As per blogeditorial decision of April 18 this year and practice since then, the blog has become a “single-thread forum” preferring the publication of comments over independent new posts.
Blogger has a limitation of 200 comments per comment page, so whenever the comments start to reach that number, we open up a new post so that comments continue. We did that with “The help and the tennis” and will now continue to do so with “It’s September 2018”.
Post Scriptum (in ref to our comment at 26 Sep 2018, 21:56:00):
Proposal of tables to pass as the Tapas Big Round Table by Jules and JBLittlemore:
And it seems that someone finds Jules to be extremely funny and is very critical to the fact that we don’t:
Post Scriptum II (in ref to our comment at 27 Sep 2018, 13:48:00):
JBLittlemore has imagined a possibility to explain the Tapas Big Round Table as the joining up of 5 small table:
Reality never matches imagination but sometimes reality just shows how ridiculous “imagination” is.
One just has to sit 9 people around the model proposed by JBLittlemore:
No
elbow space, no space to place the cutlery. People looking at other people’s backs.
Would one even accept to be
seated in such conditions when there were other tables available?
We showed there were many tables available every night in our post “Tapas Quiz Night, Question #6/?”:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2011/08/tapas-quiz-night-question-6.html“Question: How many places could be booked at Tapas Bar on the week Maddie “disappeared”?
Answer: At least 47, but the exact number, only God knows.”
Would anyone, after having had 5 meals in such conditions EVER describe it to the police as ONE big round table? No.
Would anyone, after having had 5 meals in such conditions EVER draw it to the police as ONE big round table? No.
Would one remember with absolute clarity that where one had eaten those 5 meals were 5 small tables joined together? Of course one would.
Note, that “table” was not only for meals. It served also for Quiz Night and allowed the Quiz Mistress to sit there as well.
To propose such a possibility for the BRT is just to yank everyone’s chain. To be sickly comical about the case.
Blacksmith is just like Bennett – Part 2
ReplyDeleteIn part 1, we showed how Blacksmith, just like Bennett, takes the word of Kate McCann as gospel proof of the claims he has made that there are “off-the-record” conversations between the McCann lawyer at the time, Carlos Pinto de Abreu.
According to Blacksmith, these “off-the-record” conversations were stored somewhere and would now be part of some sort of unpublished PJ Files, filled with secret, relevant and damning information that could be pulled out of a hat like a rabbit and will light the fire that will engulf the couple alive at the stake.
As proof for the existence of these conversations we only have Kate’s word. As we saw in part 1 and will continue to see, it seems Blacksmith trusts fully whatever she has to say.
We have said that one of the untruths Kate McCann says is that she was heard as a witness. We have said this was false as her statement clearly says that she was heard as assistant. Another proof of that is that the fact her lawyer was present at the questioning, shows that she couldn’t possibly be heard as a witness.
Blacksmith says that it was after the September 6 questioning the PJ decided to constitute the McCanns arguidos:
“Just as the PJ knew she had lied about the Huelva postponement, just as they have the records of her August interviews they have the records of what was said - or unsaid off the record on September 6. They are all still hanging there unused but obviously available to investigators. I tried repeatedly to find out from GA about those later September 6 exchanges which his officers had briefed him about. Not a word. Nobody has ever said a word, except that they were convinced she wanted to get it all over with. That was why they were going to make her an arguido the next day.”
*****
We have said that in this subject of alleged “off-the-record” conversations we have 3 documents which we can cross-reference: Kate’s book, the PJ Files and Mr Amaral’s book. Please always be aware that of these, only one has legal value and that is the PJ Files.
But in Mr Amaral’s book there’s a detailed account of when the PJ decided to make the McCanns arguidos. In fact, the Chapter 20 of the book is called “The decision to constitute arguidos the McCann couple”.
Blacksmith could have simply read it – apparently he hasn’t – and see very clearly that the decision of making the McCanns arguido was not made after the Sept 6 questioning as he states. It was much before that. This is what Mr Amaral says in his book pgs 190 – 193 (our translation):
“In Portugal, all criminal investigation is carried out only in the context of a criminal proceeding, which has three phases: enquiry, instruction and prosecution. The investigation itself takes place in the enquiry phase by the agencies of the criminal police, which enjoy technical and tactical autonomy, under the direction and supervision of the Public Ministry. In the context of such proceedings there are procedural subjects, one of them is the arguido. The status of arguido was created in such a way as to grant to every suspect of the practice of a crime a set of rights and duties. One of the principles underlying our penal procedural system is that of non-self-incrimination, and it is not legal to allow a witness to provide elements that may incriminate him. That is, a witness cannot be allowed to continue to speak and make facts be known that indicate him or her in relation to a particular crime. The right to silence, as arguido, avoids this self-incrimination. It is true that the status of arguido carries nowadays a certain social stigma, and it is almost irrelevant to say that all people are presumed innocent until proven guilty, which can happen with a condemning sentence.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteMindful of the procedural requirements and the hitherto existing evidence of corpse concealment and crime simulation, solidified by the laboratory results, albeit preliminary, and in view of the eminent departure for the United Kingdom of the McCann couple, the decision to question them was taken, before they leave our country. This decision was duly considered, involved all elements related to the investigation, the Public Ministry and the National Director of the Judiciary Police.
On September 3, Ricardo Paiva, the Portuguese investigator who directly dealt with the McCanns, went to their temporary residence, where he notified them of the date and time of the proceedings. At the time, Kate Healy reacted negatively, showing two kinds of concerns. One relative to her parents: "what will my parents think". The other about the press: “what will the press say when they find out”. Furthermore, she made accusations directed at the Portuguese police: “The Portuguese police is being put under pressure by the Government to quickly end the investigation”. In another meeting between Portuguese and English investigators, the questioning was prepared, having been elaborated a list of questions that focused mainly on the night of the facts. We wanted to test our doubts and confront the future arguidos with the existing evidence.
The days of questioning of the McCann couple
The decision for the constitution as arguidos of Kate Healy and Gerald McCann, was taken. The notification for that procedural act had already been made. Shortly before 3:00 p.m., on September 6, Kate Healy, enters the premises of the DIC of Portimão accompanied by the press advisor. Her lawyer is already waiting for her and the room where the questioning will take place is already prepared. Outside, for some time the public has gathered. Kate Healy laughs, as she walks through the door of the building, saying it's good for tourism, referring to the media show that was set up. Two questions arise at that moment. Her lawyer makes one last attempt not to proceed, for the moment, to a questioning as arguido, but only to an inquiry as a witness. We do not agree with this apparent retreat. Some of the leaders of the investigation seem to expect the miracle of a confession. We are skeptical about this. It was decided to start questioning her as a witness, and the interview should be stopped when, in the temporal report she was about to make of May 3, she reached the moment when she returned to the apartment with her three children at 5:30 p.m, as from there everything she said could incriminate her, being at stake the principle of non-self-incrimination and the obligation to constitute her arguido in the face of sufficient existing evidence. The other issue concerned the presence of the press advisor.
- Look here! I may be wrong, but I’ve gone through the penal process code and I don’t find here the figure of press advisor, is this one of the new changes to the code that will come into place soon, or is it a new fad?
- Leave it. There’s no problem. The woman sits by the ‘piquete’ and waits for the end of the diligence.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteI did not agree with the presence of press advisors at the police station while that kind of diligence was taking place. That presence was unnecessary and nefarious to the investigation, but the lady, stayed there waiting. At 20h00, the inquiry was interrupted for rest and food, resuming at 22h00 and ending at 23h00. Nothing of great relevance came as a result of this inquiry, other than two details: Kate remembered now - five months later - that Gerald wore blue jeans and wore sports shoes on the evening of 3 May. The other detail was related to the time that David Payne, late in the afternoon of May 3, had spent in her house. Gerald was speaking of 30 minutes, Kate Healy now said only 30 seconds. The need to reduce this time of permanence of David Payne's at 5A, when there was only Kate Healy, with her three children, while Gerald played tennis is not understandable. What's wrong with being 30 minutes or just 30 seconds? Before Kate Healy and her lawyer left the building, it was necessary to meet with an officer with responsibility from the Public Security Police, in order to guarantee Kate all the security conditions.”
*****
Before we proceed we want to acknowledge that Mr Amaral, like Kate, says that she was heard as a witness. We will deal with that in the next part of these comments when we hope to focus on what being an assistant means.
Now, we are focused on when the McCanns were constituted arguidos and why. Remember that this has all to do with the fact that being an arguido has nothing to do with being heard under caution in the UK and saying they are the same thing is a mistake that if made, will ruin any possibility of the case being prosecuted in Portugal, where it has to be prosecuted.
So, and on the constitution of arguidos, it’s very clear from Mr Amaral’s words that the decision was taken on Sept 3 or even before that. On that day, the McCanns are notified they have to appear for questioning on the 6th. They are not notified that they are arguidos but they were either informed that they would be or they were informed to have a lawyer present and that amounts to the same.
The fact that their lawyer was with Kate on Sept 6 proves this. From Mr Amaral’s words, the lawyer is fully aware that she was about to be constituted arguido and tries to change things before the questioning which he succeeds.
Please note that the decision to constitute them as arguido was outside the investigation, even outside the PJ as it involved the Public Ministry as well. So we doubt it that it was made on September 3 but on a date before that. September 3 was just the day the McCanns were informed they were going to be constituted arguidos in the near future, when they were to be questioned as per notification.
The decision to constitute a person as arguido in a normal investigation is the responsibility of the officers responsible for it, no need to inform anyone outside it. In fact, reading Mr Amaral’s words above, one can see that it is something that may happen in the middle of a questioning. In such cases, the decision to make the person an arguido is taken by the questioning officer without any other coordination.
The fact that the Maddie case investigation team felt the need to coordinate with the Director of the PJ and the Public Ministry to decide, shows how much the political pressure was felt and all was done carefully so no mistakes were made.
And Kate McCann confirms this in her book. Even though she’s clearly untruthful about the details, she acknowledges that the McCanns were informed they were to become arguidos on Sept 3. From Chapter 16 “Fantasy Land”, pgs 231 – 233:
“The day after the dream had been a difficult one. That night I’d gone to bed with puffy eyes. I woke on the morning of Monday 3 September with puffier ones.
There was a phone call from Ricardo. He would be coming over later as he needed Gerry to sign some release forms so that the emails relating to the Dutch extortion attempt could be used as evidence in court.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteAlan Pike was back in Praia da Luz today to see how we were coping with recent events and our preparations for returning to the UK the following Monday. We spent several hours talking about my recent low episodes and the support we were going to need at home. He reassured us that he would be keeping in touch with us and that we would continue to see him regularly. Gerry and I spoke of the craziness going on around us: the media speculation, the lies, and the change in the attitude and the behaviour of the police. At one point I remarked sardonically, ‘They’ll be hauling us in as suspects next!’
‘Now you’re wandering into fantasy land,’ replied Alan.
At 4.30pm Ricardo arrived with a female colleague and the forms Gerry needed to complete. After his colleague left with the paperwork, Ricardo asked if we had any queries he could answer. ‘Do you have any information for us?’ I inquired.
He clarified with us the date of our planned departure back to the UK and told us that the PJ wanted to ‘interrogate’ me on Wednesday and Gerry on Thursday. We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now? As far as we knew, they didn’t have the forensic results back yet.
We should bring our lawyer with us to the police station, Ricardo went on. Gerry smelled a rat. The law has changed now, but back then witnesses were not normally entitled to legal representation. ‘Isn’t it unusual for witnesses to be questioned with their lawyer present?’ he asked. It was like pulling teeth, but these were teeth that would have been falling out very soon anyway. We were not going to be questioned as witnesses, Ricardo finally admitted. ‘So what will our status be, then?’ Gerry pressed him.
‘It’s called arguido.’
As if we’d never heard the word.
I dropped my head in my hands in utter disbelief. I began to shake and cry. I shouted at Ricardo, ‘What are you doing? Why are you doing this? I can’t believe what’s going on! This is ridiculous. It’s despicable.’ I shook my head over and over again. ‘This can’t be happening. This just cannotbe true!’
What kind of country was this? And while the PJ were going down this track, leading the media and public to believe we were responsible for our daughter’s disappearance, who was looking for Madeleine?
I remember crying out in despair, ‘What will our parents think? How will they cope with this? What are you trying to do? Destroy our family completely?’ These were of course rhetorical questions, but they would subsequently be thrown back at me as some kind of proof of a guilty conscience. My remark about our parents in particular was perceived as strange and suspicious. To me it was a completely understandable reaction. We love our parents and were greatly concerned about their health and emotional state. They had lost their granddaughter. They had seen their own son and daughter in extreme pain and distress and every aspect of our characters ripped to shreds in the newspapers. They’d been through so much already, and now this.”
******
Is it credible to think that Ricardo Paiva, mandated to inform the McCanns they were to be heard at the PJ station, would wait for Kate to ask him before he notified them? It’s absurd to think that was what happened.
What matters is that Kate acknowledges what Mr Amaral has said: they were informed on Sept 3 that they would be constituted arguidos when they were to be questioned at the police station as per notification and were informed to take a lawyer with them.
The PJ Files corroborate the above by showing that there was lawyer present at the questioning.
All very clear and very transparent and very well referenced in time.
No mythical “off-the-record” conversations behind the decision to constitute the McCanns as Blacksmith states there were. Please note that Blacksmith speaks elsewhere of the August 8 conversations. We are fully aware of them and will deal with them as well.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteFor now, contradicting what Blacksmith has said that it happened after the September 6 questioning, the McCann’s fate in becoming arguidos was sealed before September 3.
As we have said repeatedly, we don’t engage in personal attacks. What may seem as personal isn’t as it always contains precious information either about the case or about the shenanigans that are relevant to the fate of the case.
In this case, Blacksmith’s arrogance allows us to show readers that there is no such thing as unpublished PJ Files, filled with secret things that weren’t released to the public because the public simply couldn’t handle the truth.
What was in the files and was not published, has been justified. What was not in the files and was not published were things that the PJ considered that they were irrelevant or repeated what was already in them.
But there’s another trait from Blacksmith that is helpful to us and that is his ignorance. His ignorance allows us to fully understand the complexities behind the arguido status. Something that doesn’t exist in the UK and it’s has absolutely nothing to do with being questioned under caution in the UK.
We will deal with this next but for now we ask readers to go back and read what Sr Amaral has said above.
As it can been seen, the principles behind both the arguido and the questioning under caution are the opposite. While under caution the person is told BE CAREFUL what you say it can be used against you, so play close attention to every word you say and every word you don’t say as silence is also meaningful, the arguido status says BE CAREFUL, you don’t have to say anything, so consider wisely what you are going to say next, if it helps clarify your innocence do speak but if you feel that it doesn’t help clarify your innocence – and that doesn’t mean you’re guilty in any way – it’s best you remain silent.
Or, in other words, it’s telling that person that being silent has absolutely no legal effect on the system considering you innocent or guilty, it just means that you don’t have anything to add that will help us see your innocence.
So, all those saying that Kate McCann should be hauled in and made answer the 48 questions she didn’t answer because her silence just shows how guilty she is, are looking at the issue solely under a British perspective, the questioned under caution one.
But the right perspective, that of the arguido one, is that she didn’t answer because she not only didn’t have to but as she had nothing to add that would help prove her innocence – nothing to do with admitting guilt – she should not have answered at all, as she didn’t. Her silence was just that, silence.
Any inference, either way, taken about that silence is legally WRONG under the Portuguese justice system.
We hope readers are starting to understand the real importance of this arguido v questioned under caution issue is to the validity of the case if it is to be prosecuted in Portugal, where it has to be.
Is Operation Grange not doing anything? Good. Just let it be. Its purpose is to exist and do nothing until one day someone, with the capability to decide, will tell them to “wake up” and ask the Portuguese if they don’t want to further investigate this and that, and then this “this and that” will get the ball rolling.
While it exists, it’s a nightmare for the other side, the people who have been fighting fiercely for over a decade to make sure the truth is not outed.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteAs can be seen Blacksmith is very useful to unveil the truth, both about the case and the shenanigans around it to stop truth from being outed.
Well, according to some he’s filled with qualities:
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1042864550381535234
“Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
More from the awesome Mr Blacksmith ... #McCann
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/2018/09/shambles-time.html?m=1 …
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dnj_x63WwAEzW8N.jpg
12:54 pm - 20 Sep 2018”
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1042898381889257474
“Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Whispering Retweeted Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸
Awesome!!??😂
Whispering added,
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1042864550381535234
3:08 pm - 20 Sep 2018”
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1042900104129269761
“Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
astounding, astonishing, awe-inspiring, stupendous, staggering, extraordinary, incredible, unbelievable; magnificent,wonderful, spectacular, remarkable,phenomenal, prodigious,miraculous, sublime; formidable,imposing, impressive; informalmind-boggling, mind-blowing.. :)
3:15 pm - 20 Sep 2018”
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. However, we do think this best describes all from the Lick-spittle gang:
https://twitter.com/TinaYou28640384/status/1042869565682851840
“Tina Young @TinaYou28640384
Replying to @DesireeLWiggin1 @TheBunnyReturns and 4 others
I'd rather be destitute and on the bones of my arse than be on their payroll sticking up 4 them, some people will sell their soul to the devil for money, no principles, no scruples and no moral fibre.
1:14 pm - 20 Sep 2018”
To be continued.
Hi Textusa-Is Operation Grange doing anything!
DeleteThe implication in that next sentence,implies that the Portugal PJ are awaiting for Operation Grange to "Officially" declare that Portugal PJ can now take over to Investigate the Madeleine McCann case further,is that right?
that your awaiting for them to Finalize first,but what happens if they decide to,No longer proceed to investigate,but file Not closed,put on hold,where does that leave Portugal PJ!
Are you ever going to get a response to the query about NT's revised timeline for the Smith sighting and how it helps the case AGAINST the McCanns, because it doesn’t, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 21 Sep 2018, 12:14:00,
DeleteVery good question, thank you.
The only serious answer that anyone can give it is: no one knows.
We don’t think even the Portuguese authorities know. We think they will only decide after whatever is to be decided in the UK with Grange.
From where we stand, all we can say is that we have never known for an investigation to be open for so long in Portugal. Not even Casa Pia or Operação Marquês (the investigation involving José Sócrates). Very strange, very strange indeed.
We believe the reason for that is that both operations are interlinked, an ‘Operation Grange’ set up in Portugal which serves as the point-of-contact for Operation Grange if and when it needs to establish contact with Portugal regarding the case.
Like Grange, its purpose is simply to exist until the “decision day”. Up to that day, it wastes no money and no manpower as those PJ Officers allocated to it go on with their daily business dealing with all the cases that require their attention.
The only waste of resources it had was in 2014 when it had to hear those who, under the request and supervision of Grange, were notified to be questioned in Portugal.
But then, as the PJ were not the ones who determined what was to be questioned and its role was to simply ask the questions and make sure that all was in accordance with the Portuguese law, it cannot be considered that much of a waste.
We have only been analysing the importance of both Operation Grange remaining open and it not interviewing the McCanns without the request and supervision of the Portuguese authorities.
You raise the interesting question of PJ’s open investigation in a post-Grange without results.
With Brexit, the links between the 2 countries are very far from being what they were before it.
So what has the state of Portugal to gain in suffering another humiliation with Maddie by closing the case without any conclusion again? Not seeing anything.
This humiliation will stick out like a sore thumb, visible to the world as it will happen after (please remember we are speculating a post-Grange without conclusion and not suggesting it as a certainty) the UK closes Grange. Grange opens, PJ investigation opens, Grange closes, PJ investigation closes – that cannot be simply a coincidence.
And how will the other 26 EU members react to this humiliation imposed on one of its members – Portugal – by a ‘third country’ – the UK? Will the EU allow it or will it pressure Portugal not to accept such a humiliation? Only after a Grange without results will we know.
Also, there’s the question about the public access to these new files. It will be strange if there were no reasons to stop the files from being made public in 2008, there would be a reason to stop that from happening when the PJ investigation closes.
The biggest problem we foresee, even with an eventual prosecution of the McCanns and all other involved in the obstruction of justice, is that it will have to show why the investigation remained open for so long. For example, it will be very strange to see in the process documents filed in 2013 (for example, we would expect to find Euclides Monteiro’s wife statement there) and eventually in 2014 and then see a dispatch dated 2018 or 2019 and no documentation in between these dates.
So it’s very unclear what the decision will be. One thing is certain, only a prosecution would help make the strangeness of the whole process be less visible as people would be less curious as seeing the results at the end of a journey does always distract from the curiosity about the irregularities of the path that was walked.
Note, it would be naïve to think that there aren’t also vested Portuguese interests in not having the truth outed. How they will influence the decision that will be taken then and only then will we know.
Hoped to have answered.
Hi Textusa 17.26.
DeleteI asked the question,as here in the UK it is or has been taken that Madeleine PJ part Two has been as a joint Enterprise,Scotland yard searches etc,as per McCann families request?
The UK Government at No time during Operation Grange stated Portugal has not been involved,but have Not stated the exact premise of how far the Portugal PJ have been involved either,eg No Running Commentary,we don't have to explain what we are doing?
