without providing a link in your tweet. We found a version of this document here: https://inforrm.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/mccanns-v-amaral-judgment.pdf
It seems you cut this out:
“O juízo de censura pessoal que ao réu Gonçalo Amaral pode ser dirigido parece evidente, tendo em conta o padrão do artº 487º, nº 2, do Código Civil, sendo particularmente acentuado pela forma como os eventos foram organizados cronologicamente –a divulgação do encerramento do inquérito em 21 de Julho de 2008, o lançamento do livro, a venda do mesmo e a publicação da entrevista no dia 24 seguinte. O juízo de culpa também se revela do trecho do livro subordinado ao título “Burla ou abuso de confiança?”, onde a propósito das especulações próprias das hipóteses da investigação se alvitram outros crimes potencialmente praticados pelos autores Kate e Gerald MacCann, densificando-se a ofensa (nº 23). Os danos deram-se na esfera destes últimos, que são os visados pelo livro, pela entrevista e pelo documentário. Nenhum dos demais autores sofreu, a nosso ver, qualquer prejuízo directo com esses factos.”
Our translation:
“The judgement of personal censoring that may be directed to the defendant Gonçalo Amaral seems evident, considering the standards of article 487, nº2, of the Civil Code, being particularly accentuated by the way the events were organized chronologically - the disclosure of the closing of the investigation on July 21, 2008, the launch of the book, the sale of the book and the publication of the interview on the following 24th. The judgment of guilt is also revealed in the excerpt of the book under the title “Fraud or abuse of trust?”, where, regarding the speculations inherent from the hypotheses of the investigation, other crimes potentially practiced by the authors Kate and Gerald MacCann are raised, becoming denser the offense (nº 23). The damage occurred in the sphere of the latter, who are targeted by the book, the interview and by the documentary. None of the various authors suffered, in our view, any direct damage from these facts.”
*****
Note there’s no single mention about defamation but it’s very clear that it is about defamation. In fact the document rules VERY CLEARLY that there is no defamation: “regarding the speculations inherent from the hypotheses of the investigation”. Yes, it’s speculation as there was no definite proof but these speculations are based on the INHERENT HYPOTHESES OF THE INVESTIGATION.
Speculations not proven to be true BUT not proven to be false and these speculations are, in accordance with the court INHERENT.
To note that the court says that the guilt of breaching Art 484 “seems evident, considering the standards of article 487, nº2, of the Civil Code”
“Artigo 487.º (Culpa) 1. É ao lesado que incumbe provar a culpa do autor da lesão, salvo havendo presunção legal de culpa. 2. A culpa é apreciada, na falta de outro critério legal, pela diligência de um bom pai de família, em face das circunstâncias de cada caso.”
Our translation:
“Article 487 (Guilt) 1. It is up to the injured party to prove the guilt of the perpetrator of the injury, unless there is a legal presumption of guilt. 2. Guilt is assessed, in the absence of any other legal criteria, by the diligence of a good family man, given the circumstances of each case.”
*****
“In the absence of any other legal criteria, by the diligence of a good family man, given the circumstances of each case”. We are certain the court had a hard time finding this one. But it did, it is in the law.
Now let’s see what articles 483 and 484 say:
Artigo 483.º (Princípio geral) 1. Aquele que, com dolo ou mera culpa, violar ilìcitamente o direito de outrem ou qualquer disposição legal destinada a proteger interesses alheios fica obrigado a indemnizar o lesado pelos danos resultantes da violação. 2. Só existe obrigação de indemnizar independentemente de culpa nos casos especificados na lei. Our translation:
“Article 483 (General principle) 1. Whoever, with intent or mere guilt, unlawfully violates the right of others or any legal provision designed to protect the interests of others, is obliged to compensate the injured party for the damages resulting from the violation. 2. There is only an obligation to indemnify regardless of guilt in the cases specified by law.”
“Artigo 484.º (Ofensa do crédito ou do bom nome) Quem afirmar ou difundir um facto capaz de prejudicar o crédito ou o bom nome de qualquer pessoa, singular ou colectiva, responde pelos danos causados.”
Our translation:
“Article 484 (Offense to the credit or good name) Whoever affirms or disseminates a fact that could damage the credit or the good name of any person, natural or legal, is responsible for the damage caused.”
It doesn’t mention defamation. It does not mention falsehood. And it does say FACT.
If one damages another’s good name or credit, one must pay. From where that damage has originated, the law doesn’t say. We would say the example of spreading nude images falls clearly under this category and there’s absolutely no falsehoods involved in such disgusting cases.
If the damage originates from defamation, then we don’t think these articles apply as defamation is a crime and the terms of sentencing of a crime are not for civil courts, they are criminal courts.
We are certain sure blog readers will feel like they’re in the midst of something like an exchange between lawyers in court, referring to distinctions that only the legally qualified fully appreciate and as we have stated clearly, we are not legally qualified.
It’s all a million miles away from concerns about the fate of Maddie and will add nothing to finding out what happened to her. That’s your intention.
You are doing what your friend Walker in his many disguise does: engages with irrelevancies as to whether the fund was a charity, a registered charity, not a charity. Blah blah… as if that was important.
What is important is that there was no defamation in the process the McCanns made against Gonçalo Amaral in Portugal and that, also important, means they have legally and officially recognised that what he said in his book may be true.
This disp!ays such a fundamental misunderstanding of defamation that it is difficult to know where to start, but then you probably won't publish it anyway.
A finding that something is not defamation does not render it the truth. Where you appear to be getting confused is that truth is a defence to an accusation of defamation. Defamation has to include damage to reputation; a court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.
You weren't joking when you said you were not a legal expert, so it's probably best if you don't carry on as if you are.
“A finding that something is not defamation does not render it the truth.”
FINDING that something is NOT defamation is not determining that is the truth? Seriously?
This disp!ays such a fundamental misunderstanding of English that it is difficult to know where to start…
FINDING something is defamation IS finding there is falsehood. FINDING that something is NOT defamation then it is FINDING that it is true. Being UNABLE to determine whether it was defamation or not, then it cannot BE DETERMINED if it’s true or false as it could be either. As your friend Jules says, capice?
“Where you appear to be getting confused…”
Appear? Really? You are not sure? You are not sure and then decide to insult based on a self-confessed uncertainty?
“…is that truth is a defence to an accusation of defamation”.
Really? Wow! And we were here thinking that the determination of what as truth and what wasn’t mattered nothing in an accusation of defamation! We were thinking that no one had to prove that the defamer was really defaming, it was just enough to walk into a court of law and point fingers and the finger-pointed would be immediately condemned to indemnify in the amount that would cross the finger-pointer’s mind just because of it. Thank you for enlightening all of us with such precious information that certainly no one else would be able to see it but you.
By the way is that how the courts work to rule on defamation in that deluded world that is your brain? Are you and Frog doing a show together?
“Defamation has to include damage to reputation”
Have you graduated from Frog’s school of the ridiculous?
“… a court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.”
Other than having nothing to do with the debate in question, you forgot to include the word “criminal” above. You should have said “… criminal court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.”
If a Portuguese court was concluding anything about defamation, it HAD to be a criminal one. And that is the debate, we say that but the Frog attempts to prove that red is blue by implying that it can be also brought to a Portuguese civil court, when she knows it cannot.
The debate is not about whether Amaral has said was true or not but if the McCanns accused him of defamation. They did not. They used a civil court and that alone states very clearly that there was no defamation in the accusation.
A civil court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true, the content may damage the subject. The McCanns did not debate whether he was telling the truth, they argued that as they enjoyed the presumption of innocence, then what he said, irrelevant of being true or not, damaged them.
And talking about truth, please quote us where we have said in this debate that Gonçalo Amaral said the truth. What we have said was that the fact that the McCanns used the civil courts to sue him for damages was a recognition that what he had said was POSSIBLY true. Or to use our words “means they have legally and officially recognised that what he said in his book may be true.” You do understand what “may be true” means, don’t you?
We didn’t say that we weren’t legal experts. We said that we weren’t legally qualified. There are people like us, who have no legal education, then there are those who are legally qualified, who have a degree in law and then there are the legal experts, who among those who are legally qualified stand out due to further education and specialization in their profession.
To say that a person cannot give an opinion about legal matters because one does not have legal qualifications is the as absurd as saying only mathematicians can do addition and only electricians can screw on lightbulbs.
On the other hand, you are not a qualified twat, you are an expert one. You rise above others.
Why wouldn’t we publish your comment? Why would we pass the chance of showing the utter fool you are?
Now, the question is… are you going to publish this in your blog?
Tantrum? Do you know what the word “tantrum” means? Evidently you don’t. Let us help you:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tantrum Definition of tantrum : a fit of bad temper
Are you ok with the words “fit”, “bad” and “temper”? If not, please say with which you struggle and we’ll gladly help you.
Now let us give you the definition of “pleasure”: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pleasure
Definition of pleasure (Entry 1 of 2) 1 : desire, inclination wait upon his pleasure— William Shakespeare 2 : a state of gratification 3a : sensual gratification b : frivolous amusement 4 : a source of delight or joy
It’s with an enormous pleasure that we show what a fool you are. That is not a tantrum. The word “tantrum” that so frequently occurs on the Normalised Toilet blog….
And you can try as you have to pretend that you haven’t been shown the utter and absolute fool that you are but that fools no one.
One has to wonder if you were assigned by your team to, as the Portuguese say, “offer the body to the bullets”, to draw attention away from the Frog.
Using your example, what you would have said was a lie. You agreed to that. Note, it’s not you not knowing whether I’m right or left-handed and having gotten that wrong. That would be an understandable mistake, and mistakes don’t go to court.
Your example shows a clear and intentional lie.
As it was an intentional lie, it is a false statement, it is defamation, as you would have accused me of being something that I am not.
What you are arguing is whether said defamation would carry any weight in terms of damage. You make the inference that it would not. However, the fact that you infer doesn’t mean that what you had said was defamation, as it was: a false statement with intent.
In normal circumstances, we agree that it wouldn’t carry any weight.
But imagine that said statement was made in a context in which it was important to me to be known as right-handed and you accusing me of being left-handed would be taken by those reading you that I was a hypocrite.
In that case, I could really take offense to such defamation and if I was able to convince a court of law that I had suffered damages worth compensation, you would be sentenced to pay. Why? Because you defamed. You lied.
During the stage of determining of whether what you had said was true or a lie, the court would determine it to be a lie.
It's would be up to the court to conclude if it carried sufficient damage to my reputation worth condemning. It would not up to you and your inference, nor up to me and my perception of offended reputation.
The defamation would be debated in a CRIMINAL court and that would only happen because you had lied.
If that same court would determine that what you had said was true, not even with the best lawyers in the world I would be able to squeeze a cent out of you.
We didn’t say if what Gonçalo Amaral said was true or not. And all this is irrelevant as it wasn’t defamation. We have only replied because of the pleasure we have in showing the fool you are. For that, we thank you.
Now, you are doing what we have already accused your gang of doing: an endless, irrelevant argument, to tie people up in pointless argument.
That said, you are notified that you’ll have to conduct any further arguments on your own blog.
Does any of the gang want to agree with this comment publicly?
Afraid I'm going to have to disappoint you. As usual, you are wrong. But you are probably used to that.
Well, I have tried to help you understand what defamation is, but you seem determined to cling to your fallacy. I suppose that is understandable, you never have been able to cope with the truth. Have you, Mario?
You only get it now? You are becoming slower and slower, especially for someone who thinks he can explain to others the meaning of simple words…
You say you’re not the person we say you are. Don’t know how many times we’ve been here before, so we’ll let readers judge on whether they think we are wrong or if they think you are the Mr Wonderful who being caught out, pretending to not be who he is, very lamely it must be said.
You do know how tickled pink we are to see YOU feeling to have the need to resort to “Mario”, right? 😂😂😂😂😂
It shows that the one throwing a tantrum, or having a real bad episode of “a fit of bad temper” is you. 😂😂😂😂😂
It reminds all who read us from where you got that information, Mr Bridget. Is Bridget wrong? It can’t be, the source is the same, isn’t it? 😂😂😂😂😂
The issue had died down, but it’s you who are insisting on bringing it up!
About what really is being debated: https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/07/goncalo-amaral-on-mistakes-made-by.html
It was not a libel trial. It was a civil court damages claim.
Why would anyone be so concerned about ‘teaching’ you something and in such a supercilious way? An honest reader would discuss the matter if they believed they knew better.
Textusa You need to understand the difference between prosecuting someone for defamation & suing someone for defamtion in Portugal. A criminal prosecution is backed by the State, who have the power to convict a person found guilty of defamation. A civil lawsuit is an exchange between the plaintiff & the defendant where both parties commence as equals in legal status. Here's some bedtime reading for you involving defamation cases in Portugal-one link provided, you can google the rest. Let's see if you can find any mention of criminal defamation. Alvaro Sobrinho v Impressa (later dropped) José Manuel Fernandes v Noronha de Nascimento. Pias Pires de Lima v Portugal, http://sousamendesfoundation.org/initial-victory-for-family-of-aristides-de-sousa-mendes-in-anti-defamation-lawsuit/
I must add that I think it would do your credibility a world of good if you concentrated on the content of my posts rather than pondering who I may be conspiring with. (Clue - I speak privately with more than zero but less than 2 members of "the gang". You should be able to do the maths)
To sue for defamation one has to FIRST prove that said defamation has indeed existed and that can only be done via prosecution in a criminal court.
One cannot sue for defamation based solely on the possibility that there may be have been defamation.
However, one can sue for damages against truthful statements made against oneself. That is clearly stated in the STJ’s acórdão (our caps): https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/Supreme_Court_31_01_2017.htm
“In this regard Pires de Lima and Antunes Varela teach that "whether, by natural or legal persons, a subjective right to credit and good name exists or not, a conduct threatening to cause them harm, in the prescribed terms, is considered as expressly anti-juridical. NEVER MIND THAT THE STATED OR DISCLOSED FACT CORRESPONDS TO THE TRUTH OR NOT, as long as it likely can, given the circumstances of the case, reduce the confidence in the ability and willingness of the person to fulfil their obligations (loss of credit) or shake the prestige that the person enjoys or the good image the person has (loss of good name) in the social environment in which the person lives or carries on their business" annotated CC,, Vol . I, Coimbra Editora, p. 486].”
We suggest that you read again the legal arguments presented by the SCJ and why it’s most likely the McCanns won’t succeed in the ECHR. Clues.
What balance is given to freedom of speech by the EHCR as compared to the Portuguese courts? Have a look at cases quoted by the SCJ.
All for your bedtime reading.
Glad you confirmed you talk with one of the gang. That means your words are shared, as nothing is sacred between them.
Now, you seem to think that all is a game including physical threats and disgusting remarks made about a girl. We remind what the person with whom you interacted with said this:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1219003942413197313 “Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 So Textuser’s daughter was caught by Short Arse himself slutting it in the back streets of Lisbon with the boys + the crafty wench quickly tried to blame her predicament on #McCann supporters following her.And he fell for it.Y else would she be in a dirty dog shit stained alley? 9:09 PM - 19 Jan 2020”
Don’t know if you have a daughter, if you do then how would you react to such words? One doesn’t need to have a daughter to understand the ignominy of this.
This was the tweet you replied to:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225590670473207809 “Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @FragrantFrog Coward Textuser (Mario Santos, immigrant living near Lisbon) only publishes what he wishes. His kiddie blog carries zero weight and zero credibility. It’s regarded as a joke. #mccann 1:22 AM - 7 Feb 2020”
A tweet liked by your friend Jules who is someone who has publicly alleged that we have invented the whole stalking.
You had absolutely no problem with interacting with this. It is, of course, your right and we respect that but it is also our right not to interact with people like you or him.
Like Anne Guedes, you have lost your right to comment again on the blog.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1226670589814956034 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 Been banned from his blog; never been banned from anywhere before. I'm now in a deep, deep, depression & it's all your fault. 😭😭😭 12:53 AM - 10 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1226673050126618625 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @FragrantFrog He’s such a pious Arsehole. Chip on his lowered shoulder because he comes from the Portuguese underclass. Goes on about his own daughter (caught giving finger pie, in a dog shit stained alley) but, is Kate #mccann not someone’s daughter and his slurs on her are disgusting. 1:03 AM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
This says more about these people and says nothing about us.
We are glad to see this friendship in the open, as it makes the mask fall and all can see what an act it is to try to convince that she is the most reasonable face of the McCann defenders.
Note how she deliberately ignored what we quoted from SCJ re damages even if what was said was true.
What she has avoided is the fact that under Portuguese law, it’s possible to take action for damage to reputation and good name in a civil court, even when the alleged damage is caused by way of information which may or may not be true.
In that case, there was no requirement to prove what Gonçalo Amaral said was false and no need to pursue him in a criminal court, which would have required them to give evidence in person. With this tactic they didn’t need to expose themselves to scrutiny in criminal court proceedings.
They challenged his duty of reserve; not to reveal details of an investigation, even though he had retired and the book was published after the case was archived. They never said he lied in court.
They claimed they had suffered distress although no independent experts were able to give evidence which proved distress arose from anything Gonçalo Amaral had done but they never said he defamed them in court.
They claimed the search for Maddie could be harmed by Gonçalo Amaral actions, if people believed Maddie was dead. They never said in court that people should not believe him because he lied.
Nothing shouts defamation more in a court of law than never mentioning it while in it.
Interesting to see that no one from the gang comes in defence of what Gonçalo Amaral has said against what Frog wrongly claims.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1226795830075510784 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog Could you be a love and break down in one paragraph what Mario is going on with.. I only skimmed it and it still took me 3 hours.. 9:11 AM - 10 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1227012285065023488 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx Tex has rewritten Portuguese law on defamation cases...apparently you can only sue someone for libel damages if the defamer has been convicted by the criminal courts - and you can also claim damages when someone makes a true statement about you if it causes offence. 11:31 PM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
Donald Trump has a new rival in defining what is reality. It matters not what the law says, it doesn’t matter what the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court says, it doesn’t matter what jurists quoted by the STJ says, the Portuguese law is what the Frog says it is.
The Frog knows we have never said this: “apparently you can only sue someone for libel damages if the defamer has been convicted by the criminal courts”.
What we have said is that to get paid damages for libel, that libel has to be proven. Not first prove and then sue. The process to prove a libel is within the suing process. With a suing process, one basically TRIES to sue someone by CLAIMING there was libel. Analysing that claiming and after hearing all parties involved, the CRIMINAL court, because libel is a crime, will then decide if there was libel or not.
If the CRIMINAL court decides there was, the libel is proven. Then, the same court will decide what, if any, compensation will be given to the offended party.
If the CRIMINAL court decides there was not, it will be proven there was no libel. No compensation is due.
Frog’s tweet was liked by Frog’s Walker, but oddly enough not liked by her other friend, Jules who she has replied to. Not yet at least. Will be very curious to see if Jules, the so-called anti, does like this tweet.
Jules is one of 4 people we love to see use “Mario”. Really LOVE! 😂😂😂😂😂
By the way Jules, we are still waiting for the BRT pics.
Apparently, besides the blog and just to cite those quoted or involved in the McCann v Amaral process, Gonçalo Amaral, the illustrious lawyers Pires de Lima and Antunes Varela and the judges of the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court, it seems there’s someone else who according to Frog doesn’t understand Portuguese Law: Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro.
Judge - The statements in the Portuguese court system, unlike in England where people can give extemporaneous statements [see VPS], are the declarations, which consist on a series of questions put by the lawyers and judge and by the answers of the deponent, which you just gave. You can say something but it won't have any legal validity, nevertheless it will still be recorded.
Gerald McCann - I want to speak about the sniffer dogs. They never alerted to any blood in the car and they never alerted to cadaver odour...
Judge - [interrupts] We are not here to ascertain that, our perspective here in this court is to analyse your claim.
Gerald McCann - But the book states that as a fact!
Judge - To decide that there are already forensic experts. WE ARE NOT HERE TO PROVE IF THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOK ARE TRUTHFUL OR NOT. Here we are only trying to establish if the freedom of expression of the defendants has affected the rights of the claimants. This court cannot be a substitute of the criminal investigation. [Turns to the interpreter] Tell the gentleman that he is excused.”
*****
Does the Frog think that Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro got her qualifications to be a judge from a packet of Amparo flour?
She must.
Frog’s Portuguese friends, true Migueis de Vasconcelo e Brito, will certainly explain this joke to her. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Vasconcelos
Thanks for keeping on top of these crucial matters. Apart from a few token tweets here and there, the leading "big antis" are not interested in discussing this area of the McCann debate.
Speaking of "big antis", apart from Isabelle McFadden attacking strackers74 and Not Ben attacking people who his gang says are Tony Rickwood and Michael Wright, where are they? Hiding from police and pretending they were never in Not Ben's gang?
McCanns' last hope is the ECHR to keep their lies from mainstream publications. Let's hope that the future is in favour of the truth that should be known about the death of the child.
https://twitter.com/umweltbuerger/status/1226799773300203521 Mari Welzel @umweltbuerger Textusa's blog a great help pointing to the #mccann & co lies; if the swinging is not a bother for T9 why t endless protest? "McCanns' last hope is the ECHR to keep their lies from mainstream publications. Let's hope that the future is in favour of the truth that should be known" 9:27 AM - 10 Feb 2020
Hello Textusa Sisters, You are much appreciated and most welcome.
It is interesting to experience the unfolding of this case. No one could predict the many ways in which they have tried to get the lies to stick. It would indeed be entertaining but we have here the death of a child.
We are supposing that you are the same person who left the other 2 DNP comments, for that reason, even though you did not sign the comment and your words were really kind to us, we've decided not to publish your comments.
We ask you to please sign all the comments that you don't want to see published :)
We have received your comments and read them attentively. As you know, we disagree with you. Respect your opinion and respectfully disagree with it.
The exact same conviction you clearly show you have with your theory, is the one we also have with ours.
However, we have the advantage of being 3 and of having debated every detail between ourselves in an absolutely free-speaking environment where all are not afraid to truly speak their minds.
Then we have the advantage of debating with our valuable readers. Thanks to them we have often corrected our opinions.
Lastly we’ve the scrutiny of the evil. Ironically, this vicious, relentless and obsessive scrutiny by those who are not interested that the truth behind the events surfaces, is what validates our theory.
Every theory must be challenged to be valid and our readers know how much we have been challenged.
That said, and hoping you understand, although we are grateful for your input, we see no reason to alter our opinion.
Ben Thompson's hatred of 'pikeys' and 'scousers' is now rubbing off on KLS. What does a 'scouser' look like to her? Constant bitching about the length of neck and heights has already put people off tweeting on the McCann case, and being derogatory about Liverpudlians could do the same. Will she start calling people 'spaz' and 'mong' like Ponce of Dubai does next, and alienate people with disabilities and disability in their families?
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 Replying to @lisjt90
@russell_vine and 2 others It's a shame I can't dictate because you clearly aren't worthy of a Club like ours? Are you sure you aren't a Scouser? You look like one �� 10:06 AM · Feb 14, 2020·
Interesting as it distinguishes between criminal and civil, and the fact damages can be sought in latter, whether what was said was true or not. Also no cap on non pecuniary damage claims in civil cases. , which makes it more threatening than criminal claim, as that’s not likely to result in prison term anyway.
Many people from Liverpool are proud to call themselves scousers and don't see it as derogatory. However, Karen Lowe Sanders uses the term because she sees scousers as an inferior breed of human. In much the same way as the rest of the gang call someone a pikey, spaz or mong etc. They use these words in public, but use worse in private. Recent bitching within the gang about one of their members using Munchausen's by proxy to exploit their own child as an excuse to get out of going to work and instead look after the child full time, has shown various other prejudices, and left one or two of them feeling under threat that their own private lives could easily be under discussion and questioned elsewhere.
A Twitter search for Tweets from @ericacantona7 shows no results. She has probably got a serious shadow ban for her insidious racism .. there is no-one that Karen doesn't consider herself superior to. Also don't forget that this is the woman who has on several occasions praised Enoch Powell on Twitter.
Jim Gamble is one of the worst trolls we've ever seen on twitter. His open delight over Brenda Leyland being stalked and harassed outside her own home was sickening. He knows that Sky exposing where she lived could have led dangerous people to go to her home and do more than threaten her. None of us know how unsafe Brenda felt after Martin Brunt exposed her street and home. This may have been the reason why she went to stay at a hotel. We know the police did not conduct any investigation into why she was being stalked, or the people who were stalking her on facebook and twitter before Martin Brunt too over as leader.
Jim Gamble is not only a hypocrite, but a cruel and sickening excuse for a man to have sent congratulations to Martin Brunt for leaving Brenda in so much fear, that she felt suicidal and forced to leave her own home.
Jim Gamble @JimGamble_INEQE · Feb 15 Let the hypocrisy begin. Those who bully & berate, those who hide behind the anonymity of the internet to troll people they disagree with, who are unwell & or hv made mistakes. These trolls either disappear or hide behind virtue signalling when it all goes wrong.
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 · Feb 16 You applauded the hounding of a woman who then went on to take her own life! Hypocrite.
That was a hoax! A simple title search will prove that. Brenda was an example of what the old, wrinkly, shrivelled up power would do if the truth was further clarified and disseminated.
The wizard really did operate the filming apparatus from behind the magic curtain. And it did cause irreparable damage to some innocent yet understandably curious people, just like some, more spineless members of the wider imbecilic cover-up project imagined.
As for the sneering, non-experienced, academically unqualified 'child protection' aficionado, there's only one place left for him, and that's in the dock, faced with the truth & stored in a place where only him & his ilk belong.
Some of us, these days, now have the ammunition to fight our own battles, & in short, the truth won't lie unceremoniously buried forever, circumstances change and collective cowardice doesn't give a fleeting damn about the reputations of no mark former BRITISH police officers.
You know the type, the type that haven't grown an evolutionary humane inch since the day they started. Whatever they've gained can be lost as quickly as it was made, that lesson they have yet to learn, not just Gamble and co, but every script reciting, lying, perverting the course of justice, last one of them....
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1229900760462381058 BourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews Replying to @Michael80282175 @Natalie01016290 and 48 others The #McCann parents believed they could see the patio door from TAPAS, but you knew http://that.you just want to criticize them because you think it not possible. But it's why they believed the abductor you and other guilt mongers don't believe existed used it to enter 5A 10:49 PM - 18 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229901368917471243 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Michael80282175 and 48 others Their table was behind the heavily tinted plastic screen and the arrow points to their apartment. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERF8xe2XUAMyKbs.jpg 10:51 PM - 18 Feb 2020
[Photo attached is one in which includes the 2 photos from Amaral´s book showing the esplanade where he signals the table allegedly used by the T9. In this image that table is circled] ***** https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1229901735289851905 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @AnnaEsse @BourgeoisViews and 48 others That's not their table. 10:53 PM - 18 Feb 2020
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229902943211659265 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @BourgeoisViews and 48 others And your proof is? Show us the table they sat at then. 10:58 PM - 18 Feb 2020
*****
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Glad to see that Walker, a pro, acknowledges that the table signalled by Amaral is NOT the BRT.
We would like to ask AnnaEsse – who we have repeatedly asked questions but she pretends she doesn’t read us – if she thinks 9 people dined at the table she circled. We would be curious to know her opinion.
If she doesn’t think 9 people dined around that little thing, one, does she agree that GA got it wrong (his objective with these pics was to demonstrate the lack of visibility of 5A from the esplanade and not to show THE table), and if she agrees that he got it wrong, then where does she think they ate those alleged dinners?
Besides that, does AnnaEsse believe guests queued early in the morning to be able to dine at the dump shown by Amaral’s picture?
“And your proof is? Show us the table they sat at then”. Don’t ask only Walker. Ask Jules as well. Jules has publicly said she has pictures of THAT table.
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229901368917471243 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Michael80282175 and 48 others Their table was behind the heavily tinted plastic screen and the arrow points to their apartment. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERF8xe2XUAMyKbs.jpg 10:51 PM - 18 Feb 2020
[Photo attached is one in which includes the 2 photos from Amaral´s book showing the esplanade where he signals the table allegedly used by the T9. In this image that table is circled] ***** https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1230078359817859074 BourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews Replying to @AnnaEsse @Michael80282175 and 48 others How could that be the table the TAPAS 9 gathered around? It doesn't look big enough for four. 10:35 AM - 19 Feb 2020
[😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 and 1,000 more laughing loud emojis, pity there aren’t any large enough to show how much we laughed when we saw this!!!]
***** https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1230079582457548801 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @BourgeoisViews @AnnaEsse and 48 others It’s just some random stock footage. As she well knows. 10:40 AM - 19 Feb 2020
*****
The photos appear to be those taken by Jacques Lange for Paris Match on September 21 2007. They were part of a series he took that week.
