Quantcast
Channel: Laid Bare
Viewing all 84 articles
Browse latest View live

Metagrabolized muppet Motson makes a mess of McCann matters...

$
0
0
For those of you who follow our blog, you may remember the piece we wrote that totally ridiculed, and exposed, the lies and smears of Nigel Nessling. That blog is available to Goncalo Amaral, should he decide to take action against the organised team of 'pro McCanns' who, in a desperate attempt to paint Kate and Gerry in a saintly glow, have actively sought to defame, and libel Snr. Amaral.

For those who didn't read it, or would like a reminder,CLICK HERE

That blog was both enjoyable, and satisfying, and, as I tap this one out, I hope to gain the same sense of well being from putting another of the court jesters to the sword.

Today's prevaricator is the lesser known Ste Motson. For those of you who don't know Stephen, or 'Ace Ventura' to give him a more suitable name, he enjoys nothing more than taking the moral high ground; tricky if you're standing on a bank of blancmange. You see Ace, is another Amaral hater, a conspiraloon, and, whilst not tracking down missing cats...a bit of a dick.

Enough of the pleasantries though, let's get down to business... For the avoidance of doubt, I have put the quotes from Ace Ventura's blog in red. It seemed the logical thing to do given that what he claims to be true, is in fact bumbling bollocks.

Ironically titled “A Tale of True Blunders”, Ace wastes no time in blundering his way into a paragraph littered with lies

"Amaral’s investigation: Amaral walks into the apartment where the child went missing. He assumes that the child has simply wandered off – big mistake. He fails to put out the necessary alerts. He doesn’t interview the parents, or the last person to have seen the child, under suspicion and makes no effort at all to eliminate them. He is so ill-prepared for the investigation that he has to borrow a piece of paper to scribble down some notes. He does not seal the potential crime scene for future forensic testing, in fact he does the exact opposite and lets people and dogs wander aimlessly in and out of the apartment making it extremely difficult for any future forensic tests to extract any useful or useable information. He doesn’t even notice that at least one of the forensic professionals dusting for prints wasn’t even wearing gloves! Da Sousa (Amaral’s boss) later remarked that, “the crime scene was totally compromised from the very beginning.”  
Of course, all of the above is a big fat lie.

As explained previously, Goncalo Amaral was the operational coordinator of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

For the avoidance of doubt, let's break that down:

Operational: of or relating to the operation of a business or machine, (in this case the machine being the PJ)

Coordinator: someone whose job it is to make different groups work together in an organized way to achieve something. That being said, quite why 'Ace' is implying Snr. Amaral was the first on the scene, or was under the illusion "the child (classic pro McCann terminology, one has to wonder why these people struggle to use Madeleine's name), has simply wandered off". Snr. Amaral did not think Madeleine had simply wandered off, nor did the first officers on the scene. Taken from The Truth of The Lie chapter 3:

"We need information about the parents and their friends, to know who they are, what they do, if they have problems in their country, if the children were victims of abuse, if the family, neighbours, friends could have noticed any suspicious behaviour, what are their jobs, if they work full-time, etc. Is any member of their family depressed or suffered from depression in the past? Do the couple maintain good relationships? Are they implicated in serious litigation? Do they have enemies? For what reason? So, I telephone Glen Powers, the English liaison officer in Portugal, inform him of events and request that he relay our requests for reports. We consider these to be of the greatest importance and await sensitive responses to guide our investigation."
The above quote relates to Goncalo Amaral's actions before he even set off for Praia da Luz, and is fully backed up in the files. So right there, we can see Ace is lying. Goncalo hadn't, at that point, walked into the apartment, and he hadn't suspected that 'the child had simply wandered off'

Whilst we're on the subject, and contrary to Ace's claims that our man Snr. Amaral was of the belief Madeleine had simply wandered off:
 

"On reading this report, which was given to me on the morning of May 4th, I understand that there is no evidence sufficiently convincing to tip the investigation in one direction rather than another. There are many possible leads: voluntary disappearance - the child could have wakened and not seeing her parents, gone off to look for them; accidental death and concealing of a body; physical abuse causing death; murder by negligence or premeditated; an act of vengeance; taken hostage followed by a ransom demand; abducted by a paedophile; kidnap or murder committed by a burglar."
 


Moving onto the second part of Ace's quote:


"He fails to put out the necessary alerts."


The police at Faro airport had already been informed before Snr Amaral was even alerted to Madeleine's disappearance. A control post had been set up on the Guadiana bridge, connecting Portugal and Spain, all police in Portugal had been informed as well as Interpol. CCTV had been requested from the two main motorways in the area. Spanish customs at two ports with links to Morocco, Tarifa and Algeciras were also alerted. Contact was made with all marinas, and video recordings, the 
Municipal Aerodrome Portimao, as well as registers of all boats leaving and entering within the last few days were requested.
Of course, due to the fact 'Ace' has gleaned all his information from ancient pro McCann scriptures, I will point him in the direction of the true facts:

Click here to read PJ files records of boat movements.

Click here to read PJ files re Municipal Aerodrome Portimao


Click here to read PJ files documents and maritime police.
Third part of Mr Ventura's claims now:"He doesn’t interview the parents, or the last person to have seen the child, under suspicion and makes no effort at all to eliminate them."
Ace claims to have resourced his information from the ACPO guidlines. Quite why he would expect a Portuguese cop to follow guidelines from Great Britain, is a mystery, but we will indulge our pet finding expert for now. 

The ACPO guidelines don't state that parents should be immediately interviewed as suspects. Could you imagine the uproar if every parent whose child had disappeared were interviewed as suspects before the basic facts of the case were understood? 
Both the parents were questioned upon arrival of the police, and again the following morning, as well as later in the investigation. I'm not going to put links to each interview here, they can all be read under the heading Gerry, Kate and Madeleine McCann, on the following link:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm


Perhaps Ace collars every owner of a missing animal, aims a spotlight into the face of the distraught owner, exhales the smoke from his cigarette along the beam of the light, and in a strong German accent, parodying such films as 'Lives Of A Bengal Lancer', shrieks:

"Ve haff vayz off making you tok"

An entertaining thought, and of course utter fantasy.

I shouldn't mock... 


"He does not seal the potential crime scene for future forensic testing, in fact he does the exact opposite and lets people and dogs wander aimlessly in and out of the apartment making it extremely difficult for any future forensic tests to extract any useful or useable information. He doesn’t even notice that at least one of the forensic professionals dusting for prints wasn’t even wearing gloves! Da Sousa (Amaral’s boss) later remarked that, “the crime scene was totally compromised from the very beginning.”  
I have to ask myself if 'Ace' is after the vacancy left by Clarence Mitchell; his words spin like a love struck teenager's head.

The crime scene had already been compromised prior to the police the police arriving, something Snr. Amaral considered could have been a deliberate act by the parents.

As for the reference Ace makes to 
Olegário de Sousa, firstly, he was the Chief Inspector of the PJ, not 'Amaral's boss'. Secondly, regarding Snr. de Sousa's claims the crime scene was totally compromised, our Ace drops a massive clanger. Snr. De Sousa was referring to the McCanns, the friends, and Ocean club employees - before the police arrived. As confirmed here:
Crime scene compromised before police arrival.


Sorry Ace. That's the way the cookie crumbles. 
Once the PJ arrived however, the parents were removed from the apartment, and forensic testing began. 

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

As for the above lie that Snr. Amaral doesn't notice one of the forensic team weren't wearing gloves, this was in relation to one of the team dusting for prints on the outside of the window, and it was noticed, as detailed below:
"Inside the apartment, police forensic specialists proceed to lift finger and palm prints, a job that is preferably carried out during daylight hours. Others look for traces of blood, samples of fibres and hair. We notice with dismay that one of the technicians, who is working on the outside of the McCann children's bedroom window is not using the regulation suit, thus risking contaminating possible clues. These images of negligence start to circulate world-wide; this isn't, however, the usual behaviour of judiciary police technicians." 
I haven't forgotten about Ace's claims of "dogs wandering aimlessly"around 5a. I can only suggest that he contacts police dog teams worldwide and requests all dogs work a safe distance from crime scenes...possibly even from home.

Moving on to Ace's next paragraph, and immediately we're slapped in the face with more lies:

"The contact details of all of the people in the immediate area were never taken and to this day there is still around 700 people, all potential witnesses, who have never been questioned."

LIES. From the police files, it's clear to see they were. Between the 5th of May, and the 9th of May, 143 statements were taken from hotel staff. Additionally staff on duty that night were spoken to informally at the time for any relevant information. To contact and arrange to interview 143 people is a mammoth task for any police force, and it was done in just 5 days. Additionally 27 residents were interviewed at various times as necessary.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MW_STAFF.htm

"Some years later, other potential witnesses, who were in the area but had not been spoken to at the time by the PJ (the Portuguese Police), approached the UK police to say that the PJ had refused to speak with them because they did not speak Portuguese!"

Newspaper talk again Ace? I guess you have a lot of time to read The Sun whilst you're staking out a tree, trying to entice moggy down with a packet of Dreamies.

As the files prove, the PJ spoke to many English speaking witnesses; to suggest otherwise just proves your agenda, and your flawed researching skills. 

Next Ace waffles on about why CCTV wasn't checked, well it was:

CCTV was monitored on the motorways running to and from Praia da Luz, it was from one of those cameras, that a possible sighting was noted. 

From The Truth of The Lie, chapter 3.

"Madeleine's parents are already back in Vila da Luz when we receive photos taken in a service area of the motorway: you can make out the figure of a little girl, who looks like Madeleine, accompanied by a couple. These images come from a CCTV camera on the motorway linking Lagos to the Spanish border. The McCanns are asked to come to Portimão in order to proceed to an identification. It's the end of the day. Kate Healy seems annoyed at coming back and made uncomfortable by the speed of the police car taking her. We are somewhat astonished by her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back. The identification turns out negative."

The Ocean Club itself didn't have CCTV, as confirmed by Silvia Maria Correia Ramos Batista, and Vitor Manuel dos Santos, in the PJ files. PDL is a quiet, resort, it isn't Beijing. Portuguese law states that it is not permitted to have CCTV filming its citizens in public spaces. such as streets, beaches, etc. Private business are however allowed to do so if they wish. 

https://www.cnpd.pt/bin/legis/nacional/LEI_9_2012.pdf

Ace muses further as to why the CCTV wasn't checked :

"...a nearby hotel had wiped their CCTV tape by the time Portuguese detectives had finally decided to ask questions there.  The hotel owner confirmed that the camera would have caught the infamous ‘Smith’ sighting (a man witnessed carrying a small girl in his arms just minutes after Madeleine went missing)."


Given that the Smith family didn't contact the PJ until 4 months after Madeleine's disappearance, they couldn't have known that there had been a sighting at that particular place. 

Nevertheless, Snr. Amaral did hold regrets over the failure to gain the CCTV footage from that evening:

“I asked my officers to gather all the CCTV footage in Luz but, by the time they got to this hotel, the film from this camera had been wiped over.

"It was a mistake and I will always regret it."


In fairness, the coordinator of the case was being particularly hard on himself. Independent investigations suggest, that in accordance with Portuguese law the CCTV in question wasn't pointing at the street; it was in fact only covering the grounds of Estrela da Luz.

https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/2015/03/28/madeleine-estrela-da-luz-cctv/

I could go into the fact that Kate and Gerry McCann withheld the efit of this sighting for 5 long years, and that they stopped their team of private investigators from following up on the lead. It wasn't until Crimewatch in 2013, that Scotland Yard announced that the man Mr Smith was up to 80% sure was Gerry McCann, was now the main focus of their investigation, but time is getting on, and Mr Ventura has taken up enough of my time already.

Next blunder from Ace, and here he tells us that:

"...the Portuguese press printed a story, from a source within the PJ (I wonder who that could have been) stating that the blood they had found in the apartment was Madeleine’s blood (even though the forensics had identified the blood as male!)"

Now I have two issues with this claim, the first being Ace's clear attempt to lay the blame for leaks to the press firmly at the feet of Goncalo Amaral.

Leaks did have a pivotal, and prejudicial impact on the case. The McCanns through various friends/employees have enjoyed a long, and beneficial relationship with the press.

Clarence Mitchell, "a friend close to the McCanns", "a source close to the McCanns", Philomena McCann, Justine McGuinness, Lori Campbell... The McCanns have had many, many leaks attributed to them over the years, and not just to the Portuguese press. Clarence Mitchell spoke to press agencies worldwide: 

Mitchell's interference drew the following comment from Portuguese police union chief Carlos Anjos:

"Mr Mitchell wants to discredit the Policia Judiciaria and invent excuses so the McCanns do not come to Portugal to participate in the reconstruction of the night she disappeared."

"He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth.


"Finally we know what side truth is on."


"While the Policia Judiciaria were fulfilling their duty of investigating what happened to Madeleine, her parents' spokesman was manipulating public opinion."


That comment was a true then, as it is today.

My second issue with Ace's claim of the only blood being found in 5a was male, is this:

He's a liar.

Taken from http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

"However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result (swab 3a),match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann."

As we know, sample 3a was a swab taken from behind the sofa. The area that both Eddie and Keela alerted to. 

The rest of Ace's blog highlights his lack of understanding of how Eddie and Keela work. Our very own Syn0nymph already drew attention to Motty's miserable attempts to discredit Eddie and Keela, and in particular his uneducated mutterings of nonsense, so I won't go over those again. All the apologists excuses are roundly debunked here:

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/the-truth-of-dogs-mccann-case-and-more.html

Finally, I'd like to share one of Ace's rather ironic passages:

"Believe it or not, despite all of this, there are some gullible people, who have neither looked at the evidence objectively, or with any degree of impartially, nor who have sufficient knowledge of how an investigation such as this should have been carried out."

All talk no trousers Ace. 

Whatever you're tipple, I suggest you take more water with it. 

In your case the saying "don't give up your day job", is something no man should ever say to you. 

I only hope that there aren't many missing pets relying on you to find them; you couldn't find your own nose in the dark. 

etc. etc.



"Alllll-righty then"





Murdered by her mother - the case of Joana Cipriano.

$
0
0
Goncalo Amaral, the coordinator for the original investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine Mccann, has been involved in one high profile missing child case before. That being the murder of Joana Cipriano. It was in fact the only other high profile case of a missing child that Snr. Amaral had worked on, the simple reason for this being, that there have been no missing children in the Algarve for Snr. Amaral to coordinate investigations over. Apart from what could be described as the 'normal' parental abduction cases, which thankfully are very rare and usually solved swiftly or at least identified as parental abductions, there just haven't been any missing children at the hands of a stranger.

Sickeningly, we've seen apologists make excuses for the killers of Joana Cipriano for years. They've even managed to brainwash a few, (most of whom can't even spell her name correctly, let alone quote the evidence heard in court) into believing the convictions weren't sound. Quite honestly, the contempt I have for those liars, and anybody else who knowingly defend convicted child killers to serve their own agenda, is palpable. I only hope some of those who follow their views, and unknowingly support them, will finally see through them.

I'm not going to write a narrative here, instead I will use bullet points of just some of the matters, considered to be proven in court:

Joana Cipriano disappeared in September 2004, at just 8 years old. A victim of neglect and exploitation at the hands of her mother, Joana was used to look after her two younger brothers, and was often seen in the village of Figueira running errands for her mother, Leonor Cipriano.

Joana Cipriano, was one of 6 siblings, she lived with her mother Leonor, and her 2 younger brothers. The other 3 children were given away to various family members. It was later proven to the courts that having given these children away, Leonor didn't keep any contact with them, for at least 14 years.

Leonor Cipriano, tried to give Joana away on numerous occasions, twice with the little girl's father, with whom she had had no relationship, only for him to return her. Joana was even left with a couple who were alcoholics, and had a sick child of their own.
One of the children, the fourth born, was found buckled to a chair, aged just 7 months old, whilst Leonor went out. He was later found by neighbours.

On Joana Cipriano's first day at school in 2003, her mother Leonor, left her to find her own way. Joana was found wandering, and lost by a neighbour, aged just 5 years old.

On the night Joana disappeared, her mother, had sent her daughter to the village shop, 420m away to buy groceries at 8pm.
Upon Joana's return, both Leonor Cipriano, and her brother Joao Cipriano, both beat Joana about the head, causing her mouth, temple, and nose to bleed.

Due to the severity of the beating, Joana fell and hit her head against the corner of a wall. It was this blow, that ultimately caused her death.

Both Leonor and Joao Cipriano, upon realising Joana was no longer breathing, embarked upon a plot to conceal both her death, and the body.

Joao Cipriano headed to the village, whilst Leonor cleaned the crime scene with petroleum, scouring pads, and a mop and bucket.

Traces of blood were found consistent to the attack, and subsequent concealment of the cadaver, were found in all areas described in the confessions of both killers.

Traces of blood were also found on the stem of the mop used to clean the crime scene.

The presence of ticks in the house indicated an attraction to the presence of fresh blood.

Joao Cipriano provided a confession, in front of a judge, a forensics expert, and members of the PJ, on video tape, under no duress, detailing the crime. Included in Joao Cipriano's confession, was a full description of how both he and Leonor, cut up the body of Joana into 4 parts, head, torso, and legs. The forensics expert stated that the description of the body parts that were more difficult to cut apart was anatomically accurate.

Joao Cipriano also described the implements used to cut up the body, these being a metal cutting saw, and a knife.
Joana's dismembered body was placed into 3 bags, before being placed into a freezer, where more traces of human blood were found.

Joao Cipriano stated that he didn't hurt Joana (sexually), but that he only killed her.

Joao Cipriano has various previous convictions, including one for attempted murder, whereby his victim was left blind.

Joana Cipriano's shoes were found inside the house, thus proving she had indeed returned from the shop.

Leonor Cipriano originally stated that she didn't report Joana's disappearance, due to having no credit
on her phone.

Giving testimony, António Leandro, Joana's stepfather, told the court how Leonor, had not only told him that she had been having a sexual relationship with her brother Joao, but that she also confessed to the pair murdering Joana.

Both Leonor, and Joao Cipriano were found guilty of the murder of Joana Cipriano, and the subsequent concealment of her cadaver. They were sentenced to 16 years imprisonment each.

There are so many more horrific points to this case, all of which can be read here:

http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/bfaf1cea93ab75fb8025716200388d89?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,06P363

As for controversy surrounding the case. Yes, there has been a certain amount of controversy. Leonor Cipriano, in a desperate attempt to withdraw her confession, accused members of the PJ, of torturing a confession out of her. Leonor accused 3 members of the PJ, and took a list of their names into court. All of the men accused were acquitted. This was because Leonor Cipriano's account of what she alleged, lacked "credibilty".

Below is an excerpt from Diario de Noticias, with thanks to Astro for the translation:

Leonor has no credibility:

"The jurors and the collective of judges at the Court of Faro considered that Leonor Cipriano's deposition had "no credibility". According to judge Henrique Pavão, "she changed her version several times" and "lightly" accused persons of aggressing her, based on a list of names that she carried into the court room. "She lied about the identification of the aggressors and she lied about other crucial aspects," the judge mentioned.

Concerning the photographs that were taken of Leonor, which were included in the process, the collective considered that they are "of weak quality" and that therefore, "it was not possible to conclude safely about what really happened".

Goncalo Amaral, who wasn't in the building at the time Leonor claimed to have received her injuries, was found guilty of falsifying a document. A little unfairly, as he was only writing what was conveyed to him by one of his inspectors. Nonetheless the law is the law, and whilst it may have seemed harsh, it was accepted. The document in question, had no impact on the investigation, and no bearing whatsoever on the conviction of Leonor and Joao Cipriano.

Still that didn't stop Marcos Aragão Correia, Leonor Cipriano's Lawyer from reporting back to Metodo 3 by exclaiming: 'Target was hit, Gonçalo Amaral was convicted'

Of course none of the above will stop the more sinister of apologists from using the murder of a little girl to smear Goncalo Amaral.

Leonor Cipriano was given 7 extra months on her sentence for lying about being tortured.

As a direct result of that conviction, Amnesty International hold no further records of the allegation:

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/resources/annual-report-2013#.VzZA89QrLwc

I doubt any of the above will stop the die hard McCann fans from defending this vile monster who abused, neglected, and murdered her own flesh and blood. Still, they sold their souls a long time ago.

What next for the McCanns?

$
0
0
The European Court of Human Rights - ECHR:

Almost as soon as the news of Goncalo Amaral's second successful defence against the McCanns was spreading across the parallel universe that is the main stream media, mumblings, whispers and in the case of some newspapers, definitive statements were being made; "McCanns to appeal court ruling".

I was holding out for the headline, "Kate and Gerry McCann to throw yet more donated money away in obsessive pursuit of one man".

Or...

"McCanns set to gamble yet more cash, many believe is being used to search for Madeleine"

Of course those headlines will never make the front pages, despite (plans of appealing aside), being totally true. 

Kate and Gerry McCann have spent many years and a massive amount of public donations in pursuing Goncalo Amaral. 

“He deserves to be miserable and feel fear”, is one of Kate's quotes about Snr. Amaral.

All those years, all that cash, and now, if the rumours are correct, Kate and Gerry are considering appealing yet again. This time to the last chance saloon; The European Court of Human Rights. 

The press, as you'd expect, lay out the news like it's a foregone conclusion; that the McCanns will simply get on the blower to Strasbourg, and coupling their usual arrogance, with a somewhat swaggering self entitlement complex, will be granted an appeal just like that. 

It isn't that easy. 

Personally, I doubt very much if the McCanns will go down the ECHR route. I'm more of the opinion that the cries of 'we'll appeal', are hollow, and that the McCann media machine is merely trying to fool whoever still believes their tripe, into believing the McCanns have been dealt a severe injustice (they haven't), and will seek to rectify it asap. 

That being said, it's just my opinion, so let's look at the ECHR, and whether the McCanns could, should they apply, be granted the right to appeal. 

- The first step for anyone seeking to apply to the ECHR, is to download an application form, and fill every section out, meticulously, and in full.

- If any parts of the form are incomplete, illegible, or incorrect, then the court could well end the claim right there. (These ladies and gents do not fuck about).

- Once the form is completed, it must be sent to the ECHR in Strasbourg. 

- Upon arrival at Strasbourg, the application form will be sent to the appropriate legal division. In this case, it would be a division that included Portuguese speakers, who also have expertise in Portuguese litigation.

- The file will then be given a number, and examined by a lawyer.

- The court may then contact the applicant, and ask for further information. If this isn't sent immediately, the court can, and will, terminate the application. 

- Other than the court requesting information, and the applicant sending it, the latter must NOT contact the court. (Can you imagine Gerry being able to adhere to that rule?)

- The court receives over 50,000 applicants a year, of those only 30 actually make it to the hearing stage. That's a staggeringly low 0.06% (You feeling lucky Kate and Gerry?)

- "If your application is clearly inadmissible because it does not meet all the required admissibility criteria, it will be dealt with by a single judge. The inadmissibility decision given by that judge is final. You will be informed by letter, but you will not receive a copy of the decision. It is not possible to challenge the inadmissibility decision or request any further information about it. The Court will close the case and the file will be destroyed at a later date"

- In all cases, once the ECHR decides, at any stage, that an application is inadmissible, or it is rejected, then that's it; game over; you had your chance; you blew it. 

Now, let's get down to some juicier bits. 

One of the questions that we've seen crop up a few times, is this:

If the McCanns begin the appeal process, will Goncalo Amaral's assets be frozen once more, and will the costs Kate and Gerry were ordered to pay, be suspended pending the outcome of the ECHR?

The wonderful news, if you're sat on the Amaral side of the fence, is that until a final verdict is reached by the ECHR, they don't have the power to overturn, suspend, or alter any decision made by the Portuguese, as confirmed by the ECHR below:

"If I apply to the Court, does it mean I do not have to
comply with the final judgement given by the domestic
courts?

No, applying to the Court has no suspensive effect. You must
comply with the final decisions of the national courts even if you
lodge an application with the Strasbourg Court."

So no get out there. If Kate and Gerry were hoping to delay payment (whilst they squirrelled away more of the donations given to them to find their daughter), by slapping in an application to the ECHR, they'd better have a rethink; it won't work. 

The current backlog of cases, means that any application could take up to a year, and more, to reach the appeal stage. Plenty of time for the McCanns to pay up, or find themselves arrested. 

Another question that is included in the ECHR many information sheets, is this one:

"What is the European Court of Human Rights
not able to do for me?

The Court does not act as a court of appeal in relation to national
courts (the Supreme Court in Lisbon being one of these); it does not rehear cases, it cannot quash, vary or revise
their decisions.

The Court will not intercede directly on your behalf with the authority you are complaining about. In exceptional circumstances the Court may, however, grant interim measures.

As a matter of practice it only does so where there is a serious risk of physical harm to the applicant.

The Court will not help you find or pay a lawyer to draw up your application.

The Court cannot give you any information on legal provisions in force in the State against which your complaints are directed."

More on the how applications to the European Court of Human Rights, can be read on the following links:

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Your_Application_ENG.pdf

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Questions_Answers_ENG.pdf

So, if the McCanns are indeed having utopian ideas of starting further desperate, and pitiful attempts to destroy Snr. Amaral, I would suggest that fantasy land is where they will be born and reality be there resting place. 

My honest opinion (for what it's worth), of this entire legal battle and what should happen next is as follows. 

1. Kate and Gerry need to suck this loss up. 

2. They need to apologise, publicly, to those who donated cash they believed would be used solely for the search for Madeleine. That cash has been spent on corrupt private detectives, who (as proven in previous blogs) also channelled their efforts into destroying Snr. Amaral, instead of looking for Madeleine; it has been spent on buying favourable headlines; lawyers; PR spokesman - that's Clarence Mitchell's official title, to the rest of us, he's just a child abuse apologist, who took hundreds of thousands of pounds, in exchange for a multitude of lies, fake stories, and smears, designed to do protect his employers. 

3. They need to hand over the cash they owe Goncalo Amaral, and sharp, so that the £52,900, or the change from his defence, raised by those who wished to help Snr. Amaral, can as promised, be donated to children's charities. I would then hope that the PJGA show complete transparency, and inform us all of exactly how the money was divided up, and to which charities it went to. 

I've seen a lot of comments from people agreeing to a post, that Snr. Amaral should use that money to counter sue the McCanns. 

To those people I would say this:

Goncalo Amaral will have plenty of his own money to take that course of action should he wish to. The £52,900 was raised for him to defend himself, with the remainder to go to children's charities. If I'm honest, I find the comments that he should keep going until the McCanns lose their house etc. quite sickening. It's a baying mob mentality, and if that's what you're into, we're way off being on the same page. Kate and Gerry have two other children, do you really want to see them lose their family home, as well as their sister?

That's before I've even got on to how much good that sum will do for children's charities. I wonder, are the same people who are suggesting Snr. Amaral use that money, even be it temporarily, happy that it not be given to children who desperately need it immediately? 

Even if it were to feed, educate, keep warm, keep safe, just one child (it would help many. many more), would the lynch mobbers out there prefer it be used to pursue the McCanns?

"Ah never mind the kids Goncalo, they can wait; instead, we'd like you to spend all the cash on a big stick, and beat the McCanns with it...huh their other two kids? Nahhh, be reet, here, take the stick"


If you do, and if you got your way, would you still feel comfortable accusing the McCanns of neglecting 3 children, whilst your wish would neglect many more?

Would you feel ok about a fund set up for one reason, suddenly being used to pursue Kate and Gerry through the courts, even though that's the very thing you complain about the McCanns doing? 

"but they deserve it, but they made his life hell, but, but, but..."

...but nothing, you're blinkered, hypocritical, and totally lacking any perspective. 

Finally, it has to be said, now the dust has settled; that all of this; the lies; the legal battles; the obscene amount of money wasted, could have all been avoided. If the McCanns had looked after their kids properly, then the chances are Madeleine would still be here. If they hadn't gone on to lie through their teeth, the investigation could have run it's proper course - without hindrance. 

Madeleine McCann deserved so much better. 

She was born an ordinary girl, with her whole life ahead of her.


She became a treasure trove for those who were responsible for her death, and those who supported their lies.

Katie Hopkins - Toeing the McCann line.

$
0
0
Two things we know for sure about Kate and Gerry McCann:

1. They enjoy nothing more than people banging on about neglect, it is after all their alibi, and, whilst people stick on the topic of neglect, they're not discussing the more condemnatory evidence.

2. They love to play the victim. If ever we needed proof of that, we only have to look at the lies they told about Goncalo Amaral, or the dossier in 2014, that ultimately led to an innocent woman's death; a woman who, through no fault of her own was labelled a 'vile troll', and far, far worse.

So imagine the McCanns' glee when they get two for the price of one. A minor celebrity - she was in Big Brother, and is known for being a bigot; sometimes racist; sometimes crude; sometimes xenophobic; always loud-mouthed; always offensive; often vacuous, and widely regarded as someone who likes to stir up hate for the sake of a few quid, and one who believes Madeleine was neglected, and abducted.

I am of course, talking about Katie Hopkins. The 'I say it as it is' champion of the people.

One of Hopkins' early offerings regarding the McCann case, was shortly after the tragic death of Brenda Leyland. Up stepped our heroin with the following tweet:



Keyword: "Negligence"

February 2016; Hopkins writes an article in The Daily Mail about the McCanns, and her outrage at them leaving Madeleine alone. She even signed the article off with the line,

"Maddie wasn't lost because someone took her. She was lost because she was left to be found."


Click to read article

The rest of the MSM jumped on this story, labelling the article as an 'astonishing attack on Madeleine McCann's parents'.

This was perfect for Kate and Gerry. For almost 9 years, the McCanns had openly admitted to leaving their kids alone, they had also complained about abuse from 'perfect parents', and here was Hopkins giving them both these things. Confirming the McCanns' version of events, whilst whipping up a hate storm on twitter; many who were unaware of the more damning aspects of the case, were leaping to Hopkins' side, accusing the McCanns of neglect, and firing vicious verbal volleys into the ether.