Which would explain Ten years of bullshit to the public,(Mushrooms) kept in the dark fed on shit,syndrome!
So the chicanery from Operation Grange continue for years to obfuscate Portugal PJ to begin their case PT 2,another 10 yrs of lies to the public,it doesn't matter it was only a child's life taken away from her?
The Human Race or big parts of it an utter fucking disgrace from so called educated people,then have the audacity to call other people Barbaric?
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/731452/madeleine-mccann-missing-search-kate-gerry-goncalo-amaral-fund
ReplyDeletehttps://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2018/09/goncalo-amaral-daily-mail-story-is.html
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7319265/madeleine-mccann-donations-dried-up/
ReplyDeleteWHAT'S NEXT FOR MADDIE HUNT?
Donations to Madeleine McCann’s search fund have dried up after 11 years — so what’s next?
The McCanns could lose the last bit of money they have for the search if a EU court rules against them.
By Mike Ridley
22nd September 2018, 12:27 am
Updated: 22nd September 2018, 12:30 am
IT remains the most famous missing person case in living history, broke the heart of a nation and sparked searches all over the world.
When Madeleine McCann disappeared just days shy of her fourth birthday during a family holiday to Portugal in 2007, the public response was overwhelming in terms of grief, fascination and a desperation to find her.
This goodwill translated into an outpouring of donations to the fund set up to “leave no stone unturned”, which topped £1.8million within a few months.
Yet now, after 11 years of failed investigations all over the world and lengthy legal battles, the public has simply stopped giving.
Last night a family source admitted: “There are no public donations of any value.” The fund’s online shop selling stickers, T-shirts and missing posters has shut down.
It comes after we revealed that Madeleine’s Fund — which still has nearly three quarters of a million pounds left in its accounts — could be virtually wiped out if a European court case goes against the family.
Last year it earned £7,180, but most of that came from interest on more than £500,000 invested by stockbrokers to pay for private investigators when Scotland Yard stops its probe, titled Operation Grange.
And our inquiries this week have revealed that donations from the public have virtually dried up over the past three years.
In the first months after Madeleine vanished from the family’s holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz, £1.8million flooded into the fund, including more than £64,000 from sales of T-shirts, wristbands and “holiday packs” — posters and car stickers holidaymakers could paste up when they went abroad.
The following year generous supporters donated more than £600,000, with merchandise again a major part of the fund’s income.
By 2012 accounts show more £306,393 was still coming in from the public, much of it from sales in the online shop.
But the following year income from the public dropped to £70,000, and by 2014 supporters gave just £21,265, including only £2,744 from people buying T-shirts and wristbands.
Kate McCann recently posted on the Fund website that she is no longer able to deal with sales of posters and T-shirts that help fund the hunt for her daughter, who would now be 15. Her post reads: “Unfortunately, due to many commitments and pressures, I am unable to attend to website orders.
“Your support means a lot to us. Your kindness and generosity is no less appreciated, however, and continues to buoy us up.”
Donations from well-wishers have now dwindled to nothing.
A family friend said: “Public donations dried up a long time ago. Every time the story comes into the news a few kind people generously send a few quid in.
“Last year’s tenth anniversary brought it into the public’s minds and most normal rational, kind human beings will donate then.
“But the idea that money is still flooding in is just wrong. There are no public donations of any real value. In 2007 and 2008 the money was coming in but there was a gradual fade off after that.”
Support for Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry was rocked when Portuguese police named them as “arguidos”, or suspects, in September 2007, and again when it emerged they had used public donations to pay two £2,000 instalments on their mortgage.
The couple were also subjected to baseless yet frenzied social media allegations of involvement in their daughter’s death.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteThe only extra money going into the fund now is from royalties on the book Kate wrote in 2011 about the case — Madeleine: Our Daughter’s Disappearance And The Continuing Search For Her.
Together with serialisation deals, it is understood the book — which became a best-seller — has raised nearly £1million for the fund, which has six trustees including Kate and Gerry, both 50.
Last year the book raised royalties amounting to £84,096.
An insider said: “The fund always generates lots of animosity on social media and criticism. Some people think it is all public donations. It isn’t. In the early days more than a million pounds came in on a wave of sympathy in the shock of what had happened.
“That money was largely spent in the first few years on private investigative work, as those donors would have wanted it to be. The original funds that have been given by public donation have long been spent, properly, but spent.”
Tax expert Jim Lee, who has studied accounts filed by the fund since 2008, confirmed: “The accounts no longer say where their income is coming from. Most of it is from stock market investments and royalties from Kate’s book.
“In the early days there were a lot on donations being made to their fund but they are certainly not getting the money from the public that once flowed in.”
Most recent accounts revealed how just over £65,000 was spent on fees for the McCann’s Portuguese lawyer, Isabel Duarte, to cover the several years it took to lodge a case in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.
The legal action is aimed at overturning a Portuguese Supreme Court ruling that detective Goncalo Amaral — who wrote a book about the case claiming Madeleine died in Portugal and her parents covered it up — did not defame the McCanns.
If the couple lose the European Court of Human Rights case they face having to pay Amaral £430,000 in damages, plus costs, which could wipe out most of the remaining money.
Timeline of events
May 3, 2007: Madeleine vanishes from her bedroom while her parents eat nearby.
September 6: Kate McCann attends a formal police interview.
September 7: Kate and Gerry are made arguidos. Kate refuses to answer 48 questions.
October 3: Detective Goncalo Amaral is removed from the case.
April 7, 2008: Leicestershire Police interview McCann holiday pals dubbed “Tapas Seven”.
July 21: Portugal authorities lift the arguido status from the McCanns.
May 10, 2011: Scotland Yard launches Operation Grange dedicated to the case.
April 25, 2012: Met release artist’s image of Madeleine aged nine.
July 4: Scotland Yard says it is investigating 38 “persons of interest”, including 12 Britons.
October 14: Met releases e-fits of men they want to trace, including man seen carrying a child.
October 24: Portuguese police reopen their investigation.
May 6, 2014: British detectives granted permission to excavate two sites near where Madeleine disappeared.
October 28, 2015: Operation Grange team is cut from 29 to four.
April 28, 2016: Met says investigators have one last line of inquiry.
More rubbish!
DeleteKate McCann recently posted on the Fund website that she is no longer able to deal with sales of posters and T-shirts that help fund the hunt for her daughter, who would now be 15. Her post reads: “Unfortunately, due to many commitments and pressures, I am unable to attend to website orders.
Should this be due to no interest there is nothing to sell???? Or we know the fund is a fraud???? Too many other commitments stop her working on the fund sounds like M is not a priority....which she isn’t.
Hilarious! A best seller??? Together with serialisation deals, it is understood the book — which became a best-seller — has raised nearly £1million for the fund,
I suppose they had to find an excuse for where the fund money came from. I bought my copies for 1p not long after it was published and one was hardback which means it was the original print as it doesn’t go to paperback form until hardbacks are sold out.
It does seem there is something in the air at the moment but maybe mcs don’t even know yet what is going on so the various sympathy stories are trying to pre-empt it.
https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Your_Application_ENG.pdf
ReplyDeletePlease see frequently asked questions.
Application to ECHR has no suspensive effect. Sigh.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/731452/madeleine-mccann-missing-search-kate-gerry-goncalo-amaral-fund
ReplyDeleteMadeleine McCann parents accused by ex-cop of using cash for legal bills instead of search
MADELEINE McCann’s parents have been accused of spending money on legal fees instead of the hunt for their daughter.
By Jerry Lawton / Published 22nd September 2018
Ex-detective Goncalo Amaral has called on the couple to reveal just how much they have spent on “court cases”.
And he said it was “thousands of pounds not spent on looking for their daughter”.
The McCanns sued the ex-Portuguese police officer over claims he made in a book about Madeleine’s disappearance.
The couple said his assertions stopped members of the public actively looking for her.
They were initially awarded £430,000 in libel damages.
But the judgment was overturned on appeal, a decision later ratified by Portugal’s Supreme Court.
The couple have now gone to the European Court of Human Rights to try to get the ruling overturned.
Madeleine vanished while on holiday in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in 2007.
Mr Amaral said it will not be his fault if the McCanns run out of cash, insisting he has never taken any legal action against them.
He told news website Portugal Resident.com that the couple should explain “how much money they have spent on lawyers’ fees”.
He added: “These were thousands of pounds not spent on looking for their daughter.”
Last night a spokesman for the McCanns, from Rothley, Leics, declined to comment.
https://twitter.com/Tealtraum/status/1043561339782930433
ReplyDeleteBen Salmon @Tealtraum
Just been made aware of this. Text, you are well aware I'm part of no agenda against you, it's been your choice not to publish my saying so on your blog. I'm most certainly not against Amaral or the truth. You're creating enemies by proxy, I'm not biting. #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dnt4_XHX0AEufIC.jpg
11:03 am - 22 Sep 2018
[Picture attached to the tweet above is a printscreen of this comment from us:
“Textusa18 Sep 2018, 13:05:00
Very interesting comment on FB, in support of NT:
“Ben Salmon: Although I don't comment on the blog for reasons NT knows, I'm fully behind you - your dissection of Kate's book is brilliant, and I do have a chuckle at certain other posts...you've also increased my insult vocabulary tenfold!”
Ben Salmon is @Tealtrum on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/Tealtraum/
Disregarding the fact that these people think insults are commendable and not even wondering what the reasons are (note plural), what is important to note is that we’re slowly becoming aware that these people have known each other for a long time, they talk off-line to each other, they are like a family.
A family with an agenda: to make the McCanns hated as much as possible but do all in their power to stop the truth being known about why an abduction was faked to cover-up Maddie’s death.
Amaral and his family? They are just collateral damage and he should have wised up anyway.
We know that we are outnumbered on the internet. But then, aren’t the victories when the odds are stacked against us that make us feel pride the most?
We continue to guide our actions by the 2 phrases that we have on the blog’s front page from Ghandi:
“Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth, for being correct, for being you.
Never apologize for being correct or being years ahead of your time.
If you’re right and you know it, speak your mind. Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth.””]
*******
https://twitter.com/Tealtraum/status/1043562265818091521
Ben Salmon @Tealtraum
FWIW the 'certain other posts' don't relate to you or your blog. I'm open to contact if you'd like to chat privately, however I'm not open to a disjointed twitter-blog comment-twitter-blog...exchange. If you believe we have an issue then let's actually have a conversation.
11:06 am - 22 Sep 2018
*******
https://twitter.com/Tealtraum/status/1043564948268490752
Ben Salmon @Tealtraum
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns
I have tried 2 or 3 times, and even tried the 'do not publish' approach so I could drop my email. I heard nothing back whatsoever. I don't understand why some people are so determined to create drama rather than focusing on what they're good at.
11:17 am - 22 Sep 2018
*******
https://twitter.com/Tealtraum/status/1043568026665271296
Ben Salmon @Tealtraum
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns
I just don't appreciate being dragged in just for complimenting a good blog. That doesn't mean I implicitly share every opinion in it. In fact I doubt there's anyone I literally share every opinion with. That's not natural. The accusation I want the truth hidden is absurd.
11:29 am - 22 Sep 2018
Ben Salmon,
Delete#1 - “I have tried 2 or 3 times, and even tried the 'do not publish' approach so I could drop my email. I heard nothing back whatsoever.”
You have not. We have checked the spam box as well. We respond to all “do not publish” comments to acknowledge having received them.
All unpublished comments that we don’t acknowledge fall under the category “transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse” and having checked them again, none came from you.
All unpublished comments that we acknowledge we explain why we are not publishing them, and, again, none came from you.
#2 - “That doesn't mean I implicitly share every opinion in it [NT’s blog].”
Saying “I’m fully behind you” is to say “I'm fully behind you”. Saying that you consider NT’s blog to be a good blog reinforces that idea. Things in life are very rarely black or white, as they usually fall into that infinite range of shades of grey between these 2 colours. But this is one of those situations which it is either black or white and no other colour.
That’s why we don’t want to engage in any conversation with anyone who supports NT. That simple. And now it’s too late to backpedal as you are trying to do.
You made your bed lie in it. The proof that this is the bed you made is the fact that in this particular twitter thread Mr Thompson says, unsurprisingly, very harsh words against us and we failed to see anything from you in our defence, which would be expected if you were as impartial as you now are pretending to be.
#3 - “I don't comment on the blog [NT’s blog] for reasons NT knows”
You are stating beyond doubt or any question that you and NT talk to each other. As we haven’t seen any comment from you on his blog and he alleges to not do twitter, there’s only one explanation: you talk off-line.
(Cont)
(Cont)
Delete#4 - “If you believe we have an issue then let's actually have a conversation”
You made a choice to fully support NT and that is your absolute right and one which we absolutely respect. But now please live with the consequences of the choice you made.
We’re not interested in having any conversation with you.
Even if you had “tried 2 or 3 times, and even tried the 'do not publish' approach so I could drop my email”, which you haven’t we would have acknowledged it by telling you the exact words I told Mr Thompson in a private conversation which we did not authorise him to make public but he did any way: “Sorry Ben. After your public stance against me we have nothing to talk [about]. Have a great life. Goodbye”
We will continue to mention you when we feel we should. What is said on the internet is public and subject to scrutiny and you are no exception.
We are welcomed to scrutinise what we say. It’s something we encourage people to do, not only you. The best our critics have been able to come back with is insult. If you want to join that club, again, it’s a choice you are free and have the right to make.
#5 - “The accusation I want the truth hidden is absurd”
That’s exactly what we would expect someone like you to say.
As we said, this is black and white. Justice is not about half-truths. Truth is companionless. It’s solitary because it’s unique.
It’s transparent and is never the end result of selective research, which is what prentendy antis like yourself do.
Do tell the truth, only not the whole truth. Just a selected portion of it. Like when NT says Kate is lying in her book. That is true but it’s a truth known only since 2011 and we’re in 2018 so those showing fascination and awe for such revelations so late in the day (you being among these as you find NT’s to be a good blog) are either showing utter ignorance or faking that fascination.
Telling only parts of the truth has only one objective: to deceive. It’s not meant to reveal the truth but rather to gain the status of a truthteller – or pretendy anti – so to facilitate the telling of future lies.
The truth is companionless but not lonely. It stands on its own. Proud. Revered and respected.
To support NT is to not support the truth. To support the truth, one cannot support NT. Thank you for making it clear where you stand, helping us to understand where the pieces fit.
https://twitter.com/GoncalAmoralis/status/1043537707182555136
ReplyDeleteMcCann Truth 🌐 @GoncalAmoralis
Replying to @ZaneZeleti @TheBunnyReturns @DesireeLWiggin1
Says who? Oh, you. Police could ask any question they liked. Thank you for your input. I know where to file this one. #mccann
9:29 am - 22 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/ZaneZeleti/status/1043777713826422786
žane želěti @ZaneZeleti
Replying to @GoncalAmoralis @TheBunnyReturns @DesireeLWiggin1
In accordance with Portuguese Law they couldn’t. Hence the Arguida status. #McCann
1:22 am - 23 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/GoncalAmoralis/status/1043788237809094658
McCann Truth 🌐 @GoncalAmoralis
Replying to @ZaneZeleti @TheBunnyReturns @DesireeLWiggin1
Total nonsense. #mccann
2:04 am - 23 Sep 2018
*******
It goes without saying how much we hate to say that NT is right. But truth is what truth is and when he tells the truth that must be acknowledged.
So when NT (Walker/Bale, briefly MWalkerbum and now Amoralis) says “Total nonsense”, he’s absolutely right.
The fact that an arguido has the right not to answer a question does not in any way mean that the police can’t ask an arguido questions.
Without any further justification, the files speak for itself on this: why on earth would the PJ ask the 48 questions if after the second, or third one it was clear that Kate McCann had opted to be silent? If they couldn’t, then all other questions would have been illegal and they aren’t.
Those saying that the PJ asked them just to show how Kate didn’t answer them, are wrong. They asked them so that Kate couldn’t later say that she didn’t clarify further her innocence on a certain issue because she wasn’t asked and so was unable to further clarify her innocence during the investigation.
So the fact that an arguido has the right to remain silent and not answer questions, doesn’t mean the questions are not asked. It’s not a quick “oh, as you won’t answer questions we can all go home early today” session.
Questions are asked, as the files show. The only inference that can be taken from each one of the unanswered questions is that at that moment she didn’t have anything to add that would help clarify her innocence regarding the issue mentioned in the question. Nothing else.
And Justice for Madeleine FB group has done an Anon/Nick:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.facebook.com/groups/JusticeForMadeleine/permalink/1898862970209768/
“Joanne Butterworth – Justice For Madeleine
Yesterday at 13.09 (Public)
So, Madeleine dies, intentionally / accidently, on the 3rd May, or in the days leading up to the 3rd. (Insert own views/theories.)
This is covered up by her parents / the Tapas 7 / UK gov / MI5. Again, insert own views.
Her body is hidden for a min of 20 odd days until they rent the car. Then she is moved / buried / cremated, (& again, insert own views...)
What I can't get my head around is where they took Madeleine in the interim. They didn't know Portugal. They had only been there a few days. Where / How would they know where to take her, that she 100%, (to the point the McCanns, sleeping well within days etc, )wouldn't be found?
What help did they have? Because to me it is possible they had no help until this point, but I don't believe for one minute they could have carried this off without help.
So how quickly was that help available? Was Robert Murat some kind of facilitator? He knew Portugal, he was 'into property', was he some kind of go to / fix it man????
I suppose the point I am ambling towards is....if there was no sort of cover up, or 'help' for whatever reason, how has Madeleine disappeared without trace? She should have been found. There simply wasn't enough expertise within the McCann & Tapas lot for Madeleine not to be found.
So, if not Murat, who?”
*******
This was posted on JFM, permitted by its admin.
What will NT think?! Wait, he’s an admin there so he must agree with it.
So it’s best we redirect the question: what will awesome, astounding, astonishing, awe-inspiring, stupendous, staggering, extraordinary, incredible, unbelievable; magnificent, wonderful, spectacular, remarkable, phenomenal, prodigious, miraculous, sublime; formidable, imposing, impressive; informal mind-boggling, mind-blowing Blacksmith think?
What is a Anon/Nick? It was when Anon/Nick decided to say that the McCanns were seen at Kelly’s. He then dug his hole deeper by going as far as saying that they were seen there without the children.
Them being at Kelly’s means that not only the T9 narrative flies out the window as it shows that the Tapas staff lied when they say – and Tapas reservation sheets confirm this version – the T9 used Tapas every night except Sunday and in that one they went to the Millenium.
Now JFM states clearly that other people helped. And it’s exactly the point we have been making for years and have been insulted for making it: how could T9, unfamiliar with PDL area, allegedly, dispose of a body without any assistance?
They had no tools, no vehicle, no knowledge of terrain or property ownership. They hadn’t explored the nearby area, confining themselves to resort. They didn’t even know where the church was, remember?
That’s what this JFM post conveys with which we agree fully: how could they possibly achieve all of what the evidence shows with no local knowledge?
The answer is simple. Their timings or locations are not believable and it’s evident they had local contacts.
The campaign currently led by NT & Blacksmith, to which Jerry Lawton has recently lent a hand, is explained in our post "The McCann Trial".
ReplyDeletehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-mccann-trial.html
Hatemongering to convey the idea the "evil" couple is not getting away scot-free even if Grange closes. They have, are and will forever be "punished" by the angry mob who would lynch them if they could.
Hi Textusa, Hatemongering to convey the idea the"The Evil couple"Angry Mob.Lynch Mob and will forever be punished?
ReplyDeleteIf people make their choice of how they see person's,people as,"Hatemongering"this is the use of"Twitter,Facebook,computer" based people passing messages,if they display "Hate" in their message it is their choice!
It is a bit like a "fire is going out",so how do you keep it going,refuel with Wood or Pour Petrol on the embers?
The people involved with Madeleine's disappearance knew full well what had been asked of them?
They have had a "Pact of Silence" for over Eleven Years!
These person's have never come forward to "Help/Assist" the relevant Authorities,reconstruction,they have hidden from disclosing knowledge of the case?
Madeleine's parents,Kate,Gerry have used Government resources and Legal QC's,Barristers to avoid answering to Portugal PJ Authorities,never revealing how much has been spent from the "Find Madeleine (Sluice)Fund"?
You Reap what you Sow!
Anonymous 23 Sep 2018, 16:37:00,
DeleteWe don't know in what you believe was Maddie's fate. If you believe like we do that Maddie died accidentally because an adult pushed another in the middle of a heated argument let's objectively look at what crimes have been committed:
- David Payne and Kate McCann of a homicide without any intent or premeditation, which carries, understandably so, no prison sentence;
- Gerry McCann is no way involved in Maddie's death;
- Gerry and Kate McCann & others (not only the T9) with concealment of a body;
- Gerry and Kate McCann & others (more than those involved with concealment of body) with obstruction of justice.
Do Kate and Gerry McCann - however little one may like them or however much one may think they are arrogant - deserve the social punishment they are getting?