GA doesn’t give photo credits in his book but probably bought the right to use the photos, as anybody can.
Would the wealthy Edmonds queue to eat here with his 3 boys?
Why would there be 2 quiz nights with so few customers on the reservation lists?
Waiting for the replies from AnnaEsse.
Yes, it’s stock footage but would GA publish them if they did not represent exactly what he had seen the esplanade to be? Of course he wouldn’t.
No, it’s hardly big enough for 4, with meals and wine. Not just snacks.
HAVING A BLAST SEEING PROS AGREEING WITH US!!! And seeing antis becoming “pros” to get out of this one…
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Please, could someone ask Jules to publish the pics of THE BRT, she has them (or so she says)!!!
Fully identified DNP reader at 20 Feb 2020, 21:26:00,
We are rather busy with real life issues at the moment, so for now we will just acknowledge to have received your comment.
Will hopefully reply fully soon but we imagine that you realise that we will not be able to speak about many of the issues you brought up, because if we did you would be easily recognised.
When you sober up from whatever toxic substance you have submitted your brain to, you will realise that you are one that “is easily recognised”. In your case, it is really easy.
We get quite a few direct messages but if people choose to make a DNP comment, that’s their choice.
Your motormouth has labelled DNP a lunatic without being aware of what was written.
Before we deal with the latest about the BRT, we would like to ask this from these 2 people:
#1 https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1230461376650502146 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @BourgeoisViews and 48 others I've not seen any pre May 2007, but why would we..? The one thing I know for sure is that there was a #BRT in the Tapas on the 4th May 2007, also that it was still there in September 2007, and probably was until it changed into a pizza place.. 11:57 AM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
Could Jules be a darling and show us all the proof that the BRT “was still there in SEPTEMBER 2007” (our caps)? TIA
---------------- #2 https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230489047392563201 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @Jules1602xx @MichaelaTrotte6 and 48 others Simple point re BRT. The T9 group had gone to give statements on 4/5 so if the BRT was allegedly only delivered 4/5, how did T9 know they could say it was there/they sat at it night before? And how did Tapas Bar staff know T9 would say it was there on 3/5 & need to get one in? 1:47 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
Could JBLittlemore be a darling and show the quotes from the T9 statements from May 4 where they say they ate around a BIG ROUND TABLE? TIA
Brunty's depiction of the BRT was the best by far. I'm still LMAO over the primary school level of editing and visual brainwashing involved in his provable role in the strategically contrived and crudely enacted missing deception through the medium of fake art and phoney journalism.
None of them are anywhere near as smart as they like to think they are and multi-billionaires are a dime a dozen these days; there's always someone richer and more powerful than you.
Last year Netflix spent £20 million on another rehash of the official story.
The truth is priceless (in this never-ending litany of lies), for Madeleine. In amongst all this, a tiny child, not quite 4, is buried behind innuendo, cover ups, deceit and childish debate and seems to have been pushed into the background and forgotten. Why are there no more up-to-date progressive photos Of her ? Why has Perlin never been formally thanked for his generous free Offer and the Offer taken up. Why no follow up on the dogs' findings? so Anonymous in answer to your question "How much is the truth worth" ? TO Madeleine it would be priceless.
According to Mr Bennett’s FOI request, OG visited 3 times not 5 in 2019, April, July and October.
OG could not interview witnesses in Portugal unless they used the European Investigation Order, which would require the PJ, on their behalf, to ask the questions.
The questioning would have to be conducted according to Portuguese law.
The blog has dealt with the EIO in previous posts.
This is the UK media doing a Jules. Jules pretends there was a BRT knowing full well there wasn’t but shamelessly denying the obvious by continuing to say there was. Likewise, the UK media pretends there was an abduction knowing full well there wasn’t but shamelessly denying the obvious by continuing to say there was.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Nobody, not one single person should be prosecuted for reacting badly, or some would argue, normally, because of the shock of an accidental fatality. That's for sure, but there's other aspects of the wider trickle-down illusion which have impacted on people in the utmost shabby of fashions.
Then there's also the fund. That's going to be a difficult tale to tell because there's no getting around the fact that what they've done is no less than fraud.
I can actually understand the initial fear and concealment part of this but the money smash-and-grab aspect of it and harming the public in other ways, I just don't get.
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 23 Feb 2020, 05:42:00
*****
The reason of censoring: pushing a theory Anonymous knows we don’t agree with, that we have told him/her repeatedly that we would not publish in the blog.
The rest of the comment, we found it pertinent, reason why we are publishing it.
With the greatest of respect to your commitment, analysis and hard work Textusa and team, Kate already confirmed it back when she did her bike ride. You probably weren't paying attention, why should you have? But I'm not here to argue and I'm not here to be right.
By the way, me being right about one crucial aspect of the case doesn't make you wrong. It all meshes together just perfectly if you think about it, and besides, I can feel it in my bones that Madeleine ended up there, just like Debbie said.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230621264563376130 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @SandyWilson_1 The table in Tapas Bar was round & even if it wasn't, the likes of Carla & a certain blog present the argument that there was not big table as they don't believe the T9 ever ate there. That waiting staff are lying to cover for them/swinging - because there was no group dining etc 10:32 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
“& even if it wasn't”??? Really???
The importance of this statement is that JBLIttlemore is one of the VERY FEW who have seen the pictures of the BRT that Jules says she has!
After his blunders of hypothesising that the BRT was made up of 5 small round tables and saying that he had been in that particular esplanade in the Spring and Autumn (so should know there was a BRT by looking at it like I did when I saw the octagonal table that is there now), Jules sent him via DM the “proof” of the BRT.
And now he says “& even if it wasn't”???
It’s as if he NEVER saw any BRT, not when he was there in the esplanade nor when Jules (allegedly) “showed” it to him…
So easy to catch liars.
The rest of JBLIttlemore’s words speak for themselves. If there was no table, means that the dinners during the week are lies, and if they are lies, then not only the T9 lied about them.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230630166638080001 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @SandyWilson_1 A theory based on an assertion that some think the T9 group didn't dine at Tapas Bar because there's no proof there was a big round table there - so that confirms swinging?! - is indeed, on that basis alone, potentially fit only for the bin. 11:07 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
JBLittlemore,
Please quote us where we have said that the lack of the BRT means swinging. TIA.
As we said above, it proves that the T9 and the Ocean Club staff (the Tapas and those who say made the reservation) and guests have lied.
That is ALL it proves.
Now, we suggest that this lying is because of they wanted to protect the reputation of the swingers present for the VIP swinging event that took place that week in Praia da Luz and its vicinity.
We have detailed why we think that. You may not agree with us, and that is fine.
However, if you don’t agree with us, then you must tell us all what was the reason why the people involved in the lie above did lie. We will be waiting.
The McCanns, for whatever reason, chose a very strange way to live their lives. Surely they're not still stubborn enough to carry on shovelling their abduction paedophile baloney down our throats in 2020.
Who is behind these latest finger-pointing newspaper stories? Is it them? Or is it the press themselves who are actually participating in playing this disrespectful filthy game?
We don’t know who Wedger’s source is and we haven’t given a link to his interviews before because we don’t share his views on sedation, or other cases apart from Maddie, where he has given his opinions.
We haven’t studied Wedger’s claims on various cases in any detail and don’t want to express any opinion, preferring to let readers judge for themselves.
He is on record here as claiming to have a source for his statement that the McCanns were swingers. So he is either telling the truth and his source is reliable, he’s telling the truth but his source is not reliable or he is not telling the truth.
He could have invented the whole source story and just decided he’d say they were swingers because he’d heard the theory elsewhere - as it’s nothing new - namely us, or someone quoting us.
If his source was close to the investigation or knew what was happening in PdL, then it could be reliable. Or the source could just be passing on second hand info, which may or may not have been reliable
However, it’s fans of Wedger who have to decide whether they believe him about his source. If they don’t believe this, then they can’t believe anything he says.
"Just been on your blog for a catch up and seen someone has told you about the video interview. One thing that is missing now from the post is the original comments from someone saying it was common knowledge about the lot of them being swingers and that was the reason for the holiday. He named the clubs they frequented even after they changed names and the locations, he said the information is freely available to military personnel on one of their websites. I've read exactly the same thing stated elsewhere a while back. This makes me think either the public are been directed purposely again, or maybe just maybe we may get to the truth, especially as they've chose to ignore instead of jumping on it have the admins."
Textusa, are you seeing more clearly now from an external perspective how incredibly stitched up and corrupt our good old British system actually is and who's really in charge?
It's the underground of undergrounds, it was like this when I was a child, although more class-ridden then, then I left for twenty years and experienced a totally different and far more meritocratic system.
After that I returned, expecting people would have grown exponentially and moved on, but what I've realised primarily due to the McCann scam and all its parasitic tendrils, is that Britain, and more specifically, jolly old England, is still the slaves whipping the slaves debauched little cesspit that it ever was.
Britain is not a truly FREE and democratic society, that little pile of disturbing old nonsense, is as real and verifiable as Madeleine's shamefully absurd missing status.
Dearest mother nature, please help us all, nothing else in this kindergarten of a sinking, globally inconsequential little cesspit of an island, works.
What I know with total confidence is this: all of them are group consisting of a set of individuals who are absolute spineless cowards.
They only ever had their greatest strength in numbers when they were hustling like street corner vendors from the safety of their film set headquarters in Praia da Luz.
That was a hoax too! Just like the fake family holiday. Anyone with a sliver of sense knows THEY, all of them, were there for an all together different reason than that.
Swing low sweet chariot *cough* and all the rest of their blithering, fantastical, voluminous, entirely untrue, scripted and utterly contrived..jazz!
Peace and joy to all those kno*heads who really need it, you know who you are and so DO WE! Watch this space, because ALL of you have left yourselves wide open from a civil legal standpoint at the very least.
Fraud, at a bare minimum, is not a joke, and your 'professional' status don't mean diddly in a court of law, out of compliant jurisdictions such as, in this instance, valueless (in the grand scheme of things)..LEICESTER.
Watch this space because the truth will find its way to the surface when the time is right, it will not, I repeat, will not, stay BURIED (in plain sight) forever..
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1232779795764785152 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Interesting that 2of Textuser’s team that doxed,groomed and exploited a child to score points against the child’s mother have both had their accounts shut down.Police don’t take kindly to this nor companies that host blogs that endorse child abuse.This matter isn’t over. #mccann 9:29 PM - 26 Feb 2020
MADDIE HOPE Madeleine McCann cops request more cash for £12m hunt as parents hail ‘iron will determination’ to find her
By Tracey Kandohla and Ellie Cambridge 26th February 2020, 5:02 pm
MADELEINE McCann cops have requested more cash in their £12million hunt – as her parents hail their “iron will determination” to find her.
Detectives have put a bid into the Home Office for more money when their current tax payer-funded handout runs out in four weeks.
Around £12million has been spent on the investigation by UK authorities – with £300k last awarded to the team in June last year.
Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “It is good news that the Met Police are seeking a new budget to continue the search for Madeleine.
“Kate and Gerry are greatly encouraged that officers still believe there is active work left to be done and do hope that the Home Office grants their request.
“Whilst an active investigation is ongoing it gives them hope that one day they will find out what happened to Madeleine after all these years.
“The Met has a iron will determination to find the answers Kate and Gerry so desperately want.”
Madeleine vanished from her holiday flat in Portugal on May 3, 2007, while her parents dined in a nearby restaurant.
She had been left sleeping alone with her younger twin siblings with regular checks being made on them.
Today a Home Office spokesperson told The Sun Online: “We have received details of the Metropolitan Police Service’s anticipated spending for Operation Grange in 2020/21.
“Requests for funding will be considered in due course, in line with our standard Special Grant process.”
CLINGING TO HOPE
Doctor Gerry and ex-GP Kate, both 51, from Rothley, Leics, are still hopeful their daughter could be alive. She would now be aged 16, nearly 17.
The latest Government handout for the investigation, which has been controversial with calls for it to be shelved after failing to unearth any significant new clues, lasts until the end of March.
It comes days after cops quizzed a British barmaid in Portugal over her German ex-boyfriend.
Carol Hickman, 59, was asked about Michael Jehle, 51, who previously lived in Praia da Luz where three-year-old Maddie vanished.
There is no suggestion that Mr Jehle or his former partner are considered suspects.
Mr Mitchell, speaking exclusively to The Sun Online, said: “It is as much about Scotland Yard ruling people out rather than ruling them in. Interviews are only taking place that are necessary.”
The Metropolitan Police declined to make any comment on their new funding request in the hunt for Maddie.
Maddie’s great uncle Brian Kennedy previously told how the family “still had hope even after all these years”.
The retired head teacher, 80, speaking at the 12th anniversary prayers in May last year, said: “We’re just grateful that police are still searching. It gives us hope.”
Met Police chief Cressida Dick also stated: “We have active lines of inquiries and I think the public would expect us to see those through.
“A very small team continues to work on this case with Portuguese colleagues .”
Iron will says the spinner of wild fantasies and blatant lies. No, I don't think so somehow, if they can't solve this simple domestic accident then they are either stupid, incompetent or in effect, a bunch of crooked lying thieves.
It's not their money they're recklessly squandering, it's ours.
Go to the McCanns for your answers you complete bunch of buck eejits, you won't find her in Portugal, Spain, the U.S. or for crying out loud, flaming India!!!!
Where do control freaks [hi Gerry!] hide things, eh? Right under everyone's noses and where they can keep a 24/7 eye on them, that's where.
It'S BEYOND CLASSIC, isn't it, Tracey K and *$$$$* co.? and co.? and co.? And on and on and on etc. etc. etc....
I think I forgot my dots, sorry, it's late, I'm not happy and this case has made me ill. It was psychologically abusive as well as every other assault on the senses. That was a hoax put the top hat on it for me.
Just saying, they are shrivelling cowards hiding behind falling numbers in a dying and dead tree industry. They are selling the lowest common denominator to their equally clueless, hopelessly brainwashed, humanly soiled, unashamedly tarnished and crystal clear mirror image of themselves. That's all..
Leaving Madeleine 'displaced' for all this time is quite disturbing in the cold light of day when one really thinks about it. If either of them have slept normally for a dozen years and change, I have decided, there has to be something wrong with at least one of them.
They did what they thought was best at the time I do believe, but now, allowing Operation Stranger Than Fiction, to carry on looking and wasting more of other people's hard-earned money not actually looking [over there] for Madeleine, but looking EVERYWHERE ELSE. Then, it must be said, I am not a happy camper.
Their never giving up routine is so, totally, over..
As with Watcher/NT’s suggestion that the timing of the Smith sighting could be out by as much as an hour, the latest subject the gang are avoiding is Wedger’s claim the McCanns were swingers. And Trotter is trying to distract from it with his latest tweets.
Readers will certainly notice that there’s no attempt by the gang to refute or mock Wedger like the gang likes to do with us or to accuse him of being a swinger.
The questions it would be interesting to put to Wedger, without asking him to reveal his source would be:
Is your source a primary source or simply relating a story heard?
Is this information new to you or is it something you were told some time ago?
What have you done with this information which you are happy to make public?
Do you know what the source has done with this information and how widely known is it?
Unpublished Theresa Talktothemselves at 28 Feb 2020, 19:06:00 and at 28 Feb 2020, 19:15:00,
We haven’t published your comments because we disagree on Gordon Brown’s ignorance you allege he has and we have no reason to doubt what Martin Smith and the rest of the Smith family have said.
The man Frog, Jules and BRC like to converse with amicably:
https://twitter.com/CHProfiler/status/1233248371713818625 Chelsea Hoffman @CHProfiler #McCann of course they're asking for more $$$$$ https://us.blastingnews.com/news/2020/02/madeleine-mccann-remains-missing-and-cops-need-more-money-003078301.html 4:31 AM - 28 Feb 2020
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233330427198410752 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @CHProfiler Says the woman who publishes a book trying to make money off the back of missing Madeleine #mccann. No wonder Jews have a bad name. 9:57 AM - 28 Feb 2020
*****
We have no time for her McCann theories, but criticise the woman for her opinions, not for being Jewish.
Who gave the Jews a bad name? Hitler for one. Trotter obviously agrees
And then this:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233520140811149313 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Apparently David Hall has karked it. Shame, I thought his cartoons were crap. In fact, worse than crap. #mccann 10:31 PM - 28 Feb 2020
*****
We do hope that one day justice will catch up with this man and his threats.
https://twitter.com/emily23800584/status/1233444647441174529 Emily 1000 @happy @emily23800584 Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @CHProfiler Anti semitic remark right there, #McCann 5:31 PM - 28 Feb 2020
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233449095529930754 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @emily23800584 @CHProfiler Jews don’t have a bad name? Therein lies your problem. Keep thinking that and nothing will change. 5:49 PM - 28 Feb 2020
It's amazing, in the most recent comment sections of the British fish and chip paper press, where comments are allowed, just how many don't trust or believe the McCanns yet still believe in the dumb neglect narrative.
It's quite clear as well these days just how many believe Operation Grange is a money-draining farce. Who exactly is fooling who in 2020? Because it isn't the establishment fooling the serfs anymore.
They don't know what happened to Madeleine, but the general consensus seems to be that the British don't believe the McCanns puerile tripe any longer, and for the most part, the Portuguese were over the McCann's outlandishly theatrical lies and fabrications before Gerry had time to put his fake sunglasses on.
The McCanns and crude Photoshop. DISCUSS.
Not you Textusa, you don't need to discuss anything, as you already know, as do all the concealers of infantile death in this shoddy, nefarious, taxpayer-funded and wholly grotesque affair.
No matter what they do from here on in, the piper always has to be paid.
Comment that we have received that we have censored:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
(Censored) is in meltdown after Michelle @xxSiLverdoexx set police on @Strackers74 to try and silence her, and she is holding Not Ben Sid, Jules and Karen Lowe Sanders responsible for opening another can of worms for herself and the gang for lying to the police. KLS knows what it's like to be in trouble after earning gang points for trying to harass a male into silence for Not Ben and Ponce of Dubai, so why she involved herself in this is anyone's guess. Michaela Trotter and Zora McCartney are both right. This matter is not over and there will be repercussions.
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 · Feb 26 Interesting that 2of Textuser’s team that doxed,groomed and exploited a child to score points against the child’s mother have both had their accounts shut down.Police don’t take kindly to this nor companies that host blogs that endorse child abuse.This matter isn’t over. #mccann
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 1 Mar 2020, 11:27:00”
*****
We hesitated in publishing this comment. Decided to do it censored for obvious reasons.
Decided to publish it because we have received a hilarious comment threatening with the police. Publishing the comment above shows that there is at least one gang member who has quite the experience in being contacted by the police.
I see the white elephant is still in the room! Not one mention not one response about John Wedger outing the McCann's and their cronies as swingers. Normally they all pounce together like flies on shit for anything they don't like. Their deathly sound of silence speaks volumes, in fact it's deafening!! For folk who love to ridicule and shout anyone down for even trying address the possibility, yet they promote a group of well educated folk all getting together for jollies to abuse each others kids. Even when they were all implicated by the Gaspar's statements( who let child abusers carry on bathing their child!! If you believe that) it's been business as usual for the lot of them. When one has to try hard to make something believable it starts to make it unbelievable, you can kid some of the people but you always get those who just wonder what are you trying so hard to bury. Thanks to the silence they've confirmed what the cover up is about and swinging it is!
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1234774057805123590 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @justjulescolson @Natalie01016290 and 48 others Does Natalie spend any time at all with her children? #mccann 9:34 AM - 3 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1234775065817997312 Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @justjulescolson and 48 others I bet she spends more time with them than those who ring people for hours while their son is bleating in the background for his mum to come and play with him 😊 9:38 AM - 3 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/janamb/status/1234778952327147523 Jane Brooks @janamb Replying to @Natalie01016290 @Munchki53720423 and 48 others Using kids as a stick to poke people with because he knows he will get reaction. 9:53 AM - 3 Mar 2020
*****
Walker using Natalie’s children against her. Uncalled for and absolutely disgusting.
BRC using Elaine Strachan’s little boy against her. Uncalled for, totally unrelated and absolutely disgusting.
What is the difference between Walker and BRC, Karen Lowe Sanders? The police may be able to answer that question.
Both nasty pieces of work, completely evil but, as far as we know, one doesn’t use bottles. And one doesn’t pretend to be a nice person.
By the way, how does BRC know how long phone calls with Elaine last? Maybe because BRC has spent said hours on the phone with her. When could that have been and why would that have been?
Here is a good definition of BOTH Walker and BRC (although BRC does take her vitriol also outside the McCann tag, it must be said):
https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1234780442508877824 Natalie @Natalie01016290 Replying to @janamb @Munchki53720423 and 48 others Desperate tactics by a man desperate for attention I think. Deplorable human who sits abusing others daily on #McCann to give meaning to his sad existence. Quite pathetic really x 9:59 AM - 3 Mar 2020
https://twitter.com/MrBMouze/status/1234651760846934016 Bananamouze @MrBMouze Replying to @Andreamariapre2 @MichaelaTrotte6 @nikkiloumaz She is not the poisoned dwarf. It is your mind which has been poisoned by that fool Ben Thompson. Can't you see it? #mccann 1:28 AM - 3 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/Andreamariapre2/status/1235021005548064769 Andrea maria preston @Andreamariapre2 Replying to @MrBMouze @MichaelaTrotte6 @nikkiloumaz #McCann Behave Elaine. Many Dms and Tweets ... please look after your child ... I beg of you 1:55 AM - 4 Mar 2020
Tweet liked by The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 1 user has asked not to be shown.
*****
The Fish Porn Club, hand-picked human filth, continues to use children.
Thank you Textusa for posting that. Just when one thinks the Gang can sink no lower, BRC shows her true colours referring to an innocent child as "bleating" just because she hates the mother. She is full of pus and venom. No wonder she and Walker enjoy each other's company so much.
1 – Are you referring to the photo that we never circulated where everyone can see how the lady who appears in it really looks like unphotoshopped? You know, the one that served briefly as a profile picture to an evident sock account created just to spite said lady?
2 – The other person you are referring to in your pathetic comment, is it the scamming one?
3 – Do your friends know you continue to submit comments in the blog on these 2 subjects, persisting in drawing attention to them? Don’t think they will be very happy with you.
Continuing to highlight the deafening silence on this issue:
This is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved....
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that... “
These people on Twitter believe Wedger is 100% genuine, so do they believe what he says in this interview?
One of the main irritants I find amongst the McCann Twitter and Facebook abduction doubting worlds is the constant use of the words missing, disappearance, disappeared, vanished and mystery.
Many of them have chosen to believe what they believe because they have been seduced by a load of nonsense. All of the words used prove that the individual mindsets behind the tweets have somehow allowed themselves to be hypnotised into believing the official drivel.
Of believing the easily provable fact that Madeleine has never been missing, the world tour alone is enough to highlight that, which in actuality, always was, the biggest lie and reverse psychological con trick of all.
This is what the Frog has said in the past about her using other people’s alleged personal details (our caps):
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/900520551709650945 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Massive&Unwavering is so Big & Brave it's blocked me. *Waves. No, I DON'T GIVE A TOSS ABOUT PERSONAL DETAILS OF OTHER POSTERS. #mccann 1:50 AM - 24 Aug 2017
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/972577985927745536 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @AndyFish19 Come on, Andy. Your followers are waiting for you to debunk my post. Shouldn't be too hard for you, should it? PERSONAL INSULTS JUST DON'T CUT MUSTARD. #mccann 9:00 PM - 10 Mar 2018
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1091046837572784133 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @CarlaSpade @jules999x @Anvil161Anvil16 Respect needs to be earned, Carla. Please learn to distinguish between banter & GENUINELY NASTY PERSONAL COMMENTS. 6:53 PM - 31 Jan 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1122538284650041346 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @TheSun I can't get people shadow banned, only twitter can do that. What other sort of account restriction is there? I DON'T FIND PERSONAL ABUSE ACCEPTABLE but neither do I see you condemning those who do it on "your side". 5:29 PM - 28 Apr 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/993470928754561024 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @xxMichellesxx and 3 others HAVE I SAID I CONDONE IT? There are many people whose personal details have been splashed all over fora. It is an offence to do so but rarely is any action taken. If you enter a bear pit, be prepared to be mauled. #mccann 1:41 PM - 7 May 2018
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/994682722793779205 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @xxMichellesxx and 2 others Perhaps Isabelle would also like to provide the correct page number for the translation of that document 2/10/07. I AGREE PERSONAL DIG CHILDISH but you defend someone who has been doing just that for nigh on 11 years to McCanns & anyone else who doesn't agree with her. BTW.... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc3SeY2WAAAqPEl.jpg 9:56 PM - 10 May 2018
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/998658022925897729 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @McCannCaseTweet @Tealtraum and 4 others Report away if it suits you. I HAVE BROKEN NO RULES, THREATENED NO-ONE OR GIVEN OUT ANY PERSONAL DATA. Just for once, look at what you've done to Madeleine's photo, then look at your daughter & finally look into your soul. #mccann 9:13 PM - 21 May 2018
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1012452286457696257 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @raccoon_burt @strackers74 @JBLittlemore Whoever you are, pack it in on this #mccann. TAKE YOUR PERSONAL SPAT ELSEWHERE PLEASE. 10:46 PM - 28 Jun 2018
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1012471336004923393 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @strackers74 @raccoon_burt @JBLittlemore I'm sorry you find yourself in that situation, whatever it is this Raccoon person thinks you have said or done. SHARING PERSONAL INFO OR DETAILS OF PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS IS A NO-NO IN MY BOOK. 12:02 AM - 29 Jun 2018
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1126974023143968772 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @PollyGraph69 @SadeElishaa @McCannCaseTweet Please don't drag me into YOUR PERSONAL SPAT, IT'S NONE OF MY BUSINESS. 11:15 PM - 10 May 2019
**** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1207121649461604352 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet If I want to speak to Tex then I'll post on his blog, which my system now allows me to do. Tex is not a pro & I disagree with certain case facts he posts. THE PERSONAL STUFF IS IRRELEVANT TO ME. 2:13 AM - 18 Dec 2019
*****
But then in response to this tweet from Jules:
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx #SwingersParadise #BaldMan 😫 Watford-3 Liverpool-0 😳 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ER-PpD4XsAArUyQ.jpg 9:13 PM - 29 Feb 2020 [photo attached is that of a restaurant named “Mario’s”]
The Frog, has this to say:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1233880440819286016 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx He's 5'0, he's got no hair He's here. he's there. he's everywhere. Life can be so cruel. /> 10:23 PM - 29 Feb 2020
And, to complete the hypocrisy, then Frog enters the “Mario” club:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1234224434661163014 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx For the love of God - doesn't Mario know he has BRTs which will seat 9 in his own restaurant? No-one should ever believe in his blog again. 9:10 PM - 1 Mar 2020
Not to mention that “his blog” refers to an alleged gender doxxing done by the gang, something we haven’t confirmed or denied.
Aren’t we all reminded of Silverdoe’s hypocrisy about doxxing?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1235652524683689984 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @xxSiLverdoexx @jules Anyone would think they're not proud to be a "bloke" person...or maybe there's a real split personality thing going on. (Note to self - look for that missing prostate again.) 7:44 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
This has nothing to do with gender pride. This, and the Frog knows this very well, is the public use of private information, irrelevant of whether it’s true or false.
Aggravated by the circumstances in which said private information, irrelevant of being true or not, was obtained.
All legal stuff that the Frog should be familiar with.
And let’s add another “Mario” tweet from the Frog:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1235647212560027648 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @xxSiLverdoexx @jules How was your holiday? Good weather? Mario appears to have spent the week arranging screenshots when he wasn't cooking. 😉 7:23 PM - 5 Mar 2020
As we said, we have been (and are very busy). Trust us, we want to deal with the latest nonsense from Jules, Frog and JBLittlemore but we haven’t had the time but will do so when we are able to.
We are obviously interested in the outcome of what you have said.
We have promised that we would reply to your previous comment fully and now you have given us a way to communicate with you without compromising your identity.
The Frog has now invented a new legal term in the Portuguese law: “civil defamation”.
In this acórdão from the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court: http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/-/4D77F0FC9E724543802568FC0039C1A6
“Nos processos por difamação, calunia e injuria, regulados nos artigos 587 a 594 do Codigo de Processo Penal…”
Our translation:
"In defamation, slander and injury processes, regulated in articles 587 to 594 of the Criminal Process Code ..."
Defamation is a crime. There is no such thing as a civil defamation as there isn’t a civil homicide. Homicide, under whatever circumstances is dealt with in criminal courts, exactly like defamation.
Can damages be sought for from POSSIBLE but not proven defamation?
Yes, it can and as we explain in detail in a later comment when we deal with a very useful tweet from Jules. The fact that a defamation is not proven that doesn’t mean that the events surrounding it cannot be used in legal proceedings.