Those who did have a better understanding of the case, questioned Hopkins, asking her if she was going to follow up her article with links to the PJ files, or discuss the many inconsistencies to the McCanns' version of events.

Hopkins, full of bravado, promised there would be more to come - and she was right.

June 9th 2016; Katie tells anybody who could be bothered to listen, via her podcast, that her previous article (the one about neglect), was one she had been previously stopped from writing by The Sun. Suddenly, people thought 'she's being silenced, she must be onto something, why would The Sun stop Katie writing about the case?'.

People waited with baited breath...and they waited...and they waited...

Then, in February this year, as she did with Brenda Leyland, Hopkins arrived back on the scene, riding the wave left by Goncalo Amaral's victory over Kate and Gerry in the Supreme Court.

Would we finally see her dig deeper or reveal more?

That would be an emphatic 'NO'.

We were given the leftovers from her last offering; the same food, only cold, and a little past it's best. She even quoted the same line:

"You know it strikes me that in this instance, Maddie wasn't lost because someone took her. I believe Maddie was lost because she was left to be found."

Click here for LBC show.

Yet again, avoiding the main issues, whilst reinforcing the theory of an abductor taking Madeleine because she was left in the apartment to be found.

It was of course great timing...if you're Kate and Gerry. Goncalo Amaral's book had been ruled factual, and his theory of Madeleine's parents covering up her death, based upon his time on the investigation was allowed to be published.

What better time to discuss the more detailed areas of the case?

Not for Hopkins though, it was neglect leading to abduction all the way. Exactly what the McCanns said, but from someone posing as the enemy.

Next up, came a video with Jodie Marsh, and guess what, it came off the back of yet another big announcement regarding the case - quelle surprise!

It had just been announced, that Operation Grange was to be given an extra £85k to carry on the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. The metaphorical ambulance, panting on the driveway of Jodie Marsh, the soles of rent-a-gob's running shoes still hot from the chase, and their owner in yet another position to fulfil her promise of speaking out. This was a private video, no restrictions from her editor. What did Hopkins deliver?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-brands-injustice-mccanns-10055899

More of the exact same nothingness. Neglect, leading to abduction.  Actually that's not strictly true, Hopkins did add something else this time, and I think it's the first time I've heard her be honest:

"I don't really mind what happened"

Finally the truth. Katie Hopkins doesn't give a what about that fateful night, as long as it serves her. She's a fake, someone out to make a name for herself by acting controversial, whilst at the same time, picking the splinters out of her backside.

I gave three examples of some of the biggest talking points regarding the case. Events that would, ordinarily have people discussing the hard facts, all of which Hopkins leapt on in a flash, and brought back around to the same tale of neglect, and abduction. She promised to give us more, she gave nothing, and now, she's at it again:



Only this time, she's using the name of a dead woman - Brenda Leyland, to get more attention. What's really sickening, is that  Brenda did discuss the real facts, both in her own name, and through her twitter account. She did it in a perfectly legal manner, as was ruled at the inquest into her tragic, and untimely death.

Coincidentally, an avid supporter of Kate and Gerry, who hounded and threatened Brenda days before her death; mocked her passing afterwards; and even had the brass neck to attend the inquest, seems rather pleased with Hopkins' input on the case...



...and well she might. Hopkins is towing the McCann line, she's feeding the public exactly what the McCanns want them to be fed.

"...Maddie was lost because she was left to be found."

There are many, many other aspects to this case:

The evidence of the EVRD dog, and CSI dog, Eddie and Keela:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lrrMoUr3OA

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/the-truth-of-dogs-mccann-case-and-more.html

The lies about a break in. Possibly one of the most fundamental points of the case. It was after all, because of this lie; passed onto the media, from Kate and Gerry, via their friends and family back in the UK, that a vast number of the population were conned into parting with their money:

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/more-mccann-lies-crock-of-locked-v.html

That money, many believed they were donating to help find Madeleine, was spent on legal fees, and gambled on failed and obsessive law suits. It paid the annual salary of Clarence Mitchell - a cabinet office media monitor, who left his role with the Labour party, to lie to the press on behalf of the McCanns, thus creating a paradoxical circle of events. 'Give us money, and we'll feed you more lies'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzikQRswVpw

These, and many more things happened. They're documented in the files, they're facts, so when Hopkins tell us she's going to reveal more, and she won't be silenced, why does she stick to the same mantra, neglect - abduction? The McCanns' version.

The ironic factor in all of this is of course, is that there is a valid argument, believed by many who have read the PJ files, that the children weren't left alone, as one adult was missing from the tapas bar each evening. In fact it was a theory that was explored by Paulo Rebelo, the man who took over the investigation from Goncalo Amaral.

Rebelo's theory, was that apart from the night Madeleine was reported missing, the adults took turns babysitting each night:

Sunday April 29th: Matt Oldfield may not have been at dinner as he was alleged to be too ill, and did nothing on the Sunday.

"Reply 'So Sunday was pretty much a write-off and I was thinking, oh, the start of my holiday and I'm not doing anything that day'.

4078 'Yeah. So Monday was really your first proper holiday day''
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Monday 30th, or Tuesday 1st: Russell O'Brien was not at dinner

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Wednesday 2nd: Jane Tanner was late to dinner, as her daughter was ill.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

Rachael O'Brien (Mampilly) was not at dinner as she was unwell.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-11-MAY07.htm

Quiz mistress confirms one of the group was missing at dinner,

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NAJOUA_CHEKAYA.htm

Due to the inconsistencies within the group's statements, the PJ requested that they take part in a reconstruction, the group of friends all refused, as detailed below in the final report:

"The aforementioned persons were interviewed carefully and in great detail, on various occasions (see index), with the intention to collect all the relevant elements that could help the investigation to uncover the truth regarding the facts.

The analysis of the grouping of these inquiries emphasized the existence of important details which were not entirely understood and integrated, which needed to be, from our viewpoint, tested and compared together [concatenated] in the actual location.

As such, a concrete understanding of the lack of synergy of some aspects of elevated relevance should be attempted through a processed diligence via the reconstitution of the facts, which, due to a lack of collaboration of several relevant witnesses, was not able to be accomplished, in spite of all the force brought by the authorities."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

It is only a theory, but one that Kate, Gerry, and their friends didn't take the opportunity to rule out. Whatever the truth behind whether the children were left alone or not, the fact remains, that by getting bogged down with talk of neglect, the bigger picture is being missed completely.

There is so much more to this case than the issue of neglect.

Former Senior Investigating Officer speaks out about McCann case

$
0
0
As you will all be aware the mainstream media are desperately trying to convince the nation of any theory - other than parental involvement - as to the circumstances under which Madeleine McCann disappeared in May 2007. In an article published on the 21st April 2017, The Daily Mirror were doing just that. The Mirror ran a story that included quotes from Colin Sutton, a former Senior Investigating Officer, who worked on the murder squad for the Metropolitan Police.

Using Colin's words, the article indicated that the former officer's most likely theory was that Madeleine was snatched by a trafficking gang; crucially however the paper misrepresented Colin. Writing on the CMoMM forum yesterday (22nd April 2017) Colin clarified what he actually said:

"This (the theory that Madeleine was kidnapped by a child trafficking gang) is the most likely scenario once those closely linked to Madeleine have been ruled out.

That is an important part of the quoted piece to keep in mind.

My view, as I gave to The Mirror, is that they have not been ruled out, either by the PJ or Op. Grange.  However the editorial slant given to what I said to the reporter has pushed this to the very back of the piece.

I have taken part in three pieces for the 10-year anniversary - the Mirror, the Australian TV film and the Sky TV film.  

The Australians never told me they had 'new evidence', I don't know what this is but I was asked about police procedures in these cases and not asked to give an opinion as to what actually happened.  

The Sky film will be, I hope, a much more balanced piece than anything else in the mainstream media.  I am sure you will have a view once you see it -as will I, as once again it has to go through an editing process, but in what I have recorded I have tried to deal with some of the inconsistencies, to point out that the Portuguese investigation was nowhere near as bad as it is painted, that the McCanns have never been eliminated and that Grange was too restricted either to do this or to have a meaningful impact on the case.

I am sceptical about abduction being the only valid scenario and will continue to be so. In taking that view in the mainstream media, one is subject to legal and editorial restrictions which of course do not exist on a forum. My choice therefore is either to give up and not take part or to do so and try to push the boundaries each time so that the concept of alternative theories can gradually be published more widely. I chose the latter.  

I am cross that The Mirror piece has been adjusted so much that it gives precedence to a hypothesis which I don't feel is the most likely. It is the first time I have done this sort of work for that paper and this is an outcome which has not happened when working for others. No newspaper or TV company has ever told me what conclusion I should come to and if they did I would run a mile. Once I have told them what I think, though, I am at their mercy as to what they use and do not use."

When asked on the forum about Eddie and Keela, the dogs that alerted to various areas in apartment 5a, Kate's clothing, the boot of the hire car, as well as Madeleine's soft toy, cuddlecat:

"I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted."

Colin then returned to the subject of how the article was misleading:

"I can tell you how the Mirror piece was put together - I spent 2 days in PdL with Martin Fricker and a photographer.  I didn't, on this occasion, actually write anything - Martin interviewed me and we discussed the case and the possibilities of what had happened.  He had a list of these possibilities and I gave my view on them one by one - generically as well as how they might apply to this individual case.  I had nothing to do with the piece on Mr. Amaral; my personal opinion of it was that it was pretty unpleasant.

Most of what I said forms the 5 numbered paragraphs on the bottom half of page 4. I didn't have any control over the relative prominence given to them, had I done so then point 1 (parental involvement) would have had the greatest or at least equal prominence.

My views on the Portuguese investigation form much of what was printed on the bottom halves of pages 6 and 7.  Emphasis here on the criticisms is not mine - but we must I think accept that there are some valid criticisms to be made.  Equally I believe that we should not apply the standards we expect of British officers operating within the British culture and criminal justice system to those operating in a quite different context.

On the final page I did say that I believe that Madeleine is dead but that I understand that it is difficult for many to give up hope.  I said - as I believe - that there is/are a person/persons who know what happened to Madeleine and that I fear that now only information from one of them will solve the case.  This was written as "... if the culrprit makes a confession." Which is very similar but also can be read in a quite different sense.

Just to be absolutely clear, currently my overall position is this:

I do not know what happened to Madeleine.  I do not think the official investigations by the PJ or Scotland Yard have disclosed this either.  I have read a lot of hypothesising and logical thought by many different people - both pro- and anti-abduction -  with varying levels of experience and expertise. Much of what they say, much of the evidence which is available, can point to logical conclusions either for or against the abduction hypothesis. 

But the important point for me is that the accepted best practice in these cases is to ensure that the parents and those close to the missing child are eliminated at an early stage.  The good reason for this is that, statistically and experientially, they are most likely to be involved.  If the PJ tried to do this but could not and Operation Grange didn't actually try to as it was never a part of their remit, then I don't think it can sustainably be said that Madeleine's disappearance was investigated to the depth it ought to have been.  

Of course there are, sadly, some cases where the evidence is not to be found, where the best possible investigation will not yield the answer.  I am not convinced this case is one of those because I am not sure it has been investigated as thoroughly as it could have been.

I am certain, for a number of reasons, that Operation Grange was not a full re-investigation - and I believe it should have been.

I do not ignore the other points you mention.  They all have some credibility, in my judgement at least sufficient to warrant investigation by the appropriate authorities.  As such, they are the sort of things I would have expected a proper re-investigation to look at."

Unlike the Mirror, I haven't edited any of Colin's words regarding the interview; I haven't rearranged what he had to say; I have given no prominence to any part, or parts.

I have to say that I admire the honesty, balance, and structure of what Colin said above; what he has revealed though, raises some serious questions;

Why are our press so determined to avoid printing facts?

Just how many other people has The Mirror - and other publications - misrepresented, in an attempt to portray Kate and Gerry McCann as victims?

When - if ever - are they going to realise that the victim here was Madeleine McCann, and that by printing biased, one sided, and often totally untrue articles, they are complicit in covering up the truth, as to what happened to a 3 year old little girl who went on holiday with her family, and was never seen again?




Sunday night's Madeleine McCann documentary 'Gone', Part 3 - EXPOSED

$
0
0

Continuing from where we left off this morning, in this evenings blog we tackle the idiocy of what was said in part 3 of Sunday Night's 'Gone', a documentary that promised so much, and delivered nothing more than lies, smears, and misinformation.

PART 3

2m 32s: Rahni boldly, and incorrectly states that 'the substance behind the sofa couldn't even be determined to be human blood, let alone Madeleine's blood, and the evidence of the cadaver dogs, was questionable'

Oh Rahni, you pseudological scam artist, you make it too easy. Both Eddie and Keela alerted behind the sofa, and guess what - human cellular material was found. Swabs were taken and sent for forensic testing. Of the identifiable markers on sample 3a, all matched those of Madeleine McCann, now unless Madeleine shared the same DNA as a non human species, then perhaps you could explain how you came to the conclusion that what was found wasn't human?

John Lowe - the scientist who tested the samples taken from behind the sofa after Keela and Eddie's alerts - had this to say of a swab 3a, which was taken directly from the spot both dogs alerted to:

"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 to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

Yes he states that the cellular material couldn't be attributed to a particular bodily fluid, but given that Keela only alerted to human blood, and not other bodily fluids, and that DNA was present, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to deduce that it was human blood.

Next up on the documentary we were treated to some truly inspired words from Professor Dave Barclay, here's what Dave had to say (try not to laugh).

"I don't put much faith in cadaver dogs, they will react to any decomposing material, be it human, animal, or badger (see how Dave places badgers into a whole new category - perhaps a mineral or vegetable, I don't know. Dave is a law unto himself) or even meat that you've spilt some blood from in the boot of your car and it's then gone off"

Anybody who has studied this case, could be forgiven for thinking that Dave is clearly part of the cover up - why? Because one of the McCanns' family members - Sandy Cameron mentioned the very same thing in his statement:

"On one occasion, I believe it was on July of 2007, I took Patricia to the supermarket. We carried bags in the boot (trunk) of the Renault Scenic; bought various items including fresh fish, shrimp and beef. When we unloaded the shopping bags, we noticed that blood has run out of the bottom of the plastic bag"

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm

The coincidence is quite uncanny, is it not.

Unfortunately for Dave, and Rahni, Eddie didn't alert to roadkill, dead animals, or indeed badgers. In fact the only things he did alert to, were the very things he was trained to alert to. Sick of the apologist's excuses, we covered, and thoroughly debunked them  in a blog some time ago:

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/the-truth-of-dogs-mccann-case-and-more.html

However, seeing as Dave brought up the subject of car boots, and Rahni failed to mention what Eddie and Keela alerted to in the boot, allow me:

Both Eddie and Keela alerted to the Renault Scenic; the car the McCanns hired 24 days after Madeleine was reported missing. Following an alert to the side of the boot, Martin Grime (the dogs' handler), instructed the forensic team to inspect further.

Using the following link from the PJ files as source:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm

"From the observations made inside the vehicle several areas were detected containing stains that appeared to be of haematic origin, they were subjected to tests looking for peroxide existing in blood using the Kastle-Mayer test, all of them reacted negatively."

"After the examination of the vehicle was complete the human blood specialist sniffer dog was introduced along with Martin Grime of the British police who coordinated the dog?s movements. After a few moments Mr Grime informed the team that they should collect the key and other materials from zone M or from the interior of the luggage compartment given the fact that the dog in reference had identified these materials as places where eventual blood vestiges existed. The undersigned gathered these materials placing them in paper envelopes with the following references:

10. Parts of the vehicle luggage area.

12. Vehicle ignition key."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that Keela alerted to the boot (ref 10 on the photo below), and that Fernando Viegas Um Henriques, of the Forensic specialist team in Portugal, confirmed that areas of the vehicle contained stains that appeared to be blood, it was fair to assume that these stains/areas could have had the presence of blood. We can see from the link above, that a forensic light kit was used. This kit would have lit up bodily fluids such as saliva, semen, and vaginal fluids, as they contain natural fluorescents. This isn't the case with blood. Blood will actually show up as approximately  four times darker.



The link below has more information on forensic light kits:

http://www.spexforensics.com/applications/category/forensic-light-sources

Also below, using the Huber murder case as a source:

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-07-22/news/mn-18567_1_murder-case

The Kastle-Mayer test, which was used in this case, whilst, not confirming the presence of blood, cannot rule it out.

http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/pdf/en/STR_validation_study.pdf

As can be seen from the above link, the Kastle-Mayer test, has known to give a negative, even when blood is present. A possible reasons for this, is that the test simply isn't sensitive enough.

Here is what Goncalo said regarding the DNA samples found in the boot of the car:

"In the first case, the laboratory considers that the result of the analysis is inconclusive because the samples gathered provide very little information when the DNA comes from more than one person. But all the confirmed DNA components match with the corresponding components in Madeleine’s DNA profile!."

...and here is what John Lowe of the FSS said:

"A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.

Why?...

Well, lets look at the question that is being asked

"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab?"

It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample."

No misinterpretation there whatsoever. In fact, when we look at Goncalo Amaral's summary of the DNA, he confirms, exactly what John Lowe has told him:

"The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.

- The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour - on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.

- the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine's DNA profile.

These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?

The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established."

As for Snr. Amaral referring to the sample from the boot as blood, consider this:

Keela (blood only dog), alerted to the boot; specifically the area marked 10.

It was also visually thought to be blood.

DNA confirmed by John Lowe of FSS.

DNA can only come from tissues such as blood, sweat, skin, semen, saliva etc.

As all other fluids from the body would have glowed under inspection, anything other than blood can be ruled out.

The assumption that the sample was in fact blood, is a perfectly reasonable one to make.

Oh one more thing...

Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns.

3m 30s: Back to Paul Luckman now, who when discussing Goncalo Amaral, had this to say 'I think he was fixated on one single solution when, clearly you have to look wider'

Oh dear oh dear, Luckman is again wrong. Goncalo Amaral did consider all possibilities, and discussed them in his book:

"At this stage of the investigation, the hypotheses are numerous, and each one must be considered. It is necessary to locate and identify all the paedophiles who live in or who have passed through the Algarve, in order to check that they were not in the proximity of Vila da Luz on the days preceding the disappearance.

The idea of a robbery gone wrong is not to be ruled out either. During the holidays, burglaries are not rare, and the police are not always informed, because hotels avoid spreading this kind of information. Even if the examination of apartment 5A reveals no trace of a break-in - contrary to what the parents insist and that Sky announced - we have to take stock of the petty crimes committed in the seaside resort and at the tourist complex. We are counting on the management of the hotel so that no incident of this nature remains hidden. Even if we don't have much belief in the scenario of a burglar who enters the apartment for a burglary and leaves it with the child, dead or alive, this hypothesis, as ridiculous as it may be, must not be neglected."

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Amaral%20The%20Truth%20of%20The%20Lie%20Chapter%2003

4m 47s: Rahni discusses a sighting from an Irish family, of a man carrying a small child toward the beach. What Rahni fails to say, is that the father of the family, Martin Smith, was between 60% and 80% certain that the man he saw was in fact Gerry McCann, and said so in his statement below:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

5m 14s: Dave Barclay is back, this time with a theory that Madeleine could have 'gone into the street, and just been knocked down by somebody who was drunk driving, that's an incentive for him to pick the body up and conceal it somewhere'

So Dave doesn't trust cadaver dogs, but is happy to throw a theory out there that has no evidential basis whatsoever. Nobody reported a noise, there was no report of blood out in the road, no reports of anyone driving erratically, nothing. Yet here we are, with Dave throwing it out there.

5m 45s: Here we have the introduction of criminal profiler Pat Brown. What is blatantly obvious to me, and many others, is that Pat's words were cut, swapped around, and she was misrepresented. The degree of which is utterly disgusting. I won't say any more on that matter as Pat Brown has announced that she intends to sue the production company, in a statement I will copy below:

"Pat Brown’s legal counsel, Attorney Brian Close, has identified multiple claims against Rahni Sadler and Seven West Media – including intentional misrepresentation, false light, and defamation - based on the portrayals that took place in the Sunday Night promotional video and in the piece itself. He states: “The misleading edits portray Pat Brown in a false light by contorting her statements and changing their substance, and the broadcasts and publications have done and continue to do damage to Ms. Brown’s professional reputation wherever they are viewed around the world."All I will say on that matter is that whilst I don't know Pat personally, I wish her the best of luck, and hope she succeeds with her law suit. This entire documentary was an absolute disgrace, and those who made it should be held accountable.

Unfortunately (for the blog, and not for anybody outside of Australia), the production company have now pulled parts 3, 4, and 5. I will try to get a transcript of part 4 though, as it too has some whoppers included. For now though, I will leave you with the above. Please feel free to tweet the blog to @RahniSadler, and post it on the production team's facebook page https://www.facebook.com/7sundaynight/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE&fref=nf

Enjoy your evenings, and remember - beware of badgers.















Updated to include: Whilst writing this blog, I considered that Professor Dave Barclay may have also been misrepresented in the same manner that Pat Brown, Colin Sutton, and others were. In fact I'm sure the quotes used were presented in a way that suited the agenda of the production team. I sincerely hope if that is the case, Professor Barclay speaks up - as Pat and Colin have - and gives a full, frank explanation of the context of his comments. The media have twisted the words of the truth to such an extent, that this case has become a tangled web of deceit and lies.


 

Sunday Night's Madeleine McCann documentary 'GONE' parts 1 & 2 - EXPOSED.

$
0
0
INTRODUCTION

23rd April 2017, and with the 10 year anniversary since the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann looming, Australia's Channel 7 aired a show on their Sunday Night programme titled 'Gone'. The show promised to give a balanced report into the case of Madeleine - what they delivered was something far from balanced, and even further from the truth. Split into 5 parts, the show was presented by Rahni Sadler, and seemingly sellotaped together snippets of interviews in the most unethical manner. Over the next two days we will be dissecting the documentary, and exposing it for the blatant McCann PR piece it was. 

PART ONE

7m 34s: Presenter - Rahni Sadler "The front door was locked, but the sliding patio doors at the back were left unlocked to allow easy access to check on their children"

Rahni conveniently makes no mention of the McCanns' original claims that the apartment was locked. We covered this in the following blog:

http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/more-mccann-lies-crock-of-locked-v.html

In the above link are several quotes from the McCanns' friends and family, who all stated the apartment was locked. There is also a diagram (duplicated below) that shows the routes the McCanns claim to have taken to check on the children. In the programme Rahni states that the patio door - it being the closest by some distance - was left unlocked to allow easy access to check on their children. As you will see from the above blog - which contains links to the McCanns' statements - the McCanns claim that they entered the apartment using their key, and that they didn't use the sliding door. Why would the McCanns walk twice the distance to use a locked door, if they had left another, closer door unlocked? Rahni of course, fails to mention any of these anomalies, and more.



Tellingly, Rahni also neglects to tell the viewers, that in the McCanns' original version of events, they told friends and family that someone had 'smashed', 'jemmied', and 'broken the shutters to the apartment to gain access. This was a complete lie; it was proven that their was no sign of forced entry.

9m 56s: Kate describes, how'the curtains, which had been closed, swung open', an amazing feat given that it was a still evening, and one of the curtains - as can be seen on the photograph below - was tucked down between the wall and the bed.



Kate then tells a tale of how the shutters 'were all the way up, and the window had been pushed right across'. This is a version of events that - had this been an honest interview - should have been challenged. The shutters were designed in such a fashion, that the only way they would have stayed up, is if they had been locked in that position from the inside of the apartment. Given that there was no forced entry, it is hard - if not impossible - to believe, that had an intruder entered through an unlocked door, that they would then leave through a small window (which as can be seen by the diagram below, was adjacent to the front door), having clambered over furniture carrying Madeleine, raised a set of shutters - that made a lot of noise -, and done so without waking the twins who were sleeping in the same room. 




PART 2


1m 09s: Rahni claims police didn't join the search for some 2 hours; this is a blatant lie. They weren't even contacted until 41 minutes after the alarm was raised. The first call was received at 22H41 and the GNR arrived at 23H00 a mere 18 to 19 minutes, the journey time to arrive from Odiaxere to PDL. The Statements from GNR officers Nelson Da Costa and Jose Roque are there for all to read, yet are seemingly ignored by the production team:



1m 16s: Reporter Paul Luckman - editor of The Portugal News - is next up with more misinformation; he states that police were looking for a child who had wandered away, and that 'the whole focus was on a little girl that had got lost'. If that were true (it isn't), then the police must have thought Madeleine could 'wander' at speeds equivalent to that of a motor vehicle, given that before midnight a control post had been set up on the Guadiana bridge, connecting Portugal and Spain, all police in Portugal had been informed as well as Interpol.

CCTV was requested from the two main motorways in the area. Spanish customs at two ports with links to Morocco, Tarifa and Algeciras were also alerted. Contact was made with all marinas, and video recordings, as well as registers of all boats leaving and entering within the last few days were requested.



2m 24s: Rahni Sadler claims that 'from the start, the police investigation had significant failings. Instead of closing off the apartment as a crime scene, dozens of people came and went, trampling through the rooms, and the yard, searching for any sign of Madeleine. In the process recoverable evidence was destroyed, vital clues lost forever'. Rahni then asks Paul Luckman; 'So it was not at the beginning, considered a crime?'

Luckman: 'No'.

Sadler: 'Or a crime scene?'

Luckman: 'No, no, it really wasn't...in the first few days...nobody even considered this could be something else'

Firstly it has to be said that the crime scene had already been compromised by the McCanns, their friends, and staff from the Ocean Club, as described by Goncalo Amaral:

"The search and examination of the scene were carried out in difficult conditions: when they arrived, the police were met with a large number of people coming and going - family, friends, resort employees, including dogs and members of the National Guard. The contamination of the premises risks bringing serious prejudice, as a consequence, to the investigation. We must ask ourselves if that contamination was deliberate or not - it can make the search for clues particularly complicated. The Lisbon scenes of crime technicians come as reinforcements to start the examination of the residence, which is from now on empty."

The window and the shutters, that the McCanns had claimed were the point of entry, had been interfered with by Gerry McCann, and others, as can be seen from Dianne Webster's rogatory statement:

“Yeah I mean I can remember going out there and in fact there was me and somebody else, I don’t know who else there was, to see if it could be raised from, from outside, I didn’t spend too long err trying it.” 


As for Luckman's totally untrue claims, that in the first few days 5a wasn't treated like a crime scene, I wonder if he could explain why during the night and into the next day, forensic testing took place:

"The fingerprint inspection was only carried out on the inside of the window because it was night time, the location was sealed and preserved so that light conditions would permit the inspection of the residence to be finalised."

Interestingly, the only prints found on the inside of the window, belonged to Kate McCann, no wonder Rahni lied about forensics not being taken:

"VESTIGES COLLECTED

5….. Fingerprints….Inside interior window of the children’s bedroom…..DBT…..Suf
1. Methodology and means of operation:
2. Established number of supposed authors:
3. Abandoned objects:
4. Objects or values that were the target of the crime:
5. Importance of the damage incurred:
Observations: The fingerprint traces collected are identified as being the middle finger of the left hand (3x) and forefinger of the left hand (2x), of the missing girl’s mother.
The fingerprint inspection was only carried out on the inside of the window because it was night time, the location was sealed and preserved so that light conditions would permit the inspection of the residence to be finalised."


"On 4 May 2007, at 15:30, a Crime Scene team from the Police Science Laboratory, comprising the undersigned, went, at the request of DIC PJ Portimao, to a dwelling situated at Apartment 5A, of Block A of the tourist accommodation building, "Ocean Club" - Praia da Luz, Lagos, in order to perform a specialist examination of the location."


On the subject of forensics:

"After 00.00 a team from this police force arrived at the scene and immediately began diligencies, namely fingerprint inspection which only revealed the collection of prints from people who had legitimate access to the apartment. The bedroom was also examined by Scientific Police Laboratory, which collected numerous vestiges for continuous examinations, which up until now have not contributed to a full clarification of the facts."


Goncalo Amaral discussed the forensic testing in his book the McCanns tried, and failed to ban 'The Truth of The Lie'

"Inside the apartment, police forensic specialists proceed to lift finger and palm prints, a job that is preferably carried out during daylight hours. Others look for traces of blood, samples of fibres and hair."

Yet, the documentary fail to mention any of this, instead preferring to lie, and portray the police as bungling amateurs. 

The wayback machine - as reliable as Gerry McCann.

$
0
0
16th June 2015; Steve Marsden, former admin of a group called Abduction and Scam, and Frances Gallagher, the former lead figure of the group, begin a campaign of misrepresentation of facts. I'm being very kind when I use the word "misrepresentation", if I wasn't being polite, I could say that the pair had blatantly lied in order to gain numbers and popularity, in a group that under their control, was seemingly dedicated to fooling people with sensationalism and myth. However, this post will be lengthy enough, without me getting personal, and dragging up the many, many lies of a woman many people lovingly refer to as "Fanny" Gallagher, and her sidekick "Stevo" Marsden.

So make yourselves a brew, find a comfortable seat, reach for your Hobnobs, and we'll digest this beast together.

Firstly let's start with Marsden's original post.

Marsden clearly stated, and backed up the Wayback machine findings, that CEOP (Child Exploitation Online Protection) created a web page on the 30th April 2007, (3 days prior to police being informed), that Madeleine McCann was missing.

Now let's look at this realistically:

If indeed there was a pre planned, fake abduction, and that Jim Gamble (the head of CEOP at the time) was involved in the scam, then would CEOP have really announced this before news "officially" broke?

Given that CEOP use an outside agency to update their website, would Gamble really have given the order to produce an internet page without first confirming with Kate and Gerry that Madeleine had been reported missing?

The very idea is ludicrous.

What Marsden did by using this info to suit his own theory, was to claim that this would explain CEOP's involvement early in May 2007.

Yet again "Stevo" was completely wrong. It was Goncalo Amaral who requested CEOP be involved, as detailed below in an email (dated 7th May 2007) sent to Detective Chief Superintendent Robert Hall:

"2. In the spirit of Police to Police Cooperation we request the presence of a British Criminal Analyst who may be able to assist the enquiry.
Also the collaboration of the UK's "Child Exploitation Online Protection" may be useful if they wish to send one of their officers to provide assistance to the investigation,"

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm

So does "Stevo's" theory now extend to Goncalo Amaral being involved in the cover up as well?