Is this punishment proportional in severity to the crimes listed? We don't think they are.
We at the blog refuse to participate in lynchings, specially ones to distract from those other than the McCanns are ALSO (we're not exempting the McCanns of anything) of concealment of a body and obstruction of justice.
I don’t agree with a lynch mob, but we can’t forget what they did to Brenda L and children who had to be proved not to be M. The family of the girl in Morocco being one.
DeleteAdd to that the enormous cost to Portugal. Unlike OG, they had no choice other that to investigate.
Then the injury inflicted on GA and his family.
What they have done subsequently has compounded their original deed.
On the other side of the balance is the damage they have done to themselves and their children. Something that will never disappear is the shadow hanging over them.
I have no wish to say a lot more about them as people.
Maybe our wrath should now be directed at those who may have assisted or pressured them to continue on their course.
If the case ever results in a prosecution, I won’t be jubilant. Just relieved it’s come to a close, whatever the final outcome
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6196197/Shock-Kate-McCann-closes-online-fundraising-shop.html
ReplyDeleteEXCLUSIVE: Kate McCann closes down online shop raising funds for the search to find her missing daughter Madeleine amid claims donations 'have dwindled to virtually zero'
The online shop to raise funds for her search has been closed down by Kate
Kate has told how she has shut the shop due to 'commitments and pressures'
A source claims that donations for the search 'dried up a long time ago'
By TRACEY KANDOHLA FOR MAIL ONLINE
PUBLISHED: 12:16 BST, 22 September 2018 | UPDATED: 15:18 BST, 22 September 2018
The online shop selling Madeleine McCann merchandise to help highlight the missing girl's plight and raise funds for her search has abruptly been closed down by her mother Kate.
Too-busy Kate has told how she has unfortunately had to shut the website store selling travel packs, T shirts, posters and car stickers bearing her daughter's face with slogans 'Please don't give up on me' and 'Still missing, still missed' because of her 'many commitments and pressures.'
In another fresh blow it has been revealed that donations from the public to the Maddie Fund have dwindled to 'virtually zero' over the past 11years.
A source close to Kate and husband Gerry said: 'The idea that money is still flooding in is just wrong. Donations dried up a long time ago. At times the story comes into the news a few kind people send in a quid or two but their is nothing of any real value.'
The McCanns are still waiting to fund out if Scotland Yard will request extra cash to keep the search for Maddie going when their current funding runs out in just eight days.
So far the Met Police has not put in a new bid to the Home Office leaving Kate and Gerry on tenterhooks not knowing what's happening.
A family member told MailOnline today: 'We have to wait to see what the Home Office decide about the Grange operation,'
Three-year-old Maddie vanished from an apartment in Portugal's Praia da Luz during a family holiday in May 2007. She and her younger twin siblings had been left sleeping alone in their beds while her parents were dining in a nearby tapas restaurant with pals.
The Madeleine Fund, officially called Leaving No Stone Unturned, was launched shortly after she went missing. Its sole purpose of to find Maddie, support her family and bring her abductors to justice.
A sum of £750,000 is left in the pot which the McCanns will dip into to pay for their own private investigators if the police search is shelved. But a threat of losing a vast chunk of the money in a bitter legal battle which is still ongoing against a former Portuguese police chief looms over them. Retired officer Goncalo Amaral accused the McCann's of being involved in their daughter's accidental death and covering up - false claims over which they couple sued him for libel.
Heart doctor Gerry and former GP turned medical worker Kate, both 50, of Rothley, Leicestershire, are waiting to hear of the European Court of Human Rights will consider their ultimate appeal against a ruling against them made by the Supreme Court in Portugal.
Their friend said: 'If the case goes ahead and they lose they will have to pay Mr Amaral £430,000 in damages and legal fees which could wipe out the fund for their daughter. Three quarters of a million sounds like a lot of money but it is not if a legal payout has to be made at any point in the future.'
Mr Amaral has called on the McCanns, who have paid their Portuguese lawyer helping them fight their libel battle, to reveal just how much they have spent on 'court cases.' He said today it was not his fault if they run un out of cash, insisting he has never taken any legal action against them. He told news website Portugal Resident.com that the couple should explain 'how much money they have spent on lawyers' fees', adding: 'These were thousands of pounds not spent on looking for their daughter.'
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteOver the years money had been flooding into the Fund - which once topped nearly £2million - much it from online sales of merchandise to help the search for Maddie, who would now be aged 15. But Kate recently closed the shop, posting on the Find Maddie website: 'Unfortunately, due to many commitments and pressures, I am unable at this time to attend to website orders. We greatly appreciate your support. Thank you to everyone who has kindly donated to Madeleine's Fund through our Online Store. Your support means a lot to us.'
She added: 'Your kindness and generosity is no less appreciated however and continues to buoy us up.'
In the first months of Maddie's disappearance from the Algarve £1.8million poured into the fund including more than £64,000 from sales of T-shirts, wristbands and 'holiday packs' — posters and car stickers holidaymakers could paste up when they went abroad.
The following year generous supporters donated more than £600,000, with merchandise again a s large part of the fund. But over the years is has dwindled to a few thousands pounds and now virtually nothing.
Kate's 2011 best-selling book 'Madeleine', with serialisation rights, netted her £1million which she ploughed into the Fund.
Together with serialisation deals, it is understood the book — which became a best-seller — has raised nearly £1million for the fund, which has six trustees including Kate and Gerry, both 50.
Kate and gerry are now 'keeping fingers crossed' the search for Maddie will carry on for another six months
Their pal said: 'The funding is down to the Home Office and the police. Kate and Gerry have no say in the matter. They have been here before. They simply have no idea if the search will come to an end or will carry on. It is a daunting prospect they face once more and time is running out for a decision to be made.'
The last handout of around £150,000 was given at the start of April which runs out at the end of September.
A Home Office spokesperson said today: 'To date no request has been received from the Metropolitan Police Service to extend funding for Operation Grange beyond the end of September 2018. Before we would even consider an application from the Met Police to continue its Operation Grange inquiry we need to know what work is left to be done and how much is would cost.'
Next Saturday Maddie's eminent cardiologist dad will be giving a rare and powerful radio interview discussing his heartache and mental health issues over the loss of his daughter. In a bid to raise awareness and help others open he will speak candidly in 'honest, personal and sometimes painful terms' in BBC's Radio 4 programme 'Pearl: Two fathers Two Daughters.'
It will be broadcast on September 29, coincidentally just one day before the search for Maddie could continue or be axed.
*******
Kandohla joining the hatemongering bandwagon.
Fund “abruptly been closed down by her mother Kate” the “Too-busy Kate”… with what?
“Over the years money had been flooding into the Fund” but now the couple are so disliked that the funds “have dwindled to 'virtually zero' over the past 11years”.
What’s interesting about this article?
Seeing Kandohla doing a NT. After Lawton from the Star did the exact same.
They are now pulling feathers out of the hat and calling them pigeons.
Kandohla can't hide her own personality with this line: The last handout of around £150,000... etc. "Handout" - is rather like saying that what you gave me doesn't meet the standards I'm accustomed to. What a sense of entitlement...
Deletehttps://youtu.be/IuFZWUawyoA
ReplyDeleteWe recommend readers watch this “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver” video as of 08:20.
It speaks about Facebook today. The post Trump-Brexit Facebook. What FB represents today outside the US, the video speaks specifically about Myanmar.
As we have said before, with Trump and Brexit, FB has lost all its relevance in terms of social political intervention.
FB has now returned to its original purpose of people sharing baby and cat videos. Not saying that is not important. It is, as it is how people are interconnected today. Each person’s world has now widened completely out of our neighbourhoods, cities and countries and today we maintain friendships with other people across the world and there’s not only nothing strange about that as it shows how humanity never stops progressing.
Friend with whom we share things that concern us. Noble causes like fighting hunger, poverty and defend the environment.
But once the things start to go into the political sphere, FB goes into the Trump-Brexit mode whereby one only visits and follows sites that agree with us, that one already knows it will tell us what we want to hear before we hear it.
Sites filled with alleged facts. And every-one fact checks these by a selective research procedure: what supports is highlighted, what contradicts it is set aside, ignored.
The Trump-Brexit effect has made us all mistrust FB politically even in what the sites we support say. We deep-down know exactly where those sites mislead but we choose to ignore.
Political messages are no longer meant to be messages but simple venting to like-thinking ears.
As John Oliver says at 24:51 on the video:
“…it’s painfully obvious that everyone should be treating anything on their site with extreme scepticism and see FB for what it actually is, a fetid swamp of mistruths and outright lies interspersed with a reminder of a dead pet. That’s it. That’s what it is.”
Those thinking they can fool the public opinion via FB are only fooling themselves. We would even say that today to still use FB to fool others is to show desperation.
Doesn't that apply to Textusa's FB page as well?
Deletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1044313812772564992
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Green Leaper Retweeted Green Leaper
For the benefit of those who want to see the complete big round table....... #mccann
Green Leaper added,
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUlnHhGXcAAiwj-.jpg
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
#mccann
12:53 pm - 24 Sep 2018
*****
Finally!
After 1,662 days (Mar 7 2014 to Sept 24 2018), has someone from the opposing camp echoed our post “The Proof Ocean Club reads Textusa”:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-proof-ocean-club-reads-textusa.html
Quoting ourselves:
“Lastly, our “Swan Lake - Act 3” post (10Nov2012) showed the extent of image manipulation in Mr Brunts’ Sky News video.
As you can see it has been quite a quest to find BRT.
The elusive and camera shy BRT.
Until, allegedly, November 16, 2013.
The BRT finally appeared and it came from a rather surprising source.
It was when CMTV aired its special on Maddie with Gonçalo Amaral and Francisco Moita Flores in studio.
After this documentary aired we said that we wouldn’t comment about its content until a decision from the Portuguese Justice System on the ongoing damage trial McCann v Amaral in Lisbon.
Our decision was made so as not to hinder in any way whatever tactic Mr Amaral chose to undertake with the CMTV documentary.
But there’s a detail in it that is not from Mr. Amaral, but from the Ocean Club itself.
A “rub-it-in-your-face” moment that no one, to our surprise we must confess, didn’t use to… rub it in our face: the historic moment when the BRT was finally photographed!
After Yeti and the Lochness Monster, only the BRT had remained to be photographed, until that precise moment.
In the CMTV video, part 1, at 29:00, when dealing with the Smith Sighting, to illustrate where, allegedly, Gerry McCann was at the time:”
And we show the picture the Frog has shown above.
Thank you, Frog!
https://mobile.twitter.com/SadeElisha86/status/1044311060210208768
ReplyDeleteThe quote from us in the picture attached comes from our post “Swan Lake – Act 3”. In caps what was quoted from us:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/11/swan-lake-act-3.html
“As we’ve said many times, a round table for 9 is not an easy object to find. If Mr Brunt had found such a table, we would have surely seen it in all it’s glory and size and most likely fully garnished with placemats, cutlery, plates and even napkins to make the set complete.
But no, Mr.Brunt never gets to show us the whole table, that place where the T9 last had peace .
SO WE THOUGHT THAT IT COULD BE A TABLE BROUGHT IN FROM THE MILL, OCEAN CLUB’S REAL RESTAURANT, OR THEN FROM SOME PRIVATE HOUSE IN PDL.
Although the table is shiny and highly reflective it’s seems to be darker than the ones from Mr Amarals’ pictures and this seemed to confirm our suspicions that it was table brought from outside on purpose.”
It’s clear we’re talking about the eventual use of a prop by Martin Brunt. We have never said or implied that a table was brought into Tapas for the Tapas dinners.
In fact, if there was such a table, it would have been shown by Brunt in that documentary in its full glory and wasn’t and that was the point we made.
On seeing the video, there appeared to be a large oval in front of Brunt. As the BRT doesn’t exist, it had to be a prop, so we hypothesised it could have come from where we said above. The prop that Brunt wanted to make out to be a BRT.
That seemed the most obvious solution for the creation of the deceit. But on a closer analysis, as we showed in the post, one of the small round tables was used to create that effect. All was needed was the correct camera angle, the careful placement of chairs and some studio work to make the shadow of the table appear to be the table itself.
When one takes a quote out of context as the basis of a post, it’s a sign the argument has been lost.
That 'Swan Lake' post was a great post Textusa and I recall it opened up my eyes as to the lengths they would go to deceive the public. I've just re-read it. Excellent work in smashing up the mythical BRT
ReplyDeleteThere is video footage of Martin Brunt sat at the table the McCanns used
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 25 Sep 2018, 12:55:00
Deletehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/11/swan-lake-act-3.html
Sigh
Would Brunt do such a thing with the table?
DeleteIMO pre-Brenda, a lot of people wouldn’t have believed it.
After Brenda, who could trust him?
If you look at video of Brunt at the table - at approx 1:33 as he turns to say "The apartment is only..." etc. The TABLE to OUR RIGHT seems to float as if the wind has caught it! Having some experience of this, it can only be bad CGI (computer generated images) which they haven't managed to stabilise in time; or they thought no one would notice! Textusa seems to be the only one to spot this. I've only see it now!
DeleteAre you seriously saying that Sky helped the McCanns by faking footage of a table? Why would they do that?
DeleteAnonymous 25 Sep 2018, 17:02:00,
DeleteWeren't Sky and Brunt deeply involved in the events that drove Brenda Leyland take her own life? Do you know why they did that?
From our "FB Anon":
Delete"17:02, Why would Brunt offer the use of Sky's lawyers to Robert Murat if both Sky and Brunt (and Murat) weren't heavily involved in this?"
That's no answer - the Brenda business was years later. Can you give me any reason why Sky would fake footage of a table or cover up for the McCanns? It's quite clear that the film has NOT been tampered with, but why you would even think Sky would do so makes no sense at all
DeleteAnonymous 25 Sep 2018, 18:19:00:
DeleteThe Brenda business?? How disrespectful is that to the poor woman?
As always, we will leave it to our readers whether “it's quite clear that the film has NOT been tampered with” but it seems you are suffering from a severe case of “fake news syndrome”: deny, deny and deny; even shown the obvious, deny the obvious; even shown the undeniable, deny the undeniable; even if it makes you a fool, be a fool but deny; even if it shows you have no integrity, no scruples, no principles, no conscience, no shame, no decency, just deny, deny and deny and keep on denying from now until the end of time.
We have known and exposed your tactics years ago:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/06/reason-as-per-black-hats.html
Those who have to believe you will continue to believe you no matter they know you (and they) are wrong and will continue to praise your clairvoyance.
It’s what happened to all those who HAVE to. Those who one looked into a mirror and asked “how in the hell did I end up a villain in this movie???”
Then they won’t hesitate and continue to show they share with you the same lack of values. The time for them to be pretending has long gone.
We imagine that Sky would fake footage or cover-up for the McCanns (you seriously don’t think Sky has been helping in covering up for the McCanns all these years or are you just having an uncontrollable desire to make a real fool of yourself?) for the same reasons they involved themselves years later in the events that ended up with the tragedy of Brenda Leyland taking her own life, or as you so disrespectfully have called it, the ‘Brenda business’.
https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturns/status/1044272979176300545
ReplyDelete“Bugsy @TheBunnyReturns
Então, meu velho amigo maluco. Você pode foder com seu absurdo. Ninguém dá a mínima. #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn3-xdAXcAYGkuT.jpg
10:10 am - 24 Sep 2018”
To all those who have asked for us to translate the above.
We believe that what was originally intended to be said was: “So, my crazy old friend. You can screw with your nonsense. Nobody gives a damn. #McCann” but it came out as “So, my crazy old friend. You can fuck with your absurd. No one gives a minimum #McCann”
https://homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2018/09/25/home-office-in-the-media/
ReplyDeleteFunding for Operation Grange
Posted by:HO News Team, Posted on:25 September 2018 - Categories:Leading stories, Reactive statements, Uncategorised
The Home Office responds to media coverage on funding for Operation Grange.
There has been media coverage of funding for Operation Grange, the Metropolitan Police Service’s (MPS) operation concerning the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Some of the recent coverage has suggested that funding for Operation Grange will expire on 30 September 2018, and that the MPS will be unable to continue the operation thereafter unless additional funds are provided.
We have received and are considering a request from the MPS to extend funding for Operation Grange until the end of March 2019.
Funding for Special Grant applications can be paid retrospectively for operational work already done in the same financial year. It is therefore incorrect to suggest that the MPS would have to discontinue its operational work after 30 September 2018 unless additional funds were provided in advance of this date.
The Home Office maintains an ongoing dialogue with the MPS regarding funding for Operation Grange.
Special Grant funding is usually available to police forces when they face significant or exceptional costs. The cost of Operation Grange – which, to date, is £11.6m – has been met through Special Grant funding.
As usual, full details of any Special Grant awards in 2018/19 will be published after the end of the financial year.
1. Funding has been requested.
Delete2. The Home Office does speak about the case.
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC/status/1044866633632817152
DeleteDanny ShawVerified account @DannyShawBBC
Re #Madeleine #McCann inquiry Home Office says funding "can be paid retrospectively... it is therefore incorrect to suggest that the MPS would have to discontinue its operational work after 30 September 2018 unless additional funds were provided in advance of this date."
1:29 am - 26 Sep 2018
The Big Round Table recent debate
ReplyDeleteWhen we were writing “The importance of Nick Townsend (TNT) / Honestbroker (HB)” comments there was one person who accused us of having done a poor research about Nick Townsend:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1030086015917207552
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns
Without knowing too much of what Textusa claims I can only say it seems that full research has not been undertaken, easy as it is.
6:36 am - 16 Aug 2018”
Then, we had said that TNT had a recent active presence on the internet. Mr Thompson called us ignorant and with the tweet above, confirmed that JBLIttlemore agreed with Mr Thompson about us being ignorant.
It was quite a relevant comment as @JBLittlemore together with @TheBunnyReturns were those who we saw interacting with TNT on Twitter. This is something we have already said.
We consider as recent any activity that started in May 2017, within a case that has begun in 2007.
But as we said, that May 2017 up to November that year was not noticed by anyone, and which had only a single day of interaction, on Nov 4 2017, between @TheBunnyReturns, @JBLittlemore and TNT.
TNT only started to seriously engage with @TheBunnyReturns and @JBLittlemore in January this year.
This, is clearly recent activity on the internet.
As we said, Mr Thompson has repeatedly stated that we were completely ignorant, that TNT has been extremely active for years and years and that @JBLittlemore could testify to that. All we had to do, said Mr Thompson, was to ask JBLittlemore. We did. We have still to get an answer from the one accusing us of not having undertaken full research about TNT’s activity on the internet.
Now @JBLittlemore has come up with his version of how round tables joined together can result in one big round table, the table the T9 allege they used for their dinners at Tapas as per this tweet exchange:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044005605982302211
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
#mccann #tapastables #holeinone
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn0NYZgXgAAPePQ.jpg
4:28 pm - 23 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturns/status/1044047803314573312
Bugsy @TheBunnyReturns
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Norty :)
7:16 pm - 23 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044372088889503745
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns
Or naughty even ... ; ) Blessed table! Most folk's obsessions for anything with 4 legs (or more) are with pets! But an inanimate slab of wood???
4:44 pm - 24 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1044511100203601921
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Stupid graphic. Cheap shot. Perhaps you can explain? (Then again - no, maybe not).
1:57 am - 25 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044587427988303873
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
It is neither a stupid graphic or a cheap shot. If the argument was even needed it simply shows how 5 small round tables CAN be arranged into the basis for a circular seating plan. To persist with this table debate is logically illogical! It is nothing to do with M #Mccann loss.
7:00 am - 25 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1044609702162837505
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @JBLittlemore
It has plenty to do with M #Mccann loss as it shows that the big round table is nonsense - something dreamt up by Gerry. Therefore the Tapas dinner(s) and seating arrangements is also nonsense; just a fabrication to assist with the myth of abduction.
8:28 am - 25 Sep 2018
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044611180315258882
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
Folk can sit a'round' a square table or configuration of tables. If the table arrangement was square, triangular or 3D, suggesting the actual or described shape of the table is really even relevant to M #Mccann abduction (or not) is so deep it has drowned already!
8:34 am - 25 Sep 2018
********
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1044614589122596864
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Likewise, your frantic dismissal is like someone drowning. You say that it's not relevant as to whether the Tapas 9 lied to cover the truth; whether they ate at the Tapas bar at all (at a big round table); whether they 'checked' on the children allowing a window for abduction?
8:48 am - 25 Sep 2018
*******
End of exchange.
When one has sat at a rectangular/square table and when one has to recollect for the police its shape, one does NOT say it’s round (our caps):
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
“4078 “Was it a table specifically for a large group or had they sort of mackled together a group of tables?”
Reply [Jane Tanner] “Erm, I think they’d put some together, BUT IT WAS ROUND, IT WAS JUST ONE BIG ROUND, A BIG ROUND ONE. I can’t remember to be honest. But, I mean, I think the first time we’d gone there we’d had the thing we’d had with the Millennium the first night, you know, we was all trying to put tables together, so now they knew we were coming we had a, we had the, erm, you know, THE BIG TABLE there waiting”.