If damages caused by a statement can be proven independently of it being true or false, then defamation may or it may not have been present and that presence or absence of defamation is completely irrelevant. Totally secondary to the proceedings.
The McCann v Amaral case was a clear example of this.
To understand this, one has to understand the concept of private, semi-public and public crimes.
https://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=432&show=&offset= O que é um crime público? É um crime para cujo procedimento basta a sua notícia pelas autoridades judiciárias ou policiais, bem como a denúncia facultativa de qualquer pessoa. As entidades policiais e funcionários públicos são obrigados a denunciar os crimes de que tenham conhecimento no exercício de funções. Nos crimes públicos o processo corre mesmo contra a vontade do titular dos interesses ofendidos.
What is a public crime? It is a crime for which procedure news is enough for the judicial or police authorities, as well as the optional denunciation by any person. Law enforcement agencies and civil servants are obliged to report crimes that they are aware of in the exercise of their functions. In public crimes the process runs even against the will of the holder of the offended interests.
*****
https://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=433&show=&offset= O que é um crime semi-público? É um crime para cujo procedimento é necessária a queixa da pessoa com legitimidade para a exercer (por norma o ofendido ou seu representante legal ou sucessor). As entidades policiais e funcionários públicos são obrigados a denunciar esses crimes, sem embargo de se tornar necessário que os titulares do direito de queixa exerçam tempestivamente o respectivo direito (sem o que não se abrirá inquérito). Nos crimes semi-públicos é admissível a desistência da queixa.
What is a semi-public crime? It is a crime for which it is necessary the complaint of the person with legitimacy to exercise it (usually the victim or his legal representative or successor). Law enforcement agencies and public officials are obliged to report these crimes, without excluding the need that the right holders of the complaint exercise their right in a timely manner (without which an inquiry will not be opened). In semi-public crimes it is permissible to withdraw the complaint.
https://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=434&show=&offset= O que é um crime particular? É um crime cujo procedimento depende da prévia constituição como assistente da pessoa com legitimidade para tal (normalmente o ofendido com a prática do crime, ou seu representante ou sucessor) e da oportuna dedução da acusação particular por essa pessoa. Os mais divulgados são os crimes contra a honra (injúria e difamação, bem como alguns crimes contra a propriedade entre pessoas com laços de parentesco próximo).
What is a private crime? It is a crime whose procedure depends on the previous constitution as an assistant of the person with legitimacy to do so (usually the offended person with the crime, or his representative or successor) and the timely deduction of the particular accusation by that person. The most known are crimes against honour (insult and defamation, as well as some crimes against property among people with close family ties).
*****
To sum it up, in a public crime the authorities are allowed to act on simple knowledge, even against the will of the victims; a semi-public crime needs a complaint but the authorities are obliged to report when they have knowledge of them and private crimes are the ones which process depends exclusively on there being a complaint of the affected party.
There are crimes that fall in more than one category: https://maioresde30anos.blogs.sapo.pt/crime-publicos-semi-publicos-e-20705
- simple offenses physical integrity - art. 143 It’s semi-public but becomes public when committed against agents of the security forces and services, in the exercise of their functions or because of them.
- coercion - art. 154 It’s public but is only semi-public when committed between spouses, ascendants and descendants, adopters and adopted, or between people, of the other or of the same sex, who live in a situation similar to that of the spouses (art. 154, no. 4)
- crimes against sexual freedom - arts. 163, 164, 165, 167, 168 and 170 It’s semi-public when committed against an adult but is when committed against a minor or resulting in the victim's suicide or death.
- drunkenness and intoxication - art. 295th It’s semi-public when a typical semi-public illicit act, particular when a typical particular fact
*****
Defamation is a private crime. That means that ONLY when there’s a formal complaint can the justice system act. And that complaint has to come from “the offended person with the crime, or his representative or successor”.
This translates into the fact that there are crimes that go unpunished. If person A defames publicly and blatantly person B, if person B does not act on it, that crime goes unpunished. The fact that it is not punished, in no way means that it wasn’t a crime. It was, only the offended chose for whatever reason not to act on it.
The point is that in Portugal that a defamation was not proven in court, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Note, ONLY a criminal court can determine as proven a defamation. Until that happens, it is not proven but as we said, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Defamation is a crime in Portugal.
To say “civil defamation” is simply to be ridiculous.
But note who liked the tweet where that absolute ridiculousness is expressed: Isabelle McFadden.
Back in the day when the Frog pretended to have principles, this is what she thought of McFadden:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/999394374722183168 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Seems to be a failure on this # if you're not offensive. Still, it's hard to drop personal standards to be one of the in-crowd or Isa-crowd. 9:59 PM - 23 May 2018
It seems that the Frog has definitely dropped her personal standards.
https://twitter.com/s4r4h4d4ms/status/1200176866042302471 Sezzle @s4r4h4d4ms Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet @PeritaRisus I watched an interview on YouTube with #ShaunAttwood & #JonWedger.. JW an ex cop, says it's well known in police that they were swingers & Maddie is dead.. Great interview, worth a watch 10:17 PM - 28 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/s4r4h4d4ms/status/1200178547266113539 Sezzle @s4r4h4d4ms Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet @PeritaRisus It's a 2 hour blog, covers police cover ups in general, mainly paedo rings, but they come up .. he says the hols were swinging hols, & kids sedated- which I've always thought, as no family goes on their hols with groups of friends every year. 10:23 PM - 28 Nov 2019
And on the subject of “civil defamation” let us bring over this tweet from BRC:
https://twitter.com/1matthewwright1/status/1235650629122625536 The Suppressionals @1matthewwright1 Replying to @EsMiluLatvijuxx @Jules1602xx and 5 others Fantasy Island : Where there's a man for everyone 🤣 /> 7:37 PM - 5 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1235650996874997760 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @1matthewwright1 @EsMiluLatvijuxx and 5 others 😂 7:38 PM - 5 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1235652095291752448 Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 Replying to @Jules1602xx @1matthewwright1 and 5 others How sweet little Text looks there 7:43 PM - 5 Mar 2020
When in a herd, sheep tend to bleat just because other sheep bleat. They think because others have bleated, it’s safe for them to do the same.
Some, thinking they are safe, then bleat louder than other sheep in the hope they are noted by other sheep and get in return a sense of belonging, a sense of importance.
But then with some, and we are speaking very broadly, when accountability knocks on the door, tears start rolling and they get on the phone and vent all the fears into the ears of those they had not yet fooled.
A good example of this, are the events where the current Man United player Bruno Fernandes was involved as a victim: the assault on Sporting CP football club training grounds on May 14 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/may/15/sporting-lisbon-intruders-training-attack-players-staff
A group of supporters decided that the best way to motivate the team to play was to have a “face-to-face conversation” with the players and so decided to do that by invading the training grounds. https://portugoal.net/images/Sporting/Alcochete-attack.jpg
All was organised on social media. Now all can read in the WhatsApp messages, how brave they all were, how committed they all were, how the herd-effect convinced them that because the others were willing they could also do it, how they felt they were unpunishable, how they felt that what they were doing made them belong to the group.
They even distributed which supporters would take care of each player and training staff in the attack.
552 days after, the trial started. https://www.sabado.pt/portugal/detalhe/552-dias-depois-comeca-o-julgamento-dos-ataques-a-academia-de-alcochete
On Feb 28 this year, the former president of the club was heard in court, the trial goes on. https://tribunaexpresso.pt/atualidade/2020-02-28-Julgamento-de-Alcochete.-A-versao-de-Bruno-de-Carvalho
Many of these boys have spent time in jail since the events. The majority, if not all, show regret. How many now wish they hadn’t followed the herd…
Everyone denies responsibility for the events. It’s now been 661 days and it’s very far from being over.
As Jules says, very rightfully so:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1169290939321528321 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @The_Truth_II @njbennett and 7 others Mario thinks he's safe from everything.. He isn't.. 5:47 PM - 4 Sep 2019
We keep saying that these people project. We keep saying it but it’s evident that they don’t believe in what we say. Or even in what they themselves say. The same Jules who said the above, has said this:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1159151416709189633 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Ben doesn't write the NT blog.. Ben isn't Walker either.. neither is NT Walker.. NT is NT, Ben is Ben & Walker is Walker.. But Textusa is a short arsed tool called MARIO.. YES MARIO.. #McCann 6:16 PM - 7 Aug 2019
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1235941770522959872 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Replying to @KaiserSoze___ @Andreamariapre2 and 3 others How can you underestimate a coke sniffing child abuser and child doxer who grooms a child from a filthy council flat? #mccann 2:54 PM - 6 Mar 2020
*****
This idiot apparently can’t let go of this story, can he? He just keeps reminding people of what happened about 9 months ago. Keeping fresh in people’s minds the story and those who participated in it.
Well done!
We repeat, we are NOT the ones who keep bringing this up.
By the way, the police have gone to Elaine’s home. Not about this but about an alleged spoofing of a Twitter account, which anyone with a pair of eyes in their head could see it wasn't her.
It appears that in the UK, the police find spoofing Twitter accounts to be more serious than a child grooming… who would have guessed it?
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
I thought you claimed it never happened? (censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 7 Mar 2020, 15:08:00”
*****
Anonymous at 7 Mar 2020, 15:08:00,
Please quote us where we have said that the mother-daughter scam did not happen. TIA.
To be clear, it happened in June last year.
Now to your friend who we assume will not be happy that you persist in keeping this issue alive and reminding everyone of it: the wording and absurd logic in the censored part of the comment leaves no doubt as to who wrote the comment. Yes, that person.
[Picture attached says: “Eddie is always the first to be brought onto a site. Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood. The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cadaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred.”]
******
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Doesn’t this just ABSOLUTELY DESTROY what Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, have been trying to sell us about Eddie?
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, have been saying that when there’s a simultaneous alert by Eddie and Keela then it could only be blood!
Here is the latest example from JBLittlemore (it could have been from Jules or from Frog):
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1232766014544281602 “J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @Askthedogs @Babs108164110 @metpoliceuk I'm not sure how it would be definitively proven she was in the car in cadaver form without a sample containing toxins/sedatives etc. Cellular transfer is otherwise always a possibility - from her possessions etc. 8:34 PM - 26 Feb 2020”
Based on their alleged fact that Eddie could have alerted to blood in the Scenic because Keela also alerted there. Simultaneous alert by both dogs.
But now this says “The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cadaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred”
So the dogs HAVE to had have been trained to alert specifically to 2 different scents – blood and cavader – that cannot be confused.
Under the thesis by Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, because Eddie alerts to both odours there isn’t a situation where it can be said with certainty that there is a simultaneous presence of blood and cadaver odour.
Yet the text attached by Silverdoe is very clear that there is!
And the text is clear that Eddie alerts to something different to the blood odour that Keela alerts to: “Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood.”
If Eddie also discerned blood – note the singular used in “odour” – why would Keela go “on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood” if that could have been what Eddie had detected in the first place?
It’s obvious that Eddie is trained for CADAVER ODOUR – from whatever source it may come and that includes blood from a cadaver – and Keela alerts to BLOOD ODOUR – from whatever source it may come and that includes, obviously, blood from a cadaver. The text is very clear.
Thank you Silverdoe. These people spout such nonsense they can’t remember (!) what they said in the past.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1236386843517767680 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others You've been reading too much of Mario's sh!te.. According to Mr Grime, Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life.. He knows, he trained Eddie.. Why do you think he used 2 dogs.. 8:22 PM - 7 Mar 2020
*****
Can Jules show a quote where Mr Grime has said “Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life..”?
Note, we’re not asking for a quote from a translation. That is what he MAY have said. We’re asking for a direct quote from Mr Grime.
TIA
We did he use 2 dogs? It’s quite obvious.
It was for the exact same reason the forensic people did not collect any samples from anywhere else in 5A other than the living-room.
The exact same reason they didn’t collect samples from the kitchen, from the kid’s bedroom, from the bathroom, from the dining area and neither from the bedroom where Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t. It’s called working in tandem.
As a sidenote, certain comments serve legally as “cease and desist” warnings. The fact that people after being warned to “cease and desist” continue and persist in the wrongdoing means very clearly they are doing what they are doing fully conscious of all the consequences of their actions and in acceptance of them.
Writing comments at 03:30 in the morning?? You have nothing better to do?
No, no need for a new lawyer, but thank you for you care. We are very happy with the legal counselling we are receiving.
You people on the other hand can always opt to one day just say to whomever that “...but I was certain it was bullshit…” or that “I did it because everyone else was doing it” and we are certain that any judge in any court in any country will acquit you immediately based solely on those 2 arguments.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1236726499069304836 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others In future, he can come here and ask, instead of mocking from the corner, especially when I'm right lol.. Is Mario saying people shouldn't quote from the files now.. Or is it just this quote he has a problem with... #McCann http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8L2uWoAAJxw_.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MAGXsAAIXTa.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MRbWoAI-CkH.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MdDWsAEo8DA.jpg 6:52 PM - 8 Mar 2020
[Pic #1 is the following partial screengrab from our comment at 7 Mar 2020, 23:29:00 “Can Jules show a quote where Mr Grime has said “Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life..”? Note, we’re not asking for a quote from a translation. That is what he MAY have said. We’re asking for a direct quote from Mr Grime.”]
[Pic #2 is a screengrab of our comment at Textusa7 Mar 2020, 19:04:00]
[Pic #3 says this (we don’t know from where Jules got this): “Does the dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a dead body ?”']
[Pic # 4 says: “'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver' The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.”]
*****
We asked Jules NOT to give a translation but show where Martin Grime said what she says he has said.
What does Jules do? Show the translation.
We dealt with this in detail in this post: https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/06/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-3.html
Note, the translation from the McCannPJFiles this question, the Portuguese translation says this: “O cão EVRD também dá o alerta a pistas sanguíneas de um humano com vida ou somente de um cadáver?”
Which is translated into “The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
There is no question mark, it’s a statement and not a question. Do click on the link provided by Jules to verify this, as Jules shows in pic #4.
By putting it as a question in pic #3, Jules is clearly admitting that translations contain errors. And it’s “cadaver” and not “dead body”.
By the way, again people like to gaslight and only look like fools. IF – something we doubt has ever happened – Grime does say alert to blood from the living, THEN that means there is a difference between dead blood and live blood, something we defend and that Jules and Frog find ridiculous.
If there is no difference between blood shed by a living human from one leaked from a cadaver then how is it possible for Eddie to tell the difference if there isn’t one?
This is what happens when liars can’t keep up with their lies. And we’re not mocking Jules. Liars do that all by themselves.
We’re still waiting from Jules for an example of a scenario where both blood and EVR dogs are deployed where one would expect to find non-dried blood.
https://twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1175104794563735552 Madeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet Jon Wedger retired Scotland Yard Officer... 🛑 SHOCKING message to Kate #mccann (*sit down please, it is that hard hitting) REPENT Kate McCann...McCanns know what they have done. #MadeleineMccann /> 0:30 13.5K views 6:49 PM - 20 Sep 2019 from California, USA
***** https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1175105841252487170 Natalie @Natalie01016290 Replying to @McCannCaseTweet Massive respect for Jon wedger having the courage to speak for those who have been silenced 👏 6:53 PM - 20 Sep 2019
***** https://twitter.com/barragirl49/status/1175108810958151680 Barragirl @barragirl49 Replying to @McCannCaseTweet Total respect Jon Wedger. He has the courage to speak out when others are cowards. Questioning his religious beliefs is a cheap shot and nothing to do with his expertise or opinion on the case. #McCann 7:05 PM - 20 Sep 2019
*****
Total respect for Wedger but we’re still waiting for a response about his claim that the McCanns were swingers.
Baby P detective sues ‘bully’ police after exposing child abuse and corruption
A FORMER detective commended for his work on the Baby P investigation is suing police after claiming he was bullied for exposing child abuse and corruption.
By James Fielding, exclusive PUBLISHED: 00:01, Sun, Nov 12, 2017
John Wedger said he was forced into early retirement from the Metropolitan Police after suffering a breakdown last year brought on by post traumatic stress disorder.
The former detective constable has begun a civil claim against Scotland Yard seeking damages for psychiatric injury arising from work-related stress.
Mr Wedger said he was bullied after filing an intelligence report alleging that some of his colleagues knew a prostitute was pimping out girls as young as nine but turned a blind eye.
He claimed he was told by a high-ranking Met officer to keep quiet or be “thrown to the wolves”.
Last night father-of-four Mr Wedger said: “I joined the police to serve the community and make a difference. I have wholeheartedly, loyally and relentlessly pursued, arrested and prosecuted those I was tasked to target.
“Yet for doing so and digging up information the police did not want to deal with, my life was made hell.”
Mr Wedger, 47, was involved in an investigation into a well known prostitute in 2004 who was suspected of using children.
She was linked to organised crime but intelligence from “multiple sources” suggested she also had connections within the local police.
The prostitute would ply youngsters, including a 14-year-old girl, with drugs and alcohol and then pimp them out to men in budget hotels near Paddington railway station in west London.
During the course of the operation, Mr Wedger says he found that not only were the police aware the youngsters were being used for sex but he believed at least one officer was supplying the criminal gang with information about the investigation.
After filing an intelligence report, he was brought in to see a senior officer at Scotland Yard headquarters.
Mr Wedger said: “He told me in a firm and formal manner that I had ‘dug too deep’.
He then stated that if I mentioned a word of my findings outside of his office then he would make sure I was ‘thrown to the wolves’.
“He said I had a job, mortgage and children to think about. He then asked me if I felt bullied at work. I replied that I was indeed bullied.
“He said there was a fairness at work form which I needed to complete.
He said that once the form was completed it would be sent back to him.
Pointing to a wastepaper bin he told me, ‘That’s where it will end up. I will never betray fellow rank nor will anyone else. Keep your mouth shut.’”
On his last day with the unit he was called in by the same officer.
He said: “He offered me his hand, I reciprocated, and he said, ‘You must give your word that you will never look into child prostitution ever again.’ The experience left me traumatised and paranoid.”
Mr Wedger joined the Child Abuse Investigation Command in the borough of Haringey where he became involved with the investigation in 2007 into baby Peter Connelly’s death.
He was later praised and rewarded for the way he handled an interview with Peter’s mother, Tracey.
In 2014, following the Jimmy Savile and Rotherham paedophile scandals, Mr Wedger repeated his claims of a cover-up and the bullying he suffered to a detective inspector, who he says ignored them.
He then approached the Met’s department of professional standards and was interviewed over two days.
Later that year Mr Wedger was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder.
Due to his protracted time off sick he was placed on half pay, which plunged him into debt.
Despite being placed under the care of an NHS mental health team and given counselling, he twice returned to work in 2015, first on the fraud investigation team and then on the road deaths unit. However, the return to work made his PTSD even worse.
Mr Wedger, of Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, was finally given early ill health retirement last month after 23 years of service.
He added: “I’m relieved to be out. I felt at the centre of a huge conspiracy and very much alone.”
He is now being supported by his local MP, Sir Mike Penning, who has written to Met chief Cressida Dick for a response to the allegations.
Sir Mike said: “There are some really serious answers to deal with both on what John says happened and the way he was treated afterwards.”
A Met spokesman said: “We have received a civil claim from John Wedger. We are considering the claim and will respond in due course as required by the court procedures.”
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1236707856881246209 Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6 Funny how short Arsed Mario (Textuser) can say the most disgusting things about Brian Healey's daughter but mention his own daughter, caught giving out sexual favours in the street, and he throws a hissy fit. #mccann 5:38 PM - 8 Mar 2020
*****
Jules’ and Frog’s friend. And who calls Silverdoe as “Babe”.
So predictable! We were waiting to see what he would do to distract from the Wedger question.
A liar who invents stories, based on the inventions of his dirty mind, probably fuelled by alcohol or other substances.
Let’s then return to the deafening silence around Wedger having stated that McCanns were swingers.
This is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved...
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that... “
These people on Twitter believe Wedger is 100% genuine, so do they believe what he says in this interview?
Wedger clearly supports the Textusa sisters' theory of the swinging event at PDL that week. However, even though none of them have commented,, their NON response, is clearly a response in itself - funny that - I think everyone is interested in the gangs' thoughts on JW claim the McCanns were swingers. Take your time.................
https://twitter.com/ConorBr01143067/status/1236995300268683264 Conor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. @ConorBr01143067 Conor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. Retweeted Whispering Wedger on swinging #mccann Conor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. added, https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1236950634009694208 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 #McCann case. Ex-Cop Wedger, often quoted selectively, mentions 'swinging' in this interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50BUWyWovfU … 12:40 PM - 9 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1237000417420115968 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog FollowFollow @FragrantFrog More Replying to @ConorBr01143067 He's less well-informed on Madeleine's case than you are.....was he REALLY a policeman?? 1:00 PM - 9 Mar 2020
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1237013619625336833 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog @ConorBr01143067 Liked by Jules... ✔ 1:53 PM - 9 Mar 2020
*****
Well, at least we now know that Jules agrees with Frog that Wedger wasn’t even a cop. We bet McFadden is going to be disappointed.
Another member of the gang, disagrees with Jules and Frog:
https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1237021345290031106 Natalie @Natalie01016290 Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 Saw that a while ago, he [Wedger] would know more than most wouldn't he? 2:24 PM - 9 Mar 2020
If the reader scrolls up, on the subject of John Wedger, an idiot has put a comment at 9 Mar 2020, 19:08:00 in reply to our comment at 7 Mar 2020, 13:18:00: “Wedger was just a DC. He knows nothing”.
To that we replied by transcribing this article: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/878384/baby-peter-detective-john-wedger-investigation-child-abuse-prostitution/amp
Nice to know that in your world, a Detective Constable is a only.
By the way, we're supposing you do know that Isabelle McFadden is absolutely certain that there was no swinging because she talked with a GNR - a rural police force that has nothing to do with criminal investigation - and he guaranteed to her that there had been no swinging.
Wedger says:
This is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved...
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that..."
This has nothing to do with rank but with a source he claims told him.
Jules seems to have a peculiar distaste for those people who control those who like tweets. In fact, we are certain if asked, Jules would send such people to a remote Gulag in the middle of Siberia.
Here is such a person:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1002969438373728256 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Mr Walker liked this tweet, but he can't comment.. Too funny.. LOL.. #McCann 6:45 PM - 2 Jun 2018
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1165739786063306753 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @Esjabe1 How is a video of someone's day out at the beach helping MM... Yet you liked it.. #troll #hypocrite #McCann 10:36 PM - 25 Aug 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1038116822242025474 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @JBLittlemore @SamColber too who liked that sick tweet.. Another dick head on #McCann 6:28 PM – 7 Sep 2018
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1029341759724310528 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @paultessterry @nicktownsend12 and 12 others I love how Bale liked this comment.. Bless him..🤡 1:19 PM - 14 Aug 2018
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1064164895422377985 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @Cerb32 The funny thing about your tweet Cerb is Walker liked it.. The TW@T.. 2:34 PM - 18 Nov 2018
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1049333436253704193 00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx Replying to @RealHumptyB @LanaDelRaids and 12 others Liked your own tweet again...? 5:19 PM - 8 Oct 2018
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1236746254841008137 Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others LOL Selective file quoting is a Portuguese-related disease, so I'm reliably informed. I may need surgery to remove my conundrum. 8:10 PM - 8 Mar 2020
There's not a continent on this small greenish blue dot that does not have Portuguese last names. How very imperiously waspish of the frog, no wonder she argues so intensely regarding Madeleine's non-death, when all the while, Madeleine was already 'long gone' prior to the missing circus.
The Frog knows what she knows, but she doesn't have the slightest inkling in terms of what happened to Madeleine and where she's been since real tears were shed.
The Frog is more of a mystery to me than Madeleine's non-mysterious final destination - that part's the easy part and reverse psychology, which has been liberally used during the lifespan of this affair, dictates that Madeleine is not 'out there'.
Nigh on thirteen years of pretending to search the planet strongly indicates that, IMO.
Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.
As the number of comments on the previous post has reached 200 comments, we are bringing this comment from there over to this new post, as it would become less visible than the other comments:
ReplyDeleteAnonymous14 Jan 2020, 13:45:00
Update on Gamble v shazbat2008. No comment on what the school is doing about the matter yet. The school shut be shut down until this serious safeguarding issue is addressed. The school is an unsafe space if staff do not understand they should not have colluded in this type of activity.
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor
@shazbat2008
·
10m
Just an update to all those who have replied to my tweet details of a letter sent via my disabled son's school.
I emailed every partner at solicitors this morning at 9am with questions about the context of the letter and why it was delivered .. nothing back so far... #mccann
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor
@shazbat2008
·
13m
Replying to
@s4r4h4d4ms
and
@EsMiluLatvijuxx
I am awaiting since 9am a reply to an email I sent to every partner at the solicitors, so far nothing back......
Comment received in the previous post in reply to the comment above, and which we are also bringing over:
Delete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Nice to see gullibility is still alive and well on twitter.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 17:21:00”
Unpublished Anonymous at 14 Jan 2020, 15:48:00,
ReplyDeleteWe are not publishing your comment for the simple reason that we don’t want to draw attention to a person who craves attention.
Hope you understand.
Comment received in our previous post, which we are bringing it over:
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Sade, Zora McCartney, Shell, Isabelle McFadden and Ben Thompson are the worst ones for making socks and cloning and sending each other messages of fb profiles and criticising the appearance of members and their children. Screenshots saved as proof, as Shell would say. Only when Ben Thompson, Isabelle McFadden and Sade were in the firing line for passing photos around, did they make an issue over Sade's child's photo, to prevent people reporting them to fb. The photo in question was taken from a story in the press, so had already been seen by thousands. Some of the gang were fallen out at the time, and a photo of Zora McCartney at work was passed around by at least two males to use against her if she did not leave Sade alone. One of the males DMd the photo via one of his fb socks to his known self before release. The worst comments about the cheap dress were not made by Rebecca or ES, but by someone in their own clique. Sade knows who it was but forgave them and went on to use an even more revealing pic as a joke on herself. Proving Ness correct that it is impossible to know who to trust.
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
2h
Here's a few..
Take a look at Bugsy (
@TheBunnyReturds
): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturds?s=09
Take a look at Bugsy (
@TheBunnyRetruns
): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyRetruns?s=09
Take a look at Tealtraum, andyfish19 & TheBunnyReturns (
@GetRealFools
): https://twitter.com/GetRealFools?s=09
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
2h
Take a look at Bugsy (
@TheBunnyRelurns
): https://twitter.com/TheBunnyRelurns?s=09
Take a look at mccann jam (
@preserve_truth
): https://twitter.com/preserve_truth?s=09
Take a look at Enough with the drama Shell (
@DramaShell
): https://twitter.com/DramaShell?s=09
Ness ������������
@nessiestressy
·
2h
These have all been cloned as well Jules ? How do they get away with it ffs ��
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
2h
Disgusting Ness..Some of the ones of Shell have been taken down but she will have screenshots of them..One was done of Sade too.. ��
Ness ������������
@nessiestressy
·
2h
I've not seen Sade on here for ages. Is this why ?
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
Replying to
@nessiestressy
@EricaCantona7
and 7 others
Sades a tough lady..It would take more than some loon making fake accounts to get rid of her.. She also had pics of her 8 year old daughter passed around in a group chat..Imagine someone passing your kids pics around in a group to be commented on.. ��
2:33 PM · Jan 14, 2020·Twitter for Android
5
Likes
Karen Lowe Sanders
@EricaCantona7
·
1h
Replying to
@Jules1602xx
@nessiestressy
and 7 others
I heard this too. How would it even occur to someone to do that? It's bad enough to adults but kiddies should be firmly off limits. I've seen some horrible comments about a dress she wore but I suspect that was down to the account author not being able to wear to such a dress
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
1h
Sade knows the case inside out.. Very knowledgeable.. It makes you wonder.. ��
1 more reply
Ness ������������
@nessiestressy
·
2h
Replying to
@Jules1602xx
@EricaCantona7
and 7 others
That's disgusting. I'm actually lost for words at this and you just don't know who you can trust on here.
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
1h
Absolute loons mate...
Ness ������������
@nessiestressy
·
1h
You’re not kidding. I can see why ppl protect their tweets and really vet those who follow them. I understand why now.
00The Jules... ��️♀ ������������
@Jules1602xx
·
1h
They used Shells Nans pic on one fake account..
Karen Lowe Sanders
@EricaCantona7
·
1h
They what?
More replies
julie colson
@justjulescolson
·
2h
Replying to
@Jules1602xx
@nessiestressy
and 8 others
They must be a load of nonces �� #weidos
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 17:42:00”
Comment received in reply to a comment from our previous post, which we are bringing it over. We have also censored for the reasons we have done so lately, suspicion of being goaded:
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Well said Anonymous14 Jan 2020, 09:11:00
@shazbat2008's tweets don't come close to being as defamatory as The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II and @Michael80282175 tweets about Jim Gamble. Why have they not received letters? Is it because they are friends of NotTextusa, Walker, Jules, Hamilton and Trotter who drive people off the McCann tag? Ponce has threatened to travel to his place of work to challenge Jim Gamble face to face. (Censored).