Moving on. Both Marsden and Gallagher claim the Wayback machine is never wrong.

Yet again, they're lying.

Take a look at this link written by Dr. Fred Cohen http://fredcohen.net/

– CEO – Management Analytics, the piece; "focuses on two examples of legal matters involving archived data, one a digital archive of born-analog data, and the other a digital archive of born-digital data. Their resolution is explained, and along the way, several of the challenges and issues related to digital archives, the transition from classical diplomatics to modern diplomatics, digital forensics in the light of current record-keeping systems, and related facts and supporting data points are explored"

"Case 2 involved a dispute between ex-partners in a financial business. The business failed and each went their own way seeking to start a new financial business, with ownership of a domain name remaining with one of the
partners. Several years later, in viewing what was believed to be an image of the prior Web site using the Wayback machine at archive.org, the party not retaining control of the Web site was unhappy to find that, according to the
displayed content, the subsequent company advertised the new company prior to the termination of the partnership..."

The piece is very lengthy, but some key quotes that mention, and highlight Wayback's flaws are:

"The WayBack Machine is a form of automatic storage, while archives 'preserve'. Preservation is a process in which the archivists identify, authenticate, protect, describe, build retrieval systems, provide access to, and otherwise act to protect the material being archived. The term “Internet Archives” in the context of the WayBack machine is a misuse of the term of art 'archive'. Of course people have trusted anything called archives for centuries, and those at archive.org demonstrated excellent marketing skills in using that term."

"The 'Internet archive' is a bit more nebulous in that it is a web site operated by a non-profit (i.e., public interest) corporation, seemingly like a museum or other archive. However, this is what the WayBack machine is NOT. It is not like a museum or an archive because there is no curation or assurance of protection and permanent authenticity from the moment of acquisition."

"Examination can detect inconsistency in and between records and fonds and this supports trusting (or challenging) the trustworthiness of the records.
But this is not the case for depictions presented by the Wayback machine. Collections are made on a seemingly arbitrary time frame from subsets of automatically selected Web sites. Different components that form a visualized Web page are collected at different times, stored with only a single reference to a collection date, and are not attributed or tracked in all of the other ways archives are managed. They are not systems of records as much as amateur collections, but they are sometimes treated as if they were traditional
archives."

"In the digital world, alteration can happen unintentionally or intentionally, the state of the art in protection of the WayBack Machine is not transparent, and its adequacy has not been established by a scientific or rigorous process. It does not apparently follow the rigors of archival science or records management, and thus it should be inherently obvious to an expert in the field that it does not have the same status as public records or archives maintaining and operating within those standards of care"

"The situation is further complicated by the fact that the mechanisms of the Wayback machine change over time, are not externally well documented or transparent, and do not follow widely accepted archival principles. In fact, once the findings discussed here were made public, the Wayback machine was changed with only minimal notice and little apparent transparency. Thus there isn't external repeatability across those changes, a basic foundation for scientific fields, and doing an accurate reconstruction becomes problematic"

"The Wayback tool is NOT a reliable tool for digital forensics"

Did you read that last quote "Stevo"? Kind of puts an ironic slant on your comments where you try to discredit anybody who discredited the wayback machine huh...

"If the Wayback machine didn't use date and time stamps as pathnames and store them with reasonable accuracy in some portion of the instances involved, this approach would not work. Indeed, there is no real assurance that the time
mechanism of the Wayback machine is generally reliable or reliable in any given case."

I've only taken snippets, but if you are interested, please take the time to read the full article.

For those who are still awake...

Taken from http://all.net/forsale/forensics.html

"In a recent case involving allegations of financial fraud we were able to show that the basis for the allegations was an inaccurate depiction of a situation in time that never actually existed. This was caused by the incorrect interpretation of information provided by "The WayBack Machine", a commonly used source of evidence that, if improperly applied, tends to give wildly wrong impressions of historical facts."

...and more:

http://www.fredcohen.net/Books/2013-DFE-Examination.pdf

...and yet more:

http://all.net/ForensicsPapers/2014-06-15-TwoTraces.pdf

We don't just have the expertise of Fred Cohen to call upon though. One of the most respected researchers on the case - JillyCL - has also stated that she found many time and date stamps to be inaccurate,





Given the fact that Jilly was part of a team that archived somewhere in the region of 25,000 articles on the McCann case, in fact every article between 2007 - 2015, I would say that makes her as good a source as you will find on the subject.

All of the articles archived (many of which we wouldn't be able to view if it wasn't for their hard work and commitment), can be read on the link below:

 http://themaddiecasefiles.com/forum6-25.html

For some of course, the use of sensationalism to attract numbers, will always be more important than logic, common sense, and indeed facts.

PART 1: Father Jack @urcrazytoo writing a script for a notorious pro McCann liar?

$
0
0

"Father Jack", the twitter nasty and pro McCann troll, who is held in high esteem by several known liars and stalkers, has long plagued the internet with her sinister and sly tactics . Not one for using the hash tag "McCann" regularly, "Father Jack" prefers to makes a nuisance of herself by intimidating others, and stirring as much trouble as possible away from the obvious view of other twitter users. Her cowardly methods involve targeting others with abuse, either directly, or through third parties. Recently it was claimed that "Father Jack", was in fact a tree hugging old lady named Marion Amos, although this was denied strenuously by the twitter user, who like her fellow trolls, is desperate to remain anonymous.

Of course anonymity is very important to the likes of  "Amos". A small group of "pro McCanns" have long been involved in some dark activities in order to protect Kate and Gerry McCann. They disrupt, abuse and threaten anybody they see who disbelieve the somewhat implausible theory, that the parents of Madeleine were not in any way involved in her disappearance. The lows these people stoop to even include contacting the families of others with threats, contacting the press, posting pictures online of other people's young children, and happily mocking those who have died. Pretty sick stuff; no wonder they wish to remain "anonymous".

Recently, the smear campaign against Goncalo Amaral has been ramped up. With a result expected soon from the appeal courts in Lisbon, the more malevolent of the pros have upped their lies to a new level. One of the accounts used to do this, is one called @Walkercan1000. Whether the account is run by a single user, or several is unknown. What is known however, and clear for anybody with even one lonely braincell, is that this account lies with almost every tweet. The lies and defamation fall as easily as leaves from a tree. Why anybody would purposely, knowingly, and obsessively lie about the case of a missing child is quite bewildering, yet lie it does, and the vicious pros like it. Whereas those who disbelieve the parents (anti McCanns), are corrected by other "antis" regularly, the pros sit back and allow this account to write exactly what it wishes, some even "favouriting" the rubbish it writes.

What is interesting to note, is that not only does "Father Jack" enjoy the tweets of "Walkercan1000", but that her own tweets bear a striking resemblance. Coincidence, or the same user? I'll let you be the judge of that...

"Crappy videos"














"BLISS"








"DENSE"








"EGGED HER ON"



"FOUGHT"



"LIE DOWN"




"MENDACIOUS"



"SUCKER"



"TESTAMENT TO"



"TOO FUNNY"
























Searched for: "too funny" by Walker
  1. @FakeRC LOL. Whatever the masons did to you they did a good job. Too funny my little masonic victim. #mccann ‐Sun Mar 06 15:34:26 +0000 2016
  2. @anotherviv O deary me. The BBC and SKY have gone up in your world now? Too funny. #mccann ‐Sun Mar 06 01:45:52 +0000 2016
  3. @TheBunnyReturns @CrowBarLies @Go1dfinch @Jk123p @KTHopkins Like the difference between a policeman and a "police expert"? Too funny. ‐Fri Mar 04 15:32:22 +0000 2016
  4. @uk_frost @JillyCL Verified.... Too funny.#mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 22:47:00 +0000 2016
  5. @jacqueline_000 Too funny. Amaral wrote a book based on them.#mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 19:47:24 +0000 2016
  6. @Syn0nymph @IamDavidSteel @cheshirepolice Lol, including Cheshire police. Too funny. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 00:10:11 +0000 2016
  7. @TheBunnyReturns @Syn0nymph @CrowBarLies Too funny. He did not say trillions of things.#mccann ‐Wed Mar 02 23:10:37 +0000 2016
  8. @YvonneNiShiocru @Jobaker46 @JillyCL "Allowed to speak", too funny you deluded fools. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 29 06:10:15 +0000 2016
  9. @Tricky_42 @LittlemoreJB @audleyite @JillyCL Discussion? I come on here to discuss? Too funny. #mccann ‐Sat Feb 27 19:32:25 +0000 2016
  10. @BresnickJanine @KTHopkins @TheSun Bulging in desperation. Too funny. #mccann ‐Sat Feb 27 17:24:00 +0000 2016
  11. @WitchHunted2 Too funny. Desperate or what. Lol. #mccann ‐Sat Feb 27 17:16:41 +0000 2016
  12. @Tricky_42 @alfibab3 @MontiesPython "Don't get personal" too funny, hypocrite. #mccann ‐Thu Feb 25 20:53:40 +0000 2016
  13. @uk_frost @maria213281 Too funny. You malign the #mccann s then accuse me of stalking. Thick as. ‐Tue Feb 23 22:28:04 +0000 2016
  14. @TheBunnyReturns @WokkaisChokka @Tricky_42 Lol. You haven't stopped posting. Too funny. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 22:21:07 +0000 2016
  15. @AfterTheLie Boxed in at every turn. Too funny, what a pathetic defence. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 03:12:55 +0000 2016
  16. @CarlaSpade Great. I'll delete mine and get no bill. Too funny. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 00:22:56 +0000 2016
  17. @Val__34 LOL, desperate or what? Too funny. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 00:21:26 +0000 2016
  18. @ShutTheFunkOff @mikeywomble Too funny, the MET are in on it now. Love it.#mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 12:32:04 +0000 2016
  19. @Papa___Rico o spare us. That's as bad as the Floridian coke heads "PJ connection". Too funny. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 11:42:29 +0000 2016
  20. @FakeRC @w_nicht @ShutTheFunkOff @GlobalBC @globalnews Broke in 2007, too funny. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 11:39:46 +0000 2016
  21. @abuseofpower Too funny. First para. 100% lies. Must try harder Trolls, you're too easy. #mccann ‐Fri Feb 19 05:35:38 +0000 2016
  22. #mccann Grime had retired and the dogs were his. A non policeman with non police dogs, finding nothing. Real worry? Too funny ‐Fri Feb 19 01:07:36 +0000 2016
  23. @LittlemoreJB @Syn0nymph @KDMoose @WokkaisChokka Huge audience? You Bum Trolls flatter yourselves. Too funny. #mccann ‐Fri Feb 19 00:54:40 +0000 2016
  24. @Lady_LeFaye Too funny to think that the #mccann s would waste their time on a load of self flattering Twittering Bums. ‐Thu Feb 18 06:14:40 +0000 2016
  25. @LittlemoreJB @KDMoose Backtracking at full speed. Too funny. #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 20:10:25 +0000 2016
  26. @LittlemoreJB @KDMoose So now you're telling US what K would have done. Control freak or what? Too funny. #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 19:45:57 +0000 2016
  27. @LittlemoreJB @QueenOPortugal @PoIiticalTales LOL..Grimes LinkedIn page..LOL. His CV is better fiction. Too funny! #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 18:48:56 +0000 2016
  28. @DavidCookieeee1 @tweetsanon101 @Josephodriscoll @ditsy_chick 200, too funny. Not used more than 20 times. Ask Grime. Liar. #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 00:29:11 +0000 2016
  29. @FakeRC Oh, listen to it....Too funny Mr Pious. They got to you didn't they? Them naughty masons. #mccann ‐Wed Feb 10 18:24:06 +0000 2016
  30. @TheBunnyReturns @wicatty009 @justice4maddie LOL. A Trolls blog? Exposing me? Too funny. Behave. Liar. Again. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 09 21:12:57 +0000 2016
  31. @CafeMcCann Has anyone seen his guests? Even Hall gives them sideways glances. Too funny. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 09 19:53:35 +0000 2016
  32. @kathietwinkles Says who? You Trolls? Too funny. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 08 20:56:54 +0000 2016
  33. @ShutTheFunkOff Too funny! The builders decided they were bones! #mccann ‐Sun Feb 07 09:52:05 +0000 2016
  34. @AdirenM FSS failed did they? Just because the results didn't suit you Trolls. Too funny. #mccann ‐Fri Feb 05 11:30:49 +0000 2016
  35. @AdirenM Success/fear...too funny! #mccann ‐Fri Feb 05 09:34:48 +0000 2016
  36. @NewsBoothNow You have obtained? Too funny. No school tomorrow? #mccann ‐Thu Feb 04 01:07:39 +0000 2016
  37. @NewsBoothNow "We", too funny. Must be great to own a multi national news wire. Lol. No school tomorrow? #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 23:37:24 +0000 2016
  38. @AdirenM @LittlemoreJB @Jillslaw O dear, the #mccann s shut down the FSS now! Too funny. ‐Tue Feb 02 13:26:28 +0000 2016
  39. @kathietwinkles @SuppDoc Too funny, now I know where you get your "information". SYP used them 7 times. Ask Grime, loser. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 01 22:26:00 +0000 2016
  40. @NewsBoothNow All "our"? Too funny, u mean u and your Mum. They were NOT FBI dogs, liar.#mccann ‐Mon Feb 01 21:10:28 +0000 2016
  41. #mccann you have to admit it, safarisara wipes the floor with the Trolls, in colour. What do they do? Repeat the same rubbish. Too funny! ‐Sun Jan 31 23:34:09 +0000 2016
  42. @SuppDoc @LittlemoreJB @WokkaisChokka @Killdara You? Proven? Too funny. Have you told Mr Policey-wicey? #mccann ‐Sun Jan 31 00:11:32 +0000 2016
  43. @Incosi_Bellend @justice4maddie @FancIubFanny @Val__34 @QueenOPortugal @MichaelBWanker Too funny. Hilarious really. Shame. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 30 17:18:48 +0000 2016
  44. @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @JeyxBieber @CarlaSpade Too funny. Taking your ball in now? Going to cry to Mummy? #mccann ‐Thu Jan 28 01:21:56 +0000 2016
  45. @NewsBoothNow @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @JeyxBieber "our investigation". You mean you and your Mum? Too funny. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 28 00:51:28 +0000 2016
  46. @NewsBoothNow @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM Too funny. The double bluff conspiracy theory. Pathetic. Exposes your desperation. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 28 00:48:03 +0000 2016
  47. @K9Truth @BankersDidIt Too funny. I thought aliens cleaned the flat? #mccann ‐Tue Jan 26 17:28:10 +0000 2016
  48. @LittlemoreJB @WokkaisChokka @nikki_plummer Too funny. You don't know. Thanks. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 23:55:15 +0000 2016
  49. @JillyCL Lol, manically. Too funny. Safarisara has wiped the floor with you and your dogs. I've never witnessed anything so funny.#mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 22:09:18 +0000 2016
  50. @Jobaker46 @5haronl Too funny. Lee Rigby all actors? Behave. All loons, everyone if you. Still, he gets paid.#mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 16:40:31 +0000 2016
  51. @SuppDoc @lindaweryhur @LittlemoreJB @beemmjay2011 @Jobaker46 Exposing? too funny. Now remind me, what did Lowe say?#mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 16:26:35 +0000 2016
  52. @LittlemoreJB @Jobaker46 @beemmjay2011 Too funny. Desperate or what? Lol. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 22:29:12 +0000 2016
  53. @JillyCL So Portuguese judges are OK and respected but English one's are masons and "in on it"? Too funny. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 14:06:09 +0000 2016
  54. @AdirenM You're more informed than the MET? Lol. Too funny. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 13:51:09 +0000 2016
  55. @AdirenM Loads of witness's? Too funny. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 13:38:48 +0000 2016
  56. @Killdara So the MET don't want to look? Too funny suckers. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 00:24:56 +0000 2016
  57. @justice4maddie You're the arbiter of "normal"? Too funny. #mccann ‐Fri Jan 22 14:30:24 +0000 2016
  58. @SuppDoc @LittlemoreJB @Syn0nymph Yet you being Einstein know more than 2 police forces who have spent millions and years?Too funny. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 23:56:13 +0000 2016
  59. @SuppDoc @Syn0nymph Too funny. She says the bone was switched and you say it was retested as bone. Some sheet! #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 23:45:07 +0000 2016
  60. @Syn0nymph Too funny. You would say that wouldn't you? LOL. Just show that what ever we prove you diss. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 20:54:24 +0000 2016
  61. @jillybabesx @LittlemoreJB Lol. Too funny. Go through them one by one for instant demolition. When you're ready. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 15:09:23 +0000 2016
  62. @princessfudge Yes reading, ever tried it? Abuse....too funny. Now run along and find a desperate anorexic teenager to hound. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 01:13:14 +0000 2016
  63. @ParkySteve @SampleX @LittlemoreJB @mcpois What? A Twitter Troll knows more than the police? Too funny. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 22:36:23 +0000 2016
  64. @Col_Connaughton @YouTube Read up on Bennett. Just too funny for words.#mccann ‐Sun Jan 03 08:22:11 +0000 2016
  65. @SampleX @LittlemoreJB @AdirenM @sativagirl Too funny...from you. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 03 03:21:53 +0000 2016
  66. @SampleX @LittlemoreJB @AdirenM @sativagirl Too funny!When they don't investigate you complain, when they do you complain too.Bigot. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 03 03:02:01 +0000 2016
  67. @sativagirl @SampleX @LittlemoreJB Cornered? Too funny, it's like shelling peas dealing with you Trolls. No evidence! Still! #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 23:32:13 +0000 2015
  68. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara Lol, you Trolls are the masters if that art. Too funny. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 22:39:28 +0000 2015
  69. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara Too funny... A smell. Where was the smell tested? #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 18:57:10 +0000 2015
  70. @sativagirl @LittlemoreJB @Killdara Too funny. You mentioned the none existent bag. Stitched you up like a kipper. Still waiting BTW. #mcc ‐Mon Dec 28 18:44:53 +0000 2015
  71. @sativagirl @LittlemoreJB @woolyback12 @YouTube Too funny. There was no blue tennis bag and no bag of any description is missing. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 16:13:33 +0000 2015
  72. @Lady_LeFaye @MontiesPython They have to explain to you? Too funny. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 14:18:34 +0000 2015
  73. @TheyFearTheHare @FakeRC @Col_Connaughton @YouTube £12m white wash, too funny. I suppose that's down to the Freemasons? Lol. #mccann ‐Sat Dec 26 16:25:55 +0000 2015
  74. @sativagirl @MaggieSI00 @McCannCaseTweet Too funny. #mccann ‐Fri Dec 25 14:22:48 +0000 2015
  75. @RobertCarlisl10 @itvnews Too funny... You think itv news are interested in a tweet from a bum? Lol #mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 20:49:32 +0000 2015
  76. @prophonics @justice4maddie Trolls know more than the police? Too funny. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 20:39:43 +0000 2015
  77. @SampleX @FakeRC @AdirenM @McCannCaseTweet Too funny. Reprinted from a French gossip journo. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 13:18:05 +0000 2015
  78. @AdirenM @sativagirl @fcryan1 @untroublesome No of course not. Tell that to your Trolling buddies when they mention £12M. Too funny #mccann ‐Wed Dec 23 23:53:17 +0000 2015
  79. @SampleX @McCannCaseTweet Too funny. Wilfully poor defence of dogs that get it wrong consistently. #mccann ‐Wed Dec 23 14:56:04 +0000 2015
  80. @Killdara Too funny. Whatever you say. But, I care?#mccann ‐Tue Dec 22 21:51:59 +0000 2015
  81. @jannietle @SafariSara @landloulou @wicatty009 er, ruin him?LOL. The only convict in the whole case. Too funny.#mccann ‐Sun Dec 20 21:04:56 +0000 2015
  82. @justice4maddie Too funny. Two Trolls talking to each other. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 17 17:53:59 +0000 2015
  83. @K9Truth @AdirenM Imagine that, sending samples to the FSS and finding your own DNA. Too funny. Amateurs. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 17 11:46:09 +0000 2015
  84. @K9Truth Too funny... A French rag now. Any quotes from The Beano of Dundee? #mccann ‐Tue Dec 15 17:12:52 +0000 2015
  85. @SampleX @jillybabesx Too funny. Bigot. Labs are great when it suits. Bigot. Lowe is crap, when it suits. Bigot. ‐Sun Dec 13 15:19:51 +0000 2015
  86. @SampleX @jillybabesx But you just said they found blood and the PJ agreed...now there useless? Too funny , loser. ‐Sat Dec 12 23:19:57 +0000 2015
  87. @SampleX @jillybabesx LOL, you're getting desperate now. Amaral has held back a few samples. Too funny. ‐Sat Dec 12 23:18:09 +0000 2015
  88. @SampleX @jillybabesx Too funny. And you don't even see the irony. As I said, you're a child. ‐Sat Dec 12 13:34:41 +0000 2015
  89. @sweetexi Too funny. Troll. ‐Sat Dec 12 04:11:54 +0000 2015
  90. @SampleX @jillybabesx @uk_frost Too funny... What planet are you on? Deluded apologist. Amaral is a convict full stop. What bile you write. ‐Thu Dec 10 17:33:48 +0000 2015
  91. @SampleX @jillybabesx "Objectively accurate"??? What a bull shitter you are. He wrote the damn thing. Too funny. ‐Thu Dec 10 17:18:02 +0000 2015
  92. @SampleX @jillybabesx @uk_frost Too funny, he got an 18 month prison sentence and was thrown out if the force, disgraced. ‐Thu Dec 10 16:18:10 +0000 2015
  93. @SampleX @CafeMcCann @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Too funny....you got boxed in there, big time. ‐Sun Dec 06 16:01:46 +0000 2015
  94. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Too funny, not only have the McCanns not been investigated they're leading the investigation! ‐Sun Dec 06 15:35:33 +0000 2015
  95. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Too funny...the Portuguese judge is in on it too! I'm totally convinced they murdered ‐Sun Dec 06 15:08:23 +0000 2015
  96. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Vast majority? What of the Trolls? Too funny. ‐Sun Dec 06 14:34:30 +0000 2015
  97. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost No you said what they were doing was "not legal". Too funny. Can't you read/understand your own ‐Sun Dec 06 14:12:56 +0000 2015
  98. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Too funny, one minute it's independent...then it's a team effort. Troll logic, again ‐Sun Dec 06 12:14:17 +0000 2015
  99. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Don't be ridiculous, I think her face was a bigger give away. Too funny. ‐Sun Dec 06 11:13:46 +0000 2015
  100. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Too funny...clean window=kate cleaned it. Dirty window=Kates prints. Troll Talk, Troll logic. ‐Sat Dec 05 20:23:38 +0000 2015
  101. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Aw, when I give accuracy it becomes "semantics". Too funny. ‐Sat Dec 05 19:40:36 +0000 2015
  102. @Killdara Too funny the labs are in on it too! Lol ‐Wed Dec 02 10:32:29 +0000 2015
  103. @TheCatwoman2 Too funny from a "thing" Trolling a grieving family. Vile. ‐Sun Nov 29 19:42:25 +0000 2015
  104. @mariaccnr @QueenOPortugal @AdirenM Too funny. It seems you have enough of your home grown. A well kept secret. ‐Sun Nov 29 15:40:04 +0000 2015
  105. @QueenOPortugal Too funny for a European country that had peasants up to 1980. ‐Sun Nov 29 04:18:25 +0000 2015
  106. @sativagirl You know what went down? Too funny. You know more than the police do you? ‐Sat Nov 28 14:08:07 +0000 2015
  107. @uk_frost @beemmjay2011 @justice4maddie @sativagirl @SampleX I come here for "intelligent conversation"? Too funny! ‐Fri Nov 27 15:48:30 +0000 2015
  108. @sativagirl @SampleX @justice4maddie @uk_frost @beemmjay2011 Too funny. ‐Thu Nov 26 21:32:16 +0000 2015
  109. @SampleX @uk_frost @sativagirl @justice4maddie @beemmjay2011 Bullshit. What a flaneller you are. Too funny. ‐Thu Nov 26 20:59:44 +0000 2015
  110. @SampleX @uk_frost @beemmjay2011 Trolls critize when they sue and when they don't. Too funny. ‐Thu Nov 26 16:17:17 +0000 2015
  111. @SampleX @uk_frost @beemmjay2011 And? That makes it true does it? That makes it evidence? Too funny. ‐Thu Nov 26 15:58:17 +0000 2015


    Searched for: "too funny" by Father Jack
    1. @SafariSara However, s/shots of her collected 'wisdom' are fair game, shirley? Too funny, daft mare. ‐Sun Mar 22 16:31:05 +0000 2015
    2. @SoniaPoulton @ladyfarqhall @metpoliceuk Lol. Too funny. No, really, simply too damn funny for words!! ‐Sat Dec 13 11:26:06 +0000 2014
    3. RT @MrPolyatheist: This is too funny. http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4IGqdGCUAA0fck.jpg ‐Fri Dec 05 23:59:40 +0000 2014
    4. @Randomleigh1 @K9Truth @bigredflagge fnar fnar you got him there! Too funny.😁 ‐Tue Jun 24 11:48:40 +0000 2014
    5. @Syn0nymph @MilesDKAB @NicsWits Behind closed doors, tittering at tw@ts who think 'waaa, ooo, whoa' are definitive identifiers. Too funny! ‐Fri May 30 21:28:15 +0000 2014
    6. @Randomleigh1 @NicsWits Diagrams which 'prove' Noway is 'Maria'. Too funny 4 words. She sat up all night doing that. Not well? ‐Wed May 21 08:12:30 +0000 2014
    7. @openjools Oh dear you just did what u accused me of - too funny! Face facts, your hatefest is over for all but the bile. Cops watch YOU now ‐Thu May 08 10:34:00 +0000 2014
    8. @Syn0nymph @TheWhiteWizard7 Keep digging 'hun'. Every tweet buries you deeper :-). It really is too funny. ‐Sun Apr 27 01:54:56 +0000 2014
    9. Syn0nymph @Randomleigh1 I see it's threatening again, imagines itself well 'ard. Too funny ‐Fri Apr 11 16:41:29 +0000 2014
    10. @Jorge_orwell You see no irony in that tweet? Lol too funny. Climate denial is for Lawson & Clarkson, not scientists ‐Sun Feb 16 10:40:21 +0000 2014
    11. @TrulyJudy73 @AFG_3100 Yes & now she is telling her fanbase how awful we are. too funny. As if I give a damn for haters & liars. #mccann ‐Sun Oct 13 23:31:16 +0000 2013
    12. @JillyCL @IWILLNOTGOAWAY That's too funny. You useless bunch of loons cant even agree the basics of your conspiraloonery! #mccann ‐Sat Oct 12 09:25:57 +0000 2013

Searched for: "fought" by Walker

  1. @TheBunnyReturns They fought to get them released and publicised. #mccann ‐Fri Mar 04 14:23:40 +0000 2016
  2. @TheBunnyReturns You mean the files they fought tooth and nail for to be released? #mccann ‐Fri Mar 04 14:00:28 +0000 2016
  3. @JillyCL @Killdara @Katycakes1 They fought for the release of those files. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 22:38:59 +0000 2016
  4. @hondo1650 @nikki_plummer @Debbiegeorge65 @k1482 @ShutTheFunkOff @KTHopkins No, you have files because the #mccann s fought long and hard. ‐Mon Feb 22 22:31:07 +0000 2016
  5. @AdirenM They fought hard to get those files released you fool.#mccann ‐Sun Jan 31 18:41:48 +0000 2016
  6. @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @CarlaSpade They fought long and hard in both Portugal and the UK and won.Tremendous achievement. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 28 18:34:45 +0000 2016
  7. @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @JeyxBieber @CarlaSpade led by wife beater convict Amoral. No wonder they fought for new 1 #mccann ‐Thu Jan 28 00:50:01 +0000 2016
  8. @SuppDoc @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @JeyxBieber They fought long and hard to keep the case open.#mccann tremendous credit to them when done. ‐Thu Jan 28 00:18:02 +0000 2016
  9. @missypuddleduck @AdirenM @SuppDoc @JeyxBieber They fought long and hard to keep the investigation open and eventually succeeded. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 27 22:24:35 +0000 2016
  10. @AdirenM Not true. They have fought long and hard to keep all investigations active.#mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 13:42:57 +0000 2016
  11. @w_nicht @andreadenham195 If the McCanns hadn't fought for this investment you'd Troll them for that. #mccann ‐Mon Jan 18 20:52:54 +0000 2016
  12. @jannietle @landloulou @wicatty009 That's exactly what she did and fought tooth and nail to keep the investigation open #mccann ‐Sun Dec 20 19:52:48 +0000 2015
  13. @jillybabesx @SampleX @19Barbara57 @uk_frost They have only fought the libelers.If they didn't, you Trolls would criticise that too. ‐Sun Dec 06 13:05:23 +0000 2015
  14. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost No one has fought harder than the McCanns to keep the case open AND publicise the police files. ‐Sun Dec 06 12:50:57 +0000 2015
  15. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost Their efforts don't have to be authorised by anyone. No one has fought harder to keep open. ‐Sun Dec 06 12:05:13 +0000 2015