And it is also clear that when one has sat at a rectangular/square table and when one has to recollect for the police its shape, one does NOT draw it round as Kate McCann did.
JBLittlemore seems to be just one more of those people who think the death of a little girl is a comedy rather than a tragedy. The image JBLIttlemore has come up with and the justifications that followed speak for themselves.
Suddenly a Big Round Table becomes a lot of small tables in a circle.
By the way, doesn’t JBLittlemore’s table invalidate Martin Brunt’s table?
Also, it’s certainly bigger than the one shown in Mr Amaral’s CMTV 2013 documentary and which the Frog so kindly did the favour of echoing after we showed it in 2014:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1044313812772564992
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-proof-ocean-club-reads-textusa.html
JBLittlemore is just the latest to show his true colours.
Why our obsession with “an inanimate slab of wood”?
Let us just ask the readers a simple question: if the US said that Navy Seal Team 6 – the ones who killed Osama Bin Laden – had landed at Islamabad, which is 900 miles from the sea, in a submarine, would the story be believable? No, it wouldn’t.
Or if it was said that they had used Russian helicopters Mil MI-24, would it be believable? No, it wouldn’t.
That “an inanimate slab of wood” is the equivalent of a submarine or Mil MI-24s dropping Navy Seal Team 6 at Islamabad. If they were included in the story of killing Bin Laden everyone would instantly think it ridiculous.
The fact that a Big Round Table that does not exist is part of the narrative of the Tapas dinners shows instantly how absurd that story is.
How someone could think the existence or not of the Big Round Table, the so-called Tapas dinners that were alleged to have been had there by the group and the alleged checking in on the kids that had that table as a base, isn’t related to Maddie near borders on obscene, if it isn’t indeed obscene:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044643912349110272
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @GoncalAmoralis @Anvil161Anvil16
I care not about shapes of tables. It is an unnecessary and distracting focus, for some strange reason, from what actually matters in the #Mccann case.
10:44 am - 25 Sep 2018”
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIt’s not about the size or shape of the table about its existence or not. What is said about its size and shape is what makes one be certain that it did not exist. And by not existing it a lot of inconvenient questions are raised involving people who are supposed not to be involved in the hoax.
That’s why we face such a fierce, determined, resilient and shameless opposition when we’re just showing the obvious: the Tapas dinner Big Round Table did not exist.
Why would round tables be placed together when the tapas had rectangular tables that could be put together to make room for a bigger group? That would be the obvious solution and would take up far less space.
The suggestion of placing small round tables together is absurd.
The drawing of the table by Kate McCann clearly shows 1 large table with 9 people placed around it. Jane Tanner says it is a big round table. Gerry McCann makes a circular motion with his hand to represent the table in the 2009 Mockumentary.
One just has to see the big table that has been placed RECENTLY in the Tapas esplanade, which we showed in the ‘Post-Scriptum II’ of our post “The help and the tennis” to see the visual impact that a table that side does makes.
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-help-and-tennis.html
And that RECENTLY placed octagonal table fits only 8 and the Tapas BRT (Big Round Table) was bigger as was supposed to have sat 10 people around it.
By looking at that octagonal table, the reader is now able to see how over the years the difficulty was NOT to capture such a voluminous object in the many pictures taken involving that small esplanade. Amazingly, it was always missed. Only that image from Sr Amaral’s video captured it 6 years after Maddie disappeared. Until then no image of it. After it, no image of it. Fascinating.
Having been there myself, I evidently saw the octagonal table, did not see a big round table even though the rest of the furniture was of the same type as the one that appears in Sr Amaral’s book.
It’s that table, the original that never was, that makes today the Tapas area an off-bounds area. Anyone who has been there knows that table has never existed. So does Littlemore, irrelevant of one having been there or not as one does not need to go there to know that table is a fictional as a unicorn.
Now, the usual suspects will pretend they haven’t read this. It’s too boring. It’s too wordy. Doesn’t get to the point. Etc. Etc. We are all familiar with the excuses that have been used to convince people not to read what we write, to drive people away from our blog.
We call them the Rainbow people. All that is needed is for a little light to be projected on them and their true colours are projected for all to see.
Is Littlemore the Vikki Littlemore who blogged about Mcs?
DeleteAnonymous 26 Sep 2018, 11:34:00,
DeleteWe have found this:
https://vikkilittlemore.wordpress.com/tag/maddie-mccann/
https://vikkilittlemore.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/the-fine-line-between-sympathy-and-condemnation-for-the-mccanns/amp/
Answering your question, we don’t know. If you’re on twitter, perhaps you could ask.
We’ve been led to believe JBL is male.
Whoever has Jules on their payroll – only a much needed salary can explain the way she debases herself continuously on this case – should seriously consider assigning someone to approve her tweets before she publishes them.
ReplyDeleteAs far as we are concerned we always appreciate help in spreading the truth. NT has thankfully done that quite often and today Jules has decided to give us a hand.
She published 3 tweets today concerning the Big Round Table. Two of them have images and for that reason we have published them as a Post Scriptum to the current post.
These are the tweets:
#1 - https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1044896446942781440
Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
I've found a big round table....For 9... No biggie... Just saying... #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoA3xfqWsAEbdBa.jpg
3:28 am - 26 Sep 2018
#2 - https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1044906953703649281
Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
I'm not sure if anyone knows this but tables, round ones, square ones and oval ones can actually extend... Yes, you can make a table bigger then back to smaller again... Who knew... #McCann
4:10 am - 26 Sep 2018
And then Jules presents this GIF of a round table expanding:
#3 - https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1044906953703649281
Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
[GIF]
#McCann
4:18 am - 26 Sep 2018
*****
As can be seen in the image we have put in as Post Scriptum the GIF attached to the tweet above is the GIF of a table expanding as in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Epv2AYSrEhc
So now, to justify the existence of the BRT at Tapas we have extendable tables. No one has ever mentioned one in the files, nor has anyone has seen one of these tables in any of the few pictures we have of the esplanade.
Jules has also posted a picture of a table that seats 9 people (by the way Jules, dozens of pictures of such tables can be found on the internet). We would say that its size is similar to the size table of the GIF when fully extended.
Has anyone seen such a large object in any of the pictures of the esplanade? Wouldn’t it be literally impossible for such an object appear captured even if only partially in most of the images shown to date to illustrate where the group allegedly sat during the alleged Tapas dinners?
Jules does a great job in proving our point. If such an enormous table existed we would have images of it like we do of the window of apartment 5A and we have none. What we have is an invention of absurd possibilities to make real an object that has never existed: the Tapas BRT.
What other absurd suggestions will be made up by the desperate to defend what is not possible to defend?
There was no Big Round Table and that in turn means that there were no Tapas dinners as alleged by the T9 and Tapas staff in the PJ Files.
The Tapas dinners were the alibi created to allow abduction. And the fact the Tapas staff corroborate the existence of an object that never existed shows that such alibi was not the creation of only T9 but also involving other people outside them.
Before we are accused that we are accusing the Tapas staff of concocting the alibi, we are not. We are saying that it is our belief that they were told to say they saw the group having dinner around a table they knew didn’t exist.
To note that Jules’ first tweet above was liked by JBLittlemore – further confirming that s/he thinks that this case is indeed a comedy.
We have added JBLittlemore’s tweet to the Post Scriptum so readers who haven’t clicked on the link we have given previously, can see the absurdity of the proposed to be the BRT.
We have published a Post Scriptum II to show how absurd is JBLIttlemore's proposal for the Tapas Big Round Table.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1044905968906248192
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
Having looked at Textusa website earlier I now understand why some here are shocked by & disagree with the content. If those views are yours & you cannot disagree about them without sniping then end of debate. #Mccann Textusa should discuss case, not posters or tables! Tragic,
4:06 am - 26 Sep 2018”
In what way is discussing the fact that the table the T9, the Tapas staff and some Mark Warner guests allege that existed but in fact didn’t, NOT discussing the case?
Maybe JBLittlemore would do all of us a favour and compile a list of the topics that are “case” and another, where “posters and tables” would be included, are the ones that are definitely not the case.
So that we all know what we are allowed to discuss and what we are leave alone, without knowing exactly why.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045089723470041088
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Allegedly, this entire page of various staff statements is lies. The staff 'were in on it'! http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm … They were told what to say ... #mccann Then having mostly lost their jobs not one of them leaked like a sieve in exchange for a reward? #fantasy
4:16 pm - 26 Sep 2018
******
Before we respond to this huge insult from JBLIttlemore to the powerless, the helpless and the poor, we would like to ask JBLittlemore what reward are you talking about?
If it's the NOTW reward, we would like to point out that it has shut down sometime ago.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045086539032743937
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Quoting what is on Textusa is possibly the daftest thing anyone can do. Thinking I'm a pro again, Carla? Just because I argue with pro #mccann ? No I am not. Neither am I a coward who runs from expressing a view or debating a point. Textusa has lied in that quote. Check #Mccann
4:03 pm - 26 Sep 2018
******
JBLIttlemore,
Could you please tell us what was the quote we lied about?
Thank you.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1045317209927675905
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @sallyinspire1 @jules1602x @CarlaSpade
Denying the existence of the big round table is NOT being close to the truth.
Believing that OC staff & holidaymakers all lied to support the McCanns is being close to the truth.
Amaral's book is being close to the truth.
Have a nice day.
7:20 am - 27 Sep 2018
*******
Frog,
Denying the existence of the big round table is being close to the truth.
Believing that OC staff & holidaymakers all lied to support the McCanns is being close to the truth.
Amaral's book is being close to the truth.
Have a nice day.
Don’t understand your reply to Frog. You repeated what was said about the table, leaving out the word NOT, which Frog had included.
DeleteAnonymous 27 Sep 2018, 20:09:00,
DeleteIf one takes out the NOT out of what the Frog has said, then all the Frog has said becomes truthful:
Denying the table existed, believing there was a collective lie that involved many more than the McCanns and believing in Mr Amaral is, in our opinion, to be close to the truth.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1045092241914630144
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CarlaSpade
I can absolutely confirm that JBL, Jules, NT & Blacksmith are all closet pros who do their darnedest to distract from the truth of Madeleine's abduction. Hic.
4:26 pm - 26 Sep 2018
******
Many a true word is spoken in jest or as the Portuguese say are you trying to fool with the truth?
Unpublished Anonymous at 27 Sep 2018, 14:39:00,
ReplyDeleteInteresting question but put without the appropriate context may be be misinterpreted, and that's why we're not publishing it at the moment so it won't distract.
But as a clue as to what we think on the subject, we don't think the the Tapas restaurant under normal circumstance required the manning it's alleged to have had.
However we have raised the exaggerated number of people the Ocean Club and Mark Warner say they had working in Praia da Luz during the first 4 months of 2007 in our post "Tourism diet".
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2015/04/tourism-diet.html
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045382658900054022
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Interesting little link about people using the tweets of others (original words of the tweeter) ...
https://www.howtogeek.com/310158/are-other-people-allowed-to-use-my-tweets/
Bits may be relevant for some on here #mccann
11:40 am - 27 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045603758137380864
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @umweltbuerger @FragrantFrog
Just a criminal shame Textusa uses such tweets to cast doubt into midst of #Mccann doubters, to mock 'antis' who don't agree with every word on that blog. I also believe that our tweets are 'our words'. Should not be copied or used to condemn. My TL is clearly doubter. Sickened.
2:18 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045622923560734720
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @umweltbuerger @FragrantFrog
It has to be said that endlessly copying pages of other peoples' tweets simply adds to the tedium, from the little I have seen. Frankly the stalking, harassment & false allegations against posters here, as well as use of tweets without consent, should see the Blog shut down.
3:35 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045623860937347072
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @umweltbuerger
Do you support Textusa for the allegations made against those who don't believe those wild speculations? Do you agree with the stalking of TLs to reproduce endless pages of tweets without tweeters' permission, to condemn, mock & cast false doubt about others, as valid re Maddie?
3:38 am - 28 Sep 2018
********
NEWS ALERT!
CNN, Fox News, Sky News, BBC and every other media outlets: if you ever have ever reproduced a single tweet from Donald Trump you risk closure!
By the way JBLittlemore, did you get permission to add Mari Welzel’s tweet to yours?
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045624930136666112
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
J B Littlemore Retweeted Mari Welzel
One day, Mari, maybe you'll learn how far beyond the truth that wild allegation is. I am so sorry that you are blinded by Textusa & have become a victim of its agenda to create discord. Just tread carefully. No more exchanges. #Mccann
J B Littlemore added,
https://twitter.com/umweltbuerger/status/1045623908114853888
3:43 am - 28 Sep 2018”
Quite the double standard, no?
This is as ridiculous and comical as saying the Big Round Table was made up of 5 small round tables joined together.
Why is JBLittlemore worried about seeing his tweets quoted?
We have been continuously quoted over the years and not only don’t complain as is something we expect from both those who agree with us and those who don’t.
When misquoted or quoted out of context, we simply point it out as that’s all one can do. If those who misquoted us or quoted us out of context don’t correct, it’s says more about them than about us.
For example, JBLittlemore has accused us of lying in a quote. We want to correct if that’s the case, so we have asked him/her to tell us where that happened. We’re still waiting.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045670715356315648
DeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Just a note from Twitter ToS - under "Your Rights and Grant of Rights in the Content" see & read 3. https://twitter.com/en/tos#intlTerms RTs of other posters tweets, however, is obviously permissible on tag.
6:45 am - 28 Sep 2018
******
Interesting, a very quick response.
We have done our duty and have warned the media outlets about the errors of their ways. After all, it’s quite a rare phenomenon on the internet to see tweets fully quoted to disprove their authors. NOT.
We continue to note that there still isn’t reply about the reward and the quote s/he accused us of lying about.
JBL is wrong about the alleged 'misappropriation' of tweets mainly because what is posted is owned by Twitter. It's only copyrighted 'content' which isn't, such as photographs, videos and music retained as copyright by those making them, which is also why anyone seeking to reproduce such copyrighted content needs permission to do so. Many times you will see media establishments asking for such permission on Twitter.
ReplyDeleteI note JBL tries to contend with these: https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045670715356315648.
Deletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045671112598859777.
If this is his/her justification for trying to remove a Google blog (all the best with that!), then he/she (I think it's he) needs to learn how 'content' is defined, and perhaps explain why the court hearing discussed in the article he links to states that 'Twitter say users own their tweets, and the COURT says Twitter does', at the very least it's a very grey area in law, which will be why none of them can do anything about their tweets being used wherever anyone chooses to do so.
Maybe he could also explain what the outcome to Twitter's appeal in court was, from a case more than 6 years old, as well as to what relevance that case has in countries outside of the USA, which clearly have very different 'constitutional rights' to those in Europe. I think he'll find that anyone can use anything posted in a tweet to their hearts content, except of course 'copyrighted content', which Twitter undoubtedly have act upon.
Anonymous 28 Sep 2018, 16:00:00,
DeleteAmazing how some people live in a parallel world where reality must follow their orders.
Why have they not considered where our work has been used and abused on twitter and complained there and then as well?
Absolutely! :)
DeleteHaving read the decision and order of JBL's linked court case, it's great he's only demonstrated exactly what we've been saying here, that Twitter are entitled to do anything they wish with it, 'copyrighted content' aside!
The clue for me was always the fact that being a Twitter 'user' means by definition one is not an owner, as some are now asserting.
Interesting this obsession common to several "antis" to have the blog closed.
ReplyDeleteNotFrog
NotFrog,
DeleteDo add Jules to that list of people:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045670715356315648
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Just a note from Twitter ToS - under "Your Rights and Grant of Rights in the Content" see & read 3. https://twitter.com/en/tos#intlTerms RTs of other posters tweets, however, is obviously permissible on tag.
6:45 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1045674010187616256
Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
Replying to @JBLittlemore
So what happens if say a blog and a facebook page had our tweets splattered all over them... Like ours JBL with the intent of trying to prove we're deceitful..?
6:58 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045675881530904579
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @jules1602x
I don't know Jules. I think neither Blogger/Google or Facebook would accept the non permissioned use of 'our words' applied simply to abuse/mock anyone who just has a different viewpoint ...
7:05 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1045676234284437504
Jules... 🐶 🌸 🐘 🌸 🦁 🌸 @jules1602x
Replying to @JBLittlemore
I'm going to look into it... She's gone too far now...
7:06 am - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045676981763952640
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @jules1602x
She/he/it/them most certainly has/have done so. It is a considered smear campaign with nothing, but nothing, to justify what is said against those whose tweets it is copying off Twitter. Simply because it's own viewpoints aren't bowed to.
7:09 am - 28 Sep 2018
From our "FB Anon" who asked to publish the following as a reply to our 28 Sep 2018, 15:15:00 comment:
Delete"I see Jules and JBL think any blog that copies people's tweets and uses their words to "abuse/ mock anyone who has a different viewpoint" should be shut down. Do they realise that their good friend Not Textusa has a blog called "CarlaTwat - the dimmest person on Twitter", where he copies her tweets then mocks and abuses her for her opinions. Should Not Textusa be shut down too?"
FB Anon:
DeleteYou've forgotten to mention Mr Bennett's tweets that he so much loves to publish in his blog as well.
Would would have guessed it? That we and NT are partners in crime???
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7367714/madeleine-mccann-missing-case-must-be-solved-met-police-detective/
ReplyDelete'WE NEED TO CATCH THEM'
Madeleine McCann case must be solved to stop it happening again, ex Met detective tells Good Morning Britain
Maddie McCann went missing more than a decade ago while on a family holiday in Portugal, with almost £12m poured into the Met Police investigation to find her
By Brittany Vonow
28th September 2018, 8:12 am
Updated: 28th September 2018, 8:17 am
MADELEINE McCann's disappearance must be solved to stop it from happening again, a former Met detective has warned.
The little girl disappeared more than a decade ago, with almost £12million funnelled into the Scotland Yard investigation.
But former counter-terror detective David Videcette warned every lead into the little girl's disappearance needed to be investigated, whatever the cost.
Speaking on Good Morning Britain, the seasoned cop warned: "If she had been abducted, then we need to catch whoever did that because it will happen again.
"However much money we spend on this case, we'll save on the next case if we catch that person and that's where we need to look at."
Mr Videcette added that the success of an investigation could not be based on the cost - adding: "Good investigations take time."
The debate comes after it was revealed Met Police had applied to the Home Office for another round of funding to continue their investigations into Maddie's disappearance.
Madeleine was three, nearly four, when she went missing from her family's holiday flat in Portugal on May 3, 2007.
Her parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, had left her sleeping with her siblings while they had dinner at the hotel's restaurant - only realising about 10pm that she was gone.
Since then, there have been reported sightings of the youngster, who would be aged 15 now, across the world.
Mr Videcette pointed out the investigation had not been handed an "open chequebook", saying police would always be justifying what the money would be spent on.
But founding member of Scotland Yard's undercover unit Peter Bleksley argued: "There has to be a point where they say 'you know what we have to put this file in the too difficult tray because quite frankly we are unable to solve it'.
"How much more money has to be ploughed into this, are there still live investigate threads that are going to potentially lead to some kind of resolution 11 years on."
He added: "At some stage, this has to stop."
The debate sparked a reaction online, with many agreeing with Mr Videcette's logic that the perpetrators needed to be caught.
One wrote: "Finally someone talking sense regarding the investigation costs for the Maddie McCann case... ‘the offender needs to be stopped, they will do it again’ thank you David I totally agreed with everything you said."
But another added: "They're still not one iota further forward than they were the day she disappeared. There is no justification for continuing with this investigation."
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We have received and are considering a request to extend funding for Operation Grange until the end of March 2019."
The spokesperson added: "Special Grant funding is usually available to police forces when they face significant or exceptional costs.
"The cost of Operation Grange – which, to date, is £11.6m – has been met through Special Grant funding.”
Very interesting snippets from the article:
Delete- “WE NEED TO CATCH THEM”
- Madeleine McCann case must be solved…
- MADELEINE McCann's disappearance must be solved to stop it from happening again, a former Met detective has warned”
- “But former counter-terror detective David Videcette warned every lead into the little girl's disappearance needed to be investigated, whatever the cost.”
- “However much money we spend on this case, we'll save on the next case if we catch that person and that's where we need to look at.”
- Mr Videcette added that the success of an investigation could not be based on the cost - adding: "Good investigations take time."
- Mr Videcette pointed out the investigation had not been handed an "open chequebook", saying police would always be justifying what the money would be spent on.
The debate was between pro-continuing David Videcette and pro-closing Peter Bleksley. One can clearly see who is given the biggest relevance in the article.
We would like to highlight the following from the article (our caps):
“every lead into the little girl's disappearance needed to be investigated, WHATEVER THE COST.”
Costs are not only financial.
To those saying that we always shoot down anyone who comes out publicly to “help” the case, let us say that at this point we support FULLY David Videcette.
So it’s OK to mock your blog on tweets with gifs as Orlov/Dave Hall did long ago, and it’s ok for JBL's pal Ben Thompson to have a pinned tweet speaking against the blog or for people on tweets to express their opinions against Textusa?