Michael
@Michael80282175
·
Jan 11
Replying to
@Caesar2207
@MichaelaTrotte6
and 47 others
WELL MICHAELA ANY TRUTH IN THIS RVSP
Gerry McCann was convicted for child sex abuses in 2002, although the evidence has been hacked and emptied from the case file by someone who has access to the National Sex Offenders Register, namely Jim Gamble though the CEOP mainframe
Michael
@Michael80282175
·
Jan 11
Replying to
@InezShooter
@MancunianMEDlC
and 47 others
UTTER TWADDLE JIM GAMBLE MAY KNOW, BUT IS NOT HELPING FURTHERING ANY TRIAL , HIS THREATS CONFIRM THIS
Michael
@Michael80282175
·
Jan 11
Replying to
@PhilipTann1961
@janamb
and 46 others
IT WOULD BE NICE TO GET ANSWER TO THESE ALLEGATIONS FROM #JimGamble
Gerry McCann was convicted for child sex abuses in 2002, although the evidence has been hacked and emptied from the case file by someone who has access to the National Sex Offenders Register, namely Jim Gamble
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
Nov 8, 2019
Still waiting for the postman. #wrongname #jimbel. = saying things Jim Gamble doesn’t agree with. #profiteer Jims solicitors are busy preparing papers for half of
@twitter
if we believe his daily announcements & vieled threats
@PoliceServiceNI
#harassment #trolling #doxing
See new Tweets
Conversation
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
I wondered if I should attend one of these safety on the internet seminars I’ve heard about,stand up & introduce myself to Jim & ask him why he’s been stalking me & threatening to dox me.i May also ask him about Brendas right 2 safety on the internet wouldn’t that be Gr8 #mccann
9:34 AM · Sep 27, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
8
Retweets
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
Aug 13, 2019
Replying to
@turaffetamer
@MancunianMEDlC
and 3 others
Maybe Jim didn’t want his real motives delved in to
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
Aug 10, 2019
Replying to
@ritajeswnt
and
@CarmenRose610
There are some similarities & the appearance of Jim Gamble has not done the investigation any favours. he is a gold digger who attaches himself to these cases
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
Jun 24, 2019
Replying to
@EmmaJJW
Jim’s scared of his past being exposed
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 18:44:00”
Comment received in our previous post, which we are bringing it over:
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Textusa, I have a question for you if you don't mind answering. Why do you think it is that Jim Gamble goes after people on Twitter but seems to leave the blogs/forums etc. alone? As far as I can see much worse has been written about him elsewhere such as in the CMoMM arena. That place is replete with filth and false accusations. Why then, in your opinion, have such gathering places been left alone?
Aside from that, today's events instigated by Mr. Gamble have somehow made me want to join Twitter, despite whether he's right or not in this latest online drama I have to say, I do
have the impulse.
One thing he's definitely not right about though, is Madeleine's missing status. Madeleine is not now and never has been missing. Not in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 or any year thereafter. The missing 'out there' part of this is the biggest lie of all.
"I know because I was there" (or words to that effect). Who said that? And where exactly in the global village, was there? As the words were spoken whilst standing directly outside the Portuguese courthouse it certainly does make one wonder.
There, over there, not here, there.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 18:55:00”
Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 18:55:00,
DeleteWe don’t think we can really answer why Gamble pursues some people and not others but it’s an interesting question. Any speculation we prefer to keep between ourselves.
Anonymous at 14 Jan 2020, 18:55:00,
DeleteWe imagine that you meant to say “Madeleine is not now and never has been missing. Not in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 or any year thereafter” instead of including the year 2003 as she only disappeared in 2007.
And we also agree that Maddie was not abducted in 2007 and the whereabouts of her remains in whatever form it was decided they would become, is known.
Comment submitted to the previous post and brough over:
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
The state of this solicitor! @shazbat2008 having been a school governor does not give any solicitor the right to use members of school staff to get a child to play Pony Express in Jim Gamble's Wild West twitter scenes.
Hope school staff are now suspended awaiting discipline for having interfered in shazbat's son's school life, over what is a personal argument with his mother. This matter is external to any work she has done previously for the school. Schools must be safe places with trustworthy staff, dedicating themselves to education. Schools can't be used as playgrounds for adults to point score and humiliate parents into submission.
Why are Ponce and Not Ben Thompson suddenly keeping their heads down over this, after spending months goading Jim Gamble into losing his sh*t? Is Spartacus dead? Not a whimper of anyone calling themselves Spartacus this time. No offers to meet Jim Gamble at his place of work to give him a piece of their mind. No word about him being unmentionable things today or yesterday. No mention of him cleaning out CATS files. Nada.
Good luck to @shazza2008. Read whatever Isabelle McFadden writes for you very carefully, before allowing her to organise another publicity trip for herself.
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor
@shazbat2008
Libel Update..The solicitor upholds the right to the content and means of delivery via my son as they were informed of my governorship by their clients.... I resigned late last year btw.
I've replied explaining I publically posted the letter and I'm reporting them to SRA.
2:56 PM · Jan 14, 2020·Twitter for iPad
6
Retweets
28
Like
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 14 Jan 2020, 20:13:00”
I don't believe a word of it. This letter story may have held a bit of water until she spun the yarn of it being slipped into her son's bag at school. I know the school and there's no way they would have done that. He could have made a paper aeroplane out of it and thrown it over the fence for all they knew. It's all attention seeking piffle in my opinion.
DeleteNo matter. The school handed over the letter to an autistic child, not to the mother or other guardian. And besides, I've gone back over her Twitter account to mid December last year and I can find nothing related to Jim Gamble.
DeleteCaveat emptor on this one I'm afraid, this is SOBS as far as the all-knowing child protection aficionado is concerned. He's following a procedure to shut people up, just like the McCanns and co have done so effectively over the years.
Lest we forget, Brenda Leyland died and he and his buddy, Brunt, have not faced up to the consequences of their actions yet. But nevertheless, anyhow, what the deuce and thank the lord, there's still time as the fat lady hasn't even started to sing yet..
Anonymous 14 Jan 2020, 22:57:00,
DeleteIf Sharon Taylor was lying about the letter in her son’s bag, that would be very silly because the solicitor named is a genuine Belfast firm and would be made aware.
It seems she has made a complaint against them and made these claims publicly, so we’re inclined to believe the story is true.
What may have happened is a poor decision by an admin person to put the unknown contents letter into the son’s bag rather than post it to the mother.
The solicitor most likely expected it to be given directly to the mother.
It was a bad decision by the solicitor, seems to have been done because it had not been established where the mother lived.
Jim Gamble may have taken action against her as she addressed him directly on twitter. This was a challenge he had to respond to but he didn’t opt for anything other than a warning, rather than initiating defamation proceedings.
We would have expected a cease and desist letter to be sent as the initial stage, with instructions as to what tweets should be deleted, as the first warning stage.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1217496559933411328
ReplyDelete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Max_____xxx and 38 others
I'd like him to show which tweets I'm supposed to have deleted..
Then I'll explain to him s l o w l y how Twitter works... 🤓
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOVqqwXWsAMo3sG.jpg
5:19 PM - 15 Jan 2020
Picture attached is a screengrab from a part of a comment in our blog:
“Textusa13 Jan 2020, 12:18:00
It’s interesting to see that Jules has deleted almost all her tweets in which she demeans physically “Mario”.
That is very interesting, isn’t it?”
Interesting that Jules leaves out of the screengrab the rest of the comment out, namely this:
“We say almost all as because there were so many, she let escape a couple, which we expect will be deleted soon:
https://twitter.com/strackers74/status/1120377938581520384
Elaine Strachan @strackers74
Replying to @Jules1602xx @bitconfused90 and 43 others
Well Textusa she ain't 😂😂😂
6:24 PM - 22 Apr 2019
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1120378417831129090
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @strackers74 @bitconfused90 and 43 others
Oh I know that.. She's not an old short arse wanker.. Lol
6:26 PM - 22 Apr 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1159151416709189633
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Ben doesn't write the NT blog.. Ben isn't Walker either.. neither is NT Walker.. NT is NT, Ben is Ben & Walker is Walker..
But Textusa is a short arsed tool called MARIO..
YES MARIO.. #McCann
6:16 PM - 7 Aug 2019”
Does Jules really expect people to believe that she has only referred to “Mario” in demeaning physical terms twice? Seriously?]
*****
But we rise to the challenge and to it we say, no problem!
Will show them immediately after Jules shows the pictures of the BRT that she said she had and that on Jan 19 last year she said she was going to own the blog with them. It will be one year on Sunday. Only 3 days to go. How time flies!
It does work both ways, Jules. Note, no use of demeaning physical epithets against you, as only juvenile idiots do that throughout their entire lives.
Oh, wait, you deleted that tweet, didn’t you? No, we’re not talking about either of these 2:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1069334006691446785
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1034062133720440832
Now we’ll just sit back and watch how your friend will relentlessly continue to push you into the line of fire. It’s so funny.
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1219003942413197313
ReplyDeleteMichaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
So Textuser’s daughter was caught by Short Arse himself slutting it in the back streets of Lisbon with the boys + the crafty wench quickly tried to blame her predicament on #McCann supporters following her.And he fell for it.Y else would she be in a dirty dog shit stained alley?
9:09 PM - 19 Jan 2020
*****
Jules' friend.
If anyone in here has children - imagine if this was written about your daughter - please tell us what your response would be and how you would feel !
DeleteAnd imagine how your daughter would feel if she read it !
Wow, what a sick creature to conjure up such an imaginary scenario. Maybe this is how his mind operates.
DeleteIf this is the type of supporter the McCanns have, all is lost.
Maybe he was drunk and will regret what he said when he sobers up?
DeleteDidn't Jules say the stalking incident was invented?
DeleteTo add to my earlier comment about him being drunk, he’s become a bit of a joke of late and not getting the attention he wants, so has to become more outrageous to be noticed.
DeleteSometimes, when people go completely over the top, it’s a sign they’re about to crash and burn, so don’t be surprised if he is ”banned” and morphs into yet another twitter persona.
https://mobile.twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1218996490565079042
ReplyDeleteDoes McF agree with Ben T that M‘s body wasn’t carried in the car?
Eddie was alerting to blood, according to many. Blood which could have been shed by a living person as he wasn’t trained to alert only to cadaver blood, according to some.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RightsTruth/status/1113943880276369408
ReplyDeleteAnne doesn’t seem to have a high opinion of Perlin’s offer.
She is right, of course, that finding M’s DNA in the boot wouldn’t prove anything, as Keela could have been alerting to blood from any living person who had used the car, as could Eddie (if one believes that Eddie alerted to blood shed by the living because he wasn’t trained on cadaver blood only)
M’s clothing transported in the car could have shed skin cells as the FSS were unable to determine the cellular material which yielded the 15 markers.
If Eddie’s alerts are accepted as an alert to cadaver odour only, there a compelling case for a body to have been carried in the car.
If Eddie’s alerts can be dismissed as alerts to cadaver odour only, then all Perlin could prove was that M’s DNA was present, but not that a body was carried in the car.
https://twitter.com/milesbetter73/status/1219386556449984519 Anthony miles @milesbetter73
ReplyDeleteReplying to @FragrantFrog @Esjabe1 and 3 others
Please note.....you’re therefore suggesting that there was a dead piglet in mr and mrs #mccann s apartment? 🙄🤔🤷
10:29 PM - 20 Jan 2020
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1219390148015808519
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @milesbetter73 @Esjabe1 and 3 others
Nope (although I don't exclude PJ wiping a cloth over a decomposing pig & then applying it to certain surfaces related to McCanns).
10:44 PM - 20 Jan 2020
*****
Great stand-up routine by the Frog! What a comedian!
As if pig farming is not a business and pigs are left dead lying about to rot…
Plus, why go to the trouble of finding decomposing pigs? Why not just use blood? After all, according to the Frog and the gang, Eddie alerts to any and all blood, so wouldn’t that be in this ludicrous and absurd scenario the simplest option to take by the 2-bit police TV show police that the Frog is apparently convinced that the PJ is?
The Frog appears to be Brit and living in the UK. Is this how she thinks the Brit police solves cases?
Human blood contains unique DNA, Textusa, just like human cadaver. Imagine the chaos those hypothetical forensic results would have caused.
DeleteFrog,
DeleteDo you mean that this that the following that is SUPPOSED to have happened could NOT have happened because it would be absolutely ridiculous if someone even attempted to pull it off as reality as it would be too far-fetched?
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/11/dna-bar-code_1.html
“In our last post, Remarkable Marksmanship, we saw that the DNA found in 7 out of a possible 15 stains in the corner of the living room of apartment 5A came from more than 1 person.
This is according to FSS Final Report, signed by John Lowe, that is in the PJ Files.
John Lowe doesn't give any differentiation or connection as to who these people may be, with the exception of one, CG.
FSS tells us that we have 3 single-DNA stains: stain 1 from unknown male, stain 4 from an unknown female and stain 9 from CG, a 2 yr old boy.
As we showed in our Superkid post, it's near impossible for CG to have contributed to stain 9. The only way he would have contributed would have been for someone to have planted his DNA there and that would have absurd implications.
So let's forget about CG for the moment and consider only that the male from stain #1 is not the same male from stain #9.
We know that stain #4 is from a female.
We also know that stain #15 is from, at least, 3 people, 2 male and the other unknown.
That means that, at least, 3 people, 2 male and 1 female, contributed with their DNA to 10 out of the 15 stains.
10 stains because 7 are multiple-DNA and 3 are single-DNA.
So this would be a possible scenario for 3 people:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8s1ZpV8F2JY/UnDttLSSoKI/AAAAAAAAHEA/uVwb1O6zzAM/s400/minimum.jpg)
Putting some fictional names (taken from here) to the stains, it would mean this:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DDiaRibnJU0/UnDvKx2jxtI/AAAAAAAAHEM/f2_RsCupDOI/s320/minimum1.jpg)
One can, obviously juggle the Pickles, Plaskitt and Birtwhistle names around, as long as one respects the singularity and differentiation of stains 1, 4 and 9 (stain 4 being from a female and stains 1 and 9 from different males).
But as we said, FSS hasn't made any connection between these stains, so each stain could come from a different person:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YhxM5l9P-sc/UnDx26Q55DI/AAAAAAAAHEY/uQ1GanIpJVM/s400/maximum.jpg)
Again, by putting fictional names to the stains, we would get this:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QqCguyWP-7o/UnD5cL3HXaI/AAAAAAAAHEo/RVNpKa9VmiQ/s320/maximum1.jpg)
And by putting the 2 hypothesis side by side:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NOPFs2fS2zE/UnD7pqCQtuI/AAAAAAAAHE0/jf0N9cA-8nk/s400/maximum+minimum.jpg)
As the saying goes, 2 is company 3 is a crowd, so we can say that, according to FSS, a crowd from 3 to 18 people left their DNA in an inaccessible corner of the living room in apartment 5A.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-04Fv5fSG17g/UnD-UEfHTOI/AAAAAAAAHFA/L3VsPrC9fn4/s400/blood+no+grid.JPG)
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteRemember that we're not taking into account all 15 stains but only those 10 that FSS said had DNA.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UkJKNPX0CnM/UnD-0IL6fjI/AAAAAAAAHFI/yrjpyirOxSU/s400/Vampire+Party.JPG)
Having come to the conclusion, on our DNA is... DNA post, that the DNA found in those stains could only have come from blood (or cerebrospinal fluid but that we'll leave that one out for now until opportune to bring it in again) then we have to say that in that particular, inaccessible corner of the living room of apartment 5A, Vampire Parties surely must have taken place!!
We see no other explanation to justify the enormous variety of samples albeit all being tiny, minuscule and invisible to the eye!
A new myth is born: it was vampires who abducted Maddie!!”
*****
We agree with you, it’s absolutely ridiculous. But if the PJ was walking around with a cloth contaminated with planted blood from multiple sources, all would be explained.
So, according to you, the PJ officers walked around with 2 contaminated cloths, one with blood from whomever (to produce the above and only in that particular location) and another contaminated with dead pig (much more generous in terms of spreading). All is explained, finally!
Have you considered participating in “Would I lie to you?”. Have seen some participants there unable to defend much less ludicrous stories without being able to keep the straight face that you seem to be able to.
DeleteFirst of all, a person could spit at a wall, wipe nasal discharge on a wall, or cough up fluid from their lungs which lands on a wall. All would leave stains with the individual's DNA & these stains would not have been visible under Luminol when PJ did forensics on 4/5/07.
The apartment was re-let to 3 different families between the time the McCanns vacated the apartment & the time the dogs arrived. Grime himself was unaware that 5A had not remained sealed in the intervening period. There was no way of knowing how long any of the unidentified stains had been in situ, bar CG's.
The (presumed) blood which Keela found was entirely fortuitous - under the floor tile, under the boot carpet & on a key fob handled by multiple people.
Turning to Eddie's sole alerts...can you explain why PJ chose to do NO forensics whatsoever on any of the items it was suggested were contaminated with cadaver scent? Why elect to not take all necessary steps to prove the death hypothesis, unless there was something to hide?
It hasn't escaped my attention that all evidence PJ tried to use against the parents was suggestive rather than definitive.
How does Frog know whether or not Grime was aware the apartment had been occupied by other families? He makes no comment in any of his statements.
DeleteWhat difference would it have made if he had been made aware?
I’m sure a lot of other crime scenes where the dogs were used would not be as they were at the time a homicide occurred. Other people may have subsequently been at the crime scene in intervening months or years.
The dogs had no concept of occupants. They just did their respective jobs.
Amaral writes in his book that his team were deterred from asking for items of clothing at the time.
As I understand, by the time Grime arrived, the clothing had been washed, so it may have been decided not to test unless indications of blood had been found. Why cuddle cat wasn’t seized or tested, only the PJ can answer.
In hindsight, the PJ would probably have acted more decisively in the face of interference from different sources.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm (Apartment 5A, 2nd paragraph)
DeleteWhat we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Grime's interpretation of Eddie's alert beside the wardrobe may have been affected by an erroneous assumption.
Frog, you didn’t answer how you knew that Grime didn’t know the apartment had been occupied by 3 families after M disappeared.
DeleteIf the source of the cadaver odour still existed in the apartment, the mere act of Grime entering the apartment could have caused some movement of air with the odour.
He was moving round, accompanied by other people, opening doors.
So he would expect some air movement.
The source still existed and Eddie showed where it probably emanated from - behind the sofa.
Of course, some argue that was an alert to blood, not cadaver odour.
Did the odour drift to the closet or was the source also there? More likely the latter in my opinion.
What about the Kamikaze mosquitoes?
DeleteStephen Birch also claimed the PJ planted evidence.
DeleteSeems strange Frog is singing from the Birch hymn sheet.
https://mobile.twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1219389579062599680
DeleteNow it's historic remains...
So far, Frog has suggested cremation remains scattered in the garden of 5A or B, the PJ using a decomposing pig cloth to set the Mcs up, and here, it’s completely unproven historic remains under the apartments.
Anon @ 18:35
ReplyDeleteNo body here, move along please,getting untoward 7 yrs of investigation by Scotland Yard,Operation strange will nab that abductor yet,keep the faith.
Here's a quick question for you. Does this blog believe Boris Johnson will go for the unveiling of the truth in this case? Or do you think he'll be like the virtually blinkered rest of them and choose to look the other way because he, perhaps, lacks the necessary inner strength and insight? Frankly, I'm not entirely sure our current PM has the bal*s to take on the McCann battle and see it through to its rightful conclusion. Which is, of course, the complete recovery of Madeleine McCann's earthly remains from a location known to many & hidden in plain sight..
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 23 Jan 2020, 19:19:00,
DeleteThe answer to your question is very simple: whatever it is he believes to be to his advantage.
What that “whatever” means only he knows, or rather he will know at every decision point the issue will require from him to have.
We’re not avoiding answering the question, we’re being very pragmatic. His decisions will be made on the basis of what he feels will score him more points and may or may not contradict any and all decisions he may have made in the past.
One thing one cannot accuse the man is him lacking courage. Whether one agrees with him or not, he has had the courage needed at every point in time to take the decision he best felt would benefit him. No reason to think this case will be for him an exception.
They all know the truth. The whole truth. The fictitious story line fake truth and the real, actual, indisputable truth. They know the inner workings of the fairy tale and they know precisely where Madeleine is. They all do, each and every last one of them. No wonder Mrs. Gaspar appeared so nervous when approached by S. Poulton for an interview. If the woman's scared, too bad, she still has time to tell the truth, and as a doctor paid for by the British taxpaying public, she should. Anyhow, whatever her decision the truth's going to come out in Jim Gamble's lifetime. Rest assured, if it's on Gamble's mind it's manifestly guaranteed.
ReplyDeleteIf I may, I just wanted to say one last thing.
ReplyDeleteDear Mrs. K. Gaspar,
What Majorcan holiday would that be? The script is as outrageously predictable as it ever has been and you, my dear, should tell the truth and shame the devil. How do you sleep at night knowing all you know and living with the paedophile lies? You really are a disgrace to your profession, your country, to children's rights and to the laws of two lands. Shame on you, woman!
For anyone still confused about this simple case, I highly recommend people read Stephen Carpenter's witness statement and Textusa's .. All the world's a stage (3/3) re the same subject matter. The files contain what is essentially 'their story' with the exception of Carpenter's one and only valuable clue. Pay close attention.
ReplyDeleteDo you remember Textusa, way back in the day, Kate's mother said Kate had told her it was an accident. "It was an accident Mum, it was an accident." Maybe it's an inside secret these days that people have come to terms with. Perhaps the PTB know there was no ill intent and it's pointless dredging up the agony for the sake of punishing them for hiding a body under duress.
ReplyDeleteMaybe there'll be no official ending, perhaps the only ending we'll see will be an unofficial, on the internet only conclusion? Goncalo talked about there being no political will, I still don't see it, do you?
Anon @ 23:31
ReplyDeleteIts a hard one to call for sure,just what justification is there for circa £12 million for one investigation only to come to no conclusion.( Has any one seen a spread sheet confirming that expenditure).Some call it a cover up,these happen behind closed doors not under the glare of the world's press whilst on your hands and knees digging up the Portuguese countryside.I don't think there'll be any call to justify the cost,after all were're told the Home Office fund it with a special grant.
Save for a confession I don't think it'll ever be closed,just not enough evidence to bring a conviction without reasonable doubt imo.
The trouble grange and its makers have is the exit strategy,do they declare they have evidence Madeleine left 5a alive or not? if not where does that leave the not under suspicion McCann? if they do what happened after?
It doesn't matter what the Home Office say, it's all taxpayer's money no matter how special the grant is.The people must demand accountability and whatever Grange are doing they're certainly not doing their job.
DeleteIt could have been all over in a day if they actually looked over there instead of indulging the press and the power looking in the exact opposite location to where they should have looked on day one.
Goncalo Amaral said the ground was too hard for digging at that time of year, so if he's right, Maddie's most likely not in Portugal. Somehow, I just have a funny feeling that dear Debbie was right. I don't know, there was something special, insightful and unique about Debbie.
She had high levels of emotional intelligence and always gave off a good vibe. She fought for truth and justice for Madeleine right up to her tragic passing. Madeleine, Debbie and Brenda will never be forgotten by people who do genuinely care.
There isn't enough interest for any one to demand anything,the longer its gone on the interest has waned.One thing if it was to be closed quietly there have been plenty of opportunity's with the recent votes in the commons taking the headlines.
DeleteI don't know of this Debbie so can't comment on any theory she may have had.
You're absolutely correct in that interest has waned. Nevertheless, £12 million plus the rest of our money and the money of other nations chasing the ace in this fraudulent affair is something which must be addressed. If the people won't demand it, then this one person most certainly will.
DeletePrevention of the lawful and decent burial of a dead body is an offence under the common law of the United Kingdom. The offence is infrequently charged. As a common law offence, it is trialable only on indictment and can be punished by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both.
I haven't cited the Portuguese side of this because I don't believe it's relevant. It would be sheer madness to leave Madeleine buried over there where no-one could keep a watchful eye over her gravesite IMO.
DeleteGood luck with the first point,the amount of time FOI's are fobbed off,I suspect there won't be much joy in it for you.
It may well be illegal in the UK,but its essentially a Portuguese case,they couldn't produce enough evidence to bring any one to court back in 2007,if it wasn't there then,its not there now.
There was no grave site imo.
Anonymous 24 Jan 2020, 23:31:00,
ReplyDeleteAbout the accident,
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/09/maddie-case-first-interview-to-kates.html
It seems it was Gerry who referred to a “disaster” and Kate who said “‘she’s gone” but we can’t find a direct quote where Kate says “it was an accident mum”.
Unless anyone can find a link to the source, it can’t be proven that Kate described it as an accident, although we believe it was, as we have stated in the blog
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
Susan Healy mentions the word accident, but only to reject the idea. It’s towards the end.
http://steelmagnolia-mccannarchives.blogspot.com/2011/12/madeleines-broken-neck.html
This forum no longer exists.
Seems there was a story, no more than that, about a phone conversation between Kate and her mother, with Kate saying it was an accident.
Unless, as suggested here, their phone conversation was hacked by a journalist, how would anyone know what was said in a phone call?
We think this story needs to be treated with caution as there is no other source we could find to verify it.
About the outcome, one cannot avoid the fact that the case was political from day 1. And it will continue to be political.
That said, we believe it will be played in accordance with the political benefits to those in the decision chambers of the case.
So you want to treat that with caution because you can't verify it, but you continue to spread a theory which has no evidence to support it?
ReplyDeleteAnd don't give me your usual "what evidence would you expect there to be?" claptrap - it just shows what a hypocrite you are.
Anonymous 25 Jan 2020, 13:24:00,
DeleteDon’t worry, we won’t ask you that question, for now. You have brought the elephant into the room, so there’s no need to say anything more, for now, on the subject of what expected evidence of swinging anyone would expect to find in Praia da Luz when Maddie disappeared.
However, we will ask you one question: if, according to you people, swinging is legal (as it is) and no one could care less about who does or who doesn’t swing, then why are you going off the deep end because of us alleging people are swingers? After all, according to you, we are not offending anyone, when we say they are swingers right?
Let’s see who is the hypocrite now.
Anonymous 25 Jan 2020, 19:34:00,
DeleteSo which of the options do you believe:
a - The McCanns acted alone and alone have been able to control the entire British Establishment.
b - The McCanns did not act alone and were helped (if you believe in this option, please detail who you believe helped and what proof you have to prove it).
c - There was no cover-up, the McCanns are telling the truth.
Thank you
How about you address the fact that you dismissed a claim because you couldn't verify it, but when you make a claim you expect everyone to believe it without a shred of evidence.
DeleteAnonymous 25 Jan 2020, 22:43:00,
DeleteHow predictable. To the point of it all just being boring.
And NOW is the time to ask you: "what evidence [of swinging] would you expect there to be?"
We're asking YOU. YOUR opinion. Don't deflect.
What is the fucking point of you? You do it EVERY time. Your "evidence" of swinging is that there IS no evidence of swinging. Total con artist.
DeleteAnonymous 25 Jan 2020, 23:17:00,
DeleteYou seem to have misunderstood us. We want to know what YOU would expect.
So please set aside for a minute what we have said (or not said) and just tell us all what is the EVIDENCE that YOU would have expected to find of swinging.
We will be waiting.
Which part of
Delete"And don't give me your usual "what evidence would you expect there to be?" claptrap - it just shows what a hypocrite you are"
are you failing to get your head around?
Anonymous 25 Jan 2020, 23:47:00,
DeleteYou seem not to know how debates go. A child screaming on its back in the middle of a supermarket aisle in an attempt to get sweets, it’s not debating why said sweets should be bought but just being a child throwing a tantrum. You do know that, right?
You cannot say that something is “without a shred of evidence” when you are asked what you would expect that evidence to look like and you refuse to answer.
You are criticising something because according to you it has according something fundamental missing but when asked what would that fundamental thing would be, you refuse to answer. By doing that you are being as mature as the child in the supermarket aisle. But as you are an adult, way more pathetic than that child whose tactics you so well imitate.
Give over Michaela. It’s obviously you.
DeleteHe’s evading answering the other questions about the Mcs and what he believes.
DeleteAt least we know anon doesn’t believe the Mcs were involved in a cover up of death.
Let's make this really simple for you.
DeleteYou said this:
"We think this story needs to be treated with caution as there is no other source we could find to verify it."
You are being asked to explain the double-standard. You demand verification for anyone's theory but your own. You then defend the fact that there is no evidence to support your theory by claiming that there would be no evidence of swinging, because of what you seem to regard as the terror of exposure.