    Searched for: "fought" by Father Jack
    1. RT @JWoodcockMP: Mark Serwotka being allowed to join & immediately mouthing off is a deliberate slap in face to everyone who fought so hard… ‐Tue Mar 08 10:03:48 +0000 2016
    2. @lingosteve Indeed - enough have fought and died for it. ‐Tue Jan 12 18:26:40 +0000 2016
    3. RT @MaajidNawaz: Trial by social-media mob: scare photo of "ISIS fighter" posing as refugee is false. This brave man *fought* ISIS http://t… ‐Mon Sep 07 18:49:08 +0000 2015
    4. @JamesHaarrison And now we know: Exaro fought to have 2nd allegation made public despite certain knowledge 1st was false! ‐Sat Aug 01 22:04:58 +0000 2015
    5. RT @DavidRoseUK: In an era when anyone who alleges sexual abuse is believed, the late Noel Hartnett fought for both justice and truth http:… ‐Sat Apr 18 20:32:22 +0000 2015
    6. RT @NicoHines: Didn't take long. @GrahamWP_UK has already physically fought a "provocateur" and run him out of this pro-Putin event http://… ‐Thu Apr 02 18:55:28 +0000 2015
    7. @make_trouble @obotheclown Yes but only because we'd fought a war that virtually bankrupted us! ‐Sun Jan 25 22:39:51 +0000 2015
    8. @Archie_V @LFBarfe Read Wiki entries for both men. If you look at the causes they fought for, none of it makes any sense. You may have 1/2 ‐Sun Jan 25 10:49:13 +0000 2015
    9. @xklamation @MarianneSansum @TellyTone Don't be ridiculous. They fought for a proper review, very different to PJ stitch-up you cant let go ‐Thu Oct 30 20:12:30 +0000 2014
    10. RT @nowayjomo: @rubeusflint @DrSaraPayneMBE @afneil Not only a mother who lost her child, but a mother who fought for the (cont) http://t.c… ‐Tue Aug 26 23:37:46 +0000 2014
    11. @McFaul @EastOfBrussels And who was it said this war is being fought on vodka and cigarettes? Predictable if u give rabble hi tech weapons ‐Thu Jul 17 18:52:19 +0000 2014
    12. @GicRoma @RealCrimea Try not to think of it as him, but the generation that fought the war. ‐Fri Jun 06 19:59:57 +0000 2014
    13. RT @drilldevil1: @Singh_Mo #hs2 Only wish you were as courageous as that gentleman, who fought to enable you to be so bloody disrespectful … ‐Tue Nov 26 00:21:45 +0000 2013
    14. @KSLPinto @SkyNews Ha ha. No you sucker, they fought for SY review to get new leads to reopen case. If Porto found their own, good. #mccann ‐Thu Oct 24 06:34:49 +0000 2013
Searched for: "dense" by Walker
  1. @McCann_McCrapp @Syn0nymph @WitchHunted2 Anybody can become a "police expert" without joining a police force. Dense or what? #mccann ‐Sat Mar 05 15:03:53 +0000 2016
  2. @LittlemoreJB @LoveRandomleigh ER, I think you're missing a few seconds. Are you really this dense? #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 21:45:36 +0000 2016
  3. @JillyCL Gawd, your are really dense. Second request. When did Grime retire? #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 02:28:41 +0000 2016
  4. @LittlemoreJB Have you ever heard the phrase "commercial confidentiality"? Are you really this dense? #mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 22:33:18 +0000 2016

    Searched for: "dense" by Father Jack
    1. @mopdenson Too many think infrastructural excellence is all about grand statements; in a small & densely settled country opposite is true ‐Mon Mar 07 16:19:20 +0000 2016
    2. @BooGarry @holland_tom @AndrewJMullen He never said it was migration as such. We are very densely populated country. Utterly inarguable. ‐Mon Oct 19 09:06:19 +0000 2015
    3. @polemicablog @AsgharBukhari Yes I have, and wondered why media give him airtime. He's a dense, pedestrian bigot. ‐Sun Jun 21 08:17:47 +0000 2015
    4. @JPSargeant78 @aboosalik And looking at their accounts I can quite honestly say they are the most terrifyingly stupid people. Really dense! ‐Sat Feb 28 10:35:23 +0000 2015
    5. @IsmailAssenjee I'm blocking you now as you are clearly too dense to understand what I'm saying. Carry on excusing the inexcusable. ‐Sat Feb 28 00:25:56 +0000 2015
    6. @B_balou @jontait42 @fiorifan That isn't a threat. It's an attempt to show dense people the real impact of their constant trolling. ‐Mon Feb 23 16:23:57 +0000 2015
    7. @siamesey Not as thick as a hard drinking, foul mouthed Ozzie, eh? Nowt like 'em for dense abuse. Sober up. ‐Tue Feb 10 09:24:44 +0000 2015
    8. @Randomleigh1 @SafariSara Being publicly accused by dense, hypocritical trolls is nasty but ultimately it reflects on them, not you. ‐Wed Jan 21 10:36:52 +0000 2015
    9. @EricHardcastle It's just the mouthiest, most stupid of the twitterati. I've belatedly realised a fair proportion of them are just dense ‐Sun Jan 04 11:07:13 +0000 2015
    10. @smashytashy1 Bloody thick. Really, sodding dense and I won't be written into their fekn nonsense ‐Sun Nov 16 19:20:20 +0000 2014
    11. @scottymacg35 @laurenmarjoriek Just found a rich seam of dense nationalism. Type making English working class say 'fuck em, get on with it' ‐Sat Sep 13 18:49:22 +0000 2014
    12. @Syn0nymph @IWILLNOTGOAWAY @k1482 @alfibab3 Stinky old hypocrite, you actually posted up Simon's!! Are you really so dense you forgot that? ‐Fri May 16 19:23:31 +0000 2014
    13. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY You STILL dont get it do you poor dense creature. He 'disclosed' his cousin's job. Redwood 'disclosed' #mccanns not suspects ‐Wed May 14 09:26:04 +0000 2014
    14. @mr_ceebs @sundersays And for good measure he could feature condensed milk sandwiches of TISWAS fame. Fer old times' sake. ‐Sat Apr 26 17:10:25 +0000 2014
    15. @wicatty009 @alfibab3 Dense Denise has attempted to 'out'& threaten a witness in ongoing #mccann investigation. Serious shit even tho wrong ‐Thu Apr 24 21:55:23 +0000 2014
    16. @Diddybird51 And also as dense as Florida's swamps. Truly awful, stupid people. ‐Sun Mar 09 19:06:39 +0000 2014
    17. @Neoconair Oh ffs - are neocons all as self absorbed, hypocritical, dense and annoying? BLOCK ‐Mon Feb 24 15:19:02 +0000 2014
    18. @TREACLEW12QPR Dense you are. But then we knew that already. Mucky minded too :-( #mccann ‐Tue Nov 05 11:12:10 +0000 2013
Searched for: "math" by Walker
  1. Easy Street on #mccann tonight.Women who can't do simple math (a nurse too) and a man who said GM was a pilot on 911 and in the Alma tunnel. ‐Sun Mar 06 02:20:59 +0000 2016
  2. Thick Trolls think Aug to Aug is 13 months and water is measured in square metres. Fed up of teaching them math and English. #mccann ‐Sun Mar 06 00:14:24 +0000 2016
  3. @lisalulabelle You'll be in Scientific American, the biggest math breakthrough since Einstein. #mccann ‐Sat Mar 05 21:03:31 +0000 2016
  4. @LittlemoreJB @WokkaisChokka @QueenOPortugal @PoIiticalTales Hello..0000 to 0000. Do we have to cover basic math? #mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 21:51:52 +0000 2016
  5. @McCannCaseTweet @CarlaSpade I covered math and reading already. Do I have to cover reading again Trolls? #mccann ‐Sat Feb 20 00:35:37 +0000 2016
  6. @LittlemoreJB So I did English yesterday, Math today. Tomorrow? #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 21:33:20 +0000 2016
  7. @LittlemoreJB @LoveRandomleigh Enjoy your new found Math. LOL #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 21:26:32 +0000 2016
  8. #mccann Any other Trolls want a math lesson? I did English for those that missed yesterday. Sorry. ‐Wed Feb 17 20:14:33 +0000 2016
  9. @LittlemoreJB @KDMoose August to August is a year. Math. #mccann ‐Wed Feb 17 20:01:08 +0000 2016
  10. @ShutTheFunkOff @WokkaisChokka 14 year old=3year old? Can't you do math? Thicko. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 31 23:15:30 +0000 2016
  11. @LittlemoreJB @Syn0nymph cadaver odour is an organic compound. It decays within 28 days. Dogs in at 90 days. Simple math. #mccann ‐Mon Jan 11 00:08:23 +0000 2016
  12. @LittlemoreJB totally valid. Simple math, just like yours. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 07 16:29:07 +0000 2016
  13. @LittlemoreJB Simple math, as valid as yours. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 07 16:24:16 +0000 2016
  14. @LittlemoreJB @K9Truth Funny that,because the Trolls say there was a match to Madeleine yet the maths are exactly the same.No match. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 17 13:25:14 +0000 2015

    Searched for: "sucker" by Walker
    1. @TheBunnyReturns @Val__34 @winnower1 List one lie, sucker.#mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 14:52:30 +0000 2016
    2. @TheBunnyReturns @prophonics @Killdara And, while you're on, you're the sucker who swore to close your account when embarrassed?Well #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 07:35:33 +0000 2016
    3. @TheBunnyReturns @AfterTheLie @RosalindaHu You have no shame. All your tweets are cached. Close your account sucker. Owned. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 02:52:28 +0000 2016
    4. @TheBunnyReturns @AfterTheLie @RosalindaHu Gone all quiet now sucker? #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 02:47:26 +0000 2016
    5. @TheBunnyReturns @RosalindaHu Sucker. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAULO-NETO.htm #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 02:43:51 +0000 2016
    6. @TheBunnyReturns @AfterTheLie @RosalindaHu Sucker. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAULO-NETO.htm #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 02:41:16 +0000 2016
    7. @TheBunnyReturns @RosalindaHu OK. I'll hold you to that. It'll be done within 24 hours sucker. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 02:29:53 +0000 2016
    8. @LaurieHarvey18 @AdirenM @SuppDoc @JillyCL List one here sucker.#mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 23:40:11 +0000 2016
    9. @winnower1 @MontiesPython Answer the question suckers.#mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 08:44:24 +0000 2016
    10. @kathietwinkles @SuppDoc Homework pays, sucker.#mccann ‐Mon Feb 01 22:44:33 +0000 2016
    11. @majones4111 @Cerb32 @SuppDoc @WokkaisChokka Dream on, sucker. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 31 17:40:15 +0000 2016
    12. @Lady_LeFaye @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka @QueenOPortugal name the lie sucker? #mccann ‐Fri Jan 29 01:09:36 +0000 2016
    13. @fiorifan @JillyCL You'd like it to be,nice try,but it's got no momentum, suckers. #mccann ‐Tue Jan 26 17:01:44 +0000 2016
    14. @Josephodriscoll @LittlemoreJB You can't change the laws of biology to suit you.Do your research sucker. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 13:46:40 +0000 2016
    15. @SuppDoc @LittlemoreJB @beemmjay2011 @Jobaker46 You lie and abuse a grieving family. List one lie sucker? #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 22:22:23 +0000 2016
    16. @JillyCL @YouTube Not from my perspective, sucker.#mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 20:59:10 +0000 2016
    17. @RobertCarlisl10 @SuppDoc @LoveRandomleigh @AdirenM Dream on, sucker. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 18:57:05 +0000 2016
    18. @AdirenM Bring it on suckers? Will the car burners be summoned? #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 13:37:33 +0000 2016
    19. @Killdara So the MET don't want to look? Too funny suckers. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 23 00:24:56 +0000 2016

      Searched for: "sucker" by Father Jack
      1. @jeremyduns @DDWonfor Not disagreeing. But I can see some validity to complaints of those never suckered by Islamism ‐Tue Aug 18 15:52:27 +0000 2015
      2. @KillingJokez @Lizzzzz_E @Papa___Rico @QUEENdePORTUGAL Meltdown? It's hilarious!! 😂😂😂Suckers... ‐Thu May 28 22:55:04 +0000 2015
      3. @ajaykisgroup @haltosaur @gedrobinson Good luck with that, sucker. It worked before but now we have seen massive long term damage it did. ‐Mon Apr 13 22:24:59 +0000 2015
      4. @twitwilltell @YeomanTrust I'm crapping myself. I can spot the difference between real victims and scammers. All you suckers have is threats ‐Mon Mar 23 20:01:48 +0000 2015
      5. @KaiHolloway @Neder_Bird Look, you been suckered. No nuke. Stop drinking the KoolAid. ‐Mon Feb 09 11:25:22 +0000 2015
      6. @NickNipclose @SciLoGreen @bobfrombrockley No sucker, I just read your timeline. Now troll off. ‐Wed Feb 04 18:51:12 +0000 2015
      7. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY @2and2TV You got suckered. Desperation does it every gime. Joyous to watch. ‐Sun Dec 07 23:48:51 +0000 2014
      8. @SafariSara @Randomleigh1 Poor AT, they still have unflattering pics of her on their accounts. Syn had huge role in that, BL was suckered ‐Sat Oct 18 19:16:59 +0000 2014
      9. @Lennnny11 @2and2TV Suckered by a WUM. I see Coldwater is about again, even checked in under his real name on Pat Brown's blog - I wonder... ‐Mon Oct 13 09:10:45 +0000 2014
      10. @tarirawr Because you have been inundated with the trolls' crap and suckered. Police of two countries KNOW #mccann not involved ‐Sun Oct 05 07:35:27 +0000 2014
      11. @calyxxx @moosehead49 Because you've been suckered by the critics' vile propaganda. Vctims of crime should NOT be hounded. ‐Sat Aug 02 12:40:24 +0000 2014
      12. @PriscillaJudd You are being suckered by Putin's propaganda outlets. Shockingly many of THEM are Nazis ‐Thu Jul 03 20:20:59 +0000 2014
      13. @Annette_Raymie They wont get a watertight case against innocent people. Get used to the fact you have been suckered by haters. Sad but true ‐Wed Jun 25 20:55:21 +0000 2014
      14. @Greg_LW So, having been suckered by the Hollie Greig hoax you now getting suckered by anti #mccann conspiraloons? Glutton for punishment! ‐Sat Feb 15 21:10:35 +0000 2014
      15. @SpookyCarl @19Barbara57 @ModNrodder @TrulyJudy73 Don't even try to explain. He's an idiot, suckered by a middle aged manipulative 'siren'. ‐Tue Feb 11 23:43:54 +0000 2014
      16. @GMStopHS2 @CPRE Oh dear, he got completely suckered. He believed all that B.S. Gobsmacked he thought #hs2 could protect rural England ‐Wed Jan 22 09:28:07 +0000 2014
      17. @OliviaS_Glasgow @UKMissingPerson @BBCRadio4 It was excellent! I'm a sucker for R4 plays. Much better than the one with a talking budgie :-) ‐Tue Jan 14 15:19:05 +0000 2014
      18. @IsThatYouPenny Probably getting utterly suckered by all that stupid 'Fund being investigated' nonsense. Must hurt. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 09 00:11:26 +0000 2013
      19. @glitter_brain The PJ found a cadaver? No. A dog barked three months later. That was all. You people have really been suckered! #mccann ‐Mon Dec 02 11:30:35 +0000 2013
      20. @nowaymojo Oh no darlink she's setting up a 'Teaching Group' to stuff the poor suckers' heads full of her nonsense. #beyondparody #mccann ‐Sat Nov 30 22:35:57 +0000 2013
      21. @CbClairi I have been for five years! You? Another instant expert from the Facebook Fools. Lololol #mccann haters - newly minted suckers ‐Tue Nov 12 09:46:00 +0000 2013
      22. @lewscammon @Cerebus32 #mccann @JustClareE You poor sucker. Its sad really. You look in a mirror and see someone else ‐Fri Nov 08 08:14:08 +0000 2013
      23. @masieymouse @ShentonMatt You are a fool. Different person. Feel teensy bit suckered yet by yr 'friends' feeding false info? #mccann ‐Sun Nov 03 10:15:40 +0000 2013
      24. @KSLPinto @SkyNews Ha ha. No you sucker, they fought for SY review to get new leads to reopen case. If Porto found their own, good. #mccann ‐Thu Oct 24 06:34:49 +0000 2013
      25. @kirmal @Shellspeare You got suckered by a crude photoshop. Says it all. No intelligence, inability to assess evidence. Pathetic! #mccann ‐Thu Oct 17 10:23:25 +0000 2013
      26. @kirmal Deflection again. Controversy FB fools are scum that normal people hate to be associated with. And YOU got suckered!! #mccann ‐Thu Oct 17 10:22:03 +0000 2013
      27. @kirmal @Shellspeare @LinziIsOnline @__samg You poor sad sucker. Its a Fekn PHOTOSHOP. You haters are THICK!!! #mccann ‐Thu Oct 17 07:05:47 +0000 2013

    Searched for: "egged" by Walker
    1. @TheBunnyReturns @Helly_Chick @DollyDunnit Sweepyknickers death is the responsibility of the Twitter Trolls. You egged her on. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 19:57:05 +0000 2016
    2. @MichaelBWanker @Val__34 @QueenOPortugal @TheBunnyReturns Sweepyknickers was killed by her fellow Trolls. Egged on then hung to dry.#mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 14:50:25 +0000 2016
    3. @k1482 @Val__34 I think you Trolls killed her.U egged her on, taking advantage of an old depressed Troll.Used like a commodity.Vile. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 23 01:03:57 +0000 2016

      Searched for: "egged" by Father Jack
      1. @KDMoose @LoveRandomleigh @SafariSara @ChickEll Jeez. They egged your house? ‐Tue Dec 08 16:14:06 +0000 2015
      2. @BarbaraHewson Nor me! Stranger than a box full of 3-legged frogs! ‐Tue Nov 03 10:21:58 +0000 2015
      3. RT @Julian5News: Harvey Proctor ridicules suggestion Edward Heath begged him not to castrate a schoolboy with a penknife ‐Tue Aug 25 13:43:51 +0000 2015
      4. @ystriya There's a one-legged woman hiding behind him... ‐Sun Mar 15 21:11:42 +0000 2015
      5. @SoniaPoulton Yes, that's why you egged on your partner with 88 convictions and 7 yrs inside, who loves to be photographed with guns. ‐Sat Feb 14 17:38:05 +0000 2015
      6. @Justice4MM Cowards legged it. So Brenda carried the can. And got slagged for poor performance by erstwhile chums, accused of being 'plant' ‐Sat Oct 25 20:34:34 +0000 2014
      7. @xklamation @nowayjomo Sick people who egged her on, fed her lies, encouraged her nastiness and misplaced bravado. People like you, in fact ‐Sat Oct 25 19:10:03 +0000 2014
      8. @k1482 @zante03 @D1LLIGAF @untroublesome What? I haven't done a damn thing. Your mob however egged her on. ‐Sun Oct 05 23:36:50 +0000 2014
      9. @johnboy_murray @abiandalexdaddy @shakilA56184309 Kind of agree. Those who egged her on went silent when Brunt approached them ‐Sun Oct 05 21:38:51 +0000 2014
      10. @Lizzi_Darcy @kenmactavish Thanks to you both. Deserves better than being egged for having an opinion. ‐Thu Aug 28 20:44:23 +0000 2014
      11. RT @SafariSara: EXPOSING THE LIES, STUPIDITY & SICKNESS OF TROLLS EGGED ON BY THE #TORONTO #STALKER FB GROUP #McCann http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpRPY5oCIAAA6CK.jpg ‐Wed Jun 04 07:56:02 +0000 2014
      12. @MrsMLouis She begged me to 'out' her, I declined. Because she is a relentless attention seeker. ‐Wed Jan 08 19:19:31 +0000 2014
    Searched for: "kettle" by Walker
    1. @TheBunnyReturns LOL. Too rich. Go away and read some of the drivel you post. Kettle . Pot. Black. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 02:40:49 +0000 2016
    2. @Killdara What about your court case and the root vegetable incident? See you're keeping quiet about that.kettle.pot. black. #mccann ‐Sun Mar 06 02:06:38 +0000 2016
    3. @AdirenM o spare us. Pot kettle black. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 15:11:11 +0000 2016

      Searched for: "kettle" by Father Jack
      1. http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CUl-vJeVEAECQc4.png ‐Tue Nov 24 17:48:34 +0000 2015
      2. @Barristerblog @martinkettle I'm afraid some people are easily swayed by persuasive words. It's deeds that matter. They tell another story ‐Fri Oct 09 07:47:05 +0000 2015
      3. @DaftNelly That neglect word again Debs.....tut tut. Pot, kettle, black ‐Mon May 11 22:28:41 +0000 2015
      4. @DaftNelly You left your parents alone to die while you stole their money and scarpered to Spain. Pot, kettle. I know which is worse. ‐Wed Mar 04 22:26:43 +0000 2015
      5. @xklamation @martin_liz @summersandswan Listen to the pot calling the kettle! Do the Portuguese have a word for 'irony!? #nofilms #nojob ‐Thu Oct 30 08:09:18 +0000 2014
      6. @HulmeCarol That's another kettle o' fish!!!! :-) ‐Wed Jan 15 21:27:21 +0000 2014

      Searched for: "lie down" by walker
    1. @FakeRC @jillybabesx @ShutTheFunkOff @TheSun Yes, course they was. Now go and lie down. MLMV.#mccann ‐Wed Mar 09 03:22:59 +0000 2016
    2. @londontaxitrade @YouTube Yes, course they did. Now go and lie down. #mccann ‐Sun Mar 06 23:39:53 +0000 2016
    3. @FakeRC I think you should go and lie down. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 31 03:10:26 +0000 2015
    4. @FakeRC @RobertCarlisl10 @w_nicht Go for a lie down. #mccann ‐Sun Dec 27 01:37:50 +0000 2015
    5. @BankersDidIt @TheBirmingham6 go and lie down. ‐Tue Dec 15 03:08:03 +0000 2015

      Searched for: "lie down" by Father Jack
      1. @JaypatW @twlldun I thought it was a woman but the pic looks disconcertingly like Jeremy Corbyn in a leotard. Need to lie down. ‐Mon Aug 03 19:04:03 +0000 2015
      2. @SampleX @rebroger And 12 tweets of myths, lies and bullshit is evidence you are not right in the head, sonny. Have a lie down or something. ‐Sun May 10 08:13:36 +0000 2015
      3. @9toedsleuth @RedAluma I think you need to have a lie down in a darkened room. And put the vodka bottle down. ‐Thu Feb 19 20:31:37 +0000 2015
      4. @mariaccnr @Tzhepiezo Wtf? Give over Maria. Have a lie down ‐Mon Dec 08 08:49:40 +0000 2014
      5. @SafariSara They are even beginning to stick in Morais' craw. Lie down with dogs .... ‐Thu Oct 23 19:23:13 +0000 2014
      6. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY So post up your 'proof'. Or go and have a lie down in a darkened room with something non alcoholic. ‐Tue Oct 21 00:30:25 +0000 2014
      7. @xklamation You sound hysterical. I suggest a lie down. #mccann family didn't sack GA's lawyer, he did. ‐Sat Jun 21 20:31:02 +0000 2014
      8. @Randomleigh1 @wicatty009 Was just going to suggest you go and have a nice lie down 😂 ‐Sat May 03 20:46:04 +0000 2014
      9. "@BBCWorld: Return of the comb-over: the hairstyle that refuses to lie down http://bbc.in/1dbCNU8 http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdX6YPBIAAA9hK_.jpg" @zampos ‐Tue Jan 07 13:14:14 +0000 2014
      10. @wicatty009 @winnower1 Watch Rees. He had to have a cold shower and a lie down. #mccann ‐Mon Nov 04 19:46:56 +0000 2013
    Searched for: "mendacious" by Walker
    1. @FakeRC @daviek28 @JillyCL @globalnews You hate her because she's embarrassed you all after you drove her to her mendacious death. #mccann ‐Mon Mar 07 21:46:55 +0000 2016

      Searched for: "mendacious" by Father Jack
      1. @PoultenDavid You have been talking to me, but not any more. Liars are blocked when they can't even attempt to justify mendacious behaviour. ‐Tue Oct 20 19:05:01 +0000 2015
      2. @sevenyearSCAM @Justice4MM I know you're a completely vile, conniving, mendacious person who likes to pretend she's a decent human. Not so. ‐Tue Nov 11 12:08:32 +0000 2014
      3. @Alison_Chabloz So it's your choice to do this - but it's mendacious, foolish and cruel. #sweepyfacetweets ‐Fri Oct 10 06:46:02 +0000 2014
      4. @Muttfan Those threats came from someone completely unconnected - never tweeted on #mccann before. Stupid, mendacious and disrespectful. ‐Tue Oct 07 22:26:05 +0000 2014
      5. @rebeccasherl @basilandmanuel Because she's wicked and mendacious and wants to suggest it's related to MM's disappearance. ‐Thu Mar 06 19:18:01 +0000 2014
      6. @AguiaV @CbClairi Hahaha. Newcomers are cracking me up. You know literally nothing except what HoHo puts in her mendacious vids! #mccann ‐Tue Nov 12 09:49:25 +0000 2013
      7. @glitter_brain HoHo's mendacious 'clips' always leave out punchline - that this 'evidence' was later found to be false/rumour/smear. #mccann ‐Mon Nov 11 10:34:36 +0000 2013
    Searched for: "testament" by Walker
    1. @lordspencer It's actually a testament to fairness and support for the victims of crime.#mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 01:11:33 +0000 2016
    2. @SampleX @jillybabesx yes testament to his character that he is a common criminal. Saying nothing of his wife beating and boozing. Good chap ‐Sat Dec 12 13:30:24 +0000 2015

      Searched for: "testament" by Father Jack
      1. @JonMcPhalen @CNN The Old Testament is also chock full of slavery-approving passages. It's about what people, not god, choose to practice. ‐Tue Dec 23 01:49:55 +0000 2014
      2. @REnlightenment @ms_eastern Isn't that what Christians have been doing for a good many years? Old Testament is collection of horror stories. ‐Sun Sep 21 09:49:10 +0000 2014
      3. From what I've seen of the Kings' two eldest boys, they are testament to their good parenting. ‐Mon Sep 01 23:34:18 +0000 2014
      4. @CHProfiler No love, I just exposed your lying - and frankly such astounding mendacity is a testament to how low you have sunk. SMDH ‐Sun Jan 19 23:22:35 +0000 2014
    Searched for: "dim" by Walker
    1. @TheBunnyReturns Be my guest. Troll Blogs carry zero credibilty. Are you really that dim? #mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 02:30:14 +0000 2016
    2. @justmebeingme4 @BootsieCat2 69th request. (dim or what?) #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 19:56:01 +0000 2016
    3. @jimjamieson @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka Dear Dim As.1.Grime had retired.2.They were not police dogs.3.Ask SYP r prove otherwise,thicko. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 13:48:53 +0000 2016
    4. @jimjamieson @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka Dear Dim As.1.Grime had retired.2.They were not police dogs.3.Ask SYP r prove otherwise,thicko. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 13:19:24 +0000 2016
    5. @jimjamieson @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka Dear Dim As.1.Grime had retired.2.They were not police dogs.3.Ask SYP r prove otherwise,thicko. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 13:18:05 +0000 2016
    6. @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka Dear Dim As. 1. Grime had retired.2. They were not police dogs. 3. Ask SYP or prove otherwise, thicko. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 09:26:06 +0000 2016
    7. @JillyCL @WokkaisChokka Are you really this dim? Re read please.He was NOT a serving police officer in August 2007.NOT police dogs. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 08:42:48 +0000 2016