ReplyDeleteBut for you to respond is not allowed?
Anonymous 28 Sep 2018, 18:31:00,
DeleteWe did not respond, we reacted.
We are used to sustained insult since I first started publishing alone and then as team so if the insulting newcomers think they are getting somewhere with it they only have NT to blame for that not happening.
Not that his monotonous stream of insults has ever affected us but if it ever did, it would be understandable for us to created, thanks to him, quite the immunity to insults.
Newcomers to “Let’s-Insult-Textusa”, have lots of work to do to keep up. Quite foolish of them to think that they can just come in on the scene and have their insults even noted. NT has set the bar very high for those who wish to offer insults.
For the same reason we don’t allow ourselves to take the debate into a personal level. We discuss facts of the case.
We reacted to the fact someone tried to pass an absurdity as reality. An absurdity that has been taken as a reality and once understood the absurdity it is, it alters significantly the perception one has of the case.
If, and repeating the analogy of the submarine of the Navy Seal Team 6, if one was told that special force had landed in Islamabad in a submarine and this would be corroborated by witnesses on site, what would one think: the submarine doesn’t make any sense but as witnesses say they saw it, it must have then been a flying submarine or flying submarines do not exist so the story and those who corroborate it are not telling the truth?
Certainly one would trust one’s common sense and see immediately that the witnesses were lying. For some reason we have the following quote from Buddha: “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or has said it, not even if I said it, unless it agrees with your reason and your common sense”.
One would not go around looking like a fool a promote the idea of the submarine but rather try to understand why those saying they saw it were saying that as it was obvious they didn’t.
The fact that the McCanns imply (they never said that was through there he went) that the abductor went through that window doesn’t mean he did. In fact not only all indicates that was not the case, as it is clearly shows it’s ridiculous to think it was.
In much the same way, just because the T9 and the Tapas staff say the round table existed, it doesn’t mean it existed.
The fact that no pictures of the esplanade have ever shown that table with total clarity and the fact that there’s always a coincidence that whenever a camera has filmed that esplanade it has been always convenient for the camera to be directed elsewhere so the location of the big round table is supposed to have been “missed”, indicates clearly that that table has never existed.
The octagonal table recently placed there, makes it absolutely ridiculous to even think that it existed.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteNote, we are not asking people to believe in us. We have presented our arguments as to why we think the Big Round Table is nothing but an Islamabad Submarine.
If people want to continue to believe that the T9 either dined as per Littlemore’s table or in an enormous table that no one has seen even though it would be impossible to miss – and thus impossible for such a case related enormous object not to have been photographed with clarity – it’s up to them.
We must respect them in much the same way we must respect people who believe in unicorns. It’s their right to believe in them and our right to think that belief to be ridiculous. One just has to make the effort to understand why adults appear to “genuinely believe” in such creatures.
The only conclusion one can come to is that these “genuine believers” are either pros or real antis in terms of being anti the McCanns and the other T7.
Only against that limited circle of people, who managed to dispose a body in an area previously unknown to them, without any outside assistance, at any point.
In other words, not on the internet to seek the truth but only to punish the McCanns and the other T7.
However, convinced as we are that the Big Round Table did not exist, in much the same way that we believe the abductor did not pass through that window with Maddie, whenever we see someone pretending to be anti, state that that either is fact, we will react and expose what we consider to be significant misinformation about the case.
We would have reacted in the exact same way and for the exact same reason if someone, disguising themselves as anti, tried through mockery to pass the idea that an abductor passed through the window of apartment 5A as the abduction defenders claim.
Interestingly calling the window passing as an absurdity is allowed, but calling an absurdity the existence of the Big Round Table is seems to be heresy and spawns a violent barrage of insult against us. Why?
After all, why care about what a blog with six readers – no only 2 and both Chinese – has to say?
From a “FB Friend” (not to be confused with “FB Anon”):
ReplyDelete“Hey Bronte, I am as ever reading your excellent blog, and thought FYI, you may want to see this copy of the Twitter court case's outcome: https://www.scribd.com/document/91001515/OWS-Twitter-Copy
I also took this screenshot, as it seems to summarise why, In America at least, Twitter is deemed to be the owner of 'tweets' (notwithstanding copyrighted content). It's quite unbelievable to me that some are seeking the removal of 'Textusa', outrageously so!!”
[The screenshot our FB friend attached said the following (our caps as to what our friend highlighted in yellow in the said screenshot:
“…click of the mouse or now with even the touch of a finger, Twitter users are able to transmit their personal thoughts, ideas, declarations, schemes, pictures, videos and location, for the public to view. THE WIDELY BELIEVED (THOUGH MISTAKEN) NOTION THAT ANY DISCLOSURE OF A USER’S INFORMATION WOULD FIRST BE REQUESTED FROM THE USER AND REQUIRE APPROVAL BY THE USER IS UNDERSTANDABLE, BUT WRONG. WHILE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT PROVIDES PROTECTION FOR OUR PHYSICAL HOMES, WE DO NOT HAVE A PHYSICAL "HOME" ON THE INTERNET. What an Internet user simply has is a network account consisting of a block of computer storage that is owned by a network service provider. As a user, we may think that storage space to be like a "virtual home," and with that strong privacy protection similar to our physical homes. However, that "home" is a block of ones and zeroes stored somewhere on someone's computer. As a consequence, some of our most private information is sent to third parties and held far away on remote network servers. A Twitter user may think that the same "home" principle may be applied to their Twitter account. When in reality the user is sending information to the third party, Twitter. At the same time the user is also granting a license for Twitter to distribute that information to anyone, any way and for any reason it chooses. In United States v Lifshitz, (369 F3d 173 [2d Cir 2004]), the Second Circuit held that individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in internet postings or e-mails that have reached their recipients. "Users would logically lack a legitimate expectation of privacy in materials intended for publication or public posting" (id. at 190 citing Guest v Leis, 255 F3d 325, 333 [6 Cir 2001]).”]
Still waiting for any response to NT's revised Smith timeline!
ReplyDeleteSomeone, anyone?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/733007/madeleine-mccann-kidnapper-search-continue-met-police-london
Madeleine McCann snatcher WILL strike again says top cop
MADELEINE McCann’s disappearance must be solved to stop it happening again, a former detective has declared.
By Jerry Lawton / Published 29th September 2018
The Home Office has hinted it may be about to pull the cash plug on the £11.6million hunt for the youngster, who vanished 11 years ago.
But former Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism detective David Videcette said every lead officers have about the case should be followed up in case the abductor strikes again.
He told Good Morning Britain: “If she had been abducted then we need to catch whoever did it.
“However much money we spend on this case we’ll save on the next case if we catch that person.’’
Videcette – a lead detective on the 2005 7/7 London bombings – said the success of an investigation could not be based on cost.
The officer, who was awarded several police commendations and is now a crime writer, said: “Good investigations take time.”
Home Office funding for the Met’s Operation Grange inquiry to discover what happened to Madeleine runs out tomorrow.
Scotland Yard has asked the department for another special grant to finance its team’s work for another six months, insisting it still had one final “solid live lead” to follow up.
But last night the Home Office had still not granted that request, saying the force could carry on with the investigation using its own budget.
Madeleine, from Rothley, Leics, vanished from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007.
A Home Office spokesman said: “We have received and are considering a request to extend funding for Operation Grange until the end of March 2019.
“The Home Office maintains an ongoing dialogue with the police regarding funding for Operation Grange.”
To note:
Delete- even though the article's headline does speak of a "snatcher" (in the article the abduction is just a hypothesis as is preceded by a IF) the article does not mention the pro-closing Operation Grange Peter Bleksley.
- it contains a 1:30 excerpt of Bilton's BBC documentary. The bit that everyone found it to be utterly disgusting which was the exposure of the poor man with clear mental issues. Not good, if one is selling the idea that the deed was done by a stranger...
https://twitter.com/Joyousb90/status/1045784633546338304
ReplyDeleteJoyce B 💚 @Joyousb90
Whatever became of this, and the £1.5M reward offered by the News of the World eh? http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/07/the-inflatable-billboard-the-true-story/ #DigUpMcCanns #mccann
2:17 pm - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturns/status/1045792372079153152
Bugsy @TheBunnyReturns
Bugsy Retweeted Joyce B 💚
Very good question, Joyce - one Gerry #McCann tried his best to avoid answering. It didn't go to the charities it was promised to - Barnado's, NSPCC and Childline. Yet more children that could have benefited, had it not been for the McCanns. http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id496.htm
Bugsy added,
https://twitter.com/Joyousb90/status/1045784633546338304
2:48 pm - 28 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/AndyFish19/status/1045795028944252928
Andy Fish @AndyFish19
Replying to @TheBunnyReturns
It either went to Smithmans back pocket (fraudulent fund) or it was a load of made up nonsense in the first place?! When was the last time a REWARD was announced anyway? A decade back? Stick the odd Mill in front of the tapas bunch & then they'd squeal like a pig on #McCann
2:58 pm - 28 Sep 2018
*******
It seems that it’s not only Gerry who is trying his best to avoid answering about the reward…
And Andy, the last time the reward was mentioned, was by JBLittlemore on Sept 26 as a reason as to why powerless, helpless and poor would have certainly leaked like a sieve against the powerful, rich and government protected people:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1045089723470041088
“J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Allegedly, this entire page of various staff statements is lies. The staff 'were in on it'! http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm … They were told what to say ... #mccann Then having mostly lost their jobs not one of them leaked like a sieve in exchange for a reward? #fantasy
4:16 pm - 26 Sep 2018”
As readers are well aware by now as it will be the third time we are published the tweet, JBLittlemore has said: “Allegedly, this entire page of various staff statements is lies. The staff 'were in on it'! http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS-EMPLOYEES.htm … They were told what to say ... “
ReplyDeleteOn this topic we recommend readers revisit our post “Insane’s plea to temporary insanity”
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2011/03/insanes-plea-to-temporary-insanity.html
This post was written on March 7 2011. Not Textusa did not exist then. Not talking about the person behind Not Textusa as that person has monitored our blog very closely since the day it opened.
Not Textusa, the character, was only created in June 2013 together with his blog. The Insane we refer to in this post is him.
As the post says, then he alleged to have a secret blog. One we weren’t allowed to see.
A claim he has repeated recently but to say that he had a lot of information in it but he lost it, so hard to retrieve extensive studies he says he has done in the past on various subjects. How convenient.
But what we would like to point out from this post is the amazing similarity of the statements given by the members of the Tapas staff, JERONIMO SALCEDAS, SVETLANA VITORINO, JOAQUIM BATISTA and RICARDO OLIVEIRA.
Quoting ourselves from that post:
“"Credible" Jeronimo, Svetlana, Joaquim and Ricardo do seem to sing the exact same tune, to the point that although none of them is able to be precise, after serving them for the 5 straight nights before, and having the number “9” quite explicit on the reservation sheets, about the exact number of guests: "in number 8 or 9" (Jeronimo) / "in number 8 or 9" (Svetlana) / "group of 8/9 British citizens" (Joaquim) / "group of 8/9 British citizens" (Ricardo), but are ALL able to be very PRECISE and EXACT on the margin of error: 8 or 9!”
This led to a comment on that post which we highlighted in our post
“Anonymous10 Mar 2011, 09:40:00
Textusa,
Notice how the employees, who, as you say, are UNABLE to quantify exactly the number of guests around a table, but they can be quite precise on who was missing:
Svetlana a KITCHEN ASSISTANT says “one individual, purportedly the father of the victim, left the dinner table” and then says “a woman who she believes to be his wife also left the table”. She doesn’t know how many people were at the table, but she’s able to notice who was missing. She either paid attention to the table or she didn’t. Also, how does she know, less than 24 hours after WHO out of all those men was the father of the victim? I Imagine the PJ showed her a pic of Maddie, but how can she make any sort of connection between Maddie and any of the men as her father? And how does she make a connection that Gerry and Kate are married if, as they say, they sat apart from one another at dinner?
On the same note Joaquim, notices that two men leave the table. How, once again, did he know it was two men, and not two women, or a couple, taking this into account he must have noticed two empty chairs. Remember that he also has a vague idea about how many people were in the group.
Ricardo is even more precise in the description of the person who has left the table for 15 minutes! He also says that the parents were there. How does he know that? It’s not said anywhere that the PJ walked around with pictures of the whole group. Yes, he did not know the parents, bout how does he know that the parents of that child were present in a table that he cannot be more precise than a group of 8/9?
It’s EVIDENT these people are lying. And they’re not lying to defend themselves. Its EVIDENT they’re saying to the PJ what they’ve been told to say. As you say Textusa, things were supposed to be solved quickly and nobody would even notice their statements. But unfortunately for them, things remain unsolved today
Good job Tex et al!”
We will leave it up to our readers to make up their minds on whether these Tapas staff are being truthful or not.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45694119
ReplyDeleteMadeleine McCann's father describes the 'terror' of her disappearance
Madeleine McCann's father has described the "terror" and "disbelief" at first realising his daughter was missing.
Madeleine, then aged three, disappeared from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007, sparking a worldwide search for her whereabouts.
Gerry McCann said he had not thought about "those moments" for a long time because they were too "painful".
Mr McCann was speaking to BBC Radio 4 for a programme about the relationship between fathers and daughters.
He said that he was sure immediately that his daughter had been abducted.
After being told by his wife Kate that their daughter was missing, Mr McCann said "automation kicked in" and he began searching the apartment.
"We started searching more widely really quickly and then very quickly raised the alarm," he said.
"You're in this quiet little holiday resort - that seemed idyllic - out of season and I certainly didn't speak Portuguese so I asked [our friend] Matt to go to reception and ask them to call the police."
Mr McCann said he remembered him and his wife being back in the bedroom "completely distraught", adding their reaction was "almost feral".
"I couldn't get the darkest thoughts out of our minds, that somebody had taken her and abused her," he continued.
"I felt that every moment that we couldn't find her was worse.
"I remember being slumped on the floor and starting to call some of my family members and just saying: 'Pray for her.'"
'It's so cold'
Mr McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, added that some parts of that night 11 years ago are "blurred", but he remembers waiting "forever" for the police to arrive.
"It just felt terrible. We went then to another apartment, by which time it was three or four in the morning and Kate was saying, 'I want to go back out and search.'
"I was saying: 'Just wait until it gets light,' and Kate kept saying: 'It's so cold.'"
The Metropolitan Police inquiry into the disappearance - known as Operation Grange - has been ongoing since 2011.
Four people were identified as suspects in 2013, but no further action was taken after they were interviewed by Portuguese officers and the Met Police, who visited the holiday resort in 2014.
The Home Office said last week it is currently considering a police request for an extra six months' funding for Operation Grange.
Thursday 3 May 2007: Timeline
20:30 Kate and Gerry McCann leave their apartment to have dinner at a Tapas bar
21:05 Gerry McCann checks on Madeleine and her siblings
22:00 A man is seen carrying a child wearing pyjamas heading towards the ocean (E-fit images of the suspect were released as part of a 2013 Crimewatch appeal)
22:00 Kate McCann raises the alarm that Madeleine has gone missing
So Gerry admits that he and Kate didn't search for Maddie that night.
DeleteThe article above has this one linked to it:
Deletehttps://www.bbc.com/news/uk-24526934
Madeleine McCann: Timeline and search maps
13 June 2014
Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have been searching several sites in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.
Officers have used dogs to search the sites and "ground penetrating radar" to look for disturbed earth.
The searches follow a request from the Metropolitan Police, who launched a fresh investigation into Madeleine's disappearance last July.
Madeleine, of Rothley, Leicestershire, was three when she went missing from her family's holiday apartment on 3 May 2007.
See the details below to find out about what happened that day and for the location of the latest police searches.
Thursday 3 May 2007: What happened?
15:30-17:30 Charity collectors seen in area
Scotland Yard says detectives are looking into possible links to burglaries and bogus charity collections in the area at the time. They have released two e-fit images of Portuguese men they would like to identify.
There were four separate sightings of charity collectors on the afternoon of 3 May in Praia da Luz. One man approached a property on Rua do Ramalhete, near the Ocean Club, at about 16:00. Another collector called at another apartment on 25 or 26 April.
Police say there was also a four-fold increase in the number of burglaries in the area between January and May 2007 and one possible scenario was that Madeleine had disturbed a burglar.
20:30 McCanns go for dinner
The McCanns were on holiday with a group of friends who met for dinner each evening at a Tapas bar on the Ocean Club complex where they were staying.
On the day Madeleine went missing, Mr and Mrs McCann left their apartment at 20:30 and headed to the restaurant. Throughout the evening, adults from the group would leave at regular intervals to check on their children. A member of the group - Matthew Oldfield - left at 21:00, shortly followed by Gerry McCann.
21:05 Gerry McCann checks on children
Mr McCann left the retaurant to check on his children at about 21:05. When he reached the apartment, he noticed the bedroom door was open wider than it had been left. On his return to the restaurant, he stopped to chat to a guest.
Matthew Oldfield also checked on the McCanns' apartment at about 21:30. Hearing no noise from the children's bedroom, he assumed all was well and left without seeing Madeleine.
(Cont)
(Cont)
Delete21:15 McCanns' friend sees man and child
Having left the table to check on her own children, another member of the group, Jane Tanner, saw a man carrying a child close to the McCanns' apartment. This sighting, which had previously been the focus of the investigation, has now been discounted by police. Detectives said the man was almost certainly an innocent British holiday-maker collecting his two-year-old daughter from a nearby creche.
22:00 Irish family sees man and child
An Irish family returning from a night out saw a man carrying a blonde-haired child, aged about three or four, possibly wearing pyjamas. He was walking down a street towards the beach at about 22:00. The beach is a few minutes' walk from the McCanns' apartment.
Two of the witnesses have helped produce an e-fit of the man they saw. They described him as white, aged in his 30s, of medium build and medium height, with short brown hair.
22:00 Kate McCann raises alarm
After friend Matthew Oldfield had checked on the McCanns' children half an hour previously, Kate McCann returned to the apartment at 22:00. It was then that she noticed the children's bedroom window was open, the shutter raised and Madeleine gone.
June 2014: New police searches
The first search area was cordoned off by police at the beginning of June, but nothing of interest was found. It is situated south-west of the Ocean Club complex, where the McCann family were staying in 2007. The scrubland, about the size of three football pitches, is surrounded by flats and villas and overlooks the sea.
The second area is on the other side of the Praia da Luz, close to the main road leading out of town. A third location was also investigated across the road from the second search area.
On 11 June, police said their searches had not yielded any results.
Article doesn't mention any mental health problems.
DeleteRadio program:
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/b0bl6s2v
Nothing either about what M might be experiencing or what Kate feels. Or twins.
DeleteTotally faked emotion.
An own goal.
Anonymous 29 Sep 2018, 20:28:00,
DeleteNo one is this stupid. The timing is highly suspicious.
We will see how the tabloids will pick up on this.
https://twitter.com/TomDelargy/status/1046041012974620672
ReplyDeleteTom Delargy #JC9 #PCPEU @TomDelargy
This is billed as a one hour radio drama. It is not. It is billed as an anonymous medieval poem adapted and translated by Simon Armitage. But it is not. It is emotional blackmail and it is a serious breach of taste on the part of @BBCRadio4 imho. #Pearl
7:16 am - 29 Sep 2018
*******
We agree fully.
But… did it make the public like the McCanns more or did it make it like them less? A whole lot less?
About Gerry McCann’s radio participation yesterday, this is the importance we want to give it:
ReplyDeleteThis conveys she’s dead:
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/733191/Madeleine-McCann-Gerry-McCann-weeps-uncontrollably-as-he-recalls-disappearance
Different message, no hint of death thoughts:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/7380019/gerry-mccann-maddie-terror-disbelief-missing/
Also avoids death reference:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-dad-gerry-dreams-13333134
As our readers know, we refuse to participate in any hate fest against the McCanns. We want justice, we want them to be accountable for what they are responsible, no clemency or favour, but we also want ALL with responsibility to be just as accountable.
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-mccann-trial.html
We simply want the truth about what happened to Maddie to be revealed.
https://www.tweetspeakpoetry.com/2017/11/21/poets-poems-simon-armitage-translates-pearl/
DeleteIt’s about death of a daughter.
Any tabloid which ignored that fact ignores the blindingly obvious connotations.
By the way, the radio production was by the wife of Simon Armitage.
So did Mick P, who later was found guilty
DeleteAnonymous 30 Sep 2018, 13:52:00,
DeleteMick P? Please clarify otherwise we will have to delete your comment.
Sorry!
DeleteMick Philpott:
https://mobile.twitter.com/The_Truth_II/status/1046287621297762305
Thank you!
DeleteBringing it over to the blog:
https://twitter.com/The_Truth_II/status/1046287621297762305
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II
The papers give front page to Gerry #mccann phoney crying. Let’s take a second here
https://youtu.be/jxq6Zvr8mPY
11:36 pm - 29 Sep 2018
We have received the following comment which we have censored.