It's the ultimate cop out, like claiming a theft was conducted by an invisible man to explain the lack of witnesses.
Anonymous 26 Jan 2020, 13:43:00,
DeleteLet’s then make things really simple:
- state what you consider would be evidence of swinging you would expect to have been found in Praia da Luz. If you can’t, or if you agree with Anne Guedes that there wasn’t any expected to be found, shut up. By the way, you are absolutely correct when you say “there would be no evidence of swinging, because of what you seem to regard as the terror of exposure”, as swingers are indeed terrorised of being exposed.
- state what option of comment at 25 Jan 2020, 20:16:00 you subscribe.
By the way you are wrong when you say “there is no evidence to support your theory” as our theory is based on many other things than swinging. Which ones? Read the blog.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-13025228
ReplyDeleteIronic!
“Don't publish this comment” identified reader at 26 Jan 2020, 15:15:00,
ReplyDeleteShe really is making a fool of herself lately, isn’t she?
As always
Deletehttps://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-parents-taking-legal-21424013
ReplyDeleteMadeleine McCann parents taking legal action against Portugal over disappearance
EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann vanished from her family’s apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz while her parents dined in a nearby tapas bar in 2007
By
Jerry Lawton
21:02, 3 FEB 2020
UPDATED21:03, 3 FEB 2020
Portugal may soon have to pay Madeleine McCann’s parents compensation over her disappearance.
Kate and Gerry McCann are taking legal action against a ruling by the country’s supreme court.
The McCanns’ legal action stems from a feud with former detective Goncalo Amaral, 60, who led the initial police hunt for Madeleine and in a best-selling book later accused the couple of covering up her death.
The couple, both 51, later successfully sued Mr Amaral for libel arguing his claim Madeleine was dead was hampering their global search for her.
But the decision to award them damages and costs totalling £436,000 was overturned on appeal on the basis the former detective was entitled to express his opinions under freedom of speech.
That decision was ratified by Portugal’s Supreme Court – the highest authority in the land.
Now the McCanns are hoping to appeal against that judgement in the European Court Of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.
A judge is to assess their case within the coming months.
A spokesman for the European Court of Human Rights said: “Before the end of the year there will be a preliminary examination by the court regarding the admissibility of the application.’’
If the McCanns win the Portuguese nation may be ordered to pay them a cash settlement.
A source close to the UK police probe into Madeleine’s disappearance said that could fuel 'resentment’.
“The disappearance of Madeleine has already cost Portugal,’’ they said.
"Tourism was badly affected afterwards.
“Now the possibility of having to pay money to a couple who – in many locals’ eyes – left their child to fate while they went out could cause resentment.’’
Then-three-year-old Madeleine vanished from her family’s apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz while her parents dined with pals in a nearby tapas bar in 2007.
The couple were unavailable for comment yesterday.
All that has to be said is said when see this story breaking in the Daily Star. If it weren’t for the social media, only cats would end up reading it during their toilet breaks, and even that would only happen a few days from now.
Delete12 hour later it was echoed in the Mirror:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-parents-taking-legal-21424524
What an upgrade 😂😂😂!
Seriously, going from the Daily Star to the Mirror bypassing the Express, is indeed a remarkable upgrade 😂😂😂😂😂😂!
Maybe we can expect to see it in the Sun soon? Other than the DS and the Mirror, no one, even the gutter press seemed to care much about this apparently stale news.
But it isn’t exactly stale as it contains a couple of nuggets that may be overlooked.
Before we get to those 2 nuggets, let’s immediately correct Jerry Lawton because it is important to correct him. We will one day dedicate a post about how the Maddie case opened the floodgates to what is today’s world of shameless deceit. For now we consider that it’s the duty of every reasonable person to set records straight and expose any and all tactics of repeating a lie until it becomes perceived as truth.
Jerry Lawton states falsely that “The couple, both 51, later successfully sued Mr Amaral for libel”. They never sued him for libel, a recurring lie that we exposed back in July 2014, more than 5 years ago but it still keeps making the rounds to this day, as this article clearly shows.
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2014/07/no-longer-libel-so-dont-call-it-libel.html
They sued Amaral for damages, not for libel. Not once have the McCanns denied during this process in Portugal that what Gonçalo Amaral stated was false. They only have alleged that due to the presumption of innocence they enjoy, he shouldn’t have said what he said and because he said it they felt they had suffered damage and so they sued him because of it.
DAMAGES because he supposedly didn’t respect that presumption and NOT because he was supposedly libelling them.
An OBVIOUS tell-tale sign that it was about damages and not libel, was the fact that the proceedings took place in civil court and not in a criminal one. Libel is a crime in Portugal, so if it was libel it would have to have been in a criminal court. Any self-respecting journalist does minimal researching, and a minimal research would show this clearly. We will leave it up to the reader to judge why Lawton, a journo who has followed this case for such a long time insists in confusing damages with libel…
The Portuguese courts ruled that the presumption of innocence they enjoyed was not enough reason for him to have been silent and did not give reason to the couple.
This libel v damages thing has been corrected by us time and time again but no matter how many times we clarify this, we expect to clarify it again in the future many times as well. To those helping in this farce on “both” side of the fence, please don’t complain about the state of affairs that the world is currently in, as you have contributed with your small but valuable share to help things to be what they are.
The nuggets, which in our opinion makes this not to be old news as it apparently seems to be.
The first nugget is this one: “A spokesman for the European Court of Human Rights said: “Before the end of the year there will be a preliminary examination by the court regarding the admissibility of the application.””
Yes, we knew that the McCanns had submitted a process in the ECHR. What’s new in this article is that Lawton gives an update on the state of the process: he is clearly stating that it hasn’t even got over the hurdle of being ADMITTED by the ECHR.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteTo those stand-up comedians saying that the McCanns have a process in the ECHR, what they hide is that the application may never be admitted in the ECHR. It has been submitted years ago and it has not even been admitted. It’s not us saying it, it’s Jerry Lawton. And it will be a PRELIMINARY examination at the end of this year, 2020. After that, we are supposing that a decision on admissibility will be taken further into the future.
It is NOT in the ECHR, it’s in its admin services and that’s it. This is not word play. There’s a huge difference between a process being in the ECHR and one attempting to get into the ECHR. The McCann process is ATTEMPTING to get into the ECHR. It’s clearly not there yet and it may never be.
To get as far as a case being considered for admissibility, as what is exactly what the McCanns have been able to achieve so far, all that is required is for the paperwork to cover all the information required, within the timescale.
Even IF considered admissible, the next stage could be a rejection of the case as unfounded. The point being, it hasn’t even reached the stage where it can be rejected!
Basically, what Lawton is saying in this article is that the McCanns are 2 people who submitted their names to the UK Athletics, showing a desire to compete as marathonists in the Olympics and have been bragging they’ve won gold without even having ever been called for regional trials!
That, in our opinion makes this new news. And as a corollary to this news, even if accepted, it could take years to be heard. IF this is true, by the way.
IF this is true, Operation Grange will continue until a decision on admissibility is reached, in our opinion, thanks to the McCanns, this ECHR shadow will be looming over the case and the perspective of a decision negative to the McCanns from the ECHR after an archival of the case in the UK and will be a harsh rub of salt in this already fetid, fetid wound in the country’s flesh. To avoid this, we think it would be just simpler to let the case remain open ad nauseam and simply not talk about it.
The second nugget is in the title: “Portugal may soon have to pay Madeleine McCann’s parents compensation over her disappearance.”
Where is Gonçalo Amaral in this? Nowhere. As we have repeatedly said, the case in the ECHR was NEVER against him but against Portugal.
Even in the unlikely case of the application being admitted and having a rule in favour of the McCanns, Gonçalo Amaral will NOT have to pay a single penny to the McCanns.
The battle of the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral has DEFINITELY been lost. The McCanns a few years ago started a new one against Portugal.
Jerry Lawton, with this article is showing how wrong are the stand-up comedians who have been saying that Gonçalo Amaral is going to pay all that is due when the ECHR gives the couple reason. Lawton with this article is just showing how pathetic these INCOMs are. INCOMs as involuntary comedians. Involuntary but hilariously funny.
And the likelihood of having a decision against Portugal? We will just say that we will be unpleasantly surprised if the case even gets admitted. More surprised IF admitted, IF it doesn’t get rejected.
The reader will understand what we think the odds are of the possibility that the McCanns will win anything against the state of Portugal…
Hi Textusa
ReplyDeleteI am sure that the McCanns will be successful in the ECHR simply because Amaral breached his duty of reserve.
For the benefit of your readers who are confused about the way Portuguese justice has dealt with very recent defamation claims, would you be good enough to explain its handling of Ana Gomes v José Pedro Aguiar-Branco compared to Ana Gomes v Isabel dos Santos. TIA.
Frog,
DeletePlease say what you have just said contradicts in whatever way what we have stated in the comment.
As we are accused for using too many a word, we will sum up what we said:
- The process has not been accepted by the ECHR. It has been submitted but lacks being admitted to this day.
- The process is against Portugal and not Gonçalo Amaral. Whichever result and whenever it happens, the McCanns will NEVER receive ANY money from him because of this process and that was the intent of it all, was it not?
Please say where what you say contradicts these FACTS. TIA.
You think the McCanns will win, we think they won’t. Both yours and ours are mere opinions which have to be respected in equal manner.
Now, why are you doing a Lawton?
You know perfectly well that there is NO DEFAMATION in the entire process and yet you persist in trying to convey the idea that there was.
The biggest drawback comedians have is that they basically work with one-use-only material. They cannot tell the same joke to the same audience twice and even when they repeat a joke to different audiences it may turn out that there will be people present who have heard him say the same joke previously. In fact, the concept of “same audience” has been thrown out the window with YouTube. Nowadays, if a comedian wants to succeed, a joke can only be used once.
You are a comedian persisting on the same joke, over and over again. The only people laughing are the “comedian’s family” sitting in the front row and they are doing so out of solidarity, if not pity. The rest of the audience applauds with facepalms.
We are not familiar with the processes you mention nor are we going to be just because you suggest. As you speak of "defamation claims", we are not seeing any connection with the McCann v Amaral process, as you KNOW, WAS not about defamation nor was it claimed to be.
Lastly, you do realise that calling the attention to Isabel dos Santos works very much against you, don’t you?
Textusa
ReplyDeleteI am fully aware the Mccanns' submission has not yet been considered. I am also fully aware that their case is against the State of Portugal whose Appeal/Supreme Courts chose to undermine their own laws when declaring that the duty of reserve should not apply to `Amaral.
If there was no defamation involved (the tort) then why did the Portuguese courts have to legally determine which human right (Article 8 or Article 10) should take precedence when considering the McCanns' claim for damages?
May I suggest you read ECHR judgements A. v Norway & Prunea v Romania.
Frog,
DeleteIf defamation involved, then the case in Portugal would have been in a criminal court.
You may suggest whatever. We cannot stop anyone from buying your snake oil if they wish to do so. All we can do about it is not buy it ourselves.
Textusa
ReplyDeleteDo you understand that the plaintiffs had the option of going down the criminal court route against Amaral & co. but that action would not necessarily have achieved the desired outcome of removing the book & video from the public domain?
Frog,
DeleteNo. All we know is that they didn't follow down the criminal courts.
Civil courts do not deal with crime and libel is a crime in Portugal.
The civil liability for defamation is dealt with in a civil court, not a criminal court. You still haven't addressed the issue of why the Portuguese Court needed to address the prevailing human right - Article 8 v Article 10 - - when determining their judgement.
ReplyDeletePerchance they realised that the McCann's would go down the ECHR route and covered bases,one step ahead.
DeleteFrog,
DeleteArticle 8: Respect for your private and family life
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-8-respect-your-private-and-family-life
Article 10: Freedom of expression
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/y-ddeddf-hawliau-dynol/article-10-freedom-expression
What has this to do with defamation?
Let’s look at the definition of defamation:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defamation
“Definition of defamation
law
: the act of communicating FALSE statements about a person that injure the reputation of that person
: the act of defaming another : calumny defamation of character a defamation lawsuit”
What is it that you don’t understand about FALSE? Whenever has the spreading of falsehoods EVER been protected by courts? Isn’t that just a contradiction in terms?
That only makes sense to someone who was shameless enough to suggest that the PJ went around looking for uneviscerated dead pigs to contaminate some cloth to then incriminate the McCanns…
What you are implying with your suggestion of defamation present in Art. 8 v Art. 10 is that the courts weighed these rights one against the other knowing that Amaral was spreading of falsehoods about the McCanns. Why on earth would any court do that? Oh wait, Portuguese courts. Maybe they went looking for dead uneviscerated pigs too?
The fact that YOU show that they considered freedom of speech means that the court assumed as fact that there was nothing to prove that what Gonçalo Amaral had said was false. You are proving yourself wrong. You have proven that there was defamation.
One does not need to lie to disrespect the privacy of another person’s personal life. The most common example is the publication without authorisation of nude pictures. It is TRUE the pictures depict that person; it is TRUE that person posed nude when the pictures were taken. There are no lies involved in this obvious and blatant disrespect of private life. Just scumbags being scumbags.
The court simply weighed a POSSIBLE disrespect by Amaral when seen what he said against the presumption of innocence the couple enjoyed. Nothing said about Amaral lying or defaming.
The court was very clear, the presumption of innocence is not a declaration of innocence. Nowhere has it been said that the couple did not do it, only that it hadn’t been proven to date that they did it.
Claiming innocence based on a presumption was not sufficient and that meant that the court admitted as possibly true what Amaral said – so clearly there was NO DEFAMATION – and CONCLUDED that he had the absolute right to say what he said under his right of freedom of speech.
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-170393%22]}
ReplyDeleteHere's a case of a Judge who brought a defamation claim in a civil court.....
It's an irony that's obviously lost: All the litigation under the sun tells us nothing about what happened to Madeleine McCann. It's an obscene distraction, but then it's meant to be.
DeleteMadeleine who? rhetorical of course.
DeleteFrog,
DeleteSo?
We are talking about the law in Portugal, nowhere else.
The ECHR case I linked to IS Portuguese.
DeleteRetribution or restitution - the difference behind a decision to go down the Criminal or Civil route. In a Civil court the 2 parties start out as equals.
For the benefit of your readers, would you please post your interpretation of Articles 483 & 484 of the Portuguese Civil Code (re.defamation) and also advise under which jurisdiction Amaral sued Marcos Aragao Correia for defamation. TIA.
ReplyDeleteFrog,
Deletehttp://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/goncalo-amaral-v-marcos-aragao-correia-antonio-pedro-dores/
“In the appendage to the CRIMINAL process for defamation against Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer, Gonçalo Amaral defends that the accused suffers from a ‘pathological imbalance with traits of social dangerousness.’”
(…)
Addendum to the CRIMINAL Process for Defamation Against Marcos Aragão Correia, 16 June 2009
Addendum to the CRIMINAL Process for Defamation Against Marcos Aragão Correia Joana Morais
(…)
Mr Prosecutor,
Gonçalo Amaral, the offended party with the capacity to constitute himself as an assistant, and better identified in the files, comes forward to APPEND the following to the CRIMINAL complaint that was presented against arguido Marcos Aragão, under the rights of petition and of probatory intervention:
(…)
As you know, I’m the lawyer of Leonor Cipriano, the Portuguese lady that was brutally tortured by police officers of the Portuguese State. This torture, as you also know, was proven by a Jury Court, and its verdict was confirmed by the Appeal Court. In the sequence, two police officers were convicted for torture-related crimes, one of them Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral, the leader of the police team, who was convicted for perjury to a 1 year and 6 months suspended jail sentence, because it was proven that he knew since the moment of the crime that Leonor Cipriano was tortured by the police, but he lied, saying that she wasn’t. Nevertheless, after the jury verdict, the Portuguese State accused me of CRIMINAL libel for writing a report dated before the beginning of that same trial, where the testimony of Leonor Cipriano about the torture she suffered was divulged. A university teacher, President of a Portuguese association (ACED) that has divulged the report, was also accused. Despite the efforts to prove that the accusation was illegal, the Portuguese State has notified us on 23 December 2011 for us to be judged by a non-Jury court for CRIMINAL LIBEL against the already convicted Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral!
(…)
The hearings will take place at the Court of Faro’s Second CRIMINAL Circuit and Gonçalo Amaral demands compensation in the amount of three thousand euros from Marcos Aragão Correia, as well as from the arguido António Pedro Dores, the head of the Association Against Exclusion through Development (ACED).
(…)
Process Number: 87/08.8JAFAR
2º CRIMINAL Court
Common Process (Singular Court)
Author Public Ministry
Plaintiff Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral
Arguido Marcos Teixeira da Fonte Aragão Correia
Arguido António Pedro de Andrade Dores
Judgement or final hearing 09-02-2012 9:30 and 28-02-2012 14:00
(…)
Former Judiciary Police (PJ) inspector Gonçalo Amaral – who investigated the disappearance of Joana, the daughter of arguida Leonor Ciprinao – has criminally sued Marcos Aragão Correia and António Pedro Dores, because they publicly alluded to the alleged torture that Leonor Cipriano was a target of during the Joana case’s questioning stage.
*****
What is it that you don’t understand about the word CRIMINAL?
About articles Art 483 and 484 of the CPC:
Deletehttp://www.pgdlisboa.pt/leis/lei_mostra_articulado.php?artigo_id=1959A0483&nid=1959&tabela=leis&pagina=1&ficha=1&so_miolo=&nversao=
Artigo 483.º (art.º 585.º CPC 1961)
Fixação de prazo para a apresentação de relatório
1 - Quando a perícia não possa logo encerrar-se com a imediata apresentação do relatório pericial, o juiz fixa o prazo dentro do qual a diligência há de ficar concluída, que não pode exceder 30 dias.
2 - Os peritos indicam às partes o dia e hora em que vão prosseguir com os atos de inspeção, sempre que lhes seja lícito assistir à continuação da diligência.
3 - O prazo fixado pode ser prorrogado, por uma única vez, ocorrendo motivo justificado.
Artigo 484.º (art.º 586.º CPC 1961)
Relatório pericial
1 - O resultado da perícia é expresso em relatório, no qual o perito ou peritos se pronunciam fundamentadamente sobre o respetivo objeto.
2 - Tratando-se de perícia colegial, se não houver unanimidade, o discordante apresenta as suas razões.
3 - Se o juiz assistir à inspeção e o perito puder de imediato pronunciar-se, o relatório é ditado para a ata.
Won’t even bother translating. But readers who will run it by Google translator will have a laugh.
No, we won’t be giving you our interpretation of these articles. 😂😂😂😂😂
Frog,
ReplyDeleteWe inform you that we will no longer reply to you on this subject.
The undeniable fact is the case against Gonçalo Amaral was in a civil court, where there was no need for the McCanns to give evidence on oath and was for damages.
To suggest that a crime was judged in Portugal in a civil court is to call incompetent all those who were involved in the different levels where legal decisions were taken. What a really pathetic suggestion to make.
We’ve had enough of this distraction.
In the comedian analogy, at this stage, not even “your family” sitting in the front row are pretending to find your jokes funny.
One thing to say is the frog goes on about articles 8 and 10,now its not known just what the McCann/Healey V Portugal is all about unless of course frog is???????????
DeleteI can only suggest you re-read the 27/4/2015 court judgement, where you will find the references to articles 483 & 484.
ReplyDeleteFor your benefit, here are the wordings in English of the 2 articles in the Civil Code.
https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621112/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621112/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
*First one should read https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621111/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1225588143480594432
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
For Textusa. (as you won't publish my reply)
Just so the world can see both the Portuguese #mccann judge of 2015 & I have made a laughing stock of ourselves re. Art. 483 & 484, can you explain what this section of the judgement means?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQIp4NZWoAIPs-n.jpg
1:12 AM - 7 Feb 2020
[“investigação
Nessa forma de resolução do conflito entre os direitos revela-se a ilicitude da conduta do réu Gonçalo Amaral para os efeitos do artº 484º do Código Civil.
III. Aqui chegados, há que percorrer os demais pressupostos da obrigação de indemnizar, prevista no artº 483º, n.º1, do Código Civil, determinando, em primeiro lugar se o réu actuou com culpa e , na afirmativa, se da sua conduta resultaram danos que tenham no seu comportamento a causa adequada.
O juizo de censura pessoal que ao réu pode ser dirigido parece”
Our translation:
“investigation
In this way of resolving the conflict between rights reveals the illegality of the defendant Gonçalo Amaral's conduct for the purposes of article 484 of the Civil Code.
III. Having arrived here, it is necessary to go through the other assumptions of the obligation to indemnify, provided for in article 483, no. 1, of the Civil Code, determining, in the first place, whether the defendant acted with guilt and, if so, whether from his conduct resulted damage that have in his behaviour the appropriate cause.
The judgement of personal censoring that may be directed to the defendant seems”]
*****
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225590670473207809
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Coward Textuser (Mario Santos, immigrant living near Lisbon) only publishes what he wishes. His kiddie blog carries zero weight and zero credibility. It’s regarded as a joke. #mccann
1:22 AM - 7 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1225602320848838656
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6
Apparently the joke is on me. Presumably there's no difference between a Procedural Code & a Civil Code....
2:08 AM - 7 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225667120698019840
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @FragrantFrog
You’ve boxed him in. His only response is no response. He ain’t the brightest. Apparently he got caught submitting comments to his own blog anonymously. 😂😂😂 #mccann
6:26 AM - 7 Feb 2020
*****
Frog,
It’s interesting to see you interacting so amicably with someone who uses IRA quotes to threaten and denigrate girls. But then we know that you, Jules and Walker are a tight little group who know each other even though you pretend you don’t.
Apparently, all is fair with you lot, and that doesn’t surprise us. The more Walker and the BRC, Karen Lowe Sanders badmouth us, the more they show how right we are, the stronger they make our case. So, with all honesty, may they long continue to use their filthy mouths against us.
Then, we did not say we weren’t going to publish your comments. We said we wouldn’t reply to them. We are breaking that as, as you have shown, we have made a mistake and would like to acknowledge it to our readers.
Also, we did not say the joke was on you. Neither did we say you are a joke. We simply compared you to a cringeworthy comedian on stage telling jokes that no one finds minimally funny.
Our mistake, was indeed to confuse the Procedure Civil Code (Código DE Processo Civil) with the Civil Process Code (Código DO Processo Civil). One letter makes the entire difference and when we did click on the articles in question we found what we found.
Interesting that you didn’t provide any links initially. But it shows how indifferent we were to your challenge, as we will always be towards anyone who obsessively tries to prove the unprovable, tries to prove that red is blue, tries to make be what everyone can see is not.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIt’s clear that defamation is a crime in Portugal, and because it is a crime it is dealt with exclusively within the criminal justice sub-system of the overarching justice system. You can hold your breath as much as you like, that will not be altered. It’s totally your choice if you persist on making a fool of yourself.
You have now provided the links to the articles in question (by the way, you made a mistake in copying links and, unlike you, will not even attempt to say that it shows you can’t tell articles apart, as mistakes do happen to anyone).
https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621111/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
https://dre.pt/web/guest/legislacao-consolidada/-/lc/116819175/201811301650/73621112/diploma/indice?p_p_state=maximized
You have also provided a text without providing a link in your tweet. We found a version of this document here:
https://inforrm.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/mccanns-v-amaral-judgment.pdf
It seems you cut this out:
“O juízo de censura pessoal que ao réu Gonçalo Amaral pode ser dirigido parece evidente, tendo em conta o padrão do artº 487º, nº 2, do Código Civil, sendo particularmente acentuado pela forma como os eventos foram organizados cronologicamente –a divulgação do encerramento do inquérito em 21 de Julho de 2008, o lançamento do livro, a venda do mesmo e a publicação da entrevista no dia 24 seguinte.
O juízo de culpa também se revela do trecho do livro subordinado ao título “Burla ou abuso de confiança?”, onde a propósito das especulações próprias das hipóteses da investigação se alvitram outros crimes potencialmente praticados pelos autores Kate e Gerald MacCann, densificando-se a ofensa (nº 23).
Os danos deram-se na esfera destes últimos, que são os visados pelo livro, pela entrevista e pelo documentário.
Nenhum dos demais autores sofreu, a nosso ver, qualquer prejuízo directo com esses factos.”
Our translation:
“The judgement of personal censoring that may be directed to the defendant Gonçalo Amaral seems evident, considering the standards of article 487, nº2, of the Civil Code, being particularly accentuated by the way the events were organized chronologically - the disclosure of the closing of the investigation on July 21, 2008, the launch of the book, the sale of the book and the publication of the interview on the following 24th.
The judgment of guilt is also revealed in the excerpt of the book under the title “Fraud or abuse of trust?”, where, regarding the speculations inherent from the hypotheses of the investigation, other crimes potentially practiced by the authors Kate and Gerald MacCann are raised, becoming denser the offense (nº 23).
The damage occurred in the sphere of the latter, who are targeted by the book, the interview and by the documentary.
None of the various authors suffered, in our view, any direct damage from these facts.”
*****
Note there’s no single mention about defamation but it’s very clear that it is about defamation. In fact the document rules VERY CLEARLY that there is no defamation: “regarding the speculations inherent from the hypotheses of the investigation”. Yes, it’s speculation as there was no definite proof but these speculations are based on the INHERENT HYPOTHESES OF THE INVESTIGATION.
Speculations not proven to be true BUT not proven to be false and these speculations are, in accordance with the court INHERENT.
To note that the court says that the guilt of breaching Art 484 “seems evident, considering the standards of article 487, nº2, of the Civil Code”
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteWhat does article 487, nº2 say?
“Artigo 487.º
(Culpa)
1. É ao lesado que incumbe provar a culpa do autor da lesão, salvo havendo presunção legal de culpa.
2. A culpa é apreciada, na falta de outro critério legal, pela diligência de um bom pai de família, em face das circunstâncias de cada caso.”
Our translation:
“Article 487
(Guilt)
1. It is up to the injured party to prove the guilt of the perpetrator of the injury, unless there is a legal presumption of guilt.
2. Guilt is assessed, in the absence of any other legal criteria, by the diligence of a good family man, given the circumstances of each case.”
*****
“In the absence of any other legal criteria, by the diligence of a good family man, given the circumstances of each case”. We are certain the court had a hard time finding this one. But it did, it is in the law.
Now let’s see what articles 483 and 484 say:
Artigo 483.º
(Princípio geral)
1. Aquele que, com dolo ou mera culpa, violar ilìcitamente o direito de outrem ou qualquer disposição legal destinada a proteger interesses alheios fica obrigado a indemnizar o lesado pelos danos resultantes da violação.
2. Só existe obrigação de indemnizar independentemente de culpa nos casos especificados na lei.
Our translation:
“Article 483
(General principle)
1. Whoever, with intent or mere guilt, unlawfully violates the right of others or any legal provision designed to protect the interests of others, is obliged to compensate the injured party for the damages resulting from the violation.
2. There is only an obligation to indemnify regardless of guilt in the cases specified by law.”
“Artigo 484.º
(Ofensa do crédito ou do bom nome)
Quem afirmar ou difundir um facto capaz de prejudicar o crédito ou o bom nome de qualquer pessoa, singular ou colectiva, responde pelos danos causados.”
Our translation:
“Article 484
(Offense to the credit or good name)
Whoever affirms or disseminates a fact that could damage the credit or the good name of any person, natural or legal, is responsible for the damage caused.”
It doesn’t mention defamation. It does not mention falsehood. And it does say FACT.
If one damages another’s good name or credit, one must pay. From where that damage has originated, the law doesn’t say. We would say the example of spreading nude images falls clearly under this category and there’s absolutely no falsehoods involved in such disgusting cases.
If the damage originates from defamation, then we don’t think these articles apply as defamation is a crime and the terms of sentencing of a crime are not for civil courts, they are criminal courts.
We are certain sure blog readers will feel like they’re in the midst of something like an exchange between lawyers in court, referring to distinctions that only the legally qualified fully appreciate and as we have stated clearly, we are not legally qualified.
It’s all a million miles away from concerns about the fate of Maddie and will add nothing to finding out what happened to her. That’s your intention.
You are doing what your friend Walker in his many disguise does: engages with irrelevancies as to whether the fund was a charity, a registered charity, not a charity. Blah blah… as if that was important.
What is important is that there was no defamation in the process the McCanns made against Gonçalo Amaral in Portugal and that, also important, means they have legally and officially recognised that what he said in his book may be true.
This disp!ays such a fundamental misunderstanding of defamation that it is difficult to know where to start, but then you probably won't publish it anyway.
DeleteA finding that something is not defamation does not render it the truth. Where you appear to be getting confused is that truth is a defence to an accusation of defamation. Defamation has to include damage to reputation; a court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.