      Searched for: "dim" by Father Jack
      1. @holland_tom @jeremyduns @razanadim The @isis_karaoke account kind of got there first. Feel sure they could recommend a likely tune. ‐Sat Feb 13 16:12:00 +0000 2016
      2. @GSpellchecker @razanadim I thought for one moment he was going to say 'anyone who disagrees deserves to die' .... ‐Sat Feb 13 08:44:12 +0000 2016
      3. @Otto_English You have to make the argument cogently. Dismissing people as elderly/dim could lose result you want. It's a real possibility ‐Wed Feb 03 19:38:59 +0000 2016
      4. @SAFFtweets @JamesHaarrison @moor_facts @rabbitaway I don't think he appeared dim. More naive. I like his style actually. People do open up. ‐Wed Feb 03 10:31:57 +0000 2016
      5. @KDMoose Excellent!! What a dim pair. I think David should have got his expenses pad. ‐Wed Jan 27 18:42:25 +0000 2016
      6. RT @Otto_English: "Nick" has been allowed to accuse innocent people of heinous offences with absolute impunity aided by a dimwit army https… ‐Sun Jan 17 21:09:16 +0000 2016
      7. @LFBarfe When there's so many worthwhile free speech battles to be fighting, using your freedom to hit soft & disabled targets is lazy & dim ‐Sat Jan 09 15:58:02 +0000 2016
      8. @angryli0n @RoxxxiCross @polemicablog Do you think the world economy runs on cosmetics and clothes? You really are dim. ‐Sat Jan 02 21:37:31 +0000 2016
      9. @fremebonda @DimitarL71 @dimam78 Yes it did. Greece and Serbia logged that passport holder's movements from early October. Read up, please. ‐Sun Nov 15 11:14:37 +0000 2015
      10. @DimitarL71 @dimam78 @fremebonda It doesn't matter if it's a fake - it got him into Europe. Period. ‐Sun Nov 15 11:10:26 +0000 2015
      11. @cycleoptic @ThePoke Yes, they take a dimmer view of that. Worst offenders = Post Office vans. ‐Mon Aug 10 10:13:31 +0000 2015
      12. @PhilipIndigo @ChallengeGovUK @missingpeople Of course it isn't a scam. Ask families of missing people all over UK. You twisted, dim people. ‐Tue Jun 30 22:48:46 +0000 2015
      13. @19Barbara57 @lisalulabelle @Robert_D_Guest It's blocked. Someone that dim is just tedious. ‐Fri May 01 20:42:12 +0000 2015
      14. @OnSafariSara @pjvailmac @justice4maddie @_DarkMavis No honey. It's you that's dim. She is not Sarah Weardon. This is a fact. ‐Wed Apr 15 21:42:20 +0000 2015
      15. @KSLPinto @amandaknox You dim person. I hope they find DNA on your belongings and decide you stole them 😂😂😂 ‐Mon Mar 30 08:00:48 +0000 2015
      16. @drlavertyx This shot of side of BP doesn't seem to match - windows, pediments, columns etc http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Buckingham_Palace_-_May_2006.jpg ‐Sun Mar 01 18:09:12 +0000 2015
      17. RT @makseest: One very personal dimension: Boris Nemtsov was brave enough to support Russia's LGBT community in the midst of the anti-gay h… ‐Sat Feb 28 19:58:46 +0000 2015
      18. @Annella "he has also met each being on this planet through transmission of his energy across parallel dimensions of time & space." Woooo 😂 ‐Sat Feb 28 10:22:47 +0000 2015
      19. @LoveRandomleigh @nowayjomo Win is dim. A very literal person. If you said 'till the cows come home' she'd be at the gate, waiting. ‐Sun Feb 22 19:11:32 +0000 2015
      20. @BarbaraHewson @Dimorfik @heyyou1967 If you read nothing else on the madness, read this http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?utm_source=SFTwitter Really excellent writing ‐Mon Feb 16 23:51:59 +0000 2015
      21. @BarbaraHewson @Dimorfik @heyyou1967 Yes, and their fatwas are better than his fatwas ever were because they got a Caliph. Top Trump. ‐Mon Feb 16 23:49:59 +0000 2015
      22. @Papa___Rico Please Paul, tell me you don't believe that bullshit 😂😂 Not even you are that dim. Or maybe you actually are? ‐Mon Feb 16 02:13:46 +0000 2015
      23. RT @obotheclown: Vladimir Putin decides to go on vacation abroad. The immigration officer asks him: "occupation?" Putin answers: "No, just … ‐Sat Feb 14 21:46:11 +0000 2015
      24. @DaftNelly I know who I'm addressing. We all do, except the really dim ones. I just feel a bit sorry for them really. ‐Sun Feb 08 12:05:30 +0000 2015
      25. RT @raging545: In #Mariupol man buries his whole family because Vladimir #Putin wants #Ukraine territory as road to #Crimea #Russia http://… ‐Wed Jan 28 20:40:50 +0000 2015
      26. @nadimhoury @EliotHiggins "They have conquered us through interfaith dialogue" Really? Is that how it's done? ‐Wed Jan 14 09:50:18 +0000 2015
      27. RT @Ithacanexile: Vladimir Putin trying to pass off as the Werthers Original grandpa “@shaunwalker7 http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6sszxEIcAAlcli.jpg” ‐Tue Jan 06 22:14:43 +0000 2015
      28. @markelection @iainmartin1 Agree! They are dimwits for sacking him. ‐Tue Jan 06 19:30:38 +0000 2015
      29. RT @zeynep_erdim: Journalist @SedefKabas under detention because of a tweet on corruption allegations. Her phone, pad & lap top confiscated… ‐Tue Dec 30 11:16:57 +0000 2014
      30. @elizawoods You are particularly dim person who has swallowed lies because you choose to. Don't diss others from your position of ignorance ‐Sun Nov 30 10:08:58 +0000 2014
      31. @Lennnny11 @B_balou @HiDeHo3 But to pretend new arguidos would be made while 'real' focus lies elsewhere? Insultingly dim. ‐Thu Nov 13 08:05:35 +0000 2014
      32. RT @NatalieEvans85: Nailed it. #dailymail #sandwichgate http://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2ClRcdIMAAm4vs.jpg ‐Mon Nov 10 09:09:36 +0000 2014
      33. RT @mopdenson: @MarkHookham #HS2 staff getting 30% bonuses is just a kick in the teeth to UK workers (#NHS etc) on diminishing wages #stopH… ‐Sat Oct 25 23:47:41 +0000 2014
      34. RT @hopisen: I suppose that's thing about celebrity: you can do something as dim as propose a current tax rate as revolutionary and no one … ‐Thu Oct 23 20:39:56 +0000 2014
      35. @PattyDs50 @LosiStef Sore loser. Just like Vladimir. ‐Wed Oct 08 21:21:41 +0000 2014
      36. @irishstudly @mkmumto4 I have come to the conclusion you are rather dim. READ HER TWEETS. That IS 'the evidence'. ‐Wed Oct 08 18:00:44 +0000 2014
      37. @KingsdykeMark @Coops_tv Utter bollocks. If #mccann were 'protected' there wouldnt be the torrent of shite there is. #dimwitz ‐Mon Oct 06 09:19:15 +0000 2014
      38. @KingsdykeMark #mccann @Coops_tv Virtually Illegal? Dont be dim. Facebook & twitter awash with it. Thats why Sky were interested. ‐Mon Oct 06 08:41:07 +0000 2014
      39. @Randomleigh1 #mccann @xklamation @kiki_barnes Well then JoMo is clearly as dim as a 10 watt light bulb!!! It's #notoneofours ‐Sun Oct 05 08:33:37 +0000 2014
      40. @PORTUGALbound @RothleyPillow @censorednewsnow Tee hee. You lot are fantastically stupid. Spectacularly dim. ‐Thu Oct 02 07:18:26 +0000 2014
      41. RT @IanDunt: Got supplies for tonight: pizza, coffee, liquid ketamine, dimethyltryptamine, pez dispensers, stiletto heels & a Jeremy Paxman… ‐Thu Sep 18 18:06:18 +0000 2014
      42. @EuromaidanPR @Telegraph Pity they also printed this tosh http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/11078012/Vladimir-Putins-unacceptable-action-in-Ukraine-was-predictable-and-provoked.html which claims ppl in crowd at Maidan paid by Brussels?? ‐Mon Sep 08 14:57:25 +0000 2014
      43. RT @MartinRowson: Incidentally, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cartoon/2014/aug/31/martin-rowson-cartoon-vladimir-putin-david-cameron-russia-ukraine?commentpage=1 is another lovely example of the idiocy of the internet, & how it acts like catnip f… ‐Sun Aug 31 21:48:22 +0000 2014
      44. RT @Josephodriscoll: @JoleneCSC @LHLNews If it's "out there" how's the evidence being "covered up", Dimbo? #McCann ‐Tue Aug 12 22:20:47 +0000 2014
      45. RT @GdnLiveBetter: Cleaner New York waters see surge in whale and shark numbers: http://gu.com/p/4vjde/tw http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuwFbndIMAApYDz.jpg ‐Mon Aug 11 14:39:08 +0000 2014
      46. @christogrozev I get that sense when I read the pro Russian comments on media pages. It's like a parallel dimension. ‐Sat Jul 19 08:22:29 +0000 2014
      47. @BobsStillhere @B_balou I have interests in lots of things because I have a life & a brain. One dimensional ppl are SO boring. ‐Sun Jul 06 21:10:48 +0000 2014
      48. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY Because they are so dim many have not twigged anyone can read what they write. Suggest you trot over and tell them. ‐Wed Jun 25 18:19:44 +0000 2014
      49. @basilandmanuel @jamesthom40 Those idiots are responsible for so much misinformation, and it's deliberate manipulation of rather dim people. ‐Wed Jun 25 18:03:20 +0000 2014
      50. @kcvetk @maxseddon Look dimwit, your 'plane of reality' is simple idiocy - it is Rus property branded as Nazi. Don't you get it? Brainwashed ‐Sat Jun 14 18:33:11 +0000 2014
      51. @dima7b @matsstaf @EastOfBrussels They know nothing of it. Not taught in school and older generation disinclined or afraid to voice it. ‐Sat Jun 14 09:39:11 +0000 2014
      52. @JustClareE Oh Im not worried. Want press to pick up on how thick he is. Guy is cretinously stupid! Paranoid, dim - yet all is #mccann fault ‐Mon Jun 09 09:28:00 +0000 2014
      53. RT @ChrisHernon: What can you say? MT @YuliaSkyNews: Vladimir Putin offers to hold referendum to rename Volgograd back to STALINgrad. http:… ‐Sat Jun 07 17:01:21 +0000 2014
      54. RT @mrstevegribbin: Vladimir Putin shakes the new President of Ukraine's hand...probably to calculate his weight ‐Fri Jun 06 18:59:53 +0000 2014
      55. RT @DimaMiryan: brutal #Russian #propaganda. Showing pic of 2nd Chechen war, saying it's #Ukraine. via @nehay82 http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpDMgZdIAAAM50J.jpg ‐Mon Jun 02 09:06:27 +0000 2014
      56. @fiorifan #mccann @PORTUGALONLINE I am pointing out your stinking hypocricy but you are too dim to even get it. Isabelle IS a troll. ‐Fri May 30 18:28:54 +0000 2014
      57. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY There was NO DISCLOSURE you dim bint! None! I have pointed this out, without resorting to crayons I can do no more!! <sigh> ‐Wed May 14 09:07:51 +0000 2014
      58. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY You really dont like being shown up as having stalked a guy for nowt, do you? Typical #mccann haters, dim and dimmer ‐Wed May 14 09:01:42 +0000 2014
      59. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY Nope.You made a stupid assumption about what Simon said because essentially you are a bit dim. Now you start getting stroppy ‐Wed May 14 08:59:49 +0000 2014
      60. @IWILLNOTGOAWAY @AdirenM You are talking trash Debs. What he said is public knowledge. They anounced it publicly. You choose to ignore #dim ‐Wed May 14 08:40:05 +0000 2014
      61. @PDimoldenberg @w9maidavale No. Time for people to deal with the crap they generate themselves. ‐Sat May 10 15:45:41 +0000 2014
      62. @wicatty009 @openjools Watching them being manipulated by less dim but more creepy people, often with dozens of profiles, is illuminating ‐Thu May 08 10:23:21 +0000 2014
      63. @wicatty009 @openjools @w_nicht Those who actually post are some of dimmest specimens on the interwebz. And full of hate. ‐Thu May 08 10:14:34 +0000 2014
      64. @openjools @w_nicht I AM smart compared to dim old Weiss. But then so is my rabbit. ‐Thu May 08 10:03:51 +0000 2014
      65. RT @HS2AintGreen: @RailLeaders @beleben @dimbleby_jd @atkinsglobal "#HS2 not the best value rail option, says government report" http://t.c… ‐Wed Feb 12 09:05:07 +0000 2014
      66. RT @SafariSara: @CrazyHorser How the HELL do they think they get CHARGED then? ROFL They're so dim it's painful to watch #McCann http://t.c… ‐Sun Feb 09 20:58:18 +0000 2014
      67. RT @gordyfin: @beleben @RailLeaders @dimbleby_jd HS2 is a vanity project already replicating routes that could be upgraded for capacity so … ‐Thu Feb 06 15:40:59 +0000 2014
      68. @Tree_Tricky A disability that none of us even knew he had before he decided to wave it around as an excuse for being a teensy bit dim. ‐Sun Jan 12 20:17:25 +0000 2014
      69. @MrsMLouis Because he's a dim little troll with no self awareness. ‐Sun Jan 12 16:29:40 +0000 2014
      70. RT @SafariSara: @OlwynMassey chilledkev Dimwit can't keep up with the news http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BPPFQGlCUAA5xeJ.jpg #McCann ‐Mon Nov 18 20:33:13 +0000 2013
      71. Because we now have people building conspiracy theories on base of photos which are NOT photoshopped. #mccann haters=dim ‐Tue Nov 05 08:18:45 +0000 2013
      72. @Mobyra @Jayelles1 Only possible response to screenshot is 'daft cow'. How dim d'you have to be to get taken in by crude photoshop? #mccann ‐Tue Oct 22 08:25:03 +0000 2013
      73. @kirmal @Shellspeare Well it was attached to your tweet so you must be particularly dim, or careless. #mccann ‐Thu Oct 17 12:37:02 +0000 2013
      74. @TrulyJudy73 @shellou She's too dim to understand what actually happened last night. Amaral exposed as liar & conspiracy nut #mccann ‐Tue Oct 15 07:38:06 +0000 2013
      75. @Baumflough Dont be dim. CW is a POLICE programme, always has been. Take it up with SY. #mccann ‐Sat Oct 12 08:37:16 +0000 2013
      76. @njbennett And to be frank you are so dim that your opinion on anything is worthless. Get back to the dayjob! #mccann ‐Mon Oct 07 07:01:36 +0000 2013
    Searched for: "zilch" by Walker
    1. @FakeRC @Syn0nymph @Josephodriscoll @WokkaisChokka @LittlemoreJB The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Mar 08 23:50:39 +0000 2016
    2. @Syn0nymph @Josephodriscoll @WokkaisChokka @LittlemoreJB Only when material is present. Grime and his dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Mar 08 17:18:20 +0000 2016
    3. @AdirenM it seems the lack of credibility concerns you Trolls more than anyone. Not surprising, they found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 19:03:05 +0000 2016
    4. @AdirenM There is no dog evidence. The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 03 15:20:15 +0000 2016
    5. @JillyCL @FOX8NOLA The #mccann dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Mar 02 19:00:39 +0000 2016
    6. @Killdara Wrong. The dogs, which were not police dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 29 22:35:07 +0000 2016
    7. @JillyCL @Cerb32 @M_Steeples @KTHopkins The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 18:01:17 +0000 2016
    8. @PierreJouet @PippaBrownp29 @JillyCL non police dogs with non policeman man found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 17:09:04 +0000 2016
    9. @Rockchic65 @klopp_meister They may do. But in this case they found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 22 10:59:30 +0000 2016
    10. @Im_halez @CarlaSpade The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sun Feb 21 19:55:06 +0000 2016
    11. @amberwish12 @CarlaSpade #mccann. You know nothing about them. Zilch. ‐Sun Feb 21 00:13:48 +0000 2016
    12. @CarlaSpade Not true. The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sat Feb 20 23:19:57 +0000 2016
    13. @ilafrakes @TheSun Dogs found nothing. Zilch. Kate had already answered all questions put to her. Don't have much, do you? #mccann ‐Sat Feb 20 17:33:40 +0000 2016
    14. @veniviedivici the non police dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sat Feb 20 12:21:09 +0000 2016
    15. @spacesheepy @LittlemoreJB The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 15 11:37:15 +0000 2016
    16. @LittlemoreJB @justice4maddie @mally1969ste You tell me? The non police dogs, led by a non policeman found zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 15 11:35:22 +0000 2016
    17. @LittlemoreJB @justice4maddie @mally1969ste They may have been valid. But they failed, they found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 15 11:30:34 +0000 2016
    18. @spacesheepy The dogs found nothing. Zilch. Get over it. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 15 11:16:18 +0000 2016
    19. @justice4maddie @mally1969ste Waste of time. The non police dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 15 11:10:16 +0000 2016
    20. @ShutTheFunkOff @RosalindaHu In the #mccann case they found nothing. Zilch. ‐Mon Feb 15 10:50:09 +0000 2016
    21. @Killdara The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 08 21:06:35 +0000 2016
    22. @Askthedogs @YouTube The dogs found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Sun Feb 07 22:21:36 +0000 2016
    23. @JillyCL There is NO dog evidence to freak out over.The dogs founf nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sun Feb 07 11:07:55 +0000 2016
    24. @MontiesPython The dogs found nothing. Zilch. A dog bark is NOT evidence.#mccann ‐Fri Feb 05 07:55:17 +0000 2016
    25. @ShutTheFunkOff @MontiesPython No secrecy. The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Feb 04 00:59:15 +0000 2016
    26. @kathietwinkles @LaurieHarvey18 @SuppDoc They were not police dogs. They found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 20:27:26 +0000 2016
    27. @Moondamp_Roses Car had been re-hired many times, apartment re-let too. Dogs found nothing, zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Feb 02 09:27:39 +0000 2016
    28. @Lady_LeFaye @Killdara There were no cadaver alerts. A dog barked but found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Mon Feb 01 10:02:55 +0000 2016
    29. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara But it didn't did it? Which is why the dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 30 21:04:05 +0000 2016
    30. @Jobaker46 @LittlemoreJB When they find something. In #mccann case the dogs were prompted and found nothing. Zilch. ‐Sun Jan 24 23:09:23 +0000 2016
    31. @kathietwinkles @JillyCL Not true. They barked but found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 24 22:37:48 +0000 2016
    32. @justice4maddie The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Fri Jan 22 14:20:42 +0000 2016
    33. @veniviedivici @Telegraph The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Jan 21 22:46:59 +0000 2016
    34. @umweltbuerger The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Fri Jan 15 22:07:43 +0000 2016
    35. @Chris_Roberts23 @LittlemoreJB The bones are material that generate a scent. In the #mccann case there was nothing. Zilch. ‐Sun Jan 10 21:56:15 +0000 2016
    36. @jillybabesx @LittlemoreJB She gave no excuse, only the Trolls did on her behalf. The dogs only barked when prompted. Found zilch. #mccann ‐Sun Jan 10 14:02:16 +0000 2016
    37. @NansyeLee Maybe. But in the #mccann case they found nothing. Zilch. ‐Sat Jan 09 21:28:40 +0000 2016
    38. @vivienmiss @Lady_LeFaye @JillyCL It doesn't alter the fact that the dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 09 10:20:37 +0000 2016
    39. @LittlemoreJB @jontait42 Evidence please. Sweeping generalisations mean zilch. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 09 01:00:13 +0000 2016
    40. @LittlemoreJB @jontait42 Zilch. Complete waste of time. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 15:59:40 +0000 2016
    41. @LittlemoreJB @jontait42 Ni, the Dogs just barked, mostly when prompted. They found nothing. No evidence at all. No trace. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 15:43:03 +0000 2016
    42. @LittlemoreJB @jontait42 The dogs are proven in no way. They were a waste of time and found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 13:51:50 +0000 2016
    43. @LittlemoreJB @Scambusters999 @pjcottam Not according to the met.A dog bark is no kind of evidence especially when they find zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 12:28:04 +0000 2016
    44. @LittlemoreJB @sativagirl @SampleX @jannietle @AdirenM they found nothing. Zilch.. Pretty straight forward is that.#mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 11:46:40 +0000 2016
    45. @Scambusters999 @Lady_LeFaye @pjcottam Proven? By who? The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 11:44:54 +0000 2016
    46. @jannietle @SampleX @LittlemoreJB @AdirenM @sativagirl The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Jan 06 00:29:11 +0000 2016
    47. @K9Truth @sativagirl The dogs found nothing. Zilch. Complete waste of time. #mccann ‐Sat Jan 02 02:40:50 +0000 2016
    48. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara They trust them when they find something.In #mccann case they found zilch.If not where IS what they found? #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 22:48:05 +0000 2015
    49. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara The dogs identified nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 22:36:57 +0000 2015
    50. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara Yes the odour from samples.No samples in #mccann case but 2very hungry, tired and prompted dogs. Found zilch.#mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 22:25:20 +0000 2015
    51. @LittlemoreJB @Killdara Why don't you ask them? The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 15:51:06 +0000 2015
    52. @Killdara A dog barked, nothing more. Was it hungry, tired? They found nothing. Zilch. Get over it. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 15:22:35 +0000 2015
    53. @jillybabesx @DailyMirror The dogs found nothing. Zilch. Complete waste of time. No evidence against Murat either. #mccann ‐Sat Dec 26 01:18:41 +0000 2015
    54. @jillybabesx @DailyMirror The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Fri Dec 25 23:12:58 +0000 2015
    55. @FakeRC @AdirenM @Col_Connaughton To illustrate how pointless the dogs were. They found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Fri Dec 25 16:44:02 +0000 2015
    56. @SampleX @McCannCaseTweet Nice one, nice word, discovered. They discovered nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Dec 23 15:15:27 +0000 2015
    57. @Killdara Yes, and found something. This time they found zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 22 21:27:55 +0000 2015
    58. @Killdara The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 22 21:16:57 +0000 2015
    59. @Killdara The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 22 21:09:56 +0000 2015
    60. @jannietle @landloulou @wicatty009 No. A dog barked when prompted. They found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Sun Dec 20 20:56:29 +0000 2015
    61. @FakeRC Wrong. They found no evidence at all. The dogs found nothing. Zilch.#mccann ‐Sat Dec 19 09:35:46 +0000 2015
    62. @jontait42 @JillyCL Nothing was found below the sofa. Zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 17 13:56:56 +0000 2015
    63. @LittlemoreJB Yes, I can do that, when I say they found nothing I really mean they found zilch. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 17 13:12:29 +0000 2015
    64. @SampleX @JillyCL The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ,#mccann ‐Wed Dec 16 23:43:12 +0000 2015
    65. @meadchurch7 The dogs found nothing. Zilch. #mccann ‐Wed Dec 16 19:39:11 +0000 2015
    66. @K9Truth You're interpretation of Troll material not mine and has zilch to do with the McCanns. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 15 14:28:55 +0000 2015
    67. @K9Truth @Cerb32 You have no idea, where is the video of the others? The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Tue Dec 15 11:08:54 +0000 2015
    68. @Twittwoonic @UTVNews The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Mon Dec 14 23:15:11 +0000 2015
    69. @w_nicht The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Mon Dec 14 17:16:10 +0000 2015
    70. @SampleX @jillybabesx The good news is that there is nothing, zilch, to incriminate the McCanns. ‐Sun Dec 13 02:39:02 +0000 2015
    71. @SampleX @jillybabesx dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Sat Dec 12 13:30:56 +0000 2015
    72. @Dowanhillshark @fiorifan @JillyCL Zilch. ‐Sun Dec 06 12:48:56 +0000 2015
    73. @jillybabesx @SampleX @19Barbara57 @uk_frost No change of story. dogs found zilch. ‐Sat Dec 05 20:35:26 +0000 2015
    74. @jillybabesx @SampleX @19Barbara57 @uk_frost No true. The dogs found zilch, but barked when prompted. ‐Sat Dec 05 20:29:40 +0000 2015
    75. @beemmjay2011 Her parents did look. The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Tue Dec 01 20:48:30 +0000 2015
    76. @SampleX @sativagirl @justice4maddie @uk_frost @beemmjay2011 The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Thu Nov 26 20:41:58 +0000 2015
    77. @sativagirl @justice4maddie @uk_frost @SampleX @beemmjay2011 A dog barked when prompted with a stick. They found nothing. Zilch. ‐Thu Nov 26 18:36:49 +0000 2015
    78. @SampleX @beemmjay2011 The dogs found nothing. Zilch. ‐Thu Nov 26 11:37:57 +0000 2015

      Searched for: "zilch" by Father Jack
      1. @SoniaPoulton @SuppDoc @maggies28654076 @real_zm_ @RosalindaHu Her cred is zilch. Sacked from Icke TV 😂 'Broadcaster talks' since January😂 ‐Wed Jun 10 08:57:51 +0000 2015
      2. @ystriya @GrahamWP_UK What a gormless fool that man is. His credibility is lower than zilch. ‐Wed May 06 22:41:57 +0000 2015
      3. @hondo1650 La la la 😂😂 You actually know nothing. Zilch. Nada ‐Sat Oct 18 11:33:23 +0000 2014
      4. @BBalou2 Nothing has been deleted from the site. Zilch. It's been moved to a members' area, and if you read my post there you will know why ‐Mon Oct 06 16:37:56 +0000 2014
      5. @vanderhoorn 'I haven't seen any evidence it was a BUK. Nada. Zilch' So, you were playing devil's advocate or what??? ‐Tue Aug 19 09:11:13 +0000 2014
      6. @bduritsky @ProfilerPatB Her forensics 'knowledge' is zilch. It's actually pitiful, embarassing stuff. Even networks wont touch her any more ‐Sun Jun 08 19:12:27 +0000 2014
      7. @Jorge_orwell @smallthunderdog Not in any earth science? Your knowledge of hydrology clearly zilch. Dredging unlikely to have saved Levels ‐Sun Feb 16 10:38:51 +0000 2014
      8. @Syn0nymph @SeaCarlB But your problem is you have been telling porkies & crying wolf for months; your credibility is zilch. ‐Thu Feb 13 19:16:17 +0000 2014
      9. @joerukin People I talk to about #hs2 are well aware its a runaway train, fuelled by public money & with zilch real accountability ‐Fri Dec 13 08:18:31 +0000 2013
    Searched for: "drivel" by Walker .................... There was a lot of it!
    1. @TheBunnyReturns LOL. Too rich. Go away and read some of the drivel you post. Kettle . Pot. Black. #mccann ‐Thu Mar 10 02:40:49 +0000 2016
    2. @TheBunnyReturns @LittlemoreJB @WokkaisChokka @majones4111 No answer. Drivel only.when you're ready. #mccann ‐Sun Feb 07 22:56:32 +0000 2016
    3. @Askthedogs @is140charsenoug @lindaweryhur even more pointless drivel. Amazing really. #mccann ‐Sun Dec 27 19:58:50 +0000 2015
    4. @Askthedogs @is140charsenoug @lindaweryhur Nonsense. I've been totally cleared too. What drivel you write.#mccann ‐Sun Dec 27 12:18:07 +0000 2015
    5. @Cerb32 @SampleX @FakeRC @McCannCaseTweet He's not even a convincing fake barrack room lawyer. Just drivel. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 14:05:23 +0000 2015
    6. @SampleX @RobertCarlisl10 @McCannCaseTweet I can wait for an explanation of your drivel. Love it the way you keep putty it off.#mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 12:43:28 +0000 2015
    7. @SampleX @RobertCarlisl10 @McCannCaseTweet What drivel you write. #mccann ‐Thu Dec 24 00:42:22 +0000 2015
    8. @SampleX @McCannCaseTweet Zzzz. More gas, more drivel. But still no evidence against the McCanns. #mccann ‐Wed Dec 23 23:20:42 +0000 2015
    9. @jontait42 Pseudo intellectual drivel. A collection of verbose bullshit. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 15 22:58:13 +0000 2015
    10. @K9Truth Nonsense. Anyone can write such a document. It's drivel. So the world renowned DNA profiler is in on it now? Pathetic. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 15 12:50:23 +0000 2015
    11. @SampleX @jillybabesx Stop it, we can't take anymore drivel....sides splitting here!! ‐Sun Dec 13 17:10:39 +0000 2015
    12. @SampleX @jillybabesx @19Barbara57 @uk_frost I've never so much drivel. I bet you're a full time conspiracy nut aren't you? ‐Sun Dec 06 11:14:49 +0000 2015

      Searched for: "drivel" by Father Jack
      1. @RobertCarlisl10 I've warned you enough times. You are talking drivel. As always. Drunk again? ‐Sun Nov 15 11:20:21 +0000 2015
      2. RT @twlldun: The Fiscal Charter is absolutely meaningless posturing drivel and still we've managed to fuck up our response. That's pretty i… ‐Wed Oct 14 18:49:29 +0000 2015
      3. @Randomleigh1 And even when you do give them attention and demolish their drivel, they still claim they 'won'. They are not rational. ‐Wed Jan 28 20:35:23 +0000 2015
      4. @BobsStillhere @SafariSara Oh FFS. That's ridiculous. She's ridiculous. I know her career is dead, but she's burying it with this drivel. ‐Wed Nov 19 21:09:36 +0000 2014
      5. @winnower1 Thats what happens when you post hateful drivel on an account which once had your real name on it. She was damn stupid to do it. ‐Mon Nov 10 09:42:13 +0000 2014
      6. @SafariSara @nowayjomo She's so obsessive she keeps entire, ridiculous fb threads and 'archives' them. Hundreds of pages of drivel. ‐Sun Nov 09 17:09:07 +0000 2014
      7. @czarkaztik @Justmuddling @Cerb32 @B_balou Don't be stupid. Forum myths & conspiracy drivel. If you have evidence, produce it, or pipe down ‐Sat Oct 18 14:30:44 +0000 2014
      8. @Josephodriscoll @JillyCL Met has measure of them. Repeatedly told NOT to include force accounts in their drivel but so thick they ignore ‐Mon May 19 08:10:23 +0000 2014
      9. RT @Peter_Kirkham: Message for you @gallaghereditor following your self-serving drivel on @daily_politics ... The public IS concerned over … ‐Thu May 08 15:34:41 +0000 2014
      10. @Syn0nymph @SafariSara They checked, both have said loudly parents not under suspicion. So what exactly are you drivelling about? NOWT! ‐Tue Apr 22 15:19:54 +0000 2014
      11. @Ak2oid @JohnnyWatergate It's a forum myth my dear. Most of us were there when it was invented. Utter drivel from hater grannies, 7yrs on. ‐Sat Mar 08 07:54:57 +0000 2014
      12. @WAWinter1 @Jayelles1 Whoever is using nic now is impersonator. Original got into hot water with employers for writing drivel in works' time ‐Fri Feb 21 19:28:37 +0000 2014
      13. @TrulyJudy73 He's annoyed because we ignore him. We took him apart on a forum once because he was too drunk to notice he was talking drivel. ‐Fri Feb 07 20:25:05 +0000 2014
      14. @martin_liz Liz get the feck off my TL before I report you. You r talking drivel, nasty drivel at that. Now bugger off confused fool #mccann ‐Sun Dec 08 12:10:55 +0000 2013
      Searched for: "QED" by Walker
      1. @FakeRC LOL. QED. Thanks my little masonic victim. #mccann ‐Fri Mar 11 00:18:05 +0000 2016
      2. @FakeRC See what I mean? QED. MLMV.#mccann ‐Fri Mar 11 00:12:16 +0000 2016
      3. @GibsonAndy_1 @KTHopkins @QueenOPortugal QED. #mccann ‐Mon Feb 29 06:38:11 +0000 2016
      4. @MichaelBWanker QED #mccann ‐Fri Feb 19 23:47:33 +0000 2016
      5. @Syn0nymph @WokkaisChokka @LittlemoreJB @KDMoose Does it say "two police officers"? No. QED. #mccann ‐Fri Feb 19 01:12:17 +0000 2016
      6. @sativagirl @jillybabesx @alfibab3 QED.Thanks. #mccann ‐Tue Dec 29 00:45:47 +0000 2015
      7. @sativagirl @LittlemoreJB @woolyback12 @Killdara QED.Thanks. #mccann ‐Mon Dec 28 23:34:11 +0000 2015
      8. @K9Truth "An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3a)" QED #mccann ‐Fri Dec 18 14:22:51 +0000 2015

        Searched for: "QED" by Father Jack
        1. @jeremyduns @larcheored According to my new friend yougov.profiler, Icke's people like trifle while Brand's prefer veggie sausage rolls. QED ‐Mon Dec 15 00:11:43 +0000 2015
      Searched for: "bliss" by Walker
      #mccann just love it when the Trolls are on the run. Bliss. Funny too. ‐Tue Feb 23 21:51:05 +0000 2016
      Searched for: "bliss" by Father Jack
      @19Barbara57 No, can't see any of them. Bliss. Thu Jun 19
      19:54:42 +0000 201


      I don't know if there's anything in it or not. It would be interesting to see if the pro McCanns stand by and allow the "@WalkerCan1000" account to carry on with the blatant lies though. Afterall, if they claim to be about the truth, and only wanting the best for Madeleine, then why stand by and allow trolls to spread misinformation. That is of course, unless they all lie, and they are only here for Kate and Gerry McCann. I know some certainly are, maybe those who do care for the truth, no matter what side of the fence they sit, should make themselves known, and stand up for what is right.