ReplyDelete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "It's September 2018 - Comments continue":
Looks like a plan eh? More ammo for the twitter double agents to shout about....(censored)...threats to close yourself down....one last crescendo followed by what???
Canadaian club and rye anyone?
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 30 Sep 2018, 10:06:00”
The reason for censoring has simply to do with the fact that Anonymous mentions a person we believe to be a shill. We don’t want in any way to be associated with such a person.
Continuing with what we feel is important which are the facts of the case, about whether the members of the Ocean Club staff were “in on it” or not, we would like our readers to revisit our post from Jun 18 2011 “The Tapas duet” and see how remarkably strange the statements from Isabel Coutinho and Sandro Silva coincide.
ReplyDeletehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2011/06/tapas-duet.html
As always, we will leave it up to our readers to make up their minds on whether these two members of the Ocean Club Tapas had their statements previously coordinated with each other.
And if the reader concludes that this was the case, then the reader must wonder why it was.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1046353056886116352
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
A quick note re #mccann - it is repeatedly argued 'no blood was found' or Kastle Meyer tests were -ve. Any chem scientist (inc doctors) will know haemoglobin is destroyed by reducing agents, creating apparent -ve result. Something as simple & available as Vanish ... Later..!
3:56 am - 30 Sep 2018
*********
We agree FULLY with the above. We are not on Twitter but if we were, we would put a like on it.
However, it’s interesting to see JBLittlemore be so BFF with 2 members of the Lick-spittle gang, who worship the gospel according to NT that has:
- on Thursday, 25 June 2015 said that “Keela is trained to alert to blood. We don't know what Keela alerted to as no confirmed blood was found in the apartment”;
- on Wednesday, 25 April 2018 said that “Keela is trained to alert to the smell of blood. Blood does not need to be present to trigger an alert.”
And when we said “When we say traces were cleaned, we mean blood. No one made an effort to clean cadaverine specifically but they did make a conscious and meticulous effort to clean up any and all traces of blood”, NT on May 30 2015, said “There was no blood. But do go on”
Strange alliances we see these days.
And Mr Thompson, a ardent NT disciple, was one of the people who liked JBLIttlemore’s tweet above.
Games people like to play around the death of a little girl.
Could you please put up a link that shows absolute confirmation of blood in 5a, and who it belonged to. Martin Grime clearly states, and he's right, that without forensic confirmation, the alerts will not stand up in court. Keela does indeed alert to blood, but without evidence as to who that blood belonged to, then it cannot be assumed to be Madeleine's.
ReplyDeleteThis is where the debate between yourself and NT falls down. JBL is quite correct. NT is quite correct. There is no confirmation of blood (other than Gerry's on the car key and a PJ officer who cut his hand). Without that confirmation, a case cannot be built around the alerts of Keela.
Put simply, imagine this trial was to go to court and that you were a barrister for the CPS. Would you be able present a case stating blood was found, that it was Madeleine's and be confident of the defence not being able to state it wasn't and in any event whatever was found couldn't be attributed to Madeleine?
It's not a case of dissing the dogs, they did their job. It's what humans then failed to determine or prove afterwards, the result being (on record at least) "no blood found". JBL showing why it may not have been found, is therefore perfectly reasonable, but in no way does it contradict the words of NT.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 15:50:00,
Deletehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/09/dna-is-dna.html
Please quote us where we have ever said that without confirmation the alerts would stand in court.
Thank you.
To all others, including JBLittlemore:
"a case cannot be built around the alerts of Keela"
So please stop promoting the reliability of Keela because “Keela is trained to alert to blood. We don't know what Keela alerted to as no confirmed blood was found in the apartment” and “Keela is trained to alert to the smell of blood. Blood does not need to be present to trigger an alert.”
Hi, thank you for approving my comment so quickly, and replying.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying you did claim that, sorry if that's the way my comment appeared. What I'm saying is, that no blood was confirmed (other than the samples I mentioned as being attributed to others) so with that in mind, it cannot be stated as fact that blood was found, but more than that to whom (from what wasn't actually found) it definitely belonged to. The reliability of the dogs isn't in question, as I say it's the process after that which in this case, gives no factual basis from which a credible theory would stand up under scrutiny.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 16:22:00,
DeleteNo need to go to Martin Grime's report to find that there is full confirmation that blood was found in apartment 5A.
A confirmation that stands up in court. Why? Because a court has already said so:
http://pjga.blogspot.com/2016/04/full-translation-decision-from.html
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CWZ1fz0MihI/VxYyZMV3gpI/AAAAAAAAC_Q/EjoFWjpHqmMepRXCvwwUlVskH2X6Y9BbQCKgB/s1600/TRL_Page_05.jpg
In Portuguese:
2. Em 1ª instância, foi dada como provada a seguinte mat+eria factual:
(…)
6. Os cães da policia britânica “Eddie” e “Keela” detectaram marca de odores de sangue humano e de cadáver no apartamento 5-A do Ocean Club (al AR).
7. Os cães da policia britânica “Eddie” e “Keela” detectaram marcas de odores de sangue humano e de cadáver num veículo automóvel alugado pelos AA. Kate MacCann e Gerald MacCann após o desaparecimento de Madeleine (al AS).
In English:
2. On 1st instance, it was given as proved the following factual matter:
(…)
6. The dogs of the British police “Eddie” and “Keela” detected marks of odour of human blood and of cadaver in the apartment 5-A of the Ocean Club (al AR).
7. The dogs of the British police “Eddie” and “Keela” detected marks of odour of human blood and of cadaver in the automotive vehicle reanted by the AA. Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann after the disappearance of Madeleine (al. AR).
*****
Having in team a native speaker, let us tell you that if the source hadn’t been confirmed the expression the court would have used would have been “detectaram um odor de” (detected an odour of) and not used the term “marcas” (marks) which clearly indicate that the dogs signalled a source.
Let's not veer from the point being discussed.
DeleteJBLittlemore has said this very clearly "A quick note re #mccann - it is repeatedly argued 'no blood was found'"
NT has said very clearly that no blood was found in apartment 5A and Keela's alerts there are meaningless as no need for blood to be present for her to have given an alert.
Mr Thompson and Jules subscribe fully what NT has to say about the dogs.
Of course they are all entitled to have different opinions from each other about the dogs and we must respect that.
We only pointed out that we have found strange the close relationship that appears to exist between JBLittlemore, Mr Thompson and Jules.
I'm aware of the Portuguese ruling in the damages trial (not libel as you correctly pointed out, which is important) that took place, but when Gerry McCann gave evidence, he tried to argue against the findings of the dogs, and was told the evidence of the dogs' alerts wasn't up for discussion. There were no forensic experts called upon, so it couldn't have been proven one way or another. Had they been called upon they would only have been able to reiterate what was stated in the files, that being that "no blood was found"
DeleteThe wording is very specific, and important.
"...it was given as proved" It doesn't state it WAS proved because it wasn't, as we can see from the files, and the court transcripts.
"Given as proven", or "Dado como provado" is Portugueses legalese for PROVEN.
DeleteIt's a transcription from PROVEN FACTS. Do not play with words.
The restraining of the discussion came from the McCann legal team. Gerry was not called upon by own option. To use that as an argument is absurd.
Sorry, but you're mistaken. It was Gerry McCann who tried to discuss the dogs' alerts, and the judge who told him to stop, as recorded by Anne Guedes:
Delete"The judge says that in a civil trial the parties aren't allowed to spontaneous depositions. But she allows him: please do speak!
GMC says that he wants to make a comment about the dogs; he wants to make it clear that it is not a fact that they detected blood...
The judge interrupts him – The issue here isn't not to elucidate what actually happened. The perspective, in this trial, is to determine whether the book and the documentary affected the plaintiffs.
GMC – But the book mentions facts that aren't true.
The judge – The point isn't to establish whether things are true or not, this is not the issue. We want to know whether we are in the juridical remit of offence to persons. For this it's not necessary to know what the truth is. As a judge I'm not supposed to stand in for a criminal investigation.
And so it ended"
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Gerry_McCann_08_07_2014.htm
Because during the injunction hearings the McCann legal team restrained the discussion on the facts and it was then made clear, by the McCann team that the facts were NOT to be discussed in court.
DeleteThat outburst from Gerry was as genuine as his tears on the radio show yesterday. He knew that the issue wouldn't be discussed.
The facts of the case couldn't be discussed though, because as you quite rightly pointed out the trial was for damages to the McCanns' reputation, not for libel. No matter how it's dressed up, there was no blood found, other than that I have previously mentioned that was found to belong to people who weren't Madeleine.
DeleteUnless that ever changes, which is unlikely now. It isn't credible to base the theory of Madeleine's death on a scenario whereby she bled in any given area, as no blood attributed to Madeleine was ever found.
Again, this isn't bringing into doubt the reliability of Keela doing her job, far from it. It's simply a fact that no blood that could be said to be hers, was ever found.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 17:56:00,
DeleteThen you disagree with NT. He's one of the people who argues that no blood was found in 5A.
We disagree with you. As we have shown, swab 3A belongs to Maddie.
What does the person making blood comment think the dog alerted to, where swab 3a was taken from?
ReplyDeleteNot enough for FSS to be certain of the origin of the residue, granted, but that’s why these dogs are used: to detect residues even where surfaces may have been cleaned to the point where standard tests cannot detect the residue the dog is alerting to.
If Keela was detecting the blood of the PJ officer, did he have a similar profile to swab 3a?
Why did Eddie alert in the same area?
It’s subtly undermining the relevance of the dogs, just as NT's revised Smith timeline is not quite as subtly undermine the Smith sighting.
With respect 16:41, what I THINK the dogs alerted to is of no relevance to the fact of what was found, but more importantly who it belonged to.
ReplyDeleteThat's the crux of the matter. To claim it was Madeleine's blood is simply not something that can be stated as fact. Therefore to build a theory on Keela's alerts, without confirmation as to whom whatever WAS found belonged to, is simply not credible.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 17:13:00,
DeleteIt's not a question of thinking but a question of what is stated in the FSS report:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/11/fss-its-maddies-blood.html
Quoting ourselves, our caps:
And you don’t have to go any further than to see what Lowe has to say, in the FSS Final Report, about stain 3:
“286A/2007-CRL 3A & B Swabs collected from the floor of the apartment
An incomplete and weak DNA result comprising only some unconfirmed DNA components was obtained from the cellular material present in the dry swab (3A). The attempt to obtain a result from any cellular material that may have been in the same area and present in the wet swab (3B) was unfruitful, given that no profile was obtained. These samples were submitted for LCN tests.
An incomplete DNA result was obtained through LCN from cellular material present in the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3A). The low-level DNA result showed very meagre information indicating more than one person. Departing from the principle that all confirmed DNA components within the scope of this result originated from a SINGLE SOURCE, then THESE POINTED TO CORRESPONDING COMPONENTS IN THE PROFILE OF MADELEINE MCCANN; however, if the DNA within the scope of this result originated from MORE THAN ONE PERSON then the result COULD BE EXPLAINED AS BEING DNA ORIGINATING FROM [a mixture of DNA from both] KATE HEALY AND GERALD MCCANN, for example. DNA profiles established through LCN are extremely sensitive; it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid. nor to determine how or when that DNA was transferred to that area.
A low-level DNA result was obtained through LCN from the cellular material present in the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3B). In my opinion, there are no indications that justify [confirm/prove] the theory that any member of the McCann family had contributed DNA to this result.”
Excuse me?!?
So, according to Lowe, it could be from Maddie (if single source) or it could be linked to Kate and Gerry (if more than one person) BUT it’s in no way linked to the McCann family?!?
Where is the logic in that?
(…)
This is what the Interim Report says about stain 3: “An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3a). The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, ALL OF THE CONFIRMED DNA COMPONENTS WITHIN THIS RESULT MATCH THE CORRESPONDING COMPONENTS IN THE DNA PROFILE OF MADELINE MCCANN. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive; it is not possible attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.”
So what in the Interim Report is a IS “all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann” has then become, in the Final Report, a very convenient COULD…
(…)
Inspector João Carlos in that same document is very clear: “With respect to the trace evidence recovered behind the sofa all the confirmed DNA components coincide with corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann.”
(…)
Do note that John Lowe NEVER says that swab 3A is not related with the McCanns. He only says that about swab 3B. Subtle, isn't it? About 3A, like with stain 1, he doesn't provide an opinion.
The DNA of stain 3 belongs to Maddie. John Lowe says so twice. The PJ once.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteTo try to ignore this FACT is to be an idiot. And the choice of word is not ours. It’s Stuart Prior’s, as Mr Amaral describes in his book:
“On the very day that interrogation of the McCann couple starts, a second preliminary report reaches us. Contrary to the first report, it accords more importance to the DNA profile of the blood lifted from the floor of the apartment. In that sample, the DNA came from more than one donor, but the confirmed DNA components match the corresponding components of Madeleine's DNA profile.
As for the samples lifted from the boot of the car, there is no further mention of the 15 markers, as if they had never existed.
Suddenly, light was starting to be cast on the issue: either this LCN technique is not reliable or it's simply much easier to explain the presence of Madeleine's DNA in the apartment than in the boot of a car hired 24 days after her disappearance.
At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: "With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England."”
And by the way, the blood having been found or not has been extensively discussed.
DeleteThe "the crux of the matter" is that blood was found as we have now recognised - the debate you're now trying to have is whether it belonged to Maddie - while NT says clearly that no blood was found in the apartment, from Maddie or anyone else.
Mr Thompson and Jules believe in him, or so they say. They should voice their differences with JBLittlemore on Twitter.
Please, that isn't what I've said. I've said no blood was "found" aside from that 100% attributed to people other than Madeleine. The fact other blood sources may have been there is not relevant unless it can be proven, which it wasn't. I also said that which wasn't identified as blood, but was tested, couldn't be attributed to anybody. Therefore a case or theory involving blood, cannot be made.
DeleteAnonymous 30 Sep 2018, 17:46:00,
DeleteDid we say you did?
We said that NT said it: “We don't know what Keela alerted to as no confirmed blood was found in the apartment” and “There was no blood. But do go on”
Are you NT?
If you are, then you said it. If you aren’t then we haven’t accused of saying it so don’t know why you are reacting the way you are.
However, you did say that NT was not wrong when he said the above.
JBLittlemore is clearly addressing people like NT when s/he says: "A quick note re #mccann - it is repeatedly argued 'no blood was found'"
No, I am not NT.
DeleteYou have claimed as fact that blood was found, but haven't proved it was, you then claimed "the debate you're now trying to have is whether it belonged to Maddie". Given that you haven't proved blood was "found" (remember it may have been there, but until it is fully identified as such, it cannot be referred to as "found".
Perhaps a misunderstanding of my comment on your behalf?
Can you or can you not quote any passage that identifies any sample as blood? Without a lengthy comment, just any paragraph that identifies a sample tested as blood.
If not, then you cannot prove blood was found.
If you can't find that, then you cannot attribute that which wasn't found (blood) as being Madeleine's.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 18:14:00,
DeleteThe more you try the gaslight things away from the crux of the matter, the more often we will repeat it.
And we will repeat as many times as you want us to repeat it because we quite enjoy repeating the fact that NT has said no blood was found in apartment 5A.
You believe in Keela’s reliability and so do we. That means you share with us the belief that blood was found in 5A. That’s what Keela’s alert meant.
But even if we or you didn’t believe in Keela’s reliability, it’s not up for debate as it’s a decided matter in a Portuguese court of law: it was PROVED that blood was found in 5A.
NT says it was not. Mr Thompson and Jules, JBLIttlemore’s close friends, fall on their knees to whatever NT says, so we assume they also believe that no blood was found in apartment 5A.
JBLittlemore addresses those who argue that no blood was found. NT is one of those people.
That is the crux of the matter and you agree with us.
Now, about whether the blood belonged to Maddie. As we showed, the FSS says that human DNA was found in various of the splatters on the walls and couch in the living-room. We say it is blood and have been waiting for years for other possibilities, none have been given to date.
FSS also says that swab 3A belongs to the McCanns. It’s there for all to read. FSS said that initially the FSS said it was Maddie and then later said it could be Maddie or her parents. FSS said in the same report that it either belonged to Maddie or to her parents and then inexplicably followed it up with an opinion (not a certainty) that it didn’t belong to the McCanns. The fact that the FSS contradicts itself only shows that the FSS has no reliability.
The size of the stain from where swab 5A came from, if untampered with, would produce without any problem a clear result. It consists of 2 stains of 1 cm each of human organic residue.
We consider the stain to be untampered even if it was submitted to a mopping. Considering the location, behind the couch, near the wall and below the curtains we doubt that the area was the subject of any mopping.
Any other cleaning cannot be considered to be a normal cleaning as the stain is. Any other cleaning more than a quick mopping would indicate that those 2 stains were intentionally tampered with.
The fact that swab 3A doesn’t produce a clear result indicates to us that those 2 stains (and that entire area of the living room) was tampered with. That means someone felt the need to get rid of inconvenient evidence.
You may agree or disagree with us. Most probably, reading your comments, you disagree.
But hasn’t the argument that the forensic evidence found in apartment 5A simply isn’t enough to build a case to convict the McCanns been a pro one for all these years?
Yes, it has and it seems to be the school of thought you are following.
And hasn’t the argument of those (like JBLIttlemore) who don’t agree with the theory you subscribe been that the reliability of the dogs working in tandem together with the forensic evidence that was found (the FSS report is not conclusive as it allows for further testing so not a closed issue) is enough to construct a case against the McCanns that will fall under reasonable doubt?
Yes, it has and it seems to be the school of thought you are now fighting.
But whether you agree or disagree with us, fact is that blood was found in the apartment. Another important fact is that we have seen no other diligence by the PJ to find to whom the blood belonged if they had doubts about whether the blood belonged to Maddie. In fact, the conclusions that the PJ came to make it certain that they thought that was Maddie’s blood.
By saying that the blood doesn’t belong to Maddie you are in fact contradicting the PJ. You don’t believe in the PJ?
To conclude, because the last ideas are what are retained, as you so well know, nothing you said alters the fact that NT has said there was no blood found in apartment 5A and that Mr Thompson and Jules subscribe this theory, or at least we haven’t seen them deny this in public.
Oh, another amazing coincidence between NT and Walker/Bale and now Amoralis: both are certain no blood was found in 5A:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/GoncalAmoralis/status/1046356345761476609
McCann Truth 🌐 @GoncalAmoralis
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Hi. Doesn't change the facts. No blood was found. #mccann
4:09 am - 30 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1046479790516121605
DeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @GoncalAmoralis
As a clearly renowned scientist can you prove to me that the unidentified cellular material described in the FSS report was NOT blood? I'll wait - dear! #Mccann
12:19 pm - 30 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/GoncalAmoralis/status/1046483984342020099
McCann Truth 🌐 @GoncalAmoralis
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Hi. Yes. Easy. First week at forensic school teaches you how to identify blood. One of the easiest thing ever to identify. Cold tonight. #mccann
12:36 pm - 30 Sep 2018
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1046493041568227328
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @GoncalAmoralis
Oh, did you go to Forensic school? Well I never. Yes, identifying blood is fundamental to training but - big BUT - where samples have been degraded in some way & source cannot be 100% identified by highly trained specialists ... they state so! As in FSS report. #Mccann
1:12 pm - 30 Sep 2018
Sorry, I tried to reply to this but due to the size of the comment box when writing a reply, it was impossible to see the big picture. I'll copy and paste what you said if that's ok, and add brief comments underneath so I can express my thoughts.
Delete"The more you try the gaslight things away from the crux of the matter, the more often we will repeat it."
Gaslighting means to cast doubt, there is already doubt. What I'm trying to do is discuss them with you
"And we will repeat as many times as you want us to repeat it because we quite enjoy repeating the fact that NT has said no blood was found in apartment 5A."
Blood wasn't found, not by humans, and for proof the alerts need human corroboration.
"You believe in Keela’s reliability and so do we. That means you share with us the belief that blood was found in 5A. That’s what Keela’s alert meant."
I do, as did Martin Grime. He couldn't state blood was definitely found either though.
"But even if we or you didn’t believe in Keela’s reliability, it’s not up for debate as it’s a decided matter in a Portuguese court of law: it was PROVED that blood was found in 5A."
It wasn't though, as I've shown in my comments above.
"NT says it was not. Mr Thompson and Jules, JBLIttlemore’s close friends, fall on their knees to whatever NT says, so we assume they also believe that no blood was found in apartment 5A."
I cannot speak for Mr Thompson or Jules, and don't see what relevance they have to our discussion. I do wonder though, why you single these people out, and not those who claim Madeleine was murdered by Kate and Gerry, or sexually abused.
"JBLittlemore addresses those who argue that no blood was found. NT is one of those people."
JBL discusses, you're correct. They state nothing as fact, but simply offer explanations or scenarios. You state your theory as fact, without proof.
"That is the crux of the matter and you agree with us.
Now, about whether the blood belonged to Maddie. As we showed, the FSS says that human DNA was found in various of the splatters on the walls and couch in the living-room. We say it is blood and have been waiting for years for other possibilities, none have been given to date."