You weren't joking when you said you were not a legal expert, so it's probably best if you don't carry on as if you are.
Anonymous 😂😂😂😂 8 Feb 2020, 15:32:00,
Delete“A finding that something is not defamation does not render it the truth.”
FINDING that something is NOT defamation is not determining that is the truth? Seriously?
This disp!ays such a fundamental misunderstanding of English that it is difficult to know where to start…
FINDING something is defamation IS finding there is falsehood. FINDING that something is NOT defamation then it is FINDING that it is true. Being UNABLE to determine whether it was defamation or not, then it cannot BE DETERMINED if it’s true or false as it could be either. As your friend Jules says, capice?
“Where you appear to be getting confused…”
Appear? Really? You are not sure? You are not sure and then decide to insult based on a self-confessed uncertainty?
“…is that truth is a defence to an accusation of defamation”.
Really? Wow! And we were here thinking that the determination of what as truth and what wasn’t mattered nothing in an accusation of defamation! We were thinking that no one had to prove that the defamer was really defaming, it was just enough to walk into a court of law and point fingers and the finger-pointed would be immediately condemned to indemnify in the amount that would cross the finger-pointer’s mind just because of it. Thank you for enlightening all of us with such precious information that certainly no one else would be able to see it but you.
By the way is that how the courts work to rule on defamation in that deluded world that is your brain? Are you and Frog doing a show together?
“Defamation has to include damage to reputation”
Have you graduated from Frog’s school of the ridiculous?
“… a court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.”
Other than having nothing to do with the debate in question, you forgot to include the word “criminal” above. You should have said “… criminal court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true or not, the content did not defame the subject.”
If a Portuguese court was concluding anything about defamation, it HAD to be a criminal one. And that is the debate, we say that but the Frog attempts to prove that red is blue by implying that it can be also brought to a Portuguese civil court, when she knows it cannot.
The debate is not about whether Amaral has said was true or not but if the McCanns accused him of defamation. They did not. They used a civil court and that alone states very clearly that there was no defamation in the accusation.
A civil court can conclude that regardless of whether a statement is true, the content may damage the subject. The McCanns did not debate whether he was telling the truth, they argued that as they enjoyed the presumption of innocence, then what he said, irrelevant of being true or not, damaged them.
And talking about truth, please quote us where we have said in this debate that Gonçalo Amaral said the truth. What we have said was that the fact that the McCanns used the civil courts to sue him for damages was a recognition that what he had said was POSSIBLY true. Or to use our words “means they have legally and officially recognised that what he said in his book may be true.” You do understand what “may be true” means, don’t you?
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteWe didn’t say that we weren’t legal experts. We said that we weren’t legally qualified. There are people like us, who have no legal education, then there are those who are legally qualified, who have a degree in law and then there are the legal experts, who among those who are legally qualified stand out due to further education and specialization in their profession.
To say that a person cannot give an opinion about legal matters because one does not have legal qualifications is the as absurd as saying only mathematicians can do addition and only electricians can screw on lightbulbs.
On the other hand, you are not a qualified twat, you are an expert one. You rise above others.
Why wouldn’t we publish your comment? Why would we pass the chance of showing the utter fool you are?
Now, the question is… are you going to publish this in your blog?
Oh dear, what a tantrum!
DeleteLet's try to make it a bit easier for you to understand.
Let's imagine you are right-handed, but I described you in a book as left-handed.
Was what I said true?
No.
Was it defamation?
No, because there was no damage to your reputation.
So would a finding of Not Guilty of defamation render true that which was not true?
No.
See? It's actually very simple. The problem is, so are you.
Anonymous 😂😂😂😂 8 Feb 2020, 17:38:00,
DeleteTantrum? Do you know what the word “tantrum” means? Evidently you don’t. Let us help you:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tantrum
Definition of tantrum
: a fit of bad temper
Are you ok with the words “fit”, “bad” and “temper”? If not, please say with which you struggle and we’ll gladly help you.
Now let us give you the definition of “pleasure”:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pleasure
Definition of pleasure
(Entry 1 of 2)
1 : desire, inclination wait upon his pleasure— William Shakespeare
2 : a state of gratification
3a : sensual gratification
b : frivolous amusement
4 : a source of delight or joy
It’s with an enormous pleasure that we show what a fool you are. That is not a tantrum. The word “tantrum” that so frequently occurs on the Normalised Toilet blog….
And you can try as you have to pretend that you haven’t been shown the utter and absolute fool that you are but that fools no one.
One has to wonder if you were assigned by your team to, as the Portuguese say, “offer the body to the bullets”, to draw attention away from the Frog.
Using your example, what you would have said was a lie. You agreed to that. Note, it’s not you not knowing whether I’m right or left-handed and having gotten that wrong. That would be an understandable mistake, and mistakes don’t go to court.
Your example shows a clear and intentional lie.
As it was an intentional lie, it is a false statement, it is defamation, as you would have accused me of being something that I am not.
What you are arguing is whether said defamation would carry any weight in terms of damage. You make the inference that it would not. However, the fact that you infer doesn’t mean that what you had said was defamation, as it was: a false statement with intent.
In normal circumstances, we agree that it wouldn’t carry any weight.
But imagine that said statement was made in a context in which it was important to me to be known as right-handed and you accusing me of being left-handed would be taken by those reading you that I was a hypocrite.
In that case, I could really take offense to such defamation and if I was able to convince a court of law that I had suffered damages worth compensation, you would be sentenced to pay. Why? Because you defamed. You lied.
During the stage of determining of whether what you had said was true or a lie, the court would determine it to be a lie.
It's would be up to the court to conclude if it carried sufficient damage to my reputation worth condemning. It would not up to you and your inference, nor up to me and my perception of offended reputation.
The defamation would be debated in a CRIMINAL court and that would only happen because you had lied.
If that same court would determine that what you had said was true, not even with the best lawyers in the world I would be able to squeeze a cent out of you.
We didn’t say if what Gonçalo Amaral said was true or not. And all this is irrelevant as it wasn’t defamation. We have only replied because of the pleasure we have in showing the fool you are. For that, we thank you.
Now, you are doing what we have already accused your gang of doing: an endless, irrelevant argument, to tie people up in pointless argument.
That said, you are notified that you’ll have to conduct any further arguments on your own blog.
Does any of the gang want to agree with this comment publicly?
Ah I get it - you think I'm NT?
DeleteAfraid I'm going to have to disappoint you. As usual, you are wrong. But you are probably used to that.
Well, I have tried to help you understand what defamation is, but you seem determined to cling to your fallacy. I suppose that is understandable, you never have been able to cope with the truth. Have you, Mario?
Anonymous 😂😂😂😂 8 Feb 2020, 22:01:00,
DeleteYou only get it now? You are becoming slower and slower, especially for someone who thinks he can explain to others the meaning of simple words…
You say you’re not the person we say you are. Don’t know how many times we’ve been here before, so we’ll let readers judge on whether they think we are wrong or if they think you are the Mr Wonderful who being caught out, pretending to not be who he is, very lamely it must be said.
You do know how tickled pink we are to see YOU feeling to have the need to resort to “Mario”, right? 😂😂😂😂😂
It shows that the one throwing a tantrum, or having a real bad episode of “a fit of bad temper” is you. 😂😂😂😂😂
It reminds all who read us from where you got that information, Mr Bridget. Is Bridget wrong? It can’t be, the source is the same, isn’t it? 😂😂😂😂😂
The issue had died down, but it’s you who are insisting on bringing it up!
About what really is being debated:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/07/goncalo-amaral-on-mistakes-made-by.html
It was not a libel trial. It was a civil court damages claim.
Do you disagree with Amaral’s statement?
Why would anyone be so concerned about ‘teaching’ you something and in such a supercilious way? An honest reader would discuss the matter if they believed they knew better.
DeleteAnon (NT) is making a mockery (as has Frog) of Maddie’s death.
DeleteThey’re using her coffin as a soap box.
Textusa
DeleteYou need to understand the difference between prosecuting someone for defamation & suing someone for defamtion in Portugal. A criminal prosecution is backed by the State, who have the power to convict a person found guilty of defamation. A civil lawsuit is an exchange between the plaintiff & the defendant where both parties commence as equals in legal status.
Here's some bedtime reading for you involving defamation cases in Portugal-one link provided, you can google the rest. Let's see if you can find any mention of criminal defamation.
Alvaro Sobrinho v Impressa (later dropped)
José Manuel Fernandes v Noronha de Nascimento.
Pias Pires de Lima v Portugal,
http://sousamendesfoundation.org/initial-victory-for-family-of-aristides-de-sousa-mendes-in-anti-defamation-lawsuit/
I must add that I think it would do your credibility a world of good if you concentrated on the content of my posts rather than pondering who I may be conspiring with. (Clue - I speak privately with more than zero but less than 2 members of "the gang". You should be able to do the maths)
Frog,
DeleteTo sue for defamation one has to FIRST prove that said defamation has indeed existed and that can only be done via prosecution in a criminal court.
One cannot sue for defamation based solely on the possibility that there may be have been defamation.
However, one can sue for damages against truthful statements made against oneself. That is clearly stated in the STJ’s acórdão (our caps):
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/Supreme_Court_31_01_2017.htm
“In this regard Pires de Lima and Antunes Varela teach that "whether, by natural or legal persons, a subjective right to credit and good name exists or not, a conduct threatening to cause them harm, in the prescribed terms, is considered as expressly anti-juridical. NEVER MIND THAT THE STATED OR DISCLOSED FACT CORRESPONDS TO THE TRUTH OR NOT, as long as it likely can, given the circumstances of the case, reduce the confidence in the ability and willingness of the person to fulfil their obligations (loss of credit) or shake the prestige that the person enjoys or the good image the person has (loss of good name) in the social environment in which the person lives or carries on their business" annotated CC,, Vol . I, Coimbra Editora, p. 486].”
We suggest that you read again the legal arguments presented by the SCJ and why it’s most likely the McCanns won’t succeed in the ECHR. Clues.
What balance is given to freedom of speech by the EHCR as compared to the Portuguese courts? Have a look at cases quoted by the SCJ.
All for your bedtime reading.
Glad you confirmed you talk with one of the gang. That means your words are shared, as nothing is sacred between them.
Now, you seem to think that all is a game including physical threats and disgusting remarks made about a girl. We remind what the person with whom you interacted with said this:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1219003942413197313
“Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
So Textuser’s daughter was caught by Short Arse himself slutting it in the back streets of Lisbon with the boys + the crafty wench quickly tried to blame her predicament on #McCann supporters following her.And he fell for it.Y else would she be in a dirty dog shit stained alley?
9:09 PM - 19 Jan 2020”
Don’t know if you have a daughter, if you do then how would you react to such words? One doesn’t need to have a daughter to understand the ignominy of this.
This was the tweet you replied to:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1225590670473207809
“Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Coward Textuser (Mario Santos, immigrant living near Lisbon) only publishes what he wishes. His kiddie blog carries zero weight and zero credibility. It’s regarded as a joke. #mccann
1:22 AM - 7 Feb 2020”
A tweet liked by your friend Jules who is someone who has publicly alleged that we have invented the whole stalking.
You had absolutely no problem with interacting with this. It is, of course, your right and we respect that but it is also our right not to interact with people like you or him.
Like Anne Guedes, you have lost your right to comment again on the blog.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1226670589814956034
DeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6
Been banned from his blog; never been banned from anywhere before. I'm now in a deep, deep, depression & it's all your fault.
😭😭😭
12:53 AM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1226673050126618625
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @FragrantFrog
He’s such a pious Arsehole. Chip on his lowered shoulder because he comes from the Portuguese underclass. Goes on about his own daughter (caught giving finger pie, in a dog shit stained alley) but, is Kate #mccann not someone’s daughter and his slurs on her are disgusting.
1:03 AM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
This says more about these people and says nothing about us.
We are glad to see this friendship in the open, as it makes the mask fall and all can see what an act it is to try to convince that she is the most reasonable face of the McCann defenders.
Note how she deliberately ignored what we quoted from SCJ re damages even if what was said was true.
What she has avoided is the fact that under Portuguese law, it’s possible to take action for damage to reputation and good name in a civil court, even when the alleged damage is caused by way of information which may or may not be true.
In that case, there was no requirement to prove what Gonçalo Amaral said was false and no need to pursue him in a criminal court, which would have required them to give evidence in person. With this tactic they didn’t need to expose themselves to scrutiny in criminal court proceedings.
They challenged his duty of reserve; not to reveal details of an investigation, even though he had retired and the book was published after the case was archived. They never said he lied in court.
They claimed they had suffered distress although no independent experts were able to give evidence which proved distress arose from anything Gonçalo Amaral had done but they never said he defamed them in court.
They claimed the search for Maddie could be harmed by Gonçalo Amaral actions, if people believed Maddie was dead. They never said in court that people should not believe him because he lied.
Nothing shouts defamation more in a court of law than never mentioning it while in it.
Interesting to see that no one from the gang comes in defence of what Gonçalo Amaral has said against what Frog wrongly claims.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1226795830075510784
Delete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Could you be a love and break down in one paragraph what Mario is going on with.. I only skimmed it and it still took me 3 hours..
9:11 AM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1227012285065023488
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx
Tex has rewritten Portuguese law on defamation cases...apparently you can only sue someone for libel damages if the defamer has been convicted by the criminal courts - and you can also claim damages when someone makes a true statement about you if it causes offence.
11:31 PM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
Donald Trump has a new rival in defining what is reality. It matters not what the law says, it doesn’t matter what the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court says, it doesn’t matter what jurists quoted by the STJ says, the Portuguese law is what the Frog says it is.
The Frog knows we have never said this: “apparently you can only sue someone for libel damages if the defamer has been convicted by the criminal courts”.
What we have said is that to get paid damages for libel, that libel has to be proven. Not first prove and then sue. The process to prove a libel is within the suing process. With a suing process, one basically TRIES to sue someone by CLAIMING there was libel. Analysing that claiming and after hearing all parties involved, the CRIMINAL court, because libel is a crime, will then decide if there was libel or not.
If the CRIMINAL court decides there was, the libel is proven. Then, the same court will decide what, if any, compensation will be given to the offended party.
If the CRIMINAL court decides there was not, it will be proven there was no libel. No compensation is due.
Frog’s tweet was liked by Frog’s Walker, but oddly enough not liked by her other friend, Jules who she has replied to. Not yet at least. Will be very curious to see if Jules, the so-called anti, does like this tweet.
Jules is one of 4 people we love to see use “Mario”. Really LOVE! 😂😂😂😂😂
By the way Jules, we are still waiting for the BRT pics.
Jules has now liked Frog’s tweet. She couldn’t resist it! So, so predictable. 😝😝😝😝
DeleteTheir close relationship and Jules desire to align with Frog’s arguments, detrimental to Gonçalo Amaral’s position, is now made abundantly clear.
Apparently, besides the blog and just to cite those quoted or involved in the McCann v Amaral process, Gonçalo Amaral, the illustrious lawyers Pires de Lima and Antunes Varela and the judges of the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court, it seems there’s someone else who according to Frog doesn’t understand Portuguese Law: Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro.
DeleteOur caps:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/07/palacio-de-justica-8th-of-july-2014.html
“Gerald McCann - Can I make a statement?
Judge - The statements in the Portuguese court system, unlike in England where people can give extemporaneous statements [see VPS], are the declarations, which consist on a series of questions put by the lawyers and judge and by the answers of the deponent, which you just gave. You can say something but it won't have any legal validity, nevertheless it will still be recorded.
Gerald McCann - I want to speak about the sniffer dogs. They never alerted to any blood in the car and they never alerted to cadaver odour...
Judge - [interrupts] We are not here to ascertain that, our perspective here in this court is to analyse your claim.
Gerald McCann - But the book states that as a fact!
Judge - To decide that there are already forensic experts. WE ARE NOT HERE TO PROVE IF THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOK ARE TRUTHFUL OR NOT. Here we are only trying to establish if the freedom of expression of the defendants has affected the rights of the claimants. This court cannot be a substitute of the criminal investigation. [Turns to the interpreter] Tell the gentleman that he is excused.”
*****
Does the Frog think that Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro got her qualifications to be a judge from a packet of Amparo flour?
She must.
Frog’s Portuguese friends, true Migueis de Vasconcelo e Brito, will certainly explain this joke to her.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_Vasconcelos
Thanks for keeping on top of these crucial matters. Apart from a few token tweets here and there, the leading "big antis" are not interested in discussing this area of the McCann debate.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of "big antis", apart from Isabelle McFadden attacking strackers74 and Not Ben attacking people who his gang says are Tony Rickwood and Michael Wright, where are they? Hiding from police and pretending they were never in Not Ben's gang?
McCanns' last hope is the ECHR to keep their lies from mainstream publications. Let's hope that the future is in favour of the truth that should be known about the death of the child.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/umweltbuerger/status/1226799773300203521
DeleteMari Welzel @umweltbuerger
Textusa's blog a great help pointing to the #mccann & co lies; if the swinging is not a bother for T9 why t endless protest?
"McCanns' last hope is the ECHR to keep their lies from mainstream publications. Let's hope that the future is in favour of the truth that should be known"
9:27 AM - 10 Feb 2020
*****
Thank you Mari!
Hello Textusa Sisters, You are much appreciated and most welcome.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to experience the unfolding of this case. No one could predict the many ways in which they have tried to get the lies to stick. It would indeed be entertaining but we have here the death of a child.
It is good to read your posts.
Kind Regards,
Mari
DNP identified reader at at 11 Feb 2020, 12:03:00,
ReplyDeleteWe acknowledge receiving your 2 DNP comments.
As long as you sign your comments and unless you state clearly that it is to be published, we won't publish any of them.
Hope this helps.
Unpublished Anonymous at 11 Feb 2020, 13:07:00,
DeleteWe are supposing that you are the same person who left the other 2 DNP comments, for that reason, even though you did not sign the comment and your words were really kind to us, we've decided not to publish your comments.
We ask you to please sign all the comments that you don't want to see published :)
DNP identified reader,
DeleteWe have received your comments and read them attentively. As you know, we disagree with you. Respect your opinion and respectfully disagree with it.
The exact same conviction you clearly show you have with your theory, is the one we also have with ours.
However, we have the advantage of being 3 and of having debated every detail between ourselves in an absolutely free-speaking environment where all are not afraid to truly speak their minds.
Then we have the advantage of debating with our valuable readers. Thanks to them we have often corrected our opinions.
Lastly we’ve the scrutiny of the evil. Ironically, this vicious, relentless and obsessive scrutiny by those who are not interested that the truth behind the events surfaces, is what validates our theory.
Every theory must be challenged to be valid and our readers know how much we have been challenged.
That said, and hoping you understand, although we are grateful for your input, we see no reason to alter our opinion.
Thank you, once again.
Ben Thompson's hatred of 'pikeys' and 'scousers' is now rubbing off on KLS. What does a 'scouser' look like to her? Constant bitching about the length of neck and heights has already put people off tweeting on the McCann case, and being derogatory about Liverpudlians could do the same. Will she start calling people 'spaz' and 'mong' like Ponce of Dubai does next, and alienate people with disabilities and disability in their families?
ReplyDeleteKaren Lowe Sanders
@EricaCantona7
Replying to
@lisjt90
@russell_vine
and 2 others
It's a shame I can't dictate because you clearly aren't worthy of a Club like ours? Are you sure you aren't a Scouser? You look like one ��
10:06 AM · Feb 14, 2020·
I understood that the word Scouser was a derogatory term for a person who lived in Slough.
DeleteI stand to be corrected thou.
Anonymous 15 Feb 2020, 11:40:00,
DeleteScouser is an informal word to describe a person from Liverpool, nothing to do with Slough.
It’s not a derogatory term as many Liverpudlians refer to themselves as Scousers.
Hope this clarifies you. Thank you for your comment.
https://ipi.media/portuguese-defamation-laws-still-reflect-authoritarian-concept-of-power-expert-says/
ReplyDeleteInteresting as it distinguishes between criminal and civil, and the fact damages can be sought in latter, whether what was said was true or not.
Also no cap on non pecuniary damage claims in civil cases. , which makes it more threatening than criminal claim, as that’s not likely to result in prison term anyway.
Anonymous 16 Feb 2020, 20:36:00,
DeleteThank you! :)))))
@ Anonymous15 Feb 2020, 11:40:00
ReplyDeleteMany people from Liverpool are proud to call themselves scousers and don't see it as derogatory. However, Karen Lowe Sanders uses the term because she sees scousers as an inferior breed of human. In much the same way as the rest of the gang call someone a pikey, spaz or mong etc. They use these words in public, but use worse in private. Recent bitching within the gang about one of their members using Munchausen's by proxy to exploit their own child as an excuse to get out of going to work and instead look after the child full time, has shown various other prejudices, and left one or two of them feeling under threat that their own private lives could easily be under discussion and questioned elsewhere.
A Twitter search for Tweets from @ericacantona7 shows no results. She has probably got a serious shadow ban for her insidious racism .. there is no-one that Karen doesn't consider herself superior to. Also don't forget that this is the woman who has on several occasions praised Enoch Powell on Twitter.
ReplyDeleteJim Gamble is one of the worst trolls we've ever seen on twitter. His open delight over Brenda Leyland being stalked and harassed outside her own home was sickening. He knows that Sky exposing where she lived could have led dangerous people to go to her home and do more than threaten her. None of us know how unsafe Brenda felt after Martin Brunt exposed her street and home. This may have been the reason why she went to stay at a hotel. We know the police did not conduct any investigation into why she was being stalked, or the people who were stalking her on facebook and twitter before Martin Brunt too over as leader.
ReplyDeleteJim Gamble is not only a hypocrite, but a cruel and sickening excuse for a man to have sent congratulations to Martin Brunt for leaving Brenda in so much fear, that she felt suicidal and forced to leave her own home.
Jim Gamble
@JimGamble_INEQE
·
Feb 15
Let the hypocrisy begin. Those who bully & berate, those who hide behind the anonymity of the internet to troll people they disagree with, who are unwell & or hv made mistakes. These trolls either disappear or hide behind virtue signalling when it all goes wrong.
Whispering
@Anvil161Anvil16
·
Feb 16
You applauded the hounding of a woman who then went on to take her own life! Hypocrite.
That was a hoax! A simple title search will prove that. Brenda was an example of what the old, wrinkly, shrivelled up power would do if the truth was further clarified and disseminated.
DeleteThe wizard really did operate the filming apparatus from behind the magic curtain. And it did cause irreparable damage to some innocent yet
understandably curious people, just like some, more spineless members of the wider imbecilic cover-up project imagined.
As for the sneering, non-experienced, academically unqualified 'child protection' aficionado, there's only one place left for him, and that's in the dock, faced with the truth & stored in a place where only him & his ilk belong.
Some of us, these days, now have the ammunition to fight our own battles, & in short, the truth won't lie unceremoniously buried forever, circumstances change and collective cowardice doesn't give a fleeting damn about the reputations of no mark former BRITISH police officers.
You know the type, the type that haven't grown an evolutionary humane inch since the day they started. Whatever they've gained can be lost as quickly as it was made, that lesson they have yet to learn, not just Gamble and co, but every script reciting, lying, perverting the course of justice, last one of them....
Indeed, ALL OF THEM, no exceptions!
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1229900760462381058
ReplyDeleteBourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews
Replying to @Michael80282175 @Natalie01016290 and 48 others
The #McCann parents believed they could see the patio door from TAPAS, but you knew http://that.you just want to criticize them because you think it not possible. But it's why they believed the abductor you and other guilt mongers don't believe existed used it to enter 5A
10:49 PM - 18 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229901368917471243
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Michael80282175 and 48 others
Their table was behind the heavily tinted plastic screen and the arrow points to their apartment.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERF8xe2XUAMyKbs.jpg
10:51 PM - 18 Feb 2020
[Photo attached is one in which includes the 2 photos from Amaral´s book showing the esplanade where he signals the table allegedly used by the T9. In this image that table is circled]
*****
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1229901735289851905
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @AnnaEsse @BourgeoisViews and 48 others
That's not their table.
10:53 PM - 18 Feb 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229902943211659265
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @BourgeoisViews and 48 others
And your proof is? Show us the table they sat at then.
10:58 PM - 18 Feb 2020
*****
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Glad to see that Walker, a pro, acknowledges that the table signalled by Amaral is NOT the BRT.
We would like to ask AnnaEsse – who we have repeatedly asked questions but she pretends she doesn’t read us – if she thinks 9 people dined at the table she circled. We would be curious to know her opinion.
If she doesn’t think 9 people dined around that little thing, one, does she agree that GA got it wrong (his objective with these pics was to demonstrate the lack of visibility of 5A from the esplanade and not to show THE table), and if she agrees that he got it wrong, then where does she think they ate those alleged dinners?
Besides that, does AnnaEsse believe guests queued early in the morning to be able to dine at the dump shown by Amaral’s picture?
“And your proof is? Show us the table they sat at then”. Don’t ask only Walker. Ask Jules as well. Jules has publicly said she has pictures of THAT table.
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1229901368917471243
DeleteAnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Michael80282175 and 48 others
Their table was behind the heavily tinted plastic screen and the arrow points to their apartment.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERF8xe2XUAMyKbs.jpg
10:51 PM - 18 Feb 2020
[Photo attached is one in which includes the 2 photos from Amaral´s book showing the esplanade where he signals the table allegedly used by the T9. In this image that table is circled]
*****
https://twitter.com/BourgeoisViews/status/1230078359817859074
BourgeoisViews @BourgeoisViews
Replying to @AnnaEsse @Michael80282175 and 48 others
How could that be the table the TAPAS 9 gathered around? It doesn't look big enough for four.
10:35 AM - 19 Feb 2020
[😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 and 1,000 more laughing loud emojis, pity there aren’t any large enough to show how much we laughed when we saw this!!!]
*****
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1230079582457548801
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @AnnaEsse and 48 others
It’s just some random stock footage. As she well knows.
10:40 AM - 19 Feb 2020
*****
The photos appear to be those taken by Jacques Lange for Paris Match on September 21 2007. They were part of a series he took that week.
GA doesn’t give photo credits in his book but probably bought the right to use the photos, as anybody can.
Would the wealthy Edmonds queue to eat here with his 3 boys?
Why would there be 2 quiz nights with so few customers on the reservation lists?
Waiting for the replies from AnnaEsse.
Yes, it’s stock footage but would GA publish them if they did not represent exactly what he had seen the esplanade to be? Of course he wouldn’t.
No, it’s hardly big enough for 4, with meals and wine. Not just snacks.
HAVING A BLAST SEEING PROS AGREEING WITH US!!! And seeing antis becoming “pros” to get out of this one…
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Please, could someone ask Jules to publish the pics of THE BRT, she has them (or so she says)!!!
Fully identified DNP reader at 20 Feb 2020, 21:26:00,
ReplyDeleteWe are rather busy with real life issues at the moment, so for now we will just acknowledge to have received your comment.
Will hopefully reply fully soon but we imagine that you realise that we will not be able to speak about many of the issues you brought up, because if we did you would be easily recognised.
Thank you for understanding.
Why so sweet? Don't hold back. Say what you really think, and then prove it. Prove it in the same way it can be proved Madeleine is not missing.
ReplyDeleteThat kind of proving it.
Anonymous 21 Feb 2020, 12:46:00,
ReplyDeleteWhen you sober up from whatever toxic substance you have submitted your brain to, you will realise that you are one that “is easily recognised”. In your case, it is really easy.
We get quite a few direct messages but if people choose to make a DNP comment, that’s their choice.
Your motormouth has labelled DNP a lunatic without being aware of what was written.
Before we deal with the latest about the BRT, we would like to ask this from these 2 people:
ReplyDelete#1
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1230461376650502146
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @BourgeoisViews and 48 others
I've not seen any pre May 2007, but why would we..? The one thing I know for sure is that there was a #BRT in the Tapas on the 4th May 2007, also that it was still there in September 2007, and probably was until it changed into a pizza place..
11:57 AM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
Could Jules be a darling and show us all the proof that the BRT “was still there in SEPTEMBER 2007” (our caps)? TIA
----------------
#2
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230489047392563201
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MichaelaTrotte6 and 48 others
Simple point re BRT. The T9 group had gone to give statements on 4/5 so if the BRT was allegedly only delivered 4/5, how did T9 know they could say it was there/they sat at it night before? And how did Tapas Bar staff know T9 would say it was there on 3/5 & need to get one in?
1:47 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
Could JBLittlemore be a darling and show the quotes from the T9 statements from May 4 where they say they ate around a BIG ROUND TABLE? TIA
Brunty's depiction of the BRT was the best by far. I'm still LMAO over the primary school level of editing and visual brainwashing involved in his provable role in the strategically contrived and crudely enacted missing deception through the medium of fake art and phoney journalism.