      I know we will be very soon, and against one of the biggest liars from the anti side of the fence...




          So you think Kate and Gerry McCann searched for Madeleine?

          $
          0
          0
          May 3rd 2007, 10pm. News is breaking that 3 year old Madeleine McCann, has been snatched from the hotel apartment she was staying in. Before long the streets of Praia da Luz are awash with locals and tourists; people desperately trying to find any trace of Madeleine. The beams from torches cut through the night sky, tracking any movements down the dark side streets. Madeleine's name echoes through the air. Some of the people who've volunteered have children of their own safe at home; they can't begin to imagine what Madeleine's parents must be going through.

          Police officers are searching too, some of them off duty; volunteering their time to find Madeleine. The hours pass by, it's getting cold now, no word, no sign. Still everyone searches, where could she be. People are getting tired, yet still they search, hoping that Madeleine will turn up, maybe around the next corner. What must the parents be going through?

          So what were the parents going through? Well we know from the statements, that after a 40 minute delay in calling the police, they arrive within minutes to find Kate and Gerry on their knees, wailing and beating the floor with their palms. An act that immediately aroused the suspicions of GNR officer, José Maria Batista Roque.

          Roque stated that he, "...found the parents to be nervous and anxious, he did not see any tears from either of them although they produced noises identical to crying. He did not feel that this was an abduction, although this was the line indicated by the father."

          click here to read Jose Maria Batista Roque's statement

          The police have a look around the apartment, brief statements are taken, then Kate and Gerry are left whilst the officers take to the streets to search with the volunteers.

          At approximately 3am, and according to Kate McCann as written in her propaganda pamphlet entitled "madeleine" (all lower case), Kate describes the following scenario.

          "On my insistence, Gerry and Dave went out again to look for some sign of Madeleine. They went up and down the beach in the dark, running, shouting..."

          Now I'm not suggesting Kate is lying in her book, despite it's many inconsistencies, but David Payne, the man she describes as searching with Gerry, has a different version of events. Payne doesn't mention shouting, he doesn't mention running, indeed he hardly mentions searching, in fact the crux of his recollection, is that he spent the time consoling Gerry on the beach. Taken from Payne's rogatory statement, dated 11th April 2008.

          "We went down err through past the Ocean Club reception, we went down err to the beach and in between all this you know Kate and Gerry were just breaking down you know just their behaviour was, you know was never questioned or did I ever think there was anything strange about you know their behaviour and how they would, they would act, you know in such a set of circumstances and you know Gerry's a very stoical person and you know, I think you know its the way that he's conducted himself over the past few months you know, and he broke down with me on the front, you know. You know just very obviously a broken man, and you know we spent some time you know, not long, I was trying my best to console him, we went back then to the err the apartment..."

          click here to read David Payne's full rogatory statement

          Do you see a recurring theme? It's all about Kate and Gerry McCann, and how they were feeling. How about giving the would be father of the year a good talking to, and telling him straight, "get a grip you selfish man, your 3 year old daughter is missing, and you're sat on a beach doing nothing"

          Oddly enough, David Payne makes no mention of any searching in his previous statement, dated 4th May 2007.

          At 6am Kate and Gerry step out of the Payne's apartment where they spent the night with the twins. Conveniently, Kate states that nobody saw either her or Gerry. Are we seriously supposed to believe, that at 6am, there wasn't a single person out on the streets, no hotel workers, no delivery drivers, nobody whatsoever? Well according to Kate that's exactly what happened:

          "As soon as it was light, Gerry and I returned to our search"

          What search would that be then?

          "We went up and down roads we'd never seen before having barely left the Ocean Club complex all week. We jumped over walls and raked through undergrowth. We looked in ditches and holes. All was quiet apart from the sound of barking dogs, which added to the eeriness of the atmosphere I remember opening a big dumpster-type bin and saying to myself please God don't let her be in here. The most striking and horrific thing about it all was that we were completely alone. Nobody else, it seemed was out looking for Madeleine. Just us, her parents."

          If you believe the abduction fairy tale, wouldn't you agree, 6am was 8 hours too damn late?

          Kate goes on to say,

          "We must have been out for at least an hour before returning to David and Fiona's apartment..."

          At least an hour? Oh you poor things.

          Kate and Gerry were indeed spotted that morning. Paolo Jorge Fernandes Neto a serving officer with the GNR stated in his statement dated 27th May 2008, that:

          "He remembers that he saw the McCann couple at about 07.00 alone in the street next to the site where they were stationed."

          Despite many lying McCann supporters stating the contrary, nowhere in the above statement, does Paolo Jorge Fernandes Neto state that he witnessed Kate or Gerry McCann "searching".

          Click here to read Paolo Jorge Fernandes Neto's statement

          In fact there isn't a single independent witness that states they saw Kate or Gerry McCann out searching for Madeleine.

          Kate even admits in a recorded interview with Jane Hill, that they didn't physically search.

          click here to watch the video

          A fact backed up by a former Ocean Club employee, who in the following video said,

          "My colleagues were indignant, because they went (searching). One of them even had his feet all red, tired, and he was offended because he went to search, though he wasn't related to the girl, and the parents didn't. They stayed indoors, in the apartment."

          click here to watch the video

          John Hill, the Ocean Club manager also states he didn't see Kate or Gerry searching:

          When questioned he stated that the search operations that he organised finished at about 04.30. Elements from the PJ and GNR reinforcements with sniffer dogs were still at the scene.

          He wishes to add that he does not know of any motive that could have been the cause of the Madeleine's disappearance.

          On the night of the disappearance he always saw the McCanns together in the apartment they were occupying at the time, with the exception of an episode when Gerry went to the main 24 hour reception, with the purpose of speaking to a GNR officer, he is not sure at what time this occurred, but it was certainly before 24.00.

          In the months that followed Madeleine's disappearance, and in a classic case of do as we say, not as we do, Kate and Gerry McCann would go on to publicly slate the Portuguese Police force for not doing enough to search for Madeleine. Perhaps they both thought that phoning family and friends back in the UK was a far better way of bringing their 3 year old little girl back to them. Or maybe, as has been evident throughout the whole time Madeleine has been missing, they think it better that others search for their, as Gerry said, "almost perfect" little girl.

          Gerry McCann was reported as saying, "Find the body, and prove we killed her"

          I'm not going to state that quote is genuine, as it is hard to trace back to a primary source, however...

          ...if only Gerry and Kate had acted like normal devastated parents and searched with the strangers who looked throughout the night, who knows, they might have found her, and proved they weren't involved. Sadly both the evidence, and their behaviour, suggests they knew that was never going to be the case.

          Interestingly, and in stark contrast, this was the immediate reaction of Sara Payne on hearing her daughter Sarah was missing:

          "I didn't stop to ask what had happened , there was only one thing on my mind - I had to find Sarah now. Snapping into action , I reached for Charlotte and pulled her with me towards the lane that runs along beside the house. Shouting 'Sarah,Sarah at the tops of our voices, we frantically searched up and down Peake Lane, pulling aside brambles with our bare arms and looking under hedges. Meanwhile Mike grabbed the boys and headed into the corn field where they began beating back the crops , some of which were over four feet tall, to see if she was hidden there."

          A more cynical man would say Kate took Sara Payne's book, and used her words...but surely that would be going too far...wouldn't it?




          Kate & Gerry McCann finally admit defeat in long running court battle.

          $
          0
          0

          According to reports an hour ago from The Sun newspaper's in house McCann loving journo, Tracey Kandohla - Kate and Gerry McCann have called time on their malicious hounding of ex PJ inspector - Goncalo Amaral.

          The McCanns had promised that they would fight the decision by the Supreme Court in Lisbon, who after a series of lengthy court cases, ruled in favour of Snr, Amaral's right to sell his book, and documentary, that described the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/19/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-detective-wins-appeal-against-order/

          The McCanns had claimed that they planned to take up the case with the European Court of Human Rights. Something we discussed earlier this year:

          http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/what-next-for-mccanns.html

          As predicted by Laid Bare, the McCanns have now finally decided admit defeat, in what many described as a desperate bid to silence the truth. 

          According to quotes in The Sun: 

          "Pals of Kate and Gerry have said Goncalo Amaral 'has won once and for all' because they don’t have the 'time, energy or funding” to take him to the highest court in the land."


          The report then quotes the family friend as finally admitting that:

          “Realistically a European Court appeal was never going to succeed plus it would be too expensive to launch. It seems Mr Amaral, regrettably, has won once and for all. The fight is finally over."

          It would seem all that remains to be settled now, is for the McCanns to pay Goncalo Amaral's legal expenses, as per the order from the Supreme Court. 

          What this means, if correct (The Sun, and Kandohla not being the being the most reliable of sources), is that now the McCanns have ceased with their obsessive gambling of cash - from the fund many thought would be used to find Madeleine, Goncalo Amaral is free to sell his book wherever he chooses, and in any language he feels he wishes to. 

          We sincerely hope to see English versions adorning the bookshelves of our homes here in the UK very soon, as well as a more polished, and UK friendly documentary. 


                                    


          Trollspotting - Directed by Kate and Gerry McCann

          $
          0
          0
          The internet, home to some of the lowest forms of humanity. The media has long portrayed those who take to the net to question Kate and Gerry McCann's abduction tale as "vile trolls", but if they want to see the real scum of the earth, they should take a good hard look at those claiming to be on the web to find Madeleine, and support her family. Sounds crazy doesn't it. Surely someone who is there to help find Madeleine can't be a troll? I didn't say that though, I said these people claim to be here to help find Madeleine. The truth is however, that helping find Madeleine, is the furthest thing from their minds. Each day these people wake up, they pick up their devices, and they attack. They attack anybody who questions the many lies from the McCanns, or their PR media whore, Clarence Mitchell. Indeed Clarence Mitchell himself has admitted to using the services of a "team of supporters". He didn't say they campaigned to find Madeleine, he said "supporters". 

          In many ways, these "supporters" emulate the actions of Kate and Gerry McCann themselves. They lie, they accuse, they threaten, they deflect, they damage the lives of others for their own selfish gain, and most notably, they rarely mention Madeleine. Take twitter, and the hashtag McCann for example, a hive for multiple accounts belonging to a very small (getting smaller), number of desperate people. A quick twitter search of the name "Madeleine" reveals some startling results. In the past 24 hours, those people that claim to be there for Madeleine, only mentioned her name 6 times. Of those 6 times, only 4 were direct appeals to the public, and by one account only. In stark contrast, one individual who claims he wants Madeleine brought home, spent his day, not doing a thing to further the search, but instead creating clone accounts of myself, and tweeting from them 39 times in a puerile attempt to troll me, adding #McCann to each of his tweets. Madeleine McCann was the furthest thought from his tiny mind, pathetic cowardice at the forefront. That very same man, runs several accounts, uses them on #McCann, and never, never, appeals for the safe return of Madeleine. Why? Because he's a sick troll, who uses the case of a missing 3 year old girl to get his kicks. Such is the extent of this man's trolling, and illegal activity, that he is too afraid to use his own name, as such a reward of £1,000 was recently offered, for information leading to his arrest. The face of that man is pictured below:
          He isn't alone though. The McCanns have an uncanny knack of attracting the support of some of the sickest creatures on the face of the earth. In the days after Madeleine was reported missing, the couple, on more than one occasion, dined with, and introduced their two remaining children to a child rapist. Hardly surprising then, that their "support" consists of people who are apologists for child abuse, advocates for the age of consent to be lowered, and even people who excuse convicted child killers. Sick in the extreme. Again, a visit to twitter, will reveal the cataclysmic chasm between what the McCanns'"support team" actually claim to be on the internet for, and what they actually do.


          In 2014, members of the McCanns' support team created a dossier. The sole intention of which was to cause as much damage to ordinary people who dared to question the McCanns' lies. The result of that dossier, was that twitter user, Brenda Leyland - aka Sweepyface, tragically took her own life. One pro McCann who has continually shown herself to be gleeful at the death of Brenda, is the particularly perverse parasite - Rebecca Sherlock.


          Aside from Sherlock's massively misplaced vanity, this grotesque woman is also another charlatan who has an agenda quite the opposite from the one she professes. When Sherlock isn't tweeting selfies with more filters than a sleeve of Dot Cotton's fags, she can be seen goading and gloating over the suicide of Brenda Leyland. 

            
          Days before the death of Brenda, Sherlock tweeted the following, all in the name of Madeleine McCann of course:
          Now Sherlock will claim the tweet was taken out of context, but given that Brenda was indeed doorstepped by Sky News' Martin Brunt, only 4 days later, and was found dead only 2 days after that, there can be no escaping the context of the next sickening tweet the haggard hobgoblin chose to send. Only 20 days after Brenda's death (left). 

          Sherlock even had the audacity to attend the inquest into Brenda's death, stating many times that she "fancied a day out". Enough of the miniature mongrel though, she cares for her talons more than she does for Madeleine - I want to move onto another anonymous account, one that goes by the name of "Michael Walker". 

          The "Michael Walker" account, is yet another McCann fan, one who has amassed some 27,200 tweets in less than 2 years - and that's just from one of the accounts they use. The tweets are a mixture of repeated, and provable lies about the case, as well as smears on Portugal, Goncalo Amaral, the PJ, Martin Grime, the Portuguese courts, and of course threats, and vile accusations toward anybody who challenges the account. "Walker", is another who trolls on behalf of the McCanns, and can regularly be seen to accuse people of "kiddie fiddling", despite having no knowledge of who that person is, or their circumstances. He describes Portugal as "Pedville", because, well, because these sick minded protectors of Kate and Gerry, will attack not only the people that can see the McCanns lied, but will also seek to damage an entire country. 

          Those lovely McCanns eh, due solely to their actions, their lies, and their warped followers, lies a trail of devastation 10 years long, and all the while barely a mention of Madeleine. If she were alive today, I'm sure she'd be utterly repulsed to see what her parents have caused, what they still cause, what they do nothing to stop, and how it is all done in her name.

          And it is a trail that traces back 10 years. As early as the 4th May 2007, people who, through no fault of their own, but due to the McCanns lies, joined a group they thought would help find Madeleine. The stark reality however, was that the aim of the group had anything but Madeleine's interests at heart. The group had a very organised chain of command. People such as Janet Leeson, Maxine Harris, Karen McCalman, Leah Bothe, and of course, at the top, pulling the strings, and never far from the action - Michael Wright, orchestrated a campaign to bring down youtube videos - no matter if they were factual or not - that painted the McCanns in a bad light. The way they did this, was to use people who were genuinely concerned for Madeleine, and who, at the time, believed the McCanns to be innocent. 

          Decent, honest people would be sent lists of youtube links, and asked to pass the details onto their friends via a mailing list. The videos would then be mass reported, and as a result, damning articles of evidence would be lost forever. 

          As is the case with the Portuguese police files, translated at a cost of £100,000 from the fund, the McCanns were desperate that the public would have facts hidden from them. Again, these moves didn't have Madeleine at heart, the aim was to protect the parents. It's always been the aim from day one. 

          Of course, the problem with hiding things, is that it arouses suspicion, as was the case with Wright's little group of puppeteers. Genuine members of the group began digging, and researching for themselves, much to the annoyance of the "leaders". So much for the title of the group, "Help To Find Madeleine". 

          There have been many projects to keep a lid on the truth since, and to this day. The dossier was just one of many attempts to silence people - and how that backfired. Gerry was quick to demand an example be made, sadly, Brenda Leyland was that example. Yet do we see Gerry condemn the actions of their little band of trolls? Of course not, they act with the McCanns full knowledge, and blessing. If they didn't, you could be sure the McCanns could stop their supporters actions in a heartbeat. 

          As I have mentioned several times, Madeleine couldn't be further from these trolls minds. If they had even the slightest care for her, if they believed she could be found, then where are the appeals, where is the organised fundraising, where are the trips to Morocco to find her, to Amsterdam? All we hear is a lot of noise about where the trolls are convinced she is, blurred images bandied about, and promises that that's where Madeleine is. 

          If these people who sit at their keyboards, whilst drying their scabby nails, in between marathon troll-a-thons, truly believe Madeleine is alive, and is just waiting to be found, I wonder what they think she would make of them doing sweet FA to bring her home. 

          Still, whilst they do nothing, at least Kate can reassure herself with the thought Madeleine will be "giving them her tuppenceworth", she can also reassure herself that their band of evil trolls will continue to leave a legacy of hatred, of suffering, and of spite.











































          The McCanns' fraudulent fund, and a note of thanks to Tracey Kandohla

          $
          0
          0
          So we have another whopper to add to the ever growing list of lies from Kate and Gerry McCann. In what can only be described as a highly illegal con, the couple are now claiming, on their own facebook page, that they're a charity organisation. As we know, the fund isn't a charity, it's a Ltd company:





          The page has seen a massive tumble in followers of late, hardly surprising when we look beneath the saintly exterior, and discover that the page is not as it seems. They are actively lying to people, in a desperate attempt to gather money from unsuspecting members of the public. Not only that, but they are also hiding facts of the case from their followers. 

          Now why would they do that? Surely innocent parents would want people to see as much information as possible?

          Cover-up, I hear you say. Without doubt. 

          Earlier today, I decided to read the latest tosh from Tracey Kandohla. For those of you who haven't heard of Tracey, she is a firm friend of Kate McCann, an unscrupulous liar, and (shock), a journalist. Tracey has written a great number of articles on the case, all totally biased, most containing lies, and all on behalf of her friends - the McCanns. So you can better understand what I'm about to write, here is the link to Kandohla's latest article:


          To quote the headline:

          "Maddie's parents urge vile trolls to stop 'awful and upsetting abuse' on their own website as they back new rules BANNING criticism of decision to leave her alone in apartment"

          Serial liar Kandohla just can't help herself. This isn't a new thing at all, in fact the condescending rule has been in place for many years, as the screenshot below proves:




          "We don't care what you think about leaving children alone. It's been eight years, let it go already! Posting your perfect parent advice will be deleted and you will be banned."

          So, not a new rule at all. In fact that rule goes back even further than the two years I have provided the screenshot for. 

          However, it's not just the above that the McCanns, and the people behind the OFM page will ban members of the public for, and here's where things get deeper. 

          The McCanns spent £100,000 of monies donated to the fraudulent fund, on getting the PJ files translated from Portuguese, into English. Those files contain statements taken by police, potential sightings, forensic evidence, photographs, and much, much more. Yet, the McCanns have never released their version, or promoted them, despite the fact that Operation Grange used them for their initial review of the case, despite the fact the McCanns didn't use their own money, but that of members of the public, and most importantly - you would think, that those files almost certainly hold the key to who is responsible for the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. 

          To test the water, I asked a friend of mine, to post a perfectly reasonable comment, with a link to the PJ files, that have been released by a separate set of translators. She didn't troll, she didn't abuse anybody, she didn't mention neglect - she simply posted the following comment:

          " I think every follower here should read these police files. They're free to view, and undoubtedly hold vital facts as to who is responsible for Madeleine's disappearance:


          Within two minutes, her comment was marked as spam by the OFM page, and hidden from view.

          When she posted it again, the same thing happened (as can be seen below), and she was banned from the page:


          Slipping seamlessly back to the fraudulent "charity" claim, here's where we thank the hapless Tracey Kandohla. In her article, Kandohla states:

          "The web page, which is endorsed by Kate and Gerry from Rothley, Leicestershire, states: 'We ultimately have the say on content and tone."

          So, it's there in black and white, Kate and Gerry McCann are endorsing the suppression of the PJ files. They also endorse the fraudulent claim that the Ltd company "Leaving no stone unturned", is a charity.

          I have today, lodged a complaint with trading standards. They checked the status of the fund, and told me no application for charity status has been received. They also confirmed that the OFM page was, and I quote, " a potential scam". I'm not wet enough behind the ears, as to hope this sees the end of the fund, and the McCanns' page - they seem to have a knack of evading justice.

          To summarize:

          The McCanns are endorsing a page that fraudulently promotes the fund as a charity, when it isn't.

          The McCanns are actively endorsing the covering up of vital evidence, that could lead to the case being solved.

          Only a very small percentage of the money from the fund has actually been spent on searching for Madeleine.

          A huge sum of money from the fund has been spent on the salaries of paid liars, attempts to silence the truth, as well as bogus, and corrupt private investigators.

          If you've donated to this fake charity, I would suggest that you contact consumer rights, you've been conned, and you deserve a full refund.

          Perhaps, the McCanns' claims of bogus charity collectors being responsible for the disappearance of Madeleine, weren't so far of the mark after all.

          Goodnight.


          Since yesterday's exposure of OFM's dishonesty, their self titled "Webmaster", has dug themselves a deeper hole. The following screenshots were sent to me by someone who contacted OFM via email. I have blanked out the source's name:







          As expected, everything "Webmaster" said above, was just a pack of lies. The page could quite easily have been set up as a company. The choices when creating a page are bold, plain, and couldn't be simpler, as shown below:












          OFM could have chosen from a multitude of options. They could have chosen, "Community organisation", "Community group", or even "Internet company". Hell, they could have been totally honest, and called themselves an "Insurance company", after all, hasn't a vast amount of the fund been gambled, and lost, in an attempt to insure themselves against the truth?

          Instead, however, OFM chose one of the options they most certainly are not - a charity. They've never been a charity, yet they chose that status. That choice, was a deliberate attempt to con the many unsuspecting members of the public who visit their site, into parting with their wages, their pocket money, or indeed their pensions.

          Thanks to pressure form honest people, OFM have now, miraculously discovered a way to alter their status. This was done moments after our source emailed them, and called them out on their lies. Now, the decent, and correct thing to do. would be for them to admit, openly, on their page, that with the McCanns' endorsement (thanks again Tracey), they misled hundreds of thousands of people.

          Will these bogus charity collectors do the right thing?

          Will they do so without casting aspersions, or shifting the blame elsewhere?

          Will we get a Gerry McCann type response, verbose, over egged, and as honest as a cut 'n' shut car salesman?

          Or...

          Will we get a Kate McCann type response?

          "No comment"

          Or, to quote the "devout Catholic Kate"...

          "Fucking tossers, fucking tossers", whispered through gritted teeth.

          SHINING A LIGHT INTO A DARK PLACE

          $
          0
          0
          JILL HAVERN & TONY BENNETT - AN UNHOLY ALLIANCE

          For a number of years, five to be exact, the CMoMM forum, headed by Jill Havern and Tony Bennett, has, whilst claiming to be against the McCanns, consistently attacked, smeared, and lied about a huge number of 'anti McCanns', far over and above the number of attacks they have visited upon the vile trolls supporting the McCanns, during the same period. In fact, as I shall prove later in this blog, the duplicitous pair have allowed pros onto the forum, to stir the pot, and fight their dishonest battles for them. Before I move on to that, and many other points, I would like to describe how I became a victim of Jill and Tony's deceitful, and dangerous games.
          It was around 2015 when I first became suspicious of the activities of Tony Bennett. Here was a man, who had in 2013 been found guilty of breaching a court ruling, imposed on him in 2009, and yet continued (and does to this day) to fall foul of that very court ruling. For anybody who is interested in reading the build up to the court ruling, they can do so here:

          Build up to court ruling against Tony Bennett

          Final court ruling


          The crux of the order however, can be learned from the following quote:
          "In exchange for the McCanns and Edward Smethurst reducing their combined costs claim against him from a total of around £420,000, to £35,000 - a 92% reduction overall - Tony has been required to:
          * Withdraw his appeal against Mr Justice Tugendhat’s judgment,
          * Withdraw his application to vary three of the sixteen different undertakings he gave to the McCanns and the High Court in November 2009,
          * Agree to be bound for life by the 16 undertakings he gave to the Court and the McCanns in November 2009, and
          * Agree to make no further Application either to lift the stay on the McCanns’ original Libel Claim. or to vary or
          discharge any of the undertakings he gave in November 2009."
          One of the orders Tony Bennett was given in 2009, and as can be seen above, is bound to for life, was this:
          "The Defendant undertakes not to repeat allegations that the Claimants are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann; and/or of disposing of her body; and/or of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
          Now, to my point. As I have said for a number of years, and as is proven beyond any doubt from the above quotes, Tony Bennett did indeed do a deal with the McCanns. He received a 92% reduction of the costs he was ordered to pay, despite being found guilty of a breach, and despite still breaking the court order to this day - how very charitable. Tony himself even alluded to the reaching of an agreement with the following words after the hearing:
          "I'm sorry for the distress I've caused to them - I'm hoping the way forward will result in both of us drawing a line under the situation."
          The way forward - hmmm, just what was that way forward Tony? Clearly not to stop discussing the case, or as per the order, accuse the McCanns "of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
          As any of you who have read CMoMM will know, Tony Bennett forcefully imposes the theory that Madeleine died/disappeared before the 3rd May 2007, the very date the McCanns, and the tapas 7 claim Madeleine was "abducted". In what universe does that claim not directly oppose the court order? If Madeleine disappeared before the 3rd, and the McCanns say she didn't, then the only possibility is that the McCanns are lying, and seeking to cover up what they had done". There are no two ways about it.
          Interestingly, and perhaps crucially, is this quote from Tony, shortly after the ruling, and it's in relation to Jill Havern, and her reasons for setting up the forum. If you're under the impression it was to find out the truth about what happened to Madeleine McCann, you're wrong:
          "I start by thanking once again the forum-owner (Jill Havern), who originally set up ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’, largely to help me, and who has remained loyal and helpful throughout all the ups and downs of the last four years."
          So very much like the fund for Madeleine, which was never set up with the sole purpose to help search for Madeleine, but to protect Kate and Gerry. The CMoMM forum was set up largely to help Tony - not to find out the truth, but to help Tony - and help Tony it has.
          It is my firm belief that Tony has been a conduit for the McCanns. With his wild theories, his attacks on antis, his dogged determination to force a scripted scenario upon those who follow him, his campaigns against anyone who disagrees with him, his close connections to pro McCanns, and the speed, and ferocity at which he shuts down anybody who might hold vital information, an insight to the case, or wish to promote the facts of the case, away from his controlling ways.
          SONIA POULTON
          The reason Bennett, and Jill Havern turned on me so viciously.
          For a number of years Tony Bennett has done his level best to attack, amongst others, Sonia Poulton. There are many pages on the"largely to help (Tony)" CMoMM forum - indeed there is a full section dedicated to attacking and smearing Sonia. As many of you will know, I am an admin at Justice For Madeleine; a group that Tony tried to have shut down after we stopped a former group member, and CMoMM member continually, and unfairly attacking Sonia Poulton. That is a rule we have always had on the group, and one we stick to. Bennett's obsession to harm the wellbeing of Sonia has been evident for many years, and is something I found utterly sickening.
          I am lucky enough to know Sonia on a personal level. When she announced she would be making a documentary, (one that Bennett and his team have poured cold water on since it's making was announced), I was very eager to find out what Sonia's intentions were. Would she put the facts of the case across diligently, and accurately, or would she flirt with some of the myths of the case? I decided the best thing to do, would be to ask Sonia directly, when I did so, she suggested we have a chat on the phone. We talked at great length, Sonia asked my advice on what I thought should be in the documentary, and what I felt were myths, or unsubstantiated claims. A great deal of work was then done by Sonia on a daily basis, all the while suffering attacks from Tony Bennett, and his pro McCann friends - oh, you forgot I said I would show proof of his links to pros, and that he colluded with them? More to come.
          It was during a period when the attacks upon Sonia began to reach their worst, and were emanating from a team of pro McCanns, and Bennett, that I approached Jill Havern via PM. I asked Jill to show some empathy, to stop the relentless harassment, and stalking of Sonia on her "largely to help (Tony)" CMoMM forum - Jill agreed, and put all the posts that attacked Sonia into a members only area - a small blessing given the low number of members interacting on the forum.
          At that time, Sonia was in the middle of a court case, she had brought against a prolific pro McCann and friend of Tony Bennett's - Darren Laverty. Laverty and his cronies have a long history of lying, stalking, threatening, harassing, and attacking survivors of child abuse - vulnerable people that the establishment would sooner see silenced, people that Sonia sought to help - as this blog unfolds, you will see how Tony fits right in with these people - for now though, allow me to show you some screenshots that will give you a better idea of the type of person Darren Laverty is. 

          If we are to judge a man by the company he keeps, what are we to make of Anthony Bennett over his alliance with this creature?  Bennett, so supercilious about others' bad language and vulgarity, seemingly has no problem with his friend's sickening public outbursts:











          The case, fell apart at the eleventh hour, the reasons for which I won't go into, suffice to say a certain child abuse apologist, and barrister called in favours for her friend Laverty. Tony used this opportunity to his agenda- fuelled advantage. All the pages that had previously been hidden, suddenly reappeared, and Bennett took to Twitter to bask in glee, throwing more hatred toward Sonia, and thoroughly enjoying the schadenfreude in seeing her suffer - receiving information directly from the aforementioned pro McCann - Darren Laverty. During this time Sonia struggled on, and tried her best to continue filming, researching, and producing the documentary. Finding herself up against the inevitable problems of creating a documentary the McCanns would have fought tooth and nail against, as well as facing daily abuse from Tony and his friends. Just what motivated Tony to do all he could to demoralise, and cause suffering to Sonia? Surely  any true anti would welcome another documentary on the case...wouldn't they?
          THE FUND FOR GONCALO AMARAL

          The attacks upon Sonia weren't the only time Bennett colluded with pro McCanns. When Leanne Baulch headed the Go-fund me campaign for Goncalo Amaral, Bennett, armed with false information from Darren Laverty once more, decided to take to the pages of the CMoMM forum, and try his level best to cast doubt upon the fund's authenticity. Remember, that without this fund, Goncalo Amaral would have been unable to appeal the original verdict that of the case the McCanns had against him - resulting in a ban on his book, and a very real chance of bankruptcy. Indeed the very things the McCanns sought to do to Bennett, before he reached a deal with the couple.