You have shown no proof blood was found. All I ask is for a single short quote, that blood was found, and yet you still haven't shown one. None exists.
"FSS also says that swab 3A belongs to the McCanns. It’s there for all to read. FSS said that initially the FSS said it was Maddie and then later said it could be Maddie or her parents. FSS said in the same report that it either belonged to Maddie or to her parents and then inexplicably followed it up with an opinion (not a certainty) that it didn’t belong to the McCanns. The fact that the FSS contradicts itself only shows that the FSS has no reliability."
The sample was incomplete, therefore no proof exists. This could be due to a number of things, of which I am happy to see JBL put forward as possibilities.
"The size of the stain from where swab 5A came from, if untampered with, would produce without any problem a clear result. It consists of 2 stains of 1 cm each of human organic residue.
We consider the stain to be untampered even if it was submitted to a mopping. Considering the location, behind the couch, near the wall and below the curtains we doubt that the area was the subject of any mopping."
It could have been mopped. It could have degraded. It could have been an alert to an area that wasn't swabbed, and therefore could have been any cellular material.
Contd...
Second part of my reply
Delete"Any other cleaning cannot be considered to be a normal cleaning as the stain is. Any other cleaning more than a quick mopping would indicate that those 2 stains were intentionally tampered with.
The fact that swab 3A doesn’t produce a clear result indicates to us that those 2 stains (and that entire area of the living room) was tampered with. That means someone felt the need to get rid of inconvenient evidence."
The entire living room? How can you reach that conclusion based upon a small area?
"You may agree or disagree with us. Most probably, reading your comments, you disagree.
But hasn’t the argument that the forensic evidence found in apartment 5A simply isn’t enough to build a case to convict the McCanns been a pro one for all these years?"
It's a factual one. If it isn't then you should prove otherwise, take your findings to the police, and end this charade.
"Yes, it has and it seems to be the school of thought you are following.
And hasn’t the argument of those (like JBLIttlemore) who don’t agree with the theory you subscribe been that the reliability of the dogs working in tandem together with the forensic evidence that was found (the FSS report is not conclusive as it allows for further testing so not a closed issue) is enough to construct a case against the McCanns that will fall under reasonable doubt?"
JBL will also tell you that with the evidence of the dogs and the results from the lab, that no case would hold up in court.
"But whether you agree or disagree with us, fact is that blood was found in the apartment. Another important fact is that we have seen no other diligence by the PJ to find to whom the blood belonged if they had doubts about whether the blood belonged to Maddie. In fact, the conclusions that the PJ came to make it certain that they thought that was Maddie’s blood."
They may well have thought it, they didn't state it as fact. You can state it as fact, that's your right, but it isn't a fact until proven.
"By saying that the blood doesn’t belong to Maddie you are in fact contradicting the PJ. You don’t believe in the PJ?"
No blood was confirmed, so can't be classed as being found.
"To conclude, because the last ideas are what are retained, as you so well know, nothing you said alters the fact that NT has said there was no blood found in apartment 5A and that Mr Thompson and Jules subscribe this theory, or at least we haven’t seen them deny this in public."
I think this is where you fall down. You assume things then present them as fact.
However, I am grateful for this discussion today, and despite you not convincing me that your conjecture is factual, I respect your right to say what you believe on your blog.
Kind regards, and I wish you a pleasant week.
An update from JBLittlemore:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1046513552482336768
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
It has just been brought to my attention that a blog site is stating I said blood was found in 5a? And this might be to cause dissent? What I have actually said is that the samples tested were UNidentified cellular material which COULD be blood. Kindly read properly. #Mccann
2:34 pm - 30 Sep 2018
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 22:15:00,
DeleteWe will reply, hopefully, tomorrow.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 22:15:00,
DeleteWhile we decide up to what extent and detail we will reply to your comment (won't be today, we're afraid) could you please answer the following question from JBLittlemore?
"https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/968926775312084993
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
J B Littlemore Retweeted
Keela is trained to alert only to blood. That training identified a miniscule trace to be tested, hence swabs and the 'unidentified body fluid'. So I ask again, what else could it have been/what did she find? #Mccann https://twitter.com/Debzsos/status/968925783849914368
J B Littlemore added,
This Tweet is unavailable.
11:11 am - 28 Feb 2018"
Thank you
No answer about the PJ officer’s blood.
ReplyDeleteDid it not occur to the person that a swab was taken from him in order to eliminate him from any results obtained?
In fact, as I recall, swabs were taken from a number of Portuguese personnel involved with the forensics.
Nowhere does it state his blood was a match to swab 3a.
Sorry, did I say sample 3A was a match to the PJ officer who cut his hand?
DeleteQuite why you would say I did, is a mystery.
From the files:
"286/2007-CRL (17) Cement-glue [grouting] between the floor tiles identified as number 2
A DNA profile that appeared to be from at least two sources was obtained through LCN from cellular material recovered in that area. In my opinion, the major part of the profile matched that of Lino Henriques. Breaking [departing] from the principle, for it to have had a DNA contribution from Lino Henriques then the remaining information in the smaller part of the result is too meagre to permit a meaningful interpretation."
This is NOT sample 3A. This was sample 3A:
"286A/2007-CRL 3A& B Swabs collected from the floor of the apartment
An incomplete and weak DNA result comprising only some unconfirmed DNA components was obtained from the cellular material present in the dry swab (3A). The attempt to obtain a result from any cellular material that may have been in the same area and present in the wet swab (3B) was unfruitful, given that no profile was obtained. These samples were submitted for LCN tests.
An incomplete DNA result was obtained through LCN from cellular material present in the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3A). The low-level DNA result showed very meagre information indicating more than one person. Departing from the principle that all confirmed DNA components within the scope of this result originated from a single source, then these pointed to corresponding components in the profile of Madeleine McCann; however, if the DNA within the scope of this result originated from more than one person then the result could be explained as being DNA originating from [a mixture of DNA from both] Kate Healy and Gerald McCann, for example. DNA profiles established through LCN are extremely sensitive; it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid. nor to determine how or when that DNA was transferred to that area."
Sample 3A was not confirmed as blood.
I don't have to consider if a sample was taken from the forensic team, it states it was in the files. How else do you think I knew one of the officer's DNA was recovered after he cut his hand removing a tile?
I didn’t say 3a was PJ officer.
DeleteNor did I say you said it was.
Why bring the PJ officer up at all was my query.
His blood was deposited after any clear up happened. That’s why it was easy to identify it as blood. No chemicals had eradicated it.
This is NT or his entourage. His charm offensive didn’t last long. So obvious.
The tactic is clear. The dogs were useless in providing any leads. He avoids the cadaver alerts in the same place and the dogs working in tandem.
Perhaps whilst he’s here, he can tell us all how his revision of the Smith’s timing implicates the McCanns, given he places events an hour later, after the alert had been raised? No answer to that despite repeated requests.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 21:12:00,
ReplyDeleteSo transparent, isn't he? Amazing his arrogance in thinking he fools anyone. His temper will always be his Achilles heel.
NT, you had your say; enough for us to know what’s going on. No more comments from you, as you have your own blog to diss the dogs.
We who believe Keela’s alert believe that the high probability is the DNA came from blood. It’s down to readers to decide if they accept the probability of blood.
I've NEVER said the dogs were useless, far from it.
ReplyDeleteI haven't discussed the cadaver alerts, as they weren't the topic of conversation, blood was.
Why do you keep asking about NT's other blogs that have no relevance to what I'm trying to discuss with the blog owner?
I have just as much right to discuss things here as anyone, without being accused of being part of some entourage, which I'm not. I read as much as I can on the case, just because I disagree with Textusa, does not give you the right to accuse me of having an agenda.
Textusa, you have been good enough to allow me to discuss with you, and I'd appreciate it if I could be allowed to continue perhaps tomorrow, without the sniping from anon and questions about other topics.
Anon, I won't reply to you again as you've displayed an immature attitude to my reasonable comments.
Thank you, Textusa.
Anonymous 30 Sep 2018, 21:38:00,
DeleteWe have allowed your comment because we believe that we were wrong when we made the comment at 30 Sep 2018, 21:25:00.
At this point in time it's our assessment that you are not NT. And about this we will say no more.
It will be interesting to debate the facts of the dogs with you.
However what you consider as "other topics" it is THE topic.
THE topic being that someone who says that no blood was found in apartment 5A is being promoted by those close to JBLittlemore on Twitter as THE anti to be followed by all.
THE topic is the reason why we keep bringing up NT. We have to show the hypocrisy of Mr Thompson and Jules, who sell NT - the one who has said unequivocally that there was no blood found in 5A - as the new anti messiah while at the same time suck up to JBLittlemore on Twitter when he says that blood was found in 5A.
Not only is there a discrepancy between these two vociferous NT disciples, Mr Thompson and Jules,and JBLittlemore about blood having been found in 5A as there is also about the cadaver scent as we will show soon.
As we said, it will be interesting to debate the dogs with you. We will wait for your comments.
Thank you. I have left two comments, after an age of trying to work in this little reply box (no easy task).
DeleteGoodnight.
My question for anon above is WHAT was the policeman's blood distinguished FROM?
DeleteIncidentally, you can enlarge the reply box by dragging the arrow located at the bottom right with your mouse (if on a PC, as I am). The box can be enlarged by dragging out to the right or further down the page, until a more suitable size.
Unpublished Jules at 30 Sep 2018, 22:07:00,
ReplyDeleteWe thought we made it clear that we want to protect you. That once you said you would never comment in our blog again, it would be disrespectful to you if we showed the world how you couldn't resist the temptation.
Please use you master's blog and/or Twitter.
Thank you.
Paper edition of The Sun on Sunday:
ReplyDeleteMADDIE COPS IN FUNDING BOOST
Sunday, September 30, 2018
By Michael Hamilton
Cops on the Madeleine McCann probe have been given an extra £150,000 after telling the Home Office of a new line of inquiry.
The funding came as speculation mounted that the investigation into the 2007 disappearance would be shelved.
But The Sun on Sunday can reveal the extra cash had already been rubber-stamped by officials. It could extend the investigation, which has already cost £11.6 million, by six months.
A source said: “The funding was actually agreed before this week’s announcement about the application for money. It was signed off after detectives said they were pursuing a new, viable line of inquiry. The Government agreed because of that.
“it is hoped it will bring some sort of closure. Everyone would like this wrapped up and to end the mystery.”
It is unclear whether the fresh inquiry line stems from a sighting or new intelligence.
Madeleine was three when she vanished from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.
Last night a spokesman for parents Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leics, said that they “remain incredibly grateful to the officers working on the case.”
Surprising is not the granting of funds.
DeletePleasantly surprising was that tonight, at 23:00, 1 hour before the deadline the media reported that OG would close, the internet was practically silent on the issue.
We, as our readers fully know, are pleased that OG continues open.
http://portugalresident.com/plug-pulled-on-maddie-funding
ReplyDeletePosted by portugalpress on October 01, 2018
Plug pulled on Maddie funding
Operation Grange - the controversial British police investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann - has finally seen its funding ‘officially closed’.
At least this is the version of reports circulating in Portugal this week.
In UK, the Home Office line is that expenses on any future operations “could be paid retroactively” - intimating the probe is still active.
There are even reports that a final decision on funding is still being considered.
But it seems largely an issue of semantics.
Here, tabloid Correio da Manhã leads on the ‘bottom line’ which is that “after seven years and over €13 million spent, the investigation by British authorities is approaching its end without producing any result”.
CM stresses that Grange has followed various leads “but never the possibility of involvement of Maddie’s parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, in the (child’s) disappearance.
“The couple and friends with whom they spent holidays at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz in 2007 never made any statements within the scope of Operation Grange”.
CM questions former Portuguese minister for Internal Administration Rui Pereira, himself a well-known commentator and indeed critic on this case.
Pereira stresses that in his opinion Grange has always been politically directed. It’s a suggestion that has come from multiple sources, not least former Metropolitan police detective chief inspector Colin Sutton, and former ambassador Craig Murray (click here and click here).
Meantime, in UK mainstream papers have been focusing on Madeleine’s father Gerry’s latest interview with BBC Radio 4, centering on the incredibly special relationship that he had with his missing daughter (click here)
natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/dinheiro-para-procurar-maddie-chega-ao-fim?v=cb
DeleteThe money to look for Maddie has ended.
New financing still to approve. English investigation has already received more than 13 million euris for the case.
By Joáo Mira Godinho | 01:30
Officially, it ended this Sunday the available funds for Operation Grange. After seven years, the investigation of the English authorities on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, Lagos, in 2007 – after receiving more than 13 million euros (11.6 million pounds) – is nearing to…
(the rest of the article only available to subscribers)
******
CMTV is giving the news that this doesn’t mean the end of the investigation: “The investigation can continue as its costs can be paid retroactively…”
What's going on here? £150,000 have been allocated to Op Grange, haven't they?
DeleteA VERY INTERESTING tweet.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1046882229924843520
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @SamColber
I get the feeling there will be limited funds to tie up whatever is left & it will be up to the PJ what happens next. Not good omens when they've just allowed Joao Azevado to slip thru the net again.
2:59 pm - 1 Oct 2018
****
Frog,
That hypothesis has been considered within blog many, many moons ago even though we haven’t expressed it publicly.
It being attempted was a possibility considered up until Gerry’s radio show. We simply cannot see where the radio show fits into that puzzle.
Also, that premise relies on a friendly environment in Portugal. A submission we never thought realistic but that now is even less so.
Not sure if you are aware but the country is in the middle of a very serious controversy that is putting the credibility of the criminal investigation police in Portugal at stake.
People are not aware that there are 2 PJs in Portugal. One, the one we all know, and the other, the Military PJ (PJM) that is responsible to investigate crimes that the law states to be “strictly military”.
What has happened is that the Director of the PJM is suspect of having covered up a major crime.
That crime was the stealing of military material year. Months later, after an anonymous call, the stolen material was found in a field near where it had been stolen from. The problem was that more material was returned than the one that had been stolen.
Under the presumption of innocence, the Director of the PJM is suspect of having staged that return.
The man who stole got frightened with the media attention the case got last year, allegedly called a friend who was a GNR, who in turn called the PJM. Someone, somewhere, within the PJM or outside it – still to be clarified – decided that in the best interests of the state (excuse used by some of the arguidos) the best solution was to stage the return and allow the thief not to be brought to justice.
The PJM is now facing a very serious credibility crisis and understandably so. It was the PJ, the one we are all familiar with, that cracked this case so any attempt to bring suspicions on the PJ over this case is stupid.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteWhat is relevant from the above and should be considered is that when you say “it will be up to the PJ what happens next” and expect that “next” will be the covering-up by the PJ of this farce, we would say that presently it would not be the best time for that is can be easily understood. And this “presently” will last months if not years, as the speed of the Portuguese justice is familiar to all by now.
We’re seeing the PJ of running the risk of going through the same nightmare the PJM is going through right now.
When the material was returned, everyone smelled a rat and that rat has been outed. In Portugal, about Maddie everyone smells a rat as well.
It hasn’t been outed yet but we wouldn’t recommend asking the PJ to keep it boxed up and have the onus of telling Portugal once more that there was no rat around the Maddie case. Basically, the PJ allowing the culprits not to be brought to justice, just like the PJM seems to have done. Not seeing the PJ doing that, just saying…
So, we prefer to keep as likely the scenario whereby just before Sept 23, certain circles were told the bad news that Operation Fall, with the objective of archiving the case and closing OG this fall, had indeed failed miserably on all fronts; someone, somewhere, decided that the best thing to do next was to have Gerry shed some tears (probably genuine) and basically do a “mea culpa”.
Again, you may know more than we do. In fact, we know nothing. We only make assessments with the information that has been put before us.
One piece of that information is the confusion around the funding of Grange but, apparently, no confusion about it not having being closed.
And all this confusion is set against a backdrop of a silence that this particular cycle seems unusually to have when in comparison with all other previous cycles that we have witnessed. A silence so loud that it really is eerie. Uncomfortably so.
Now what if Ben Thompson were to say the same about NT, or perhaps more aptly, why isn't he saying the same about NT? https://twitter.com/TheBunnyReturns/status/1047124847317401601
ReplyDeleteNT is obviously exempt.
Delete4 hours ago:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1047100622586175490
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @jules1602x @martin_liz
OG no longer on Met Police website. #mccann
5:26 am - 2 Oct 2018
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1047105904653553664
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @jules1602x @martin_liz
https://www.met.police.uk/ It was always on here if you typed OG in the search bar.
5:47 am - 2 Oct 2018
*****
Let’s see what time tells us what this means.
There is no Operation Grange that comes up on the met site.
DeleteIt could be argued that there is no longer an operation codenamed Operation Grange.
To those who have followed the case from the old days: the Garveighs were residents of Seal Beach.
ReplyDeleteAs our habitual readers know, we have 2 kinds of posts/comments.
ReplyDeleteThe majority of them are to explain to our readers the complexity of the case’s tangled web that was woven. The loyalty we have been able to gather over the years, tell us that we have been successful in this.
The other kind is when we speak directly to the people on the other side of the brick wall. When we write them, we are fully aware that we run the risk of possibly alienate friendly and intelligent readers who may find the content of these comments going above their heads in complexity.
In these posts where the message is for those who know we know, we trust that our readers trust us. This comment is one of those to those who know we know.
If there’s something that worries NT is the excess of plastics in the ocean in the ocean. Not minimising the actual problem or even implying that it isn’t real. It is a problem and it is real.
We’re just highlighting the concern that NT has for the issue. He has created separate blogs but, in this occasion, he has used his main blog for his “conservation” messages.
Yes, plural. Remember when he made an appeal on Aug 2 this summer about people releasing balloons and lanterns?
Or as we said in our comment at 3 Aug 2018, 12:39:00 on the post “The help and the tennis – comments continue VI”:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-help-and-tennis-comments-continue-vi.html
“All to just write one sentence: “If you are thinking of remembering Madeleine by releasing balloons or lanterns, please don't.”
Or to be more precise and how that sentence should be read: If you are thinking of ‘remembering Madeleine’ by ‘releasing balloons or lanterns’, please don't.
A stern warning: DON’T!”
He has now used his blog to express his concerns about the environment. With a post dated Oct 1 2018 11:18 (Pacific Daylight Time) that would make it 19:18 GMT.
A post called “Off-Topic” and this was what it said:
“Evening all,
For anyone in the UK, there is an excellent documentary at 8.30pm on BBC1
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv-programme/e/g2st6s/drowning-in-plastic/
(…)
Well worth a watch
And a quick plea - if you have a Marks and Spencer Sparks card, do consider making your donation to the MCS (Marine Conservation Society)
It costs you nothing, but the charity will benefit every time you shop at M&S
Thanks
NT.”
Firstly, to note, NT’s first ecological appeal in August got to be promoted on Justice For Madeleine FB group and this one, strangely, has been ignored by all NT’s new BFFs. Why not? Has the caring for the oceans suddenly stopped? If so, why?
Then, isn’t saying “well worth a watch” something someone says about something that one has seen, has liked it and wants to recommend?
“Well worth a watch” certainly seems an odd thing to say about something that one hasn’t seen yet.
That makes sense IF it was said after the documentary had already been aired when the post was changed.
Blogger allows for one to determine at what “time” one wants to publish a post. If we wanted to deceive people and publish a post that will have yesterday’s date, all one has to do is in the scheduling of the post go to the option “set time and date” and just do that.
To show how simple it is, we have published now a post that didn’t exist and now has a date of publication that has nothing to do with the real time that it was published. The reader can now see that between the post “It’s September 2018!” (Sept 3) and “It’s September 2018 – comments continue” (Sept 21) there is now a post a post called “Bogus post” (Sept 20). That post was created today, Oct 3:
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2018/09/bogus-post.html
(Cont)
Amazing!! I knew the “Off Topic” was odd, and I suspected a hidden message. I appreciate the post that explains exactly what’s what. I couldn’t for the life of me suss it. All makes sense now. Cheers.
ReplyDelete(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIt’s a very simple thing to do and easy for the reader to be none the wiser.
Only Blogger knows. Only Blogger keeps track of when exactly the post was published. For example, 1 minute after the “Bogus post” was published, even though the date of the post is shown to be Sept 20, Blogger would say it was “published 1 minute ago”.
And that might explain why a friend of ours who likes to keep an eye on NT’s blog, told me on Monday at 22:40 “Nite friend, going to bed early. No news I see…”
NT published a post on Sept 29 about the Twitter’s terms and conditions. NT coming to JBLittlemore’s rescue, which would be telling if it was surprising and it was no surprise at all.
So, if the Off-Topic post had been published at 19:18, our friend would have noticed it. Having said at 22:40 that there was no news meant that he had checked NT’s blog at that time and saw nothing new there.
But at 01:01, this same friend, certainly sleepless, texted this “OMG – NT has another save the world from plastics on latest post”.
By the way, this chat with our friend is not the only proof we have that NT fiddled with the time of his “environmental” post. We have a screengrab from Blogger saying his post was “published XXX hours ago” and doing the math, it isn’t Oct 1 19:18 GMT.