ReplyDeleteNone of them are anywhere near as smart as they like to think they are and multi-billionaires are a dime a dozen these days; there's always someone richer and more powerful than you.
Last year Netflix spent £20 million on another rehash of the official story.
That. Was. a. Lie. How much is the truth worth?
The truth is priceless (in this never-ending litany of lies), for Madeleine. In amongst all this, a tiny child, not quite 4, is buried behind innuendo, cover ups, deceit and childish debate and seems to have been pushed into the background and forgotten. Why are there no more up-to-date progressive photos Of her ? Why has Perlin never been formally thanked for his generous free Offer and the Offer taken up. Why no follow up on the dogs' findings? so Anonymous in answer to your question "How much is the truth worth" ? TO Madeleine it would be priceless.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-police-quiz-british-21556263
ReplyDeleteAccording to Mr Bennett’s FOI request, OG visited 3 times not 5 in 2019, April, July and October.
OG could not interview witnesses in Portugal unless they used the European Investigation Order, which would require the PJ, on their behalf, to ask the questions.
The questioning would have to be conducted according to Portuguese law.
The blog has dealt with the EIO in previous posts.
This is the UK media doing a Jules. Jules pretends there was a BRT knowing full well there wasn’t but shamelessly denying the obvious by continuing to say there was. Likewise, the UK media pretends there was an abduction knowing full well there wasn’t but shamelessly denying the obvious by continuing to say there was.
Besides being pathetic, it’s boring.
Comment censored that we have received:
ReplyDeleteAnonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Nobody, not one single person should be prosecuted for reacting badly, or some would argue, normally, because of the shock of an accidental fatality. That's for sure, but there's other aspects of the wider trickle-down illusion which have impacted on people in the utmost shabby of fashions.
Then there's also the fund. That's going to be a difficult tale to tell because there's no getting around the fact that what they've done is no less than fraud.
I can actually understand the initial fear and concealment part of this but the money smash-and-grab aspect of it and harming the public in other ways, I just don't get.
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 23 Feb 2020, 05:42:00
*****
The reason of censoring: pushing a theory Anonymous knows we don’t agree with, that we have told him/her repeatedly that we would not publish in the blog.
The rest of the comment, we found it pertinent, reason why we are publishing it.
With the greatest of respect to your commitment, analysis and hard work Textusa and team, Kate already confirmed it back when she did her bike ride. You probably weren't paying attention, why should you have? But I'm not here to argue and I'm not here to be right.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, me being right about one crucial aspect of the case doesn't make you wrong. It all meshes together just perfectly if you think about it, and besides, I can feel it in my bones that Madeleine ended up there, just like Debbie said.
Thanks for publishing what you did anyway.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230621264563376130
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @SandyWilson_1
The table in Tapas Bar was round & even if it wasn't, the likes of Carla & a certain blog present the argument that there was not big table as they don't believe the T9 ever ate there. That waiting staff are lying to cover for them/swinging - because there was no group dining etc
10:32 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
“& even if it wasn't”??? Really???
The importance of this statement is that JBLIttlemore is one of the VERY FEW who have seen the pictures of the BRT that Jules says she has!
After his blunders of hypothesising that the BRT was made up of 5 small round tables and saying that he had been in that particular esplanade in the Spring and Autumn (so should know there was a BRT by looking at it like I did when I saw the octagonal table that is there now), Jules sent him via DM the “proof” of the BRT.
And now he says “& even if it wasn't”???
It’s as if he NEVER saw any BRT, not when he was there in the esplanade nor when Jules (allegedly) “showed” it to him…
So easy to catch liars.
The rest of JBLIttlemore’s words speak for themselves. If there was no table, means that the dinners during the week are lies, and if they are lies, then not only the T9 lied about them.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1230630166638080001
DeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @SandyWilson_1
A theory based on an assertion that some think the T9 group didn't dine at Tapas Bar because there's no proof there was a big round table there - so that confirms swinging?! - is indeed, on that basis alone, potentially fit only for the bin.
11:07 PM - 20 Feb 2020
*****
JBLittlemore,
Please quote us where we have said that the lack of the BRT means swinging. TIA.
As we said above, it proves that the T9 and the Ocean Club staff (the Tapas and those who say made the reservation) and guests have lied.
That is ALL it proves.
Now, we suggest that this lying is because of they wanted to protect the reputation of the swingers present for the VIP swinging event that took place that week in Praia da Luz and its vicinity.
We have detailed why we think that. You may not agree with us, and that is fine.
However, if you don’t agree with us, then you must tell us all what was the reason why the people involved in the lie above did lie. We will be waiting.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/25/cyril-smith-accuser-calls-for-david-steel-to-be-stripped-of-peerage
ReplyDeleteMealy mouthed apology from Steel. It was a nauseating non-apology.
The McCanns will always be associated with him, unfortunately for them.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/01/mccanns-trying-to-move-forward-at.html?m=1
DeleteNot only at Musselburgh races, but at their gathering here too.
The McCanns, for whatever reason, chose a very strange way to live their lives. Surely they're not still stubborn enough to carry on shovelling their abduction paedophile baloney down our throats in 2020.
ReplyDeleteWho is behind these latest finger-pointing newspaper stories? Is it them? Or is it the press themselves who are actually participating in playing this disrespectful filthy game?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50BUWyWovfU&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR1LGLKWKAsKjXtncjUd6BntpEBUC-KgxNNKpsMzW8B5WNwJQT_1aqTkCPo
ReplyDeleteLord Spencer,
DeleteWe don’t know who Wedger’s source is and we haven’t given a link to his interviews before because we don’t share his views on sedation, or other cases apart from Maddie, where he has given his opinions.
We haven’t studied Wedger’s claims on various cases in any detail and don’t want to express any opinion, preferring to let readers judge for themselves.
He is on record here as claiming to have a source for his statement that the McCanns were swingers. So he is either telling the truth and his source is reliable, he’s telling the truth but his source is not reliable or he is not telling the truth.
He could have invented the whole source story and just decided he’d say they were swingers because he’d heard the theory elsewhere - as it’s nothing new - namely us, or someone quoting us.
If his source was close to the investigation or knew what was happening in PdL, then it could be reliable. Or the source could just be passing on second hand info, which may or may not have been reliable
However, it’s fans of Wedger who have to decide whether they believe him about his source. If they don’t believe this, then they can’t believe anything he says.
From a friend from FB:
Delete"Just been on your blog for a catch up and seen someone has told you about the video interview. One thing that is missing now from the post is the original comments from someone saying it was common knowledge about the lot of them being swingers and that was the reason for the holiday. He named the clubs they frequented even after they changed names and the locations, he said the information is freely available to military personnel on one of their websites. I've read exactly the same thing stated elsewhere a while back. This makes me think either the public are been directed purposely again, or maybe just maybe we may get to the truth, especially as they've chose to ignore instead of jumping on it have the admins."
Textusa, are you seeing more clearly now from an external perspective how incredibly stitched up and corrupt our good old British system actually is and who's really in charge?
ReplyDeleteIt's the underground of undergrounds, it was like this when I was a child, although more class-ridden then, then I left for twenty years and experienced a totally different and far more meritocratic system.
After that I returned, expecting people would have grown exponentially and moved on, but what I've realised primarily due to the McCann scam and all its parasitic tendrils, is that Britain, and more specifically, jolly old England, is still the slaves whipping the slaves debauched little cesspit that it ever was.
Britain is not a truly FREE and democratic society, that little pile of disturbing old nonsense, is as real and verifiable as Madeleine's shamefully absurd missing status.
Dearest mother nature, please help us all, nothing else in this kindergarten of a sinking, globally inconsequential little cesspit of an island, works.
What I know with total confidence is this: all of them are group consisting of a set of individuals who are absolute spineless cowards.
They only ever had their greatest strength in numbers when they were hustling like street corner vendors from the safety of their film set headquarters in Praia da Luz.
That was a hoax too! Just like the fake family holiday. Anyone with a sliver of sense knows THEY, all of them, were there for an all together different reason than that.
Swing low sweet chariot *cough* and all the rest of their blithering, fantastical, voluminous, entirely untrue, scripted and utterly contrived..jazz!
Peace and joy to all those kno*heads who really need it, you know who you are and so DO WE! Watch this space, because ALL of you have left yourselves wide open from a civil legal standpoint at the very least.
Fraud, at a bare minimum, is not a joke, and your 'professional' status don't mean diddly in a court of law, out of compliant jurisdictions such as, in this instance, valueless (in the grand scheme of things)..LEICESTER.
Watch this space because the truth will find its way to the surface when the time is right, it will not, I repeat, will not, stay BURIED (in plain sight) forever..
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1232779795764785152
ReplyDeleteMichaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Interesting that 2of Textuser’s team that doxed,groomed and exploited a child to score points against the child’s mother have both had their accounts shut down.Police don’t take kindly to this nor companies that host blogs that endorse child abuse.This matter isn’t over. #mccann
9:29 PM - 26 Feb 2020
Tweet liked by:
julie colson @justjulescolson
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
****
When idiots are… idiots. Thick as thick can be.
The scamming mother and daughter team only wish this issue would go away. Be dead and buried.
It isn’t us who keeps bringing this up time and time again. It’s one of the gang, so any complaints should be addressed directly to this moron.
With friends like this, who needs enemies??
And BRC, helping to stoke this fire, liked this tweet! 😂😂😂😂😂
Oh, if there’s any response, please don’t forget to use “Mario”.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11047514/madeleine-mccann-cops-cash-12m/amp/
ReplyDeleteMADDIE HOPE
Madeleine McCann cops request more cash for £12m hunt as parents hail ‘iron will determination’ to find her
By Tracey Kandohla and Ellie Cambridge
26th February 2020, 5:02 pm
MADELEINE McCann cops have requested more cash in their £12million hunt – as her parents hail their “iron will determination” to find her.
Detectives have put a bid into the Home Office for more money when their current tax payer-funded handout runs out in four weeks.
Around £12million has been spent on the investigation by UK authorities – with £300k last awarded to the team in June last year.
Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “It is good news that the Met Police are seeking a new budget to continue the search for Madeleine.
“Kate and Gerry are greatly encouraged that officers still believe there is active work left to be done and do hope that the Home Office grants their request.
“Whilst an active investigation is ongoing it gives them hope that one day they will find out what happened to Madeleine after all these years.
“The Met has a iron will determination to find the answers Kate and Gerry so desperately want.”
Madeleine vanished from her holiday flat in Portugal on May 3, 2007, while her parents dined in a nearby restaurant.
She had been left sleeping alone with her younger twin siblings with regular checks being made on them.
Today a Home Office spokesperson told The Sun Online: “We have received details of the Metropolitan Police Service’s anticipated spending for Operation Grange in 2020/21.
“Requests for funding will be considered in due course, in line with our standard Special Grant process.”
CLINGING TO HOPE
Doctor Gerry and ex-GP Kate, both 51, from Rothley, Leics, are still hopeful their daughter could be alive. She would now be aged 16, nearly 17.
The latest Government handout for the investigation, which has been controversial with calls for it to be shelved after failing to unearth any significant new clues, lasts until the end of March.
It comes days after cops quizzed a British barmaid in Portugal over her German ex-boyfriend.
Carol Hickman, 59, was asked about Michael Jehle, 51, who previously lived in Praia da Luz where three-year-old Maddie vanished.
There is no suggestion that Mr Jehle or his former partner are considered suspects.
Mr Mitchell, speaking exclusively to The Sun Online, said: “It is as much about Scotland Yard ruling people out rather than ruling them in. Interviews are only taking place that are necessary.”
The Metropolitan Police declined to make any comment on their new funding request in the hunt for Maddie.
Maddie’s great uncle Brian Kennedy previously told how the family “still had hope even after all these years”.
The retired head teacher, 80, speaking at the 12th anniversary prayers in May last year, said: “We’re just grateful that police are still searching. It gives us hope.”
Met Police chief Cressida Dick also stated: “We have active lines of inquiries and I think the public would expect us to see those through.
“A very small team continues to work on this case with Portuguese colleagues .”
Iron will says the spinner of wild fantasies and blatant lies. No, I don't think so somehow, if they can't solve this simple domestic accident then they are either stupid, incompetent or in effect, a bunch of crooked lying thieves.
DeleteIt's not their money they're recklessly squandering, it's ours.
Go to the McCanns for your answers you complete bunch of buck eejits, you won't find her in Portugal, Spain, the U.S. or for crying out loud, flaming India!!!!
Where do control freaks [hi Gerry!] hide things, eh? Right under everyone's noses and where they can keep a 24/7 eye on them, that's where.
It'S BEYOND CLASSIC, isn't it, Tracey K and *$$$$* co.? and co.? and co.? And on and on and on etc. etc. etc....
Theresa Talktothemselves
I think I forgot my dots, sorry, it's late, I'm not happy and this case has made me ill. It was psychologically abusive as well as every other assault on the senses. That was a hoax put the top hat on it for me.
DeleteJust saying, they are shrivelling cowards hiding behind falling numbers in a dying and dead tree industry. They are selling the lowest common denominator to their equally clueless, hopelessly brainwashed, humanly soiled, unashamedly tarnished and crystal clear mirror image of themselves. That's all..
Theresa Talktothemselves;)
Leaving Madeleine 'displaced' for all this time is quite disturbing in the cold light of day when one really thinks about it. If either of them have slept normally for a dozen years and change, I have decided, there has to be something wrong with at least one of them.
ReplyDeleteThey did what they thought was best at the time I do believe, but now, allowing Operation Stranger Than Fiction, to carry on looking and wasting more of other people's hard-earned money not actually looking [over there] for Madeleine, but looking EVERYWHERE ELSE. Then, it must be said, I am not a happy camper.
Their never giving up routine is so, totally, over..
Theresa x
As with Watcher/NT’s suggestion that the timing of the Smith sighting could be out by as much as an hour, the latest subject the gang are avoiding is Wedger’s claim the McCanns were swingers. And Trotter is trying to distract from it with his latest tweets.
ReplyDeleteReaders will certainly notice that there’s no attempt by the gang to refute or mock Wedger like the gang likes to do with us or to accuse him of being a swinger.
The questions it would be interesting to put to Wedger, without asking him to reveal his source would be:
Is your source a primary source or simply relating a story heard?
Is this information new to you or is it something you were told some time ago?
What have you done with this information which you are happy to make public?
Do you know what the source has done with this information and how widely known is it?
Unpublished Theresa Talktothemselves at 28 Feb 2020, 19:06:00 and at 28 Feb 2020, 19:15:00,
ReplyDeleteWe haven’t published your comments because we disagree on Gordon Brown’s ignorance you allege he has and we have no reason to doubt what Martin Smith and the rest of the Smith family have said.
The man Frog, Jules and BRC like to converse with amicably:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/CHProfiler/status/1233248371713818625
Chelsea Hoffman @CHProfiler
#McCann of course they're asking for more $$$$$
https://us.blastingnews.com/news/2020/02/madeleine-mccann-remains-missing-and-cops-need-more-money-003078301.html
4:31 AM - 28 Feb 2020
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233330427198410752
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @CHProfiler
Says the woman who publishes a book trying to make money off the back of missing Madeleine #mccann. No wonder Jews have a bad name.
9:57 AM - 28 Feb 2020
*****
We have no time for her McCann theories, but criticise the woman for her opinions, not for being Jewish.
Who gave the Jews a bad name? Hitler for one. Trotter obviously agrees
And then this:
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233520140811149313
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Apparently David Hall has karked it. Shame, I thought his cartoons were crap. In fact, worse than crap. #mccann
10:31 PM - 28 Feb 2020
*****
We do hope that one day justice will catch up with this man and his threats.
https://twitter.com/emily23800584/status/1233444647441174529
DeleteEmily 1000 @happy @emily23800584
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @CHProfiler
Anti semitic remark right there, #McCann
5:31 PM - 28 Feb 2020
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1233449095529930754
Michaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @emily23800584 @CHProfiler
Jews don’t have a bad name? Therein lies your problem. Keep thinking that and nothing will change.
5:49 PM - 28 Feb 2020
It's amazing, in the most recent comment sections of the British fish and chip paper press, where comments are allowed, just how many don't trust or believe the McCanns yet still believe in the dumb neglect narrative.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite clear as well these days just how many believe Operation Grange is a money-draining farce. Who exactly is fooling who in 2020? Because it isn't the establishment fooling the serfs anymore.
They don't know what happened to Madeleine, but the general consensus seems to be that the British don't believe the McCanns puerile tripe any longer, and for the most part, the Portuguese were over the McCann's outlandishly theatrical lies and fabrications before Gerry had time to put his fake sunglasses on.
The McCanns and crude Photoshop. DISCUSS.
Not you Textusa, you don't need to discuss anything, as you already know, as do all the concealers of infantile death in this shoddy, nefarious, taxpayer-funded and wholly grotesque affair.
No matter what they do from here on in, the piper always has to be paid.
Comment that we have received that we have censored:
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
(Censored) is in meltdown after Michelle @xxSiLverdoexx set police on @Strackers74 to try and silence her, and she is holding Not Ben Sid, Jules and Karen Lowe Sanders responsible for opening another can of worms for herself and the gang for lying to the police. KLS knows what it's like to be in trouble after earning gang points for trying to harass a male into silence for Not Ben and Ponce of Dubai, so why she involved herself in this is anyone's guess. Michaela Trotter and Zora McCartney are both right. This matter is not over and there will be repercussions.
Michaela Trotter
@MichaelaTrotte6
·
Feb 26
Interesting that 2of Textuser’s team that doxed,groomed and exploited a child to score points against the child’s mother have both had their accounts shut down.Police don’t take kindly to this nor companies that host blogs that endorse child abuse.This matter isn’t over.
#mccann
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 1 Mar 2020, 11:27:00”
*****
We hesitated in publishing this comment. Decided to do it censored for obvious reasons.
Decided to publish it because we have received a hilarious comment threatening with the police. Publishing the comment above shows that there is at least one gang member who has quite the experience in being contacted by the police.
I see the white elephant is still in the room! Not one mention not one response about John Wedger outing the McCann's and their cronies as swingers. Normally they all pounce together like flies on shit for anything they don't like. Their deathly sound of silence speaks volumes, in fact it's deafening!! For folk who love to ridicule and shout anyone down for even trying address the possibility, yet they promote a group of well educated folk all getting together for jollies to abuse each others kids. Even when they were all implicated by the Gaspar's statements( who let child abusers carry on bathing their child!! If you believe that) it's been business as usual for the lot of them. When one has to try hard to make something believable it starts to make it unbelievable, you can kid some of the people but you always get those who just wonder what are you trying so hard to bury. Thanks to the silence they've confirmed what the cover up is about and swinging it is!
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1234774057805123590
ReplyDeleteMichaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @justjulescolson @Natalie01016290 and 48 others
Does Natalie spend any time at all with her children? #mccann
9:34 AM - 3 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1234775065817997312
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @MichaelaTrotte6 @justjulescolson and 48 others
I bet she spends more time with them than those who ring people for hours while their son is bleating in the background for his mum to come and play with him 😊
9:38 AM - 3 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/janamb/status/1234778952327147523
Jane Brooks @janamb
Replying to @Natalie01016290 @Munchki53720423 and 48 others
Using kids as a stick to poke people with because he knows he will get reaction.
9:53 AM - 3 Mar 2020
*****
Walker using Natalie’s children against her. Uncalled for and absolutely disgusting.
BRC using Elaine Strachan’s little boy against her. Uncalled for, totally unrelated and absolutely disgusting.
What is the difference between Walker and BRC, Karen Lowe Sanders? The police may be able to answer that question.
Both nasty pieces of work, completely evil but, as far as we know, one doesn’t use bottles. And one doesn’t pretend to be a nice person.
By the way, how does BRC know how long phone calls with Elaine last? Maybe because BRC has spent said hours on the phone with her. When could that have been and why would that have been?
Here is a good definition of BOTH Walker and BRC (although BRC does take her vitriol also outside the McCann tag, it must be said):
https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1234780442508877824
Natalie @Natalie01016290
Replying to @janamb @Munchki53720423 and 48 others
Desperate tactics by a man desperate for attention I think. Deplorable human who sits abusing others daily on #McCann to give meaning to his sad existence. Quite pathetic really x
9:59 AM - 3 Mar 2020
https://twitter.com/MrBMouze/status/1234651760846934016
DeleteBananamouze @MrBMouze
Replying to @Andreamariapre2 @MichaelaTrotte6 @nikkiloumaz
She is not the poisoned dwarf. It is your mind which has been poisoned by that fool Ben Thompson. Can't you see it? #mccann
1:28 AM - 3 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/Andreamariapre2/status/1235021005548064769
Andrea maria preston @Andreamariapre2
Replying to @MrBMouze @MichaelaTrotte6 @nikkiloumaz
#McCann Behave Elaine. Many Dms and Tweets ... please look after your child ... I beg of you
1:55 AM - 4 Mar 2020
Tweet liked by
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
1 user has asked not to be shown.
*****
The Fish Porn Club, hand-picked human filth, continues to use children.
Thank you Textusa for posting that. Just when one thinks the Gang can sink no lower, BRC shows her true colours referring to an innocent child as "bleating" just because she hates the mother. She is full of pus and venom. No wonder she and Walker enjoy each other's company so much.
ReplyDeleteUnpublished Anonymous at 3 Mar 2020, 19:41:00
ReplyDelete1 – Are you referring to the photo that we never circulated where everyone can see how the lady who appears in it really looks like unphotoshopped? You know, the one that served briefly as a profile picture to an evident sock account created just to spite said lady?
2 – The other person you are referring to in your pathetic comment, is it the scamming one?
3 – Do your friends know you continue to submit comments in the blog on these 2 subjects, persisting in drawing attention to them? Don’t think they will be very happy with you.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/03/23/same/
Delete"Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results"
Continuing to highlight the deafening silence on this issue:
ReplyDeleteThis is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved....
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that... “
These people on Twitter believe Wedger is 100% genuine, so do they believe what he says in this interview?
Or is he less than 100% reliable?
One of the main irritants I find amongst the McCann Twitter and Facebook abduction doubting worlds is the constant use of the words missing, disappearance, disappeared, vanished and mystery.
ReplyDeleteMany of them have chosen to believe what they believe because they have been seduced by a load of nonsense. All of the words used prove that the individual mindsets behind the tweets have somehow allowed themselves to be hypnotised into believing the official drivel.
Of believing the easily provable fact that Madeleine has never been missing, the world tour alone is enough to highlight that, which in actuality, always was, the biggest lie and reverse psychological con trick of all.
This is what the Frog has said in the past about her using other people’s alleged personal details (our caps):
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/900520551709650945
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Massive&Unwavering is so Big & Brave it's blocked me. *Waves.
No, I DON'T GIVE A TOSS ABOUT PERSONAL DETAILS OF OTHER POSTERS. #mccann
1:50 AM - 24 Aug 2017
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/972577985927745536
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @AndyFish19
Come on, Andy. Your followers are waiting for you to debunk my post. Shouldn't be too hard for you, should it? PERSONAL INSULTS JUST DON'T CUT MUSTARD. #mccann
9:00 PM - 10 Mar 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1091046837572784133
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CarlaSpade @jules999x @Anvil161Anvil16
Respect needs to be earned, Carla. Please learn to distinguish between banter & GENUINELY NASTY PERSONAL COMMENTS.
6:53 PM - 31 Jan 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1122538284650041346
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @TheSun
I can't get people shadow banned, only twitter can do that. What other sort of account restriction is there?
I DON'T FIND PERSONAL ABUSE ACCEPTABLE but neither do I see you condemning those who do it on "your side".
5:29 PM - 28 Apr 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/993470928754561024
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @xxMichellesxx and 3 others
HAVE I SAID I CONDONE IT? There are many people whose personal details have been splashed all over fora. It is an offence to do so but rarely is any action taken. If you enter a bear pit, be prepared to be mauled. #mccann
1:41 PM - 7 May 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/994682722793779205
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @xxMichellesxx and 2 others
Perhaps Isabelle would also like to provide the correct page number for the translation of that document 2/10/07. I AGREE PERSONAL DIG CHILDISH but you defend someone who has been doing just that for nigh on 11 years to McCanns & anyone else who doesn't agree with her. BTW....
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dc3SeY2WAAAqPEl.jpg
9:56 PM - 10 May 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/998658022925897729
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @McCannCaseTweet @Tealtraum and 4 others
Report away if it suits you. I HAVE BROKEN NO RULES, THREATENED NO-ONE OR GIVEN OUT ANY PERSONAL DATA. Just for once, look at what you've done to Madeleine's photo, then look at your daughter & finally look into your soul. #mccann
9:13 PM - 21 May 2018
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1012452286457696257
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @raccoon_burt @strackers74 @JBLittlemore
Whoever you are, pack it in on this #mccann. TAKE YOUR PERSONAL SPAT ELSEWHERE PLEASE.
10:46 PM - 28 Jun 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1012471336004923393
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @strackers74 @raccoon_burt @JBLittlemore
I'm sorry you find yourself in that situation, whatever it is this Raccoon person thinks you have said or done. SHARING PERSONAL INFO OR DETAILS OF PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS IS A NO-NO IN MY BOOK.
12:02 AM - 29 Jun 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1126974023143968772
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @PollyGraph69 @SadeElishaa @McCannCaseTweet
Please don't drag me into YOUR PERSONAL SPAT, IT'S NONE OF MY BUSINESS.
11:15 PM - 10 May 2019
****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1207121649461604352
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet
If I want to speak to Tex then I'll post on his blog, which my system now allows me to do. Tex is not a pro & I disagree with certain case facts he posts. THE PERSONAL STUFF IS IRRELEVANT TO ME.
2:13 AM - 18 Dec 2019
*****
But then in response to this tweet from Jules:
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx
#SwingersParadise #BaldMan 😫
Watford-3 Liverpool-0 😳
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ER-PpD4XsAArUyQ.jpg
9:13 PM - 29 Feb 2020
[photo attached is that of a restaurant named “Mario’s”]
The Frog, has this to say:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1233880440819286016
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx
He's 5'0, he's got no hair
He's here. he's there. he's everywhere.
Life can be so cruel.
/>
10:23 PM - 29 Feb 2020
And, to complete the hypocrisy, then Frog enters the “Mario” club:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1234224434661163014
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @EricaCantona7 @EsMiluLatvijuxx
For the love of God - doesn't Mario know he has BRTs which will seat 9 in his own restaurant? No-one should ever believe in his blog again.
9:10 PM - 1 Mar 2020
Not to mention that “his blog” refers to an alleged gender doxxing done by the gang, something we haven’t confirmed or denied.
Aren’t we all reminded of Silverdoe’s hypocrisy about doxxing?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1235640957913178112
DeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @xxSiLverdoexx @jules
Thou art guilty of gender doxxing.😅
6:58 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
Interesting to see that Frog now finds doxxing funny.
Still waiting to see to be revealed by these same people the name of the 2 Justice admin who pretend to be of a gender they are not.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1235652524683689984
DeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @xxSiLverdoexx @jules
Anyone would think they're not proud to be a "bloke" person...or maybe there's a real split personality thing going on.
(Note to self - look for that missing prostate again.)
7:44 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
This has nothing to do with gender pride. This, and the Frog knows this very well, is the public use of private information, irrelevant of whether it’s true or false.
Aggravated by the circumstances in which said private information, irrelevant of being true or not, was obtained.
All legal stuff that the Frog should be familiar with.
And let’s add another “Mario” tweet from the Frog:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1235647212560027648
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @xxSiLverdoexx @jules
How was your holiday? Good weather? Mario appears to have spent the week arranging screenshots when he wasn't cooking. 😉
7:23 PM - 5 Mar 2020
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1235661981736210432
Delete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @xxSiLverdoexx @jules
He's projecting again.. I'll read the rest later, if I can't sleep.. 😴
8:22 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
A receipt that Jules has read all of the above and persists in the alleged gender-doxxing.
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1235708907055714304
Delete©KarmagicalKarmonyShell 🌈 ✨ 💅 ㊙️ ☯ ™ @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @Jules1602xx @FragrantFrog @jules
I'm waiting for the 'liked by Silverdoe' 🤦
Whoever combs our accounts for him is sad...
11:28 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
The receipt from Silverdoe.
“for him”
Fully identified DNP at 5 Mar 2020, 19:25:00,
ReplyDeleteAs we said, we have been (and are very busy). Trust us, we want to deal with the latest nonsense from Jules, Frog and JBLittlemore but we haven’t had the time but will do so when we are able to.
We are obviously interested in the outcome of what you have said.
We have promised that we would reply to your previous comment fully and now you have given us a way to communicate with you without compromising your identity.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1233787334925090816
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Michael80282175 and 48 others
Tex doesn't do sensible, BRT's or civil defamation.