          Here's a link to Laverty casting doubt upon the fund.



          ...and here, a link to a pro McCann blog that promoted the words of Bennett, and shows how he was also doing the very same as Laverty (also note the involvement of CMoMM member "Cloak and Dagger", AKA Frances Gallagher - another whose links to pro McCanns are very well documented:

          Link to Bennett attempting to smear the fund for Goncalo Amaral


          SO WHY DID HAVERN AND BENNETT ATTACK MYSELF
          My crime, to defend both Sonia, and Leanne - or to look at it another way, to defend the truth.
          In light of the resurrected attacks upon Sonia, that were upon a forum overtly bearing the name of Madeleine McCann, but, covertly, from the fingertips of Bennett and his pro McCann friends, I decided to make a stand. Each day, on twitter, I asked Bennett how he was still able to comment on the case, despite a court ruling preventing him from doing so. What followed, was both unbelievable, sick, and despicable.
          Yeah right...

          JILL HAVERN'S LIES
          Jill Havern, the woman who, according to Tony set up her forum, using the name of Madeleine McCann, but with the purpose of helping him, began to lose her mind. She accused me of a number of things. The link below is to my own Facebook page, and shows how Jill was easing herself into a rhythm of lies, and attempts to discredit me:


          As can be seen, I countered those lies from Jill with inarguable facts, even as can be seen below, offering Jill the opportunity to resolve our issues privately. 





          In hindsight, showing Jill up as a liar, for what were fairly mild lies, was a mistake. What followed, was far, far worse, and utterly despicable.
          Jill stated on her forum, and without the slightest bit of evidence, that I was guilty of 8 crimes, the worst of which being sexual assault, the screenshot for which is below:



          So Jill accused me of the following crimes:

          1. Threats to kill (other than Tony).
          2. Threats of violence.
          3. Persistent (and continuing) stalking/harassment.
          4. Sexual assault.
          5. Fraud.
          6. Blackmail.
          7. Making a false statement to police.
          8. Obtaining a pecuniary by deception. 

          Interestingly, Tony Bennett (on the screenshot, and link below), confidently, and dishonestly, denied these claims were ever made,after Jill had deleted her lies. He even dragged Cherry Berry into the mix, who had seen the claims, but was accused of lying as well (more on the terrible way Cherry was treated later). Unfortunately for Tony, and Jill, they presumed I was stupid, and hadn't archived the libellous claims.




          Link to Tony Bennett lying again. 

          I had seen through Tony's game, but worse for him, I wasn't going to let it drop. They now needed to silence me, and would stop at nothing to do so, even accusing me of being another poster, known only to me as Andrew, a former CMoMM member, who they claim rang Tony, and issued a death threat back in 2014/15. It was at this point I contacted the police. A twitter/forum spat is one thing, to falsely and maliciously accuse another of sexual assault, for no other reason than to cause that person harm, is beyond sick. Not only did they put me in danger - as they discussed openly where I used to live, examined photographs from my Facebook profile for clues about my movements, they also tweeted links to their lies, with a hashtag attached to the name of the small town I lived in. What that meant was that anybody from my area who was interested in news in my town, would be met with links to Havern's lies. This course of action caused me severe distress, I became ill, I didn't feel safe leaving my own home, and became withdrawn. My health deteriorated further, culminating in me collapsing at home, and being rushed to hospital via an ambulance, due to a bout of pneumonia. Nice people...

          CONTACT WITH THE POLICE
          Jill has continually claimed that I have never contacted the police over both her accusations, and those of Tony Bennett.
          Well Jill, as you already know, I did contact the police, they did investigate your claims, and, as can be seen from the emails below, they stated that you were guilty of harassment, and defamation of character. Of course you know why that is...

          I have never been involved in, nor have I committed any of the crimes you claimed I was guilty of.



          As for Bennett, and his stance that I called his home phone in the early hours of the morning, and issued a death threat, I also contacted the police regarding that matter. In fact I spoke directly to the original investigating officer, PC Sunderland of Essex police, who stated I was never, and had never been a person of interest, and that the case was now closed. I did offer to travel to Essex to give a statement, but was told that wouldn't be necessary. Once again, I did everything I could to resolve the issue. Sorry to disappoint you Tony, but once again, you've made a complete fool out of yourself, by mixing reality with your own warped fantasies.

          Two emails of my correspondence with PC Sunderland, (as is my right, I have withheld some personal information):




          PC Sunderland's reply:


          CHERRY BERESFIELD
          Cherry has been a great friend to me over the years. She has never once lied to me, and doesn't get involved in any trouble, preferring instead to stick to the facts of the case. In fact, you would be extremely hard pushed to find anyone with a bad word to say about her. Unfortunately, and against my advice (which incidentally I have given to many who wished to back me up), Cherry called Jill and Tony out on their lies. She did so in her usual polite manner, stating that, as is true, she had seen the emails from the police. She also said that she had seen my driving licence, which she had, that proved I wasn't "Andrew", due to our birth dates being different, and (rather obviously), our names being different. For her troubles, Cherry was banned from CMoMM (the forum set up to help Tony), accused of being a liar, and smeared, whilst having her right to reply taken away.
          Both Jill and Tony owe Cherry a huge apology, I have proved I was telling the truth, and therefore proven Cherry to be totally correct in what she said in my defence as well.
          Cherry's crime? To tell the truth.

          THE PLOT THICKENS
          Cherry isn't alone, the list of anti McCann that have been attacked by the forum to "help" Tony, is ever growing. People such as JillyCL, Isabelle, Carla, Carole, Ann, Linda, Teddy and no doubt others I have missed here. The collective forum "voice" rounds upon anyone who might hold vital, or useful information - former Met detective, Colin Sutton for example, the man who told us that Operation Grange hadn't been carried out in the correct manner, and who could have told us so much more, had Bennett not done all in his power to chase Mr Sutton away.
          Again, the question must be asked - for what purpose?
          Bennett wouldn't need half of these facts to throw an accusation about - he can actually do that with no substance at all.
          Indeed, a true measure of how respected the owner of the CMoMM forum is, can be seen from the following two tweets by Jill Havern.

          Link to original tweet.
          Little wonder then, that despite bragging about being the most popular Madeleine McCann forum in the world <snort> Jill had to advertise on twitter, for a Portuguese translator.

          But back to business.
          Jill and Tony weren't acting alone with their lies and smears against me; they had enlisted the help of another pro McCann - Simon Just. Just (AKA @MajorLeak2017 on twitter), another close friend of Darren Laverty, and one who displays exactly the same sort of behaviour, is a vicious troll who also likes to invent totally baseless stories about those he wishes to silence. Unlike Laverty however, Jill allowed this pro McCann nasty to join her forum, and post his accusations up in the form of a blog, for all to see.
          I ask again, why would Jill Havern and Tony Bennett allow a pro McCann troll, one with a PIN notice from police for previous illegal activities online, to post on their forum, with the sole purpose of discrediting an anti McCann? Any port in a storm, or something far more sinister.

          THE FINAL LINK
          So far I've shown Jill and Tony's links to pro McCanns, and how they work hand in glove, but I've saved the best for last. The Needle Blog, is frequented by Simon Just, Darren Laverty, and Tony Bennett, when they fancy a spot of anti McCann bashing. What is most intriguing however, is who The Needle Blog supports - none other than the leading pro McCann site, used by all the main pro trolls. Proof, if it's still needed at this point:

















          ...and who do we see here on Stop The Myths?

          Link to Stop The Myths

          Why it's Rebecca Sherlock/Flannely, the sick ghoul who attended Brenda Leyland's inquest, after previously hounding her on twitter, and celebrating her passing by posting a youtube link to"Another One Bites The Dust". Rebecca's trolling has been well documented over the years, in this blog, others, and on twitter. Not surprising then that she also peddled the lie that I was a sex offender, and took to twitter to support Jill Havern.

          *Coincidentally, and as this blog sits finished, waiting to be published in the morning, Jill has had another petty swipe at me on twitter, with a vague threat. Click on the link below to Jill's tweet, and then hover over the two likes that she has received. Who do we see supporting Havern yet again? Yep, it's Rebecca Sherlock/Flannely once more*

          Link to Sherlock supporting Jill Havern once again. 
          Anybody still in any doubt about the nefarious actions of Jill and Tony, a pair of born liars with an agenda poles apart from real truth seekers?
          Let's have a look at the words of John Blacksmith, owner of The Blacksmith Bureau blog:
          "25 July 2017 at 13:56
          I’ve finished with the thread’s specific subject but I’m struck by JJ’s post, 10.12, and Margaret, 21.23 about the timing of the Pit’s about-turn after which the site became a “weird place”.
          The significant dates are given in those posts. 2013 was when the investigative review turned into an investigation.
          People are claiming that Bennett works undercover to assist the McCanns.
          From 2013 to date, among the insanity of thousands of claims, we have three directions of repeated critical attack led by Havern and Bennett.
          1) Relentless assaults on the Smiths and their sighting, which Grange made clear is a critical lead under investigation.
          2) Clear statements that Amaral’s conclusions, and therefore the 2007 PJ investigation are mistaken.
          3)Repeated infantile attacks on operation Grange and Scotland Yard.
          --
          We can ask a question: What is it that the McCanns show real signs of fearing?
          Their statements in court, “Madeleine” and the OFM show that one terror is the Smith sighting. Another, naturally, is Goncalo Amaral. The Smith sighting is being studied and unpicked in Operation Grange.
          So these three major fears of the McCanns match exactly the above three subjects that Bennett dismisses as misguided or worthless daily.
          On the other side, what does the Pit constantly push as the correct key to the case?
          The one thing that the McCanns never show any signs of worrying about: a conspiracy to protect them by politicians, bent police officers “like Gamble”, mysterious millionaires like Kennedy, Freemasons or others unknown.
          Check the record: the McCanns – in glaring contrast to their behaviour and comments regarding the three subjects above – are completely unconcerned about what people say or claim about such a plot. In “Madeleine”, for example, KM works like one of the Springer spaniels to sniff out areas of danger to subvert or buttress: do a “find” on the e-text of Madeleine and you’ll see buttresses erected to strengthen the Tanner sighting, the Payne visit, other “abductor” sightings, 10PM in 5A, Oldfield’s check and so on.
          But she doesn’t bother with conspiracies. Far from hiding her “protection”, she boasts of it as if she wants us to believe the conspiracy theory – which, of course, she does.
          She gloats at the support from Gordon Brown, the Blairs, Gamble, Kennedy and Smethurst, Control Risks, Scotland Yard etc.
          Kate McCann is the main source for the conspiracy theory.
          Lastly, Jill Havern. The lies and inability to state facts come from the top at COMM. In this letter, having described Grange as a “farce” she writes (to the PM!):
          “This is despite the fact that when the Portuguese investigation was shelved in July 2008, it EXPLICITLY DECLARED that they were looking at two distinct alternatives: 1) abduction by a stranger or (2) the parents, the McCanns, having hidden Madeleine’s body to prevent an autopsy, and having staged a hoax abduction.”
          The sentence is a complete invention and she’s sent it to the PM in June 2017! Is she also actually mad?"
          I am not alone in believing that CMoMM is a front - that it's real purpose is to help Tony Bennett. The help I believe those who run the forum give to Tony, is, as I said before, to forcibly ram certain theories down the throats of the readers. Theories that the McCanns would far rather be accepted, than the truth. Think about it, Tony claims that:
          1. Smithman isn't Gerry McCann - The Smith sighting is something the McCanns have desperately tried to cover up.
          2. Madeleine wasn't seen by any indepenedent witness after 29th April 2007 - she of course was, but stating that she wasn't, has any would be investigators, looking at the wrong date entirely.

          Back to Bennett's court case, and the deal now proven to have taken place between him, and the McCanns. A deal that saw him receive a 92% discount on a sum of money he was told to pay Kate and Gerry, yet has seen him continue to comment on the case, and directly accuse the McCanns of covering up the facts relating to the disappearance of Madeleine.
          The above case was put to the court by the McCanns' lawyers, during their failed attempt to extort money from Goncalo Amaral:
          "Judge – What about the public in the UK?
          GMC says that, thanks to the legal actions, the content of the book hasn't been published by the MSM, but small minority groups, in the UK, have launched campaigns of persecution against them, based on the book.
          Judge – Can you name them?
          GMC – Yes, we had legal actions against the Madeleine Foundation and the name is Anthony Bennett.
          Judge – What relation exists between this group and the publication of the book?
          GMC says that AB used parts of the book, interviewed Gonçalo Amaral and invited him on a forum.
          Judge – Did the group exist before the publication?
          GMC isn't sure about that. But he's able to say that the material they used was based on the allegations of the book. They published pamphlets that said that Madeleine hadn't been abducted. They distributed them to his neighbours and in the whole Leicestershire. This led AB to receive many warnings from his juridical counsels and finally to be sued." 
          Link to court transcript of Gerry McCann
          What we see above is the McCanns cleverly using Tony Bennett's case, in an attempt to take down Goncalo Amaral. I wonder, had they been successful, would the McCanns have given Snr. Amaral a 92% reduction in his costs, so much as to see themselves out of pocket, as they did with Bennett - not a chance.
          Further to my point, Tony Bennett has openly admitted to doing the main part of the research for Richard D Hall's documentaries. Again, these documentaries push Bennett's theories (above), yet they still remain available, and unchallenged. The McCanns could, should they choose to do so, apply to the court for Bennett to be jailed for a further breach of his court order, yet they don't.
          I ask again, why?
          I've seen the excuse that the McCanns would have to disprove Hall's documentaries to have them removed, that is of course hogwash. I refer once again to Bennett's order:
          "The Defendant undertakes not to repeat allegations that the Claimants are guilty of, or are to be suspected of, causing the death of their daughter Madeleine McCann; and/or of disposing of her body; and/or of lying about what had happened and/or of seeking to cover up what they had done.”
          As a self confessed researcher for the Hall DVD's, Tony is again in breach of his court order, and yet he still evades prosecution. In fact the McCanns, by agreeing to reduce their costs, actually made a loss when they twice defeated Bennett in court.
          Does that sound like the Kate and Gerry we have come to know?
          Come on Tony, you're quick to quote the bible when it comes to dishonesty, yet yourself and Jill have lied continually for a number of years. You've done your level best to bring down any anti McCann who stands against your vile controlling ways, and you've done so through vicious untruths. The game is up, time to tell your employers - nobody believes you.

          Oh, one more thing...

          You asked for this Jill, no literally, you asked for it...







          I didn't even go into how you used Matt Hasker, a young estate agent who lives 20 minutes from your own home, to troll myself, Carla Spade, and Andrew on twitter. It was blatantly obvious he hadn't been following the case, yet he managed to find himself on your forum, then to twitter, and straight to our accounts, armed with, and repeating your lies - that Jill, is incitement.

          By accusing me of the crimes you did, and knowing what you alleged was false, you showed your true colours. Especially with the sexual assault lie. There are many, many people who have had their lives shattered by sexual abuse. What you and your associates have done is beyond despicable, more so given the high number of people around you who have suffered the effects of that type of crime. You disgust me, in fact you disgust most people.

          As for you Tony, it's high time you gave up the pretence; you're a charlatan, a fake, a liar, and a nasty, vicious old man. You've used that fetid forum for your own personal gain, and been caught more times than a dose of clap in Chavsville.




          ...and so it was written in The Bible - 

          "
          Lying lips are an abomination to the LORD, But those who deal faithfully are His delight."

          Proverbs 12:22





          Transcript of the Met's press release re Madeleine McCann investigation 25/04/2017

          $
          0
          0

          The Metropolitan Police have given a rare press release regarding the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The media won't be releasing the details of that release until 10pm tonight, however we can reveal a transcript of what was said.

          Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley reflects on the tenth anniversary of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann:

          "As an investigation team we are only too aware of the significance of dates and anniversaries. Whatever the inquiry, we want to get answers for everyone involved.

          The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is no different in that respect but of course the circumstances and the huge public interest, make this a unique case for us as police officers to deal with. In a missing child inquiry every day is agony and an anniversary brings this into sharp focus. Our thoughts are with Madeleine's family at this time - as it is with any family in a missing person’s inquiry - and that drives our commitment to do everything we can for her.


          On 3rd May 2017, it will be 10 years since Madeleine vanished from her apartment in Praia Da Luz, a small town on the Algarve. In the immediate hours following her disappearance, an extensive search commenced involving the local police, community and tourists. This led to an investigation that has involved police services across Europe and beyond, experts in many fields, the world’s media and the public, which continues to this day. The image of Madeleine remains instantly recognisable in many countries across the world.


          The Met’s dedicated team of four detectives, continues to work closely on the outstanding enquiries along with colleagues of the Portuguese Policia Judiciária. Our relationship with the Policia Judiciária is good. We continue to work together and this is helping us to move forward the investigation.

          We don't have evidence telling us if Madeleine is alive or dead. It is a missing person’s inquiry but as a team we are realistic about what we might be dealing with - especially as months turn to years.
          Now is a time we can reflect on an investigation which captured an unprecedented amount of media coverage and interest. The enormity of scale and the complexity of such a case brings along its own challenges, not least learning to work with colleagues who operate under a very different legal system. The inquiry has been, and continues to be helped and supported by many organisations and individuals. We acknowledge the difference these contributions have made to the investigation and would like it known that we appreciate all the support we have and continue to receive.

          Since the Met was instructed by the Home Office to review the case in 2011, we have reviewed all the material gathered from multiple sources since 2007. This amounted to over 40,000 documents out of which thousands of enquiries were generated. We continue to receive information on a daily basis, all of which is assessed and actioned for enquiries to be conducted.


          We have appealed on four BBC Crimewatch programmes since April 2012. This included an age progression image which resulted in hundreds of calls about alleged sightings of Madeleine; an appeal for the identity of possibly relevant individuals through description or Efit; and information sought relating to suspicious behaviour or offences of burglary. These programmes collectively produced a fantastic response from the public. The thousands of calls and information enabled detectives to progress a number of enquiries. This was in addition to over 3,000 holiday photographs from the public in response to an earlier appeal.

          The team has looked at in excess of 600 individuals who were identified as being potentially significant to the disappearance. In 2013 the team identified four individuals they declared to be suspects in the case. This led to interviews at a police station in Faro facilitated by the local Policia Judiciária and the search of a large area of wasteland which is close to Madeleine's apartment in Praia Da Luz. The enquiries did not find any evidence to further implicate the individuals in the disappearance and so they are no longer subject of further investigation.

          We will not comment on other parts of our investigation - it does not help the teams investigating to give a commentary on those aspects. I am pleased to say that our relationship with the Portuguese investigators is better than ever and this is paying dividends in the progress all of us are making.

          We are often asked about funding and you can see that we are now a much smaller team. We know we have the funding to look at the focused enquiry we are pursuing.
          Of course we always want information and we can't rule out making new appeals if that is required. However, right now, new appeals or prompts to the public are not in the interest of what we are trying to achieve.

          As detectives, we will always be extremely disappointed when we are unable to provide an explanation of what happened. However the work carried out by Portuguese and Met officers in reviewing material and reopening the investigation has been successful in taking a number of lines of interest to their conclusion. That work has provided important answers.


          Right now we are committed to taking the current inquiry as far as we possibly can and we are confident that will happen. Ultimately this, and the previous work, gives all of us the very best chance of getting the answers – although we must, of course, remember that no investigation can guarantee to provide a definitive conclusion.

          However the Met, jointly with colleagues from the Policia Judiciária continue the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann with focus and determination."














          A mother's love

          $
          0
          0
          By Blaze

          My younger son is almost exactly one year older than Madeleine was when she disappeared. He's still a baby, really: just learning to read and write, can't tie his shoelaces or brush his teeth without (patient) adult assistance, he still sneaks in bed beside me for cuddles most nights, he still makes a raucous scene when he doesn't get his own way, and he still, at the age of almost five, sometimes sucks a dummy. (Yes, i know I should have made him go cold turkey years ago). He is inexhaustible, over-excitable, stubborn, impatient, boisterous, funny, fearless and affectionate, with a gorgeously expressive face peppered with freckles, and a wild mop of beautiful bright copper hair that he refuses to have cut (he doesn't even like me combing it). He can recite "where the wild things are" off by heart, complete with adorable actions.

          I think I probably don't need to add: I love him. With every fibre of my body and soul, I love that quirky little boy.

          I don't need to add it because I've conveyed my love for him in my description of him. I don't even need to be particularly gushing with my compliments (because oh yes, he sure can be a little sh*t, too, sometimes).

          A mother's love transcends words of course; it's just there, ever-present, like oxygen and sunlight. You don't even need to be a parent yourself to discern that palpable, unmistakable, unfakeable love, love that is limitless and instinctive and vital, the love every ordinary mother (or father) feels for their child because they are literally incapable of feeling anything more or anything less. You can sense it just by watching them interact together, or detect it in the parent's eyes and tone of voice when they are talking about their child. It's an emotion that supersedes and eclipses everything else.

          Above, I wrote just one paragraph describing my son, and yet that one paragraph conveys a more authentic and vivid idea of the kind of child he is than the 400+ pages of Kate McCann's 'madeleine' book manages to convey about its eponymous tragic protagonist. That's because the protagonist of 'madeleine' isn't, in fact, Madeleine at all, with either a big 'M' or a little 'm'. It's all about her mummy, all in capitals. And her daddy, the heroic co-star; and the unassailable virtuousness and blamelessness of both.

          Can you imagine losing your firstborn child - whether through death or abduction - and writing a book about them but actually making it all about you? Your feelings. Your life, your opinions, your fears, your achievements, your obsessions, your strengths and admirable resilience against adversity. Your worthiness.

          Can you imagine losing your child and just a month later being greeted by a sea of placards and posters with your child's face...




          ...and SMILING? Standing beside your husband, looking out at hundreds of children who have never even met you or the daughter you've lost, but there they all are, showing they care, holding up pictures of her... and yet both of you... the devastated desperate parents... you're both just... smiling, beaming. How is that even possible? How??

          Just a few weeks later, mere months after losing your child, a beautiful three year old, your precious and yearned-for firstborn, could you... stand beside your husband, holding up a T-shirt depicting the face of your child, a T-shirt that is just one sample of mass-produced thousands for an online merchandise store... could you stand and smile unabashedly for a promotional snapshot?



          Five years later, still apparently no closer to finding your lost beloved child or knowing her fate, can you imagine holding an age progression picture of her in front of a camera crew without your knees buckling helplessly beneath you and your face contorting with unbearable, wretched sorrow?



          Can you imagine posing stoically for that photo, over and over again, with flawless hair and makeup, while your husband barely contains his smirk beside you? Your own face not giving away even a flicker of emotion, not the slightest suggestion of puffy eyes or anxiety or insomnia. How is that possible, if you love like a mother does?

          All of the above is my opinion only and represents the main reason, as a mother, I can never, ever believe Kate McCann, and nor should anyone reasonably expect me to.


          A mother's guilt.

          $
          0
          0
          By special guest author - Blaze


          Although I refer predominantly to 'mothers' in this article, I do of course I appreciate that the 'normal' instincts discussed generally hold true for fathers, too. (Normal fathers, that is.)

          This was originally one (very long) article but because of the numerous complex themes involved, I've split it into two parts. Very few psychologists have dared speculate about the McCanns' potential pathologies, so I am primarily basing this first part on some interesting (and bold) observations made Dr Christian Ludke during an interview in the early days of the investigation (September 2007). For me, this provides an entirely accurate, unflinching and incisive assessment by an experienced mental health professional, specifically a criminal psychologist. 

          You can read the interview here:

          http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DR_CHRISTIAN_LUDKE.htm

          Dr Ludke's matter-of-fact candour makes a refreshing change from the unquestioningly sympathetic and infuriatingly deferential approach adopted by almost every other commentator and journalist. 

          Dr Christian Ludke
          This article focuses on what I consider to be one of the most inexplicable and alarming aspects of the case: a seeming total absence of guilt or conscience in both parents but most notably Kate, who has nevertheless been confidently and repeatedly appraised by herself and by others as a "good, responsible, loving mother"... Two of her 'close friends' even went so far as to describe her as "the perfect mum":





          This habitual avoidance of critical reflection (even in the face of what undoubtedly amounts to the most diabolical and calamitous 'mistake' a parent could possibly make) is highly significant. It's effectively delusional. Even the most impressively accomplished and devoted mother in the world is unlikely to describe herself as anything more than "just about adequate". 

          As Dr Ludke elucidates: "I have, in recent years, cared for many parents who lost their children due to acts of violence. Most of them were under severe shock, feeling helpless, desperate and withdrawn. Many also quarrelled. They blamed themselves hugely for not having looked after their child adequately."

          This reaction is normal. It is expected. Mothers (and fathers too of course, but mothers in particular) feel guilt on a daily basis: guilt is as inevitable as, and commensurate with, our overwhelming feelings of love. Motherhood is pretty much an endless guilt trip, and that is completely natural and normal. We beat ourselves up daily over every perceived inadequacy, misjudgement or mistake. Guilt is an integral, vital part of the experience of parenthood.

          If you leave your child unattended - even if you merely take your eye off them for a few seconds - and, as a consequence of that fleeting lapse of vigilance, something terrible happens to your child.... the consequent parental guilt, the shame and the self-blame would be immediate, powerful and thereafter incessant. It would be debilitating, relentless, torturous. The guilt would eat you up from the inside, day after day after day. It would wear you down and burn you out, it would age and enfeeble you progressively until you became a shell of your former self. That is what real guilt does to you. 

          If you are a relatively normal parent with reasonably normal mental and emotional states and responses, feeling guilt and anxiety about your child on an almost continuous basis is something you just have to learn to live with. This isn't a supposition or a generalisation, it is a fact. It doesn't mean the guilt is always rational or particularly desirable or 'healthy', it just means that to feel guilt is as natural a part of normal parenthood as noise, mess, stress, perpetual exhaustion, CBeebies, smelling of vomit, learning how to unwrap a Chupa-Chup in under 30 seconds, and stepping on Lego.
          I keep coming back to that rather arbitrary word 'normal'. By Kate and Gerry's own accounts and unabashed admissions, the loss of their daughter did not cause night after night of frantic, sickened sleeplessness. (A mere ten days after the disappearance, Kate McCann wrote in her diary that she was sleeping well. Gerry even managed a cheeky little power nap on the night of the 'abduction'.) It did not cause unbearable marital strain, save for Kate's distasteful public admission via a gruesome redtop front page splash that she was temporarily indisposed to getting intimate with her husband... a prospect that would surely leave any sane woman stupefied with repulsion. 

          It certainly did not impede Gerry's meteoric career trajectory or prevent Kate from maintaining her lovely highlights or matching her earrings. Neither parent felt disinclined to continue to enjoy the leisure facilities at the Ocean Club, including the consumption of free food and drink. It did not delay them from instigating a complex and calculated global campaign, setting up legal/ PR teams and securing lines of communication between 'helpful' contacts. Incredibly, it did not move either of them to break down inconsolably during any of their hundreds of carefully prepared interviews.

          It did not cause either of them to publicly express shame or regret, apart from occasionally proffering the most superficial, insincere and perfunctory lip service to the vaguely guilt-tinged emotions they supposed they *should* be feeling and expressing.

          None of this - NONE OF IT - is 'normal'. None of it is natural, admirable, justifiable, reasonable, right, expected or understandable.



          Instead, the loss of their little girl has been, from the start and ever since, utilised as an opportunity to raise, promote and enhance their own profiles and (attempt to) convince everyone of their innocence.

          Regardless of whether these endeavours are because they really ARE innocent and desperate to 'prove' their innocence to the public, the fact that THAT is what they poured all their efforts and resources into is quite frankly one of the biggest and most conspicuous indicators of their true natures.


          Where is their sense of instinctive, protective duty towards their child? Was it ever there? Where's their sense of decorum, of decency, of dignity and respect for their child, regardless of whether she is alive or dead, and regardless of whether or not they know if she is alive or dead? What mother or father truly gives a toss what people might think of them or how much cash they can accumulate if there's a possibility that their baby girl is out there, suffering in unspeakable ways? Or if she is dead and they know it, "beyond their concern" to use statement analyst Peter Hyatt's phrase, how can their concern for their daughter (if indeed it ever existed at all) switch exclusively to their own self-protection so seamlessly, and with such astonishing audacity and equanimity? Normal parents just don't work that way. "Good" parents certainly don't.

          In their desperation to 'prove' their innocence, they have therefore categorically demonstrated the opposite.

          Here's a selection of interview quotes, when the interviewer has (gently, diplomatically) presented either or both parents with the opportunity to accept and acknowledge at least a little bit of responsibility for what happened to their daughter. Every time, they diverted and dodged, self-justified or simply reiterated pointless and irrelevant facts such as the distance between the tapas restaurant and the apartment.


          Jane Hill (BBC first interview): "You must look back and think "We did the wrong thing?" (A similar question was asked in another early interview, about how the McCanns deal with the criticism about leaving their children alone: the answer is always the same)
          GM"...No one will ever feel more guilty than us for the fact that we were not with Madeleine at that time when she was abducted and whether we'd been in the bedroom next door we would still have felt as guilty, I'm sure, but, you know, you've seen the proximity of the restaurant; there was a line of sight to the apartment and it was not dissimilar to having dinner in your garden ..."

          Kate:"At worst we were naive. We are very responsible parents, we love our children very much. I don't think any parent could ever imagine or consider anything like this happening."