As the Chinese lanterns post on Aug 2, it’s quite clear that NT likes to use his blog as a message center, by using the environment as an excuse. He pretends an interest in saving the sea from plastic, a quite unrelated to Maddie topic, in order to pass messages.
It's easy to understand why he uses the blog to do this. Not only avoids the trouble of having to speak privately on the phone or in private messages on Twitter and on FB to many different people as, by doing it this way, he reaches those who refuse to talk to him on the phone, Twitter and FB.
He has chosen the Marine Conservation Society as a group because it says Mcs with initials.
And why mention Marks and Spencer Sparks card? We are absolutely certain that MCS accepts donations from many other cards, so why be specific about this one brand? Isn’t the acronym M&S very similar to Mcs as well? It is.
So what’s the “ecological” message this time?
Well, if he fidgeted with the time it had to be something that happened or was said between 19:18 and 01:00.
And we could only find this tweet (which we called “a VERY INTERESTING tweet”) from the Frog and our reply at 2 Oct 2018, 00:17:00 to it:
“https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1046882229924843520
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @SamColber
I get the feeling there will be limited funds to tie up whatever is left & it will be up to the PJ what happens next. Not good omens when they've just allowed Joao Azevado to slip thru the net again.
2:59 pm - 1 Oct 2018”
We published this comment with this tweet at 00:17 and gave our opinion as to why it wouldn’t be a wise option to take. It took less than 40 minutes for NT to react to it.
So let’s look again at NT’s reaction:
“And a quick plea - if you have a Marks and Spencer Sparks card, do consider making your donation to the MCS (Marine Conservation Society)
It costs you nothing, but the charity will benefit every time you shop at M&S”
Basically: “if you are a stakeholder in the case, NOW is the time to make your “donation” (move influences, pull favours, speak up on social media), as the “charity” – or the collective – will benefit with every single action.”
Quite the call to arms, we would say.
For some reason “old names” have risen from the ashes lately. They are all coming out like Gollums from their caves.
Do note that NT is reminding that the “charity” – or the collective – benefits from each “donation” each stakeholder makes.
To exemplify how easy to fiddle with dates, we have - as said above - created a "Bogus post":
Deletehttps://textusa.blogspot.com/2018/09/bogus-post.html
Thursday, 20 September 2018
Bogus post
PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT ON THIS POST (comments will not be published)
This post was created on October 3 at 17:23 GMT. It is to show that one can fiddle with the date of a post as it will appear to have been published on Sept 20 at 12:00.
The reason for the publication of this post is explained in our comment made at “3 Oct 2018, 17:26:00” in our post “It's September 2018 - comments continue”.
Posted by Textusa at 12:00
Interestingly - there's only one comment left on NT's post which is from Ben Thompson who comments as Pseudo Nym: "I'm a little late for this, but will watch on IPlayer tomorrow. I didn't know about the M&S card, but do know people with those, so will pass that on." My question is, how many people do you know, with certainty, have M&S cards - either in their purses; handbags; pockets? And WHY would you know? HOW would you know? It's just a way of saying: I got the message, 'will pass it on.
DeleteIt was very strange that when all attention was on the funding, NT published that off-topic comment. Now it makes sense. Thank you, sisters!
ReplyDeleteBasically: “if you are a stakeholder in the case, NOW is the time to make your “donation” (move influences, pull favours, speak up on social media), as the “charity” – or the collective – will benefit with every single action.”
ReplyDeleteA curious one yesterday we see a popular Twitter entity who daily incites hatred and public focus solely upon the McCann's claim to have spoken to one of the four Detectives involved in Operation Grange for 31 minutes. Being asked for opinions on various questions including the early death theory apparently...Now is that just coincidental or is that what you call timing considering such an alleged call to arms...
NT/Walker/Bale/Amoralis,
ReplyDeleteJust to inform you that your incriminating tweet that you deleted did not pass unnoticed.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1047639246910181376
ReplyDeleteFrog,
Thank you for the link Frog but we were already aware of it.
We had no doubt M&S supported many charities. Some of us actually shop there.
Question remains, if your friend Watcher is so concerned, why no separate blog for the subject?
Why didn’t NT promote the MCS society to donate to directly? why through M&S? All money will then go direct to them! Why hasn’t NT created a whole blog on this topic?
DeleteIf he is so concerned he should set up a “Just Giving” page for all those that have commented on his post to give directly!
Keep exposing Textusa
Of course all 5 of his followers think it's all hilarious. I'm sure they're donating even as we speak.
DeleteAnonymous 4 Oct 2018, 11:49:00,
DeleteWhen we wrote our comment “3 Oct 2018, 17:26:00”, about NT’s concerns about the oceans, we and everyone else expected that the Lick-Spittle Gang was going to try and deride us. Expected and delivered, so no complaints about that whatsoever.
As we have always said, insults only offend when they touch a nerve. When they don’t, they’re not even as annoying as the barking of a dog behind a gate.
However, it must be said that having attempted to mock us on what we have written – Marks & Spencer can thank us for the free publicity – it means one thing: that they not only have read us but they have also NT’s appeal.
Are we the only ones to notice that everyone from the Lick-Spittle gang has ignored completely NT’s appeal?
They couldn’t be showing more how NT’s appeal is totally fake even if they tried.
Before we wrote our comment, as Anonymous 3 Oct 2018, 20:05:00 has said, only Mr Thompson appeared to have noticed the appeal and only to show how he has been downgraded to a glorified errand boy, one losing his glory with each passing day.
Even then, we did not see a tweet from Mr Thompson with regard to NT’s appeal. And no FB post either. Nothing.
After our comment, Mr Thompson joined the rest of the gang in the attempted jest against us. He and the rest of the gang also have the following in common: absolute silence about NT’s appeal.
Not a single one of them has echoed it.
Not a single one of them has expressed any concern for the plastics in the oceans, no one has spoken about the Maritime Conservation Society, no one has gone out of their way to motivate people into using their M&S cards. Nothing, nada, niente, zilch.
Why? Aren’t the oceans that important after all?
Not one, not a single one of them has even acknowledged to have watched the documentary. Someone, anyone saying that it was interesting, relevant, whatever… Nada.
NT makes an appeal and they are all much more concerned about what a blog with only 2 Chinese readers has to say than about the appeal itself, which as been totally and completely ignored.
They are so concerned – rattled? – that even the appeal-maker, NT himself, has also decided to join in the dubious humour and by doing so he’s distracting people’s attention from his own appeal!
As Nick/Anon once said… could it be more blatant?
Anonymous 4 Oct 2018, 12:35:00,
DeleteNope. They're not. And that's the point we made in our comment above.
:)
NT's latest only proves how phoney the eco-plastics post was... very sad really
DeleteAnonymous 4 Oct 2018, 13:39:00,
DeleteEven if we had asked them to help prove our point and they had agreed to, they couldn't have been more helpful.
This is brilliant, well done Tex!
Deletehttps://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/734120/madeleine-mccann-search-continue-scotland-yard-official-money-gone
ReplyDeleteMadeleine McCann search to CARRY ON even after official cash gone
SCOTLAND YARD appeared to be footing the bill for the Madeleine McCann search last night as official cash dried up.
By Jerry Lawton, Crime Correspondent / Published 4th October 2018
The Metropolitan Police probe into the youngster's 2007 disappearance has been financed by special government grants for seven years.
The latest ran out on Sunday. Police chiefs have asked the Home Office for more, but are carrying on the investigation without knowing if they will get it.
The probe has already cost £11.6million.
In a tearful BBC Radio 4 interview at the weekend Madeleine's dad Gerry, 50, spoke of the importance of the inquiry to his family.
He said he and wife Kate were "extremely grateful" police were still trying to find their daughter, who vanished on Portugal's Algarve aged three.
He said Portuguese cops let them down in a "devastating" failure.
A Met Police spokesman said: "We are currently in dialogue with the Home Office regarding future funding."
A Home Office official said: "The application is still being considered."
So JBL is still 'reading' your great blog I see, Textusa, shame he obviously has no understanding of it.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1047803863456264192
"I had a look at T blog earlier. What on earth ...??!!! It is spy movie comedy! I note my lifted tweets still remain, despite public request for removal made here..."
The reason I am, as well as plenty of other users are 'lifting your tweets', JBL, is because there's not a damned thing you can do about it, no matter how much you try to plead the contrary. I'm fairly sure you can go ahead and do your worst!
Well, it seems google don't agree. They have accepted a valid claim for content removal for copyrighted material from this blog. Due to the large amount of material, a complete removal of the blog is being considered.
ReplyDeleteTextusa is pretty foolish if she allows this to continue. The key issue is the refusal to remove copyrighted material even after multiple requests. They haven't come back and requested any further information, so it's now progressing
https://animals.desktopnexus.com/wallpaper/1176825/
DeleteIs this legal then?
Deletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/931671236698148866
JBL, did you get Walker's permission to copy his tweet?
ROFL
Anon 22:23, a Confederacy of Dunces... love it!
How many news websites do NT and his lick spittles believe who 'embed' other peoples' tweets? There are HUNDREDS, probably THOUSANDS! Maybe we should list them?
DeleteDear oh dear, anon 21:33, who told you that? It clearly wasn't JBL, shown in this tweet, which I'm 'lifting' LOL:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1047964803195723777
"My view is that if they could use many others of my tweets then they must certainly chose to ignore my request to remove my tweets from their blog, especially when they are only using our content to behave like mocking abusers. Glad someone has acted."
Neither is it Jules plainly, from her tweet that I copy here: https://twitter.com/jules1602x/status/1047963801528799235 "Yes they are JBL.. We don't wish for the blog to be taken down by Google so I'm giving them an hour before I act... By the looks of it someone else already has... ?!"
Amazing how google respond to 'valid claims' from users made in behalf of others, LOL!
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1047980787289808896
DeleteI'd also like to point out that RTing on Twitter - or answering a tweeter who has already clearly SSd and used a tweet of another - remains within twitter. It is exporting of tweets that is not acceptable.
3:44 pm - 4 Oct 2018
Exporting? Where is that in Twitter’s terms of agreement?
https://twitter.com/en/tos
Meanwhile, over on NT's blog A Confederacy of Dunces are busy competing for wittiest comment for the prized James Bond/Eco-Warrior trophy. No one has the clear lead; but some are trying hard, returning to try again. The rather odd-looking trophy comes with two M&S cards -- all made of plastic.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 4 Oct 2018, 22:23:00,
DeleteStill no concerns for the oceans? It really seems that it wasn't a concern at all.
Haha, perhaps NT will create his google BAFTA awards in miniature version, with the 'PRIZED MASK' bafta, obviously awarded to the most notable blog 'author' adjudged by the esteemed company, the 'ADORNED DIRECTOR', the 'OUTSTANDING DEBUT', the 'GAMING AWARD' and the 'CHILDREN'S AWARD', this latter given to the 'writer' having most outdone themselves regarding their mental age, at an average of 5 years.
DeleteThat would more or less make it about 1 award each wouldn't it?
https://twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/959743112594694145
ReplyDeleteMadeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
Did Gerry #McCann carry his dead daughter Madeleine to the initial hiding place? I believe so ...you decide for yourself #McCanns #Portugal Nice work by investigative journalist @gemmaod1
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVGxRKGUQAATq_c.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVGxRKHUMAAu5n9.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVGxRKHUMAE-3xP.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVGxRKFUMAE_KXo.jpg
*****
McFadden says Gerry moved Maddie from initial site. How did he move her from that temporary site, which would have to be very near where Smiths saw him, to another site, after the world’s media descended on the scene shortly afterwards?
Was it that night after 4 am and before the PJ arrived in the morning? If so, why take her to a temporary site at 22:00 and then to definite site at 04:00 instead of taking her to definite site right away there at 22:00?
They didn’t know the area, they didn’t have a car, but they managed all of this without help from anybody with local knowledge and contacts?
How?
That’s what we keep asking.
https://twitter.com/janamb/status/961084003934789632
DeleteJane Brooks @janamb
Replying to @McCannCaseTweet @gemmaod1
Personally I would say the Smith sighting is credible, it was Gerry but with another child from the group not Madeleine. Tanner sighting IMO bogus, plan went wrong night of 3rd they didn't want Smith sighting known about.
7:47 pm - 6 Feb 2018
https://twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/961100616197181440
Madeleine CaseTweets 🌐 @McCannCaseTweet
Replying to @janamb @gemmaod1
Everyone is allowed a theory <3
8:53 pm - 6 Feb 2018
*****
It seems Jane Brook believes in our theory.
Apparently, everyone is entitled to a theory. Except us it seems.
If Gerry was carrying his 'dead daughter' (which sounds ridiculous to me), where does the bag come into it? We can be fairly sure that Madeleine's body was in that bag, so when did Gerry remove her from it?
DeleteAnonymous 6 Oct 2018, 11:04:00,
DeleteAs we don't believe that the body of a 4yr would fit inside the tennis bag that is seen in the PJ Files without being dismembered, the blog considers any theory that states that to be untrue.
We believe that bag contained clothing and other material that was used to clean the blood in the living area. That's why it was taken out while the PJ was in the apartment.
The question one should ask, is if Isabelle McFadden is saying Gerry McCann was carrying a dead Maddie - we, like you don't believe that to be the case, he was carrying a live decoy girl who we believe to be Jane Tanner's daughter - then isn't she putting in question all the Tapas staff and guest who state that Gerry was at Tapas at that time?
Ah yes, hadn't realised about the contents of the bag according to size, so I can readily accept your view. It's madness to me to claim that he was carrying his dead daughter!
DeleteThe area was searched by 60 people. Including beach. Impossible to hide a body unless access to a building or apt.
DeleteOr transport,I'll go driving in my car,its not quite a Jaguar.
DeleteQuite an interesting article in the Mirror yesterday:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/cry-true-story-inspiration-behind-13367789
Is The Cry a true story? The inspiration behind the gripping BBC hit starring Jenna Coleman
The thriller has been adapted from Helen FitzGerald's 2013 book of the same name.
By Emily Sheridan
14:42, 5 OCT 2018
Updated16:09, 5 OCT 2018
Jenna Coleman 's new series The Cry has had viewers gripped since it started on BBC1 on Sunday.
The four-part thriller tells the story of a young mother Joanna (Jenna), who travels from Scotland to Australia with her husband Alistair (Ewen Leslie) and their baby son Noah.
The family have jetted Down Under so Alistair can fight for custody of his daughter Chloe from his Australia ex-wife Alexandra (Asher Keddie).
However, the couple are rocked when little Noah is abducted from their hire car while they pop into a store in a small rural town in Victoria.
The series is adapted from the 2013 novel of the same name, written by Australian author Helen FitzGerald.
Helen, 52, grew up in Australia but moved to Scotland as an adult where she worked in a high risk offenders unit and HM Prison Barlinnie in Glasgow.
She then went on to work as a criminal justice social worker in and around Pasiley, but has recently take a break from her day job.
Now a mother to two grown-up children Anna and Joe, Helen admits being inspired to write The Cry following two particularly hellish long-haul flights from the UK to Australia when she was a young mother.
She told Crime Fiction Love in 2013: "A few hours after my Dad was diagnosed with a brain tumour, I jumped on a plane with my two children, then five and two.
"I was upset and worried, and not particularly in control of my toddler, who was having great fun running up and down the aisle while I was sobbing in my seat.
"When the air hostess approached me, I was expecting her to ask if she could help in any way, but she leant down and said: 'Your children are upsetting the passengers.' I went a bit nuts. This is basically what happens to Joanna in the first chapter of the book."
Nine years later, when making the same flight when her father's cancer had returned, Helen was sat behind a woman with screaming children.
She recalled: "I had no children with me for this flight, but the woman in front of me had three under five. They screamed for eight hours, and I wanted to kill her. How quickly we forget…
"Despite the screaming children, I wrote the final scene of The Cry on that flight."
In The Cry, viewers see Jenna's character Joanna's mental anguish as she deals with being a new mother and the aftermath of her baby's abduction.
Helen admits her own time as a new mother struggling to cope also inspired her novel.
She told The Herald : "When I look back on that time now, I know what it was. I've just been through a period of serious anxiety and depression, so now I understand what was happening to me then.
"It's a common sign of post-natal depression, the feeling that everyone else is coping. I was obsessed with child-rearing books too, desperate to get it right."
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteThe writer also revealed she was influenced by two high-profile child abductions.
She was growing up in Australia in 1980 when Lindy Chamberlain was wrongly convicted of murdering her nine-week-old daughter Azaria.
Lindy and her now ex-husband Michael maintained a dingo snatched their baby when she was sleeping in a tent during a camping trip to Uluru (Ayers Rock) in Australia's Northern Territory.
After being convicted, Lindy spent several years behind bars for the death of her daughter. However, the conviction was quashed in 1988 following the discovery of further evidence.
Helen was also interested in the ongoing search for British girl Madeleine McCann, who vanished from a Portugal holiday apartment in May 2007.
She told The Herald: "I have always believed both of them. But thinking about their cases made me wonder – what kind of couple would get away with something like this? What would have to be going on behind the scenes in that relationship?
"Lindy was incredibly naïve and open and just had no clue, and she got slaughtered by the media. Her case was really the first example of trial by television.
"Women are always the target, especially when babies are involved. No matter how much we talk about parental or gender equality, that’s what happens."
Why is this article so interesting?
DeleteBecause one should ask if Joanna and Alistair are telling the truth when they say their son Noah was abducted.
The answer is here:
https://www.bustle.com/p/what-happens-in-the-cry-the-book-the-truth-behind-baby-noahs-disappearance-is-heartbreaking-12119100
“As the police and media turn to them as potential suspects, it is revealed that Alistair served a fatal overdose of this medicine to his child before Noah died — and the couple covered it up as a kidnapping. Not that Fitzgerald reveals that until the very end.”
Noah’s abduction was just a cover-up.
Knowing this, aren’t the following words from the Mirror’s article so much more interesting?
“She told The Herald: "I have always believed both of them. But thinking about their cases made me wonder – what kind of couple would get away with something like this? What would have to be going on behind the scenes in that relationship?”
I watched the first episode of The Cry last week - I did think it odd that the mother didn't do any searching or running around to see where he might be..
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting tweet from the Frog:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1048681374142672898
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @ericson_niklas @grand___wazoo and 2 others
I think there may have been something else going on in the Algarve contemporaneous to Madeleine's abduction. Whether the two things are connected remains to be seen but I suspect not.
2:08 pm - 6 Oct 2018
*******
One just has to replace “abduction” with “death”.
The moment the accident happened, we believe the only connection between the “something else going on” and Maddie’s death was that it was around the topic of “something else going on”, more specifically where Kate was to be that night, that was being argued between Kate McCann and David Payne, when one of them was pushed the other adult on to the couch where Maddie was standing, causing her to be projected and accidentally die.
Interesting choice of “Algarve” instead of “Praia da Luz”. As our readers know, we believe that the “something else going on” was not limited to Praia da Luz but also took place outside it.
Could this be another something else?
ReplyDeletehttp://portugalresident.com/scottish-gangsters-run-multi-million-trafficking-network-from-algarve
Could explain a lot of string pulling...
Anonymous 7 Oct 2018, 11:50:00,
DeleteWe repeat what we have stated and seen stated by others before that there's nothing illegal about swinging.
So we don't believe that in the events that were connected with Maddie's death, there was absolutely no illegal things going on. All is consensual and legal in swinging.
As we have also said, after Maddie's death, we believe that shady people have participated in the cover-up. That said, we wouldn't discard the possibility of the people above having been involved in the cover-up.
Not in something "contemporaneous" to Maddie's death.
Thinking about it, OG don’t need any further funding if they want to carry on. The salaries of officers are already paid and they do other work.
ReplyDeleteThe overheads above staff wages are now minimal.
If OG have discovered info about crime/s committed, they cannot be told to close down if they choose not to. The government can’t stop their independent police force from investigating crime.
If the new Commissioner feels she should carry on where her predecessor left off, she’s free to do so.
So maybe we won’t see any costs allocated when the figures are released in April 2019, but until we hear officially that OG is no longer operational, we can’t assume it no longer functions.
Strange thing is that’s it’s no longer on Met Police official website. Only previous FOI requests are shown.
Just wondering if OG has been given another title if it’s no longer funded by Home Office, as it’s regarded as the next phase?
All supposition of course.
I think it is highly likely Grange has closed.
DeleteMore funding or official closure would attract wide spread criticism either way.
The best way in my view would be first to put out alternating statements to confuse.One Day say further funding on the cards and the next day say no decisions made yet.
Then later quietly close.
By the time people realise what has happened the sting has gone out of it.
On Twitter’s copyright, I was reading stuff on Twitter and I've noticed that anyone can 'embed' tweets if they so wish. There’s no need to have an account. Every tweet has a 'user menu', a clickable arrow to the top right of the message box. 'Embedding' a tweet is not to be confused with 'retweeting' (RT) or 'quoting', where one elects to paste the tweet into your own tweet.
ReplyDeleteSo, why are Twitter offering every internet user (as you can do it without having an account) the choice of 'embedding tweets' if illegal to do so?