4:13 PM - 29 Feb 2020
Tweet liked by:
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Madeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
*****
The Frog has now invented a new legal term in the Portuguese law: “civil defamation”.
In this acórdão from the Portuguese Supreme Justice Court:
http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/-/4D77F0FC9E724543802568FC0039C1A6
“Nos processos por difamação, calunia e injuria, regulados nos artigos 587 a 594 do Codigo de Processo Penal…”
Our translation:
"In defamation, slander and injury processes, regulated in articles 587 to 594 of the Criminal Process Code ..."
Defamation is a crime. There is no such thing as a civil defamation as there isn’t a civil homicide. Homicide, under whatever circumstances is dealt with in criminal courts, exactly like defamation.
Can damages be sought for from POSSIBLE but not proven defamation?
Yes, it can and as we explain in detail in a later comment when we deal with a very useful tweet from Jules. The fact that a defamation is not proven that doesn’t mean that the events surrounding it cannot be used in legal proceedings.
If damages caused by a statement can be proven independently of it being true or false, then defamation may or it may not have been present and that presence or absence of defamation is completely irrelevant. Totally secondary to the proceedings.
The McCann v Amaral case was a clear example of this.
To understand this, one has to understand the concept of private, semi-public and public crimes.
https://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=432&show=&offset=
O que é um crime público?
É um crime para cujo procedimento basta a sua notícia pelas autoridades judiciárias ou policiais, bem como a denúncia facultativa de qualquer pessoa.
As entidades policiais e funcionários públicos são obrigados a denunciar os crimes de que tenham conhecimento no exercício de funções.
Nos crimes públicos o processo corre mesmo contra a vontade do titular dos interesses ofendidos.
What is a public crime?
It is a crime for which procedure news is enough for the judicial or police authorities, as well as the optional denunciation by any person.
Law enforcement agencies and civil servants are obliged to report crimes that they are aware of in the exercise of their functions.
In public crimes the process runs even against the will of the holder of the offended interests.
*****
https://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=433&show=&offset=
O que é um crime semi-público?
É um crime para cujo procedimento é necessária a queixa da pessoa com legitimidade para a exercer (por norma o ofendido ou seu representante legal ou sucessor).
As entidades policiais e funcionários públicos são obrigados a denunciar esses crimes, sem embargo de se tornar necessário que os titulares do direito de queixa exerçam tempestivamente o respectivo direito (sem o que não se abrirá inquérito).
Nos crimes semi-públicos é admissível a desistência da queixa.
What is a semi-public crime?
It is a crime for which it is necessary the complaint of the person with legitimacy to exercise it (usually the victim or his legal representative or successor).
Law enforcement agencies and public officials are obliged to report these crimes, without excluding the need that the right holders of the complaint exercise their right in a timely manner (without which an inquiry will not be opened).
In semi-public crimes it is permissible to withdraw the complaint.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.pgdporto.pt/proc-web/faq.jsf?ctxId=85&subCtxId=86&faqId=434&show=&offset=
O que é um crime particular?
É um crime cujo procedimento depende da prévia constituição como assistente da pessoa com legitimidade para tal (normalmente o ofendido com a prática do crime, ou seu representante ou sucessor) e da oportuna dedução da acusação particular por essa pessoa.
Os mais divulgados são os crimes contra a honra (injúria e difamação, bem como alguns crimes contra a propriedade entre pessoas com laços de parentesco próximo).
What is a private crime?
It is a crime whose procedure depends on the previous constitution as an assistant of the person with legitimacy to do so (usually the offended person with the crime, or his representative or successor) and the timely deduction of the particular accusation by that person.
The most known are crimes against honour (insult and defamation, as well as some crimes against property among people with close family ties).
*****
To sum it up, in a public crime the authorities are allowed to act on simple knowledge, even against the will of the victims; a semi-public crime needs a complaint but the authorities are obliged to report when they have knowledge of them and private crimes are the ones which process depends exclusively on there being a complaint of the affected party.
There are crimes that fall in more than one category:
https://maioresde30anos.blogs.sapo.pt/crime-publicos-semi-publicos-e-20705
- simple offenses physical integrity - art. 143
It’s semi-public but becomes public when committed against agents of the security forces and services, in the exercise of their functions or because of them.
- coercion - art. 154
It’s public but is only semi-public when committed between spouses, ascendants and descendants, adopters and adopted, or between people, of the other or of the same sex, who live in a situation similar to that of the spouses (art. 154, no. 4)
- crimes against sexual freedom - arts. 163, 164, 165, 167, 168 and 170
It’s semi-public when committed against an adult but is when committed against a minor or resulting in the victim's suicide or death.
- drunkenness and intoxication - art. 295th
It’s semi-public when a typical semi-public illicit act, particular when a typical particular fact
*****
Defamation is a private crime. That means that ONLY when there’s a formal complaint can the justice system act. And that complaint has to come from “the offended person with the crime, or his representative or successor”.
This translates into the fact that there are crimes that go unpunished. If person A defames publicly and blatantly person B, if person B does not act on it, that crime goes unpunished. The fact that it is not punished, in no way means that it wasn’t a crime. It was, only the offended chose for whatever reason not to act on it.
The point is that in Portugal that a defamation was not proven in court, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Note, ONLY a criminal court can determine as proven a defamation. Until that happens, it is not proven but as we said, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Defamation is a crime in Portugal.
To say “civil defamation” is simply to be ridiculous.
But note who liked the tweet where that absolute ridiculousness is expressed: Isabelle McFadden.
Back in the day when the Frog pretended to have principles, this is what she thought of McFadden:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/999394374722183168
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Seems to be a failure on this # if you're not offensive. Still, it's hard to drop personal standards to be one of the in-crowd or Isa-crowd.
9:59 PM - 23 May 2018
It seems that the Frog has definitely dropped her personal standards.
https://twitter.com/s4r4h4d4ms/status/1200176866042302471
ReplyDeleteSezzle @s4r4h4d4ms
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet @PeritaRisus
I watched an interview on YouTube with #ShaunAttwood & #JonWedger.. JW an ex cop, says it's well known in police that they were swingers & Maddie is dead.. Great interview, worth a watch
10:17 PM - 28 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1200177763447197698
©KarmagicalKarmonyShell 🌈 ✨ 💅 ㊙️ ☯ ™ @xxSiLverdoexx
Replying to @s4r4h4d4ms @McCannCaseTweet @PeritaRisus
I saw obviously the one with Sonia but not that one I will definitely take a look tomorrow.
All of it's shocking.
The swingers to me? I dunno, there was a nudest beach not far away, they weren't exactly prudes in PDL.
I will defo watch it with an open mind though :)
10:20 PM - 28 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/s4r4h4d4ms/status/1200178547266113539
Sezzle @s4r4h4d4ms
Replying to @xxSiLverdoexx @McCannCaseTweet @PeritaRisus
It's a 2 hour blog, covers police cover ups in general, mainly paedo rings, but they come up .. he says the hols were swinging hols, & kids sedated- which I've always thought, as no family goes on their hols with groups of friends every year.
10:23 PM - 28 Nov 2019
And on the subject of “civil defamation” let us bring over this tweet from BRC:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/1matthewwright1/status/1235650629122625536
The Suppressionals @1matthewwright1
Replying to @EsMiluLatvijuxx @Jules1602xx and 5 others
Fantasy Island : Where there's a man for everyone 🤣
/>
7:37 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1235650996874997760
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @1matthewwright1 @EsMiluLatvijuxx and 5 others
😂
7:38 PM - 5 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/EricaCantona7/status/1235652095291752448
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Replying to @Jules1602xx @1matthewwright1 and 5 others
How sweet little Text looks there
7:43 PM - 5 Mar 2020
[Tweet liked by:
©KarmagicalKarmonyShell 🌈 ✨ 💅 ㊙️ ☯ ™ @xxSiLverdoexx
Madeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
carole S @carmarsutra
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
2 users have asked not to be shown]
*****
When in a herd, sheep tend to bleat just because other sheep bleat. They think because others have bleated, it’s safe for them to do the same.
Some, thinking they are safe, then bleat louder than other sheep in the hope they are noted by other sheep and get in return a sense of belonging, a sense of importance.
But then with some, and we are speaking very broadly, when accountability knocks on the door, tears start rolling and they get on the phone and vent all the fears into the ears of those they had not yet fooled.
A good example of this, are the events where the current Man United player Bruno Fernandes was involved as a victim: the assault on Sporting CP football club training grounds on May 14 2018.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/may/15/sporting-lisbon-intruders-training-attack-players-staff
A group of supporters decided that the best way to motivate the team to play was to have a “face-to-face conversation” with the players and so decided to do that by invading the training grounds.
https://portugoal.net/images/Sporting/Alcochete-attack.jpg
All was organised on social media. Now all can read in the WhatsApp messages, how brave they all were, how committed they all were, how the herd-effect convinced them that because the others were willing they could also do it, how they felt they were unpunishable, how they felt that what they were doing made them belong to the group.
They even distributed which supporters would take care of each player and training staff in the attack.
552 days after, the trial started.
https://www.sabado.pt/portugal/detalhe/552-dias-depois-comeca-o-julgamento-dos-ataques-a-academia-de-alcochete
On Feb 28 this year, the former president of the club was heard in court, the trial goes on.
https://tribunaexpresso.pt/atualidade/2020-02-28-Julgamento-de-Alcochete.-A-versao-de-Bruno-de-Carvalho
Many of these boys have spent time in jail since the events. The majority, if not all, show regret. How many now wish they hadn’t followed the herd…
Everyone denies responsibility for the events. It’s now been 661 days and it’s very far from being over.
As Jules says, very rightfully so:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1169290939321528321
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @The_Truth_II @njbennett and 7 others
Mario thinks he's safe from everything..
He isn't..
5:47 PM - 4 Sep 2019
We keep saying that these people project. We keep saying it but it’s evident that they don’t believe in what we say. Or even in what they themselves say. The same Jules who said the above, has said this:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1159151416709189633
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Ben doesn't write the NT blog.. Ben isn't Walker either.. neither is NT Walker.. NT is NT, Ben is Ben & Walker is Walker.. But Textusa is a short arsed tool called MARIO.. YES MARIO.. #McCann
6:16 PM - 7 Aug 2019
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1235941770522959872
ReplyDeleteMichaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Replying to @KaiserSoze___ @Andreamariapre2 and 3 others
How can you underestimate a coke sniffing child abuser and child doxer who grooms a child from a filthy council flat? #mccann
2:54 PM - 6 Mar 2020
*****
This idiot apparently can’t let go of this story, can he? He just keeps reminding people of what happened about 9 months ago. Keeping fresh in people’s minds the story and those who participated in it.
Well done!
We repeat, we are NOT the ones who keep bringing this up.
By the way, the police have gone to Elaine’s home. Not about this but about an alleged spoofing of a Twitter account, which anyone with a pair of eyes in their head could see it wasn't her.
It appears that in the UK, the police find spoofing Twitter accounts to be more serious than a child grooming… who would have guessed it?
Comment we have received that we have censored:
Delete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
I thought you claimed it never happened?
(censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 7 Mar 2020, 15:08:00”
*****
Anonymous at 7 Mar 2020, 15:08:00,
Please quote us where we have said that the mother-daughter scam did not happen. TIA.
To be clear, it happened in June last year.
Now to your friend who we assume will not be happy that you persist in keeping this issue alive and reminding everyone of it: the wording and absurd logic in the censored part of the comment leaves no doubt as to who wrote the comment. Yes, that person.
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1236254053212004352
ReplyDelete©KarmagicalKarmonyShell 🌈 ✨ 💅 ㊙️ ☯ ™ @xxSiLverdoexx
What shills leave out?
Keela and Eddie were TWO teams, NOT one.
Grime had a partner called Ellis who was Keela's trainer. Odd they leave that out eh? Blaming everything on Grime. How dare he train his dogs so well?! 😏 #17x alerts only to #mccann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESgOJQIXYAAbos1.png
11:35 AM - 7 Mar 2020
[Picture attached says:
“Eddie is always the first to be brought onto a site. Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood. The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cadaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred.”]
******
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Doesn’t this just ABSOLUTELY DESTROY what Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, have been trying to sell us about Eddie?
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, have been saying that when there’s a simultaneous alert by Eddie and Keela then it could only be blood!
Here is the latest example from JBLittlemore (it could have been from Jules or from Frog):
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1232766014544281602
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @Askthedogs @Babs108164110 @metpoliceuk
I'm not sure how it would be definitively proven she was in the car in cadaver form without a sample containing toxins/sedatives etc. Cellular transfer is otherwise always a possibility - from her possessions etc.
8:34 PM - 26 Feb 2020”
Based on their alleged fact that Eddie could have alerted to blood in the Scenic because Keela also alerted there. Simultaneous alert by both dogs.
But now this says “The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cadaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred”
So the dogs HAVE to had have been trained to alert specifically to 2 different scents – blood and cavader – that cannot be confused.
Under the thesis by Jules and JBLittlemore, supported by Frog, because Eddie alerts to both odours there isn’t a situation where it can be said with certainty that there is a simultaneous presence of blood and cadaver odour.
Yet the text attached by Silverdoe is very clear that there is!
And the text is clear that Eddie alerts to something different to the blood odour that Keela alerts to: “Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood.”
If Eddie also discerned blood – note the singular used in “odour” – why would Keela go “on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood” if that could have been what Eddie had detected in the first place?
It’s obvious that Eddie is trained for CADAVER ODOUR – from whatever source it may come and that includes blood from a cadaver – and Keela alerts to BLOOD ODOUR – from whatever source it may come and that includes, obviously, blood from a cadaver. The text is very clear.
Thank you Silverdoe. These people spout such nonsense they can’t remember (!) what they said in the past.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1236298607508234240
Delete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others
Eddie also alerts to dried blood..
Capiche...?
2:32 PM - 7 Mar 2020
*****
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Are we the only ones to see the absolute and utter idiocy of this statement??
Clue: Frog’s conundrum.
Can Jules – or anyone else – come up with ONE scenario, just ONE, in which either the blood or the cadaver dog will alert to blood that is not dried?
DeleteTIA
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1236386843517767680
Delete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others
You've been reading too much of Mario's sh!te..
According to Mr Grime, Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life.. He knows, he trained Eddie..
Why do you think he used 2 dogs..
8:22 PM - 7 Mar 2020
*****
Can Jules show a quote where Mr Grime has said “Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life..”?
Note, we’re not asking for a quote from a translation. That is what he MAY have said. We’re asking for a direct quote from Mr Grime.
TIA
We did he use 2 dogs? It’s quite obvious.
It was for the exact same reason the forensic people did not collect any samples from anywhere else in 5A other than the living-room.
The exact same reason they didn’t collect samples from the kitchen, from the kid’s bedroom, from the bathroom, from the dining area and neither from the bedroom where Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t. It’s called working in tandem.
As a sidenote, certain comments serve legally as “cease and desist” warnings. The fact that people after being warned to “cease and desist” continue and persist in the wrongdoing means very clearly they are doing what they are doing fully conscious of all the consequences of their actions and in acceptance of them.
Unpublished Anonymous at 8 Mar 2020, 03:34:00,
DeleteWriting comments at 03:30 in the morning?? You have nothing better to do?
No, no need for a new lawyer, but thank you for you care. We are very happy with the legal counselling we are receiving.
You people on the other hand can always opt to one day just say to whomever that “...but I was certain it was bullshit…” or that “I did it because everyone else was doing it” and we are certain that any judge in any court in any country will acquit you immediately based solely on those 2 arguments.
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1236726499069304836
Delete00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others
In future, he can come here and ask, instead of mocking from the corner, especially when I'm right lol..
Is Mario saying people shouldn't quote from the files now.. Or is it just this quote he has a problem with...
#McCann
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8L2uWoAAJxw_.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MAGXsAAIXTa.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MRbWoAI-CkH.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESm8MdDWsAEo8DA.jpg
6:52 PM - 8 Mar 2020
[Pic #1 is the following partial screengrab from our comment at 7 Mar 2020, 23:29:00
“Can Jules show a quote where Mr Grime has said “Eddie alerted to blood from a human with life..”?
Note, we’re not asking for a quote from a translation. That is what he MAY have said. We’re asking for a direct quote from Mr Grime.”]
[Pic #2 is a screengrab of our comment at Textusa7 Mar 2020, 19:04:00]
[Pic #3 says this (we don’t know from where Jules got this):
“Does the dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a dead body ?”']
[Pic # 4 says:
“'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.”]
*****
We asked Jules NOT to give a translation but show where Martin Grime said what she says he has said.
What does Jules do? Show the translation.
We dealt with this in detail in this post:
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/06/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-3.html
Note, the translation from the McCannPJFiles this question, the Portuguese translation says this:
“O cão EVRD também dá o alerta a pistas sanguíneas de um humano com vida ou somente de um cadáver?”
Which is translated into “The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver”
There is no question mark, it’s a statement and not a question. Do click on the link provided by Jules to verify this, as Jules shows in pic #4.
By putting it as a question in pic #3, Jules is clearly admitting that translations contain errors. And it’s “cadaver” and not “dead body”.
By the way, again people like to gaslight and only look like fools. IF – something we doubt has ever happened – Grime does say alert to blood from the living, THEN that means there is a difference between dead blood and live blood, something we defend and that Jules and Frog find ridiculous.
If there is no difference between blood shed by a living human from one leaked from a cadaver then how is it possible for Eddie to tell the difference if there isn’t one?
This is what happens when liars can’t keep up with their lies. And we’re not mocking Jules. Liars do that all by themselves.
We’re still waiting from Jules for an example of a scenario where both blood and EVR dogs are deployed where one would expect to find non-dried blood.
https://twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1175104794563735552
ReplyDeleteMadeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
Jon Wedger retired Scotland Yard Officer...
🛑 SHOCKING message to Kate #mccann
(*sit down please, it is that hard hitting)
REPENT Kate McCann...McCanns know what they have done. #MadeleineMccann
/>
0:30
13.5K views
6:49 PM - 20 Sep 2019 from California, USA
*****
https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1175105841252487170
Natalie @Natalie01016290
Replying to @McCannCaseTweet
Massive respect for Jon wedger having the courage to speak for those who have been silenced 👏
6:53 PM - 20 Sep 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/barragirl49/status/1175108810958151680
Barragirl @barragirl49
Replying to @McCannCaseTweet
Total respect Jon Wedger. He has the courage to speak out when others are cowards. Questioning his religious beliefs is a cheap shot and nothing to do with his expertise or opinion on the case. #McCann
7:05 PM - 20 Sep 2019
*****
Total respect for Wedger but we’re still waiting for a response about his claim that the McCanns were swingers.
Wedger was just a DC. He knows nothing
DeleteAnonymous 9 Mar 2020, 19:08:00 (and Frog and Jules),
DeleteBow your head in shame (we know you won’t):
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/878384/baby-peter-detective-john-wedger-investigation-child-abuse-prostitution/amp
Baby P detective sues ‘bully’ police after exposing child abuse and corruption
A FORMER detective commended for his work on the Baby P investigation is suing police after claiming he was bullied for exposing child abuse and corruption.
By James Fielding, exclusive
PUBLISHED: 00:01, Sun, Nov 12, 2017
John Wedger said he was forced into early retirement from the Metropolitan Police after suffering a breakdown last year brought on by post traumatic stress disorder.
The former detective constable has begun a civil claim against Scotland Yard seeking damages for psychiatric injury arising from work-related stress.
Mr Wedger said he was bullied after filing an intelligence report alleging that some of his colleagues knew a prostitute was pimping out girls as young as nine but turned a blind eye.
He claimed he was told by a high-ranking Met officer to keep quiet or be “thrown to the wolves”.
Last night father-of-four Mr Wedger said: “I joined the police to serve the community and make a difference. I have wholeheartedly, loyally and relentlessly pursued, arrested and prosecuted those I was tasked to target.
“Yet for doing so and digging up information the police did not want to deal with, my life was made hell.”
Mr Wedger, 47, was involved in an investigation into a well known prostitute in 2004 who was suspected of using children.
She was linked to organised crime but intelligence from “multiple sources” suggested she also had connections within the local police.
The prostitute would ply youngsters, including a 14-year-old girl, with drugs and alcohol and then pimp them out to men in budget hotels near Paddington railway station in west London.
During the course of the operation, Mr Wedger says he found that not only were the police aware the youngsters were being used for sex but he believed at least one officer was supplying the criminal gang with information about the investigation.
After filing an intelligence report, he was brought in to see a senior officer at Scotland Yard headquarters.
Mr Wedger said: “He told me in a firm and formal manner that I had ‘dug too deep’.
He then stated that if I mentioned a word of my findings outside of his office then he would make sure I was ‘thrown to the wolves’.
“He said I had a job, mortgage and children to think about. He then asked me if I felt bullied at work. I replied that I was indeed bullied.
“He said there was a fairness at work form which I needed to complete.
He said that once the form was completed it would be sent back to him.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeletePointing to a wastepaper bin he told me, ‘That’s where it will end up. I will never betray fellow rank nor will anyone else. Keep your mouth shut.’”
On his last day with the unit he was called in by the same officer.
He said: “He offered me his hand, I reciprocated, and he said, ‘You must give your word that you will never look into child prostitution ever again.’ The experience left me traumatised and paranoid.”
Mr Wedger joined the Child Abuse Investigation Command in the borough of Haringey where he became involved with the investigation in 2007 into baby Peter Connelly’s death.
He was later praised and rewarded for the way he handled an interview with Peter’s mother, Tracey.
In 2014, following the Jimmy Savile and Rotherham paedophile scandals, Mr Wedger repeated his claims of a cover-up and the bullying he suffered to a detective inspector, who he says ignored them.
He then approached the Met’s department of professional standards and was interviewed over two days.
Later that year Mr Wedger was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder.
Due to his protracted time off sick he was placed on half pay, which plunged him into debt.
Despite being placed under the care of an NHS mental health team and given counselling, he twice returned to work in 2015, first on the fraud investigation team and then on the road deaths unit. However, the return to work made his PTSD even worse.
Mr Wedger, of Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, was finally given early ill health retirement last month after 23 years of service.
He added: “I’m relieved to be out. I felt at the centre of a huge conspiracy and very much alone.”
He is now being supported by his local MP, Sir Mike Penning, who has written to Met chief Cressida Dick for a response to the allegations.
Sir Mike said: “There are some really serious answers to deal with both on what John says happened and the way he was treated afterwards.”
A Met spokesman said: “We have received a civil claim from John Wedger. We are considering the claim and will respond in due course as required by the court procedures.”
https://twitter.com/MichaelaTrotte6/status/1236707856881246209
ReplyDeleteMichaela Trotter @MichaelaTrotte6
Funny how short Arsed Mario (Textuser) can say the most disgusting things about Brian Healey's daughter but mention his own daughter, caught giving out sexual favours in the street, and he throws a hissy fit. #mccann
5:38 PM - 8 Mar 2020
*****
Jules’ and Frog’s friend. And who calls Silverdoe as “Babe”.
So predictable! We were waiting to see what he would do to distract from the Wedger question.
A liar who invents stories, based on the inventions of his dirty mind, probably fuelled by alcohol or other substances.
Let’s then return to the deafening silence around Wedger having stated that McCanns were swingers.
This is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved...
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that... “
These people on Twitter believe Wedger is 100% genuine, so do they believe what he says in this interview?
Or is he less than 100% reliable?
Wedger clearly supports the Textusa sisters' theory of the swinging event at PDL that week. However, even though none of them have commented,, their NON response, is clearly a response in itself - funny that - I think everyone is interested in the gangs' thoughts on JW claim the McCanns were swingers. Take your time.................
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50BUWyWovfU
Deletehttps://twitter.com/ConorBr01143067/status/1236995300268683264
DeleteConor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. @ConorBr01143067
Conor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. Retweeted Whispering
Wedger on swinging #mccann
Conor Brownleigh. No anti Harry & Meghan or abuse. added,
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1236950634009694208
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
#McCann case. Ex-Cop Wedger, often quoted selectively, mentions 'swinging' in this interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50BUWyWovfU …
12:40 PM - 9 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1237000417420115968
Green Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
FollowFollow @FragrantFrog
More
Replying to @ConorBr01143067
He's less well-informed on Madeleine's case than you are.....was he REALLY a policeman??
1:00 PM - 9 Mar 2020
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1237013619625336833
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @ConorBr01143067
Liked by Jules... ✔
1:53 PM - 9 Mar 2020
*****
Well, at least we now know that Jules agrees with Frog that Wedger wasn’t even a cop. We bet McFadden is going to be disappointed.
Another member of the gang, disagrees with Jules and Frog:
https://twitter.com/Natalie01016290/status/1237021345290031106
Natalie @Natalie01016290
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
Saw that a while ago, he [Wedger] would know more than most wouldn't he?
2:24 PM - 9 Mar 2020
https://alternativeviewg.co.uk/av9-jon-wedger-police-whistle-blower-on-child-abuse
DeleteEither Wedger is a blatant liar or Frog is completely wrong or deliberately misleading.
The latter would be my choice.
Anonymous 9 Mar 2020, 19:11:00,
DeleteSo would be ours, so would be ours...
If the reader scrolls up, on the subject of John Wedger, an idiot has put a comment at 9 Mar 2020, 19:08:00 in reply to our comment at 7 Mar 2020, 13:18:00: “Wedger was just a DC. He knows nothing”.
DeleteTo that we replied by transcribing this article:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/878384/baby-peter-detective-john-wedger-investigation-child-abuse-prostitution/amp
Which you have now deleted, presumably once you realised it confirmed what I said. He was just a DC - so why did you delete it?
DeleteFrom the article you posted
Delete"The former detective constable"
He knows nothing.
Anonymous 9 Mar 2020, 20:31:00,
DeleteSince you like to make an arse of yourself, we won't stop that self-pleasuring.
Scroll up.
Anonymous 9 Mar 2020, 21:03:00,
DeleteNice to know that in your world, a Detective Constable is a only.
By the way, we're supposing you do know that Isabelle McFadden is absolutely certain that there was no swinging because she talked with a GNR - a rural police force that has nothing to do with criminal investigation - and he guaranteed to her that there had been no swinging.
Wedger says:
This is what Wedger says:
“I did get a lot of good information because I knew somebody who was involved in there and what I got back was that the parents were heavily involved...
What I was told, and I’m not going to disclose my source, was that they were swingers, the family, the whole group and all that..."
This has nothing to do with rank but with a source he claims told him.
Are you calling a Wedger a liar?
Jules seems to have a peculiar distaste for those people who control those who like tweets. In fact, we are certain if asked, Jules would send such people to a remote Gulag in the middle of Siberia.
ReplyDeleteHere is such a person:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1002969438373728256
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Mr Walker liked this tweet, but he can't comment.. Too funny.. LOL.. #McCann
6:45 PM - 2 Jun 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1165739786063306753
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @Esjabe1
How is a video of someone's day out at the beach helping MM... Yet you liked it.. #troll #hypocrite #McCann
10:36 PM - 25 Aug 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1038116822242025474
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @JBLittlemore
@SamColber too who liked that sick tweet.. Another dick head on #McCann
6:28 PM –
7 Sep 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1029341759724310528
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @paultessterry @nicktownsend12 and 12 others
I love how Bale liked this comment.. Bless him..🤡
1:19 PM - 14 Aug 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1064164895422377985
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @Cerb32
The funny thing about your tweet Cerb is Walker liked it.. The TW@T..
2:34 PM - 18 Nov 2018
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1049333436253704193
00The Jules... 🕵️♀ 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 🐌 🌸 @Jules1602xx
Replying to @RealHumptyB @LanaDelRaids and 12 others
Liked your own tweet again...?
5:19 PM - 8 Oct 2018
[and this one wasn’t to Isabelle McFadden!!!]
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1236746254841008137
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 🏆 @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @Ntown1976Nick and 48 others
LOL Selective file quoting is a Portuguese-related disease, so I'm reliably informed.
I may need surgery to remove my conundrum.
8:10 PM - 8 Mar 2020
*****
Please add racism to Frog’s qualities.
Clear intention to doxx nationality.
There's not a continent on this small greenish blue dot that does not have Portuguese last names. How very imperiously waspish of the frog, no wonder she argues so intensely regarding Madeleine's non-death, when all the while, Madeleine was already 'long gone' prior to the missing circus.
DeleteThe Frog knows what she knows, but she doesn't have the slightest inkling in terms of what happened to Madeleine and where she's been since real tears were shed.
The Frog is more of a mystery to me than Madeleine's non-mysterious final destination - that part's the easy part and reverse psychology, which has been liberally used during the lifespan of this affair, dictates that Madeleine is not 'out there'.
Nigh on thirteen years of pretending to search the planet strongly indicates that, IMO.
This post has reached the limit of comments before needing to "see more"
ReplyDeletePlease comment on the new post:
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2020/03/blood-and-evr-dog-part-6-comments.html