          Ian Woods (Sky News):
          IW: "Do you blame yourselves regularly?"
          KM: "Certainly in the first few days. I think the guilt was, was very difficult. But I think as time goes on, erm, you feel stronger and we felt very supported from that point of view."
          IW: "Is there a lesson, do you feel, to other parents?"
          GM:"I think that's a very difficult thing to say because if you look at it, and we try to rationalise things in our head, ultimately what is done is done and we continually look forward. We've tried to put it into some sort of perspective for ourselves. We're in a very safe resort. If you think about the millions and millions of British families who go to the Mediterranean each year, really the changes of this happening are in the order of a hundred million to one."

          GM (to Piers Morgan):"the focus on our behaviour takes the focus away from the abductor" 

          KM (to Jon Corner): "there's not a day goes by that I'm not kinda thinking to myself 'why did I think that was ok? Was I wrong in thinking that was ok?' All I can say to myself is that I know how much I love my children, I know I'm a responsible parent."


          For "the first few days" there was some guilt, apparently. Only the first few days. At worst, they were "naive". Seriously, the mother of a missing/dead child said this. Three weeks later. She really said it. 

          "What is done is done." Seriously, the father of a missing/dead child said this. Three weeks later. He really said it.

          The material wealth and infamy that has arisen because of the McCanns' cold-bloodedly focused mission of self-preservation are merely (very welcome) side effects. Without doubt they love money and they love attention (even negative attention is preferable to being ignored), but even more than that, they love being perceived as victims. They love to call their doubters "haters", "trolls" and "a lynch mob", because lazy, vacuous ad hominem attacks are all they know, and all they've got. They love blame-shifting, misleading, diverting away from the facts and The Truth. They seek out whatever elevates them, and in turn whatever crushes or undermines their enemies: anything that steers away from The Facts.

          If a mother (or father) is mentally unwell or has a toxic personality disorder such as NPD, that natural parental guilt, that nagging, anxious, reassuringly NORMAL feeling that underscores our every waking moment as parents, is typically pretty much non-existent, or it is otherwise distorted into a destructive and dysfunctional way of connecting with and attuning to their child. In other words, there is a catastrophic disconnect; a detachment.

          I have both professional and personal experience of toxic personality disorders. NPD parents, that is parents who have the *full-blown narcissistic personality disorder* (rather than simply possessing a few narcissistic traits) don't love their children any more meaningfully than you or I might say we 'love' our cars or our smartphones (i.e, if they are faulty or they fail to meet our expectations, we stop 'loving' them and seek to modify or replace them)... however NPD parents are generally able to recognise when it is appropriate to feign concern and affection for their children; in other words to 'put on a show'.


          Because psychopaths (and narcissists generally) do not feel guilt or shame either, again, by necessity, they tend to have the acting skills to at least fake or exaggerate those 'expected' human emotions such as distress, guilt and grief when appropriate. In fact they typically thrive on the attention and sympathy that being 'grief-stricken' and dramatically martyred affords them. A NPD parent will always focus on their own suffering. The suffering of others is totally inconsequential, in fact they don't even give it a first thought, never mind a second thought. Some narcissists (the malignant kind) actually get a sadistic thrill out of the suffering of others. 

          But crucially, most narcissists recognise that in order to win support, they will need to PRETEND to care about others. They will need to PRETEND to not be pathologically selfish, unconscionable, soulless beings driven solely by ego and avarice. Therefore, most narcissists are extraordinarily good at subterfuge, and the bigger the audience, the more imperative it is that they are *damn good* at pretending, at 'acting the part'. The McCanns have had a worldwide audience for over a decade, and yet.... it's as if they don't even need to TRY.

          Accepting responsibility and showing contrition is something narcissists are acutely uncomfortable with, indeed it is an alien concept to them. They will never be held accountable for anything, but will think nothing of accepting undue and undeserved credit or praise. As such they are constantly seeking ways to shift and deflect blame or accountability for their wrong-doings, while expecting unwavering deference, grovelling admiration and preferential treatment. 

          A parent who is a narcissist or a psychopath does not have any sort of conscience. Their thoughts and concerns are never specifically about their child, unless it is how the child affects and/or reflects them.

          I am obviously not stating as fact that the McCanns are psychopaths or narcissists. I do not know for sure of course (and I can pretty much guarantee that neither of them will ever be diagnosed), but I do most DEFINITELY see the signs clearly in both of them: in the language they use, in what they say (and fail to say) and the way in which they say it, in their conduct and demeanour, in their actions and inactions, in their facial expressions and other non-verbal cues. 

          However, even despite having extensive knowledge and harrowing experience of narcissistic personality disorder, I still cannot comprehend how neither of the McCanns were able to even adequately FAKE guilt or grief, or why it didn't occur to them, in the glare of the media spotlight, that it might be a good idea to at least convincingly *try to*. 

          To go from having this precious little child in your life, to suddenly... not... the void that would leave for ANY PARENT - even an emotionally incapacitated parent - is unimaginable. As parents who went through the pain of infertility and the colossal stress and strain of IVF, their combined ferocious yearning for that child would surely have been all-consuming, even from before the moment they first saw her tiny pinprick of an embryonic heartbeat at the first pregnancy scan. 

          Whatever the circumstances surrounding the loss of that desperately wanted child, it would surely, surely have left a seismic, obliterating void. And yet... it was as if it were a mere inconvenience; a blip in their otherwise ostensibly 'perfect' life.



          So, while I know about and 'sort of' understand that narcissistic parents don't feel love (at least not the quality of love that most of us are familiar with), and I know and 'sort of' understand that they don't feel guilt, because NPD is fundamentally characterised by a lack (or a deficit) of those feelings, I find it impossible to rationalise their blatant lack of grief, even of faked grief. I'll discuss this in detail in the next chapter.


          McCann case - 21 of the most frequently asked questions.

          $
          0
          0

          There are a great number of myths surrounding this case; unsubstantiated rumours and of course, niggling questions people wish to know the answers to. Having been a part of the social media side of this case for some time now, I've observed certain topics cropping up more than others. I've seen those questions answered correctly, and I've seen them answered incorrectly, thus giving weight to the myths, and leading to wild goose chases.

          With that in mind, I thought I would write a post addressing some of the more commonly asked questions on the case, and for the avoidance of doubt, added links to back up the answers:


          Q1. What are the PJ Files?

          A. The PJ Files were 'released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law' shortly after the first investigation was archived. The files contain witness statements, forensic records, photographs, CCTV analysis, tip offs, dialogue between the PJ and other investigating bodies. They can be read on the following link:
          http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm










          Q2. Why was Madeleine made a ward of court, and what does this mean?

          On May 17th 2007, only 2 weeks after Madeleine was reported missing, Kate and Gerry McCann began proceedings to make Madeleine a ward of court. So what is a ward of court, what does it mean, and more importantly what did the McCanns stand to gain from it? To find out more, click the link below...

          Q3. Why was none of Madeleine's DNA found in the apartment, and why did the kids share one toothbrush.
          A. Both of the above are untrue. Firstly, DNA that matched Madeleine's was found in the apartment. It's location was revealed by Keela (CSI blood dog), and Eddie (blood and cadaver dog), more on those two later. The sample was recovered from behind the sofa in apartment 5a, whilst it wasn't complete, all the components that were present matched Madeleine's.
          A possible, and highly plausible explanation as to why so many samples were either 'incomplete', or 'mixed' is given on the link below:

          As for the toothbrush myth, the story that all the kids shared a toothbrush, came about after it was reported a sample of Madeleine's DNA couldn't be obtained from her toothbrush, or hairbrush.
          The PJ wanted a control sample of Madeleine's DNA, one that could be used to compare against any other samples. A control sample couldn't be taken from her toothbrush, as their was a risk one of her siblings may have picked up the wrong toothbrush; the bristles of two brushes may have made contact; or DNA could have been transferred in other ways.

          Q4. Why did Gerry McCann go back to Rothley to hand a pillowcase to police?
          A. The pillowcase was agreed to be the best place to gain the control sample mentioned above. The sample was tested, and found to contain 'a series of bands, half of which a child inherits from their natural mother (maternal) and half of which it inherits from their natural father (paternal).'
          http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

          Q5. Was Madeleine, Gerry McCann's real daughter?


          A. Yes, without any doubt. The link above shows several reports, two of which are from FSS scientist - Lesley Ann Denton. The first letter shows that the pillowcase was tested, and contained a 50/50 split of bands belonging to Kate and Gerry. This information meant that it was 29 million times more likely that the sample was from a female child of the McCanns'. Lesley goes on to say:
          "Please note: I understand that the McCANN - s have a second female child. It therefore remains a formal possibility that the DNA on the pillowcase could have originated from her as the genetics would be in keeping with those described above."
          The quoted text has caused some confusion, due to the inclusion of the words 'formal possibility', opening the door for a lot of sensationalism regarding Gerry being the father. That letter was written/dictated, at a point when Lesley Denton had only compared the oral samples of Gerry and Kate against the pillowcase. That's why at the bottom of the letter she uses the words 'formal possibility', ie. a possibility dependent upon on future test results. Further down the webpage, in the section on the link below, is a second letter, the top of which shows that Denton now has the results of the twins to use:

          The aforementioned 'former possibility' of the DNA sample from the pillowcase belonging to Amelie, is ruled out:

          "A DNA profile has been obtained from the reference samples of Amelie Eve McCANN (SBM/2) and Sean Michael McCANN (SBM/3).
          In this case, all of the bands present in the profiles of both Amelie McCANN and Sean McCANN are represented in the combined profiles of Kate HEALY and Gerald McCANN. This is what I would expect to find if Amelie McCANN and Sean Michael McCANN were their natural children.
          Neither the DNA profile of Amelie McCANN nor Sean McCANN matches that from the pillowcase (SJM/1) and therefore in my opinion, neither Amelie McCANN nor Sean McCANN can be the source of this profile."


          Q6. I've read that Gerry McCann was on the sex offenders register, is this true?
          A. Gerry being on the sex offenders register, is one of those internet myths surrounding the case, and certainly causes confusion.
          Sadly because some like to promote sensationalism, this topic keeps cropping up. The story originated from a blogger known as Kaossis, and as their name suggests, it caused just that. She claimed that in 2002 Gerry McCann was placed on the sex offenders register. Kaossis didn't provide a single piece of evidence to substantiate her claims, largely because there isn't any. We have been in touch with several agencies who have access to information that would reveal any record of this, and all of them have said the same thing, there is no record, and no such offence was ever attributed to Gerry McCann.
          Here is where the confusion arises though. As part of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, both Kate and Gerry had what is known as a CATS file set up in their name. A CATS file can be for many purposes, domestic violence and crimes involving children being just two. Basically it is a file that all investigating bodies, police, social services etc., can go to and look up all relevant inquiries relating to the case in question.
          From the PJ files (I will add the link below) we can see that this file existed, and as I say, was set up in both Kate and Gerry's names.
          A lot of people confuse this file with the sex offenders register, and coupled with Kaossis' unfounded accusations, jump to the wrong conclusions.

          What may or may not be of interest, is that Jim Gamble, former head of CEOP, stands accused of sanitising this file.

          Jim Gamble is a very unsavory character, and a huge supporter of Kate and Gerry McCann. He follows many of the unpleasant pro McCann nasties on twitter, and has a history of dodging legitimate questions, and obfuscation of facts. The file in question is indeed empty, but given it's purpose, and existence, one has to ask why? A question that if put to Gamble, will result in you being ignored, and blocked.

          Was the file never used?

          Seems odd to set it up and not use it.

          Or...

          Was information from the file removed?

          We may never know. More questions than answers there. The fact is though, that the setting up of a CATS file in both names, is perfectly plausible, and in keeping with procedure. The mystery surrounding it's contents, if indeed there were any, is murky to say the least.

          Q6. What did the dogs alert to?
          A. The full report on Eddie and Keela's findings can be read here:

          Two videos (a short, and a long version), can be viewed on the following links:
          Q7. How are the dogs used and what is involved in their training?
          A. The following link explains how the dogs are deployed; it takes a look at their training methods; what they alert to; what they don't alert to, and debunks every excuse McCann apologists try to use to discredit the findings of two exceptional dogs:
          Q8. Has Theresa May sealed Madeleine McCann's medical records for 100 years?

          A. IF Madeleine's medical records have been sealed, then those who claim it as fact, are either guessing, believing myths, or lying.
          In 2012, James Murray from The Express wrote an article that was covered by many others:
          "THE Home Office is refusing to release secret files on the Madeleine McCann case to avoid diplomatic ructions with Portugal.
          The documents are believed to record discussions with the Metropolitan Police about sensitive details of the baffling case.
          Rejecting attempts by a newspaper to see the files, the Home Office said there would be “specific detriment to the UK’s relationship with Portugal” if they were released.
          It also claimed disclosure of three of the documents would “stifle discussion” between officials.
          A Met review of the case was ordered last year after pressure from the Home Office and David Cameron.
          Sources said there were “serious concerns” within the Met that they were investigating a “foreign” case over which they had no jurisdiction.
          Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann, of Rothley, Leicestershire, are convinced she is still alive. She was taken in May 2007 from a holiday apartment on the Algarve."

          This report has since been exaggerated by many. When the files were released to the public in 2008, many of them were held back from public view. This is explained below (translation by Albym):

          "- Category A
          relate to people identified during the inquiry whose possible link to the events is extremely unlikely (the most tenuous) and whose right to privacy would be infringed if their personal information were left on file (basically the 'pervy percy' list).
          - Category B
          relate to crimestopper data with respect to sightings, the TV program having guaranteed anonymity.
          - Category C
          relate to information from people - often criminals or having a criminal history - that was volunteered by them and they should not be put at risk for having come forward.
          You will notice that in the DVD forum Volume-by-Volume Index there are occasional notes on missing pages. Those that I have checked relate to pages withdrawn in accordance with these instructions."


          Files were also said to have been locked away for 100 years, relating to the Leveson Inquiry. These files aren't locked away, although at first glance they appear to have been. Joana Morais explained it on her blog:

          Quote:
          "If you see exhibits and evidence submitted by others, under that section : Subseries within LEV 2 Module 1 - are also closed for 100 years


          If you search for "Gerald McCann" in "records" at the National Archives site, you'll find 'W/S of Gerald Patrick McCann'


          that is the Written Submission by GM, which appears in the site with a reference "LEV 2/72D/Z", further description states the document is closed or retained for the period of 100 years, yet if you search google for that written submission, using the keywords "LEV 2/72D/Z - W/S of Gerald Patrick McCann" the first result will lead you to that same submission link, in PDF form, which you can still download"
          In short, the files from the Leveson Inquiry haven't been "locked away", they're still accesible in PDF form.
          Q9. Why weren't the McCanns charged with neglect?

          A. There were a few reasons the McCanns weren't charged with abandonment, a crime that carries a 10 year jail sentence. Contrary to the word of some, the reason the McCanns weren't charged with that crime, wasn't because they couldn't then be charged with manslaughter, or murder. 

          The former minister of Portuguese internal affairs Rui Pereira had this to say:

          "The error was not constituting the
          parents as arguidos for the crime of abandonment."

          “At the beginning there was an extraordinary and ridiculous theory that said the English have very peculiar cultural customs."

          “And therefore it was natural for them to leave the two-year-old twin siblings and the other three-year-old child alone in a bedroom for the parents to go out a few hundred metres away to socialise with their friends.’’

          Former police chief Moita Flores added:

          “I have no doubts. If this had involved a Portuguese child our public ministry would have immediately set
          off measures which are in place to protect children.

          “In our culture this kind of behaviour would have not been tolerated as reasonable. I am not even sure it is tolerated under Anglo-Saxon cultural values.’’

          Goncalo Amaral wasn't wasting his time with a charge of neglect, as his attentions were focused on solving what actually happened to Madeleine. As we know, his time on the case was cut short due to political pressure from the UK, something Goncalo Amaral describes in this extract from chapter 18, in his book "The Truth of The Lie":

          "BAD RESPONSE TO A JOURNALIST

          In the evening, while driving, I receive an unidentified phone call, the last straw...A journalist asks me if I want to comment on the subject of the email. Whether due to the difficult day, the raging storm or the fact of driving through rain...I lose my cool. I reply, irritably, without thinking, that the message is of no interest and that it would be better for the English police to occupy themselves with the Portuguese investigation. Even as I am hanging up, I realise that I have not only made a blunder, but I have been unfair towards the majority of the British police who have helped us throughout these difficult months. I drive on, certain that I have triggered a diplomatic incident with predictable consequences: as soon as these simple words are made public, I risk not being able to continue to direct the Portimão Department of Criminal Investigation..." 

          "...According to a British correspondent, the Prime Minister personally called Stuart Prior to ask for confirmation of my dismissal. Why would the head of the British government be interested in a lowly Portuguese official? We refuse to believe the rumours going around, according to which the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon was dependent on my dismissal. Rumours, of course, nothing more. I cannot help but think that for the first time in its history, the judiciary police has dismissed a simple official from his post because of external pressure."


          As for the claims that the Algarve is well known for child abductions; during Goncalo Amaral's time with the PJ, there were no cases of child abduction in the Algarve - apart from what could be described as the 'normal' parental abduction cases, which thankfully are very rare and usually solved swiftly, or at least correctly identified as parental abductions, there just haven't been any missing children at the hands of a stranger.

          All this talk of Portugal being a hive for child abductions; that the neglect of children isn't illegal, is nonsense, and just another in a long list of smears against a fabulous country.

          Q 10. Have the McCanns ever taken a lie detector test?

          A. In 2007 the McCanns announced, through a family source, that they would be willing to take a lie detector test to prove their innocence. Of course that source, as is often the case, was unattributable. These sources have proved to be the McCanns' greatest weapon, "tell em anything, and if it goes down like a lead balloon, or we change our minds, we'll deny it" 
          Well it didn't go down like a lead balloon, all the papers rolled with the story, and the public was fooled once more, after all who in their right mind would offer to take a lie detector test if they were guilty? Thing is they weren't offering to take one, and what's more had no intention whatsoever of taking one. What they actually said through their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell was:

          "If a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used."

          What a load of tripe! As per usual Mitchell, the master manipulator, opens his mouth, and blows nothing but hot air. The Portuguese police were never going to ask the McCanns to take a lie detector test, the results aren't admissible in court, not here in the UK, and not in Portugal, as Clarence knew full well.

          It wasn't until Don Cargill (chairman of the British And European Polygraph Association), approached the McCanns, did we find out just how worried they were about taking the test. Cargill was quoted in several newspapers as saying:

          "I spoke to the McCanns' people and they came back with a list of conditions that would have been impossible to satisfy.They wanted me to prove the test would be 100 per cent accurate, that I was the world's best examiner and that it would be admissible in a Portuguese court – but I could not guarantee any of those things. Although polygraph testing is very accurate, it is not infallible."

          So yet again the McCanns wriggled and squirmed out of a tricky situation.

          Clarence even confirmed the refusal by stating:

          "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."

          So there you have it, the gospel according to a paid liar. Kate and Gerry are telling the truth, go about your lives!

          I wonder what Clarence would have to say if the McCanns are ever charged?
          "Kate and Gerry will NOT be attending The Old Bailey, as they don't accept the charges as being reasonable"
          Top and bottom of it is, no matter how much we would all love them to, or how loud we shout for one, the McCanns will never be made to take the test, nor would they ever risk it.

          Q 11. Did Gerry McCann change the fridge in the apartment?

          A. Again another question that keeps cropping up. Shortly after Madeleine was reported missing, Gerry started writing a blog. One entry that many I trust claim to have seen, was said to reveal how Gerry replaced the fridge. By all accounts the entry was deleted quickly, so there is no record of it. Not long after this Pamalam started to save all of Gerry's blogs, which can be read on the following link:

          The above site also contains a myriad of information, photographs, transcripts, news reports, and much more.
          Back to the question though. There is no mention of a fridge being replaced in the PJ files. David Payne mentions problems with the fridge in 5a in his rogatory statement:
          "1485 "Yeah. Was there anybody around the resort or you know your, the Ocean Club in general that you weren't happy with''
          Reply "Err we, you know we did obviously retrospectively question you know who'd been in, in to the resort to actually work there. They, on one of the days they had some err gardening people which we hadn't you know seen before and we you know we just wondered, you know, after Madeleine had gone err you know who they were and what their you know validity was if you like. Err the, I know that again, you know Kate and Gerry had had problems err with I think it was the blinds in their flat and the fridge and they'd had people in err you know into the flat, you know which obviously retrospectively was a concern as well. Err yeah that, you know who were those people, had they been checked out.'

          However, at the time of Gerry's reported blog entry, the McCanns had left 5a, and were renting a villa at 27 Rua Das Flores. Both Kate and Gerry are well known for dropping red herrings, and creating confusion, I suspect this was just that.

          Q12. Who is Stephen Birch, and why does he claim Madeleine is buried under a driveway in Praia da Luz?
          A. Stephen Birch is an opportunistic con artist; he is only out to make money off a stolen theory, and a multitude of lies The background of him, and his lies can be read on the link below:

          Q13. Why didn't the McCanns and their friends agree to taking part in a police reconstruction?
          Crime reconstructions are a vital part of police forces investigations Worldwide, they give a clearer picture of what actually happened. It's all very well having all the pieces of a jigsaw, but without the picture on the lid of the box it can be difficult to put the pieces together, especially as was the case with the McCann's and their friends statements, those pieces don't fit.

          In 2008 Ricardo Paiva, an Inspector with the PJ, sent an email to Mick Graham, Detective Inspector of the Major Crime Unit. In this email Ricardo requested that the tapas 7 be contacted with a view to attending a reconstruction. The following is a list of questions the 7 wanted answering (in red) followed by the answers (black italics):
          1 - Why do the PJ want them to take part in the re-enactment?
          The PJ wants them to take part in the re-enactment because they were the ones who experienced the situation. Therefore, they are in the best conditions to reproduce it.

          2 - What is the aim, what are the PJ trying to achieve with the re-enactment?

          The PJ is trying to find out, with accuracy, the circumstances of the events occurred, using for that purpose the exact place of events and the same persons who took part in it.

          3 - Why so close to the anniversary?

          Only now has the PJ conditions to carry out these proceedings, and also because it is desirable that the weather conditions are as similar as possible to those at the time of the events.

          4 - Why don't the PJ use actors?

          The reason is because only the persons involved can clarify, with accuracy and at the same place, their position and movements.

          5 - Will the footage of the re-enactment be released to the press/TV etc?

          The PJ won't release any pictures/footage to the press.

          6 - What protection is there for the friends in relation to the media coverage/like frenzy?

          The place will be isolated and press interference will be avoided to its maximum.
          The re-enactment will be carried out in one single day, at the exact time the events occurred.
          However, the witnesses are requested to stay in Portugal for a couple of days more, in order to allow the production of all the material which shall be analysed, checked and signed by the persons involved."

          So having asked 7 questions of the PJ and duly been given the answers you'd expect the tapas 7 to be more than willing to help, you'd be wrong. Their next move was to start haggling with the PJ, putting forward demands that needed satisfying before they would co-operate:
          Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner demanded the PJ;
          • publicly dispels the damaging and disturbing lies churned out by the Portuguese press regarding alleged changes to statements, re-interviews or alleged lack of co-operation.
          • publicly states there are "no suspicions over [us] regarding the commission of any criminal acts." This in no way compromises Judicial Secrecy.

          Rachael Oldfied wrote:

          "Either they believe our version of the events of May 3rd 2007, or they don't. If they do, why the need for a reconstruction? If they don't believe us, do they want a reconstruction so we can convince them otherwise?
          If the purpose of a reconstruction is to convince the Prosecutor to lift Kate and Gerry's arguido status then we would consider taking part in it. If it is to properly focus the investigation on the person seen carrying a child away from the apartment, again, we would consider taking part because that would help to find Madeleine."

          That would be the sighting Jane Tanner stands accused of lying about, changed several times, and has now been ruled out of the investigation by Scotland Yard. Are you starting to get an idea of how impossible the PJ's job was? This arrogant group of lying lowlifes had the audacity to make demands of a police force fighting against a tide of Government pressure, a slimy PR man in the shape of Clarence "let me bend over and talk to you" Mitchell, and Leicestershire police force whom are so far up the McCann's rear quarters only their shiny shoes are on display (CS). Is it any wonder Kate and Gerry McCann have never been brought to justice?
          After several more emails (all of which can be read on the link at the bottom of this post) that probably had Snr Paiva banging his head against a brick wall, ALL of the tapas 7 and Jeremy Wilkins refused to attend the reconstruction.

          http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id279.htm
          Q14. Is it true Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions, whilst being interviewed by the police?
          A. Yes, she refused to answer all questions (bar one), during her arguida interview. To this day there is no public record of Kate answering any questions to police, regarding the events which took place after she raised the alarm. The questions she refused to answer can be read on the link below:

          Kate's response to the only question she did answer, is very odd:
          PJ: "Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?"
          Kate McCann: "Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks."

          Q15. The Supreme Court in Lisbon recently said the McCanns were never cleared of involvement. Yet for years, the McCanns and their small group of supporters say they were. Were they ever cleared?
          A. The McCanns were never cleared of involvement in their daughter's disappearance, in fact, as the link below explains, the final archiving report clearly states that there were many questions left to be answered, and that they and their friends had lied:
          Q16. Have there been any supposed sightings of Madeleine since she disappeared?

          A. Yes, there have been many sightings, the vast majority of which have been ruled out, or discovered to be made up. Last year, we exclusively revealed how Kate McCann's mother - Susan Healy, is a friend of one of a man responsible for at least 3 fabricated sightings, the link to that article is below:
          http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/man-responsible-for-hoax-sightings-of.html

          Q17. Why have the McCanns been allowed to use money from the fund for legal fees, five star hotels, two mortgage payments, witness expenses, and pay the likes of Clarence Mitchell who is responsible for deliberately lying to the press about the case, when people who donated, thought the money was to help find Madeleine?
          A. In the small print of the terms and conditions of the Ltd company 'Leaving no stone unturned', lies this little gem:
          "To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family."

          That one line means the McCanns can do anything they wish with the money, and they have. The vast majority of the cash has been spent on keeping the truth hidden.

          Q18. Who is Clarence Mitchell, and what is his role?
          A. Clarence Mitchell became the official spokesman for the McCanns, and was paid a reported £75,000 a year for his services. Prior to his resignation to take up his position with the McCanns full time, Mitchell was a former media monitor for the Labour Government cabinet office, and is responsible for hundreds, if not thousands of proven bare faced lies that were printed in the media, and discussed on news channels worldwide. The following video captures him discussing the case, and highlights his lies as they perpetually drip from his treacherous tongue:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzikQRswVpw

          Mitchell also worked for Matthew Freud, Rupert Murdoch's son-in-law, from September 2008 – February 2010. No coincidence then, that the odious man has the MSM in his back pocket.

          https://uk.linkedin.com/in/clarence-mitchell-58746b42

          Q19. Has any money from the fund been spent on the search for Madeleine?
          A. The accounts for the McCanns company, can be read on the following link:

          The McCanns did hire private detectives, and claimed they were looking for Madeleine. The truth however, tells a much different tale:
          https://www.facebook.com/groups/TheMadeleineMcCannControversy/permalink/1856079531083387/

          Q20. The McCanns claimed an 'abductor' broke into the apartment, and smashed the shutters to gain entry, was there any evidence of a break in?

          A. No, not a scrap of evidence. The McCanns announced this lie through family, and friends. However, once it was established by authorities, that no break in ahd taken place, the McCanns backtracked, and said they'd left the door unlocked:
          http://laidbareblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/more-mccann-lies-crock-of-locked-v.html

          Q21. Why were the McCanns protected by our government, and other powerful figures?
          A. One possible theory for this is detailed on the link below:


          A mother's (and father's) grief

          $
          0
          0

          By special guest author - Blaze


          "They are a very normal couple thrown into something extraordinary." 
          (Richard Edwards writing for The Telegraph, 2nd June 2007)



          We all deal with shock, loss and grief differently. 

          Some people use humour to cope with trauma and bereavement. Some people live in numbed denial. Some people weep constantly; others barely shed a tear. Some people get angry; others get depressed or despondent. Some genuinely bereaved people just don't and won't grieve openly or demonstratively at all, for a whole host of reasons. Whether we bottle it up or let it all out, it's fair to say that there are broad parameters within which to assess the 'normal range' of a grief response.


          The grieving process is unique for everyone, but we all feel sorrow, every single one of us; we all mourn death. Even psychopaths grieve, and in fact they are excellent at exaggerating or misappropriating grief and sorrow in order to squeeze as much attention and sympathy from others as they can. They tend to be accomplished and terrifyingly credible actors - nevertheless they DO still get genuinely affected by the same traumatic events and human emotions that affect us all - just in fundamentally different ways.

          I have witnessed a (diagnosed) sociopath grieve, and they do cry, they cry just like the rest of us. The tears might flow from a less pure source of suffering, but they can and do weep inconsolably, uncontrollably, sometimes over even relatively trivial losses and setbacks. They are still human beings.Grief (of a loss) is universal. It is communicated in a universally-understood non-verbal language. We only have to look into the eyes of a bereaved or stricken person to begin to acknowledge the depth of their pain and affliction. And there is no greater loss than the loss of one's child. No bereavement is more cataclysmic.

          The sustained impassivity and lack of expressed grief from not just one but both parents therefore remains one aspect of this case I find completely unfathomable and incomprehensible. 

          Along with just about everything else that has come out of his lying mouth since May 2007, I don't buy Clarence Mitchell's spurious "tears are shed backstage" remark, either... If you are a parent experiencing what the McCanns claim to be experiencing, you cannot just turn your devastation 'on and off' when it suits you. You will be a chaotic mess of excruciating emotions 24/7. That is a fact that cannot be batted away by the weak pro-McCann protest: "you just don't know what you'd do, because it hasn't happened to you.

          And let's be clear: 'straightforward' grief (the natural but variable mourning period that follows the loss of a loved one) is actually entirely different to what the McCanns tell us they are going through. They tell us they *don't know* whether their daughter is alive or dead, whether or not she is suffering horribly, what kind of monster/s might be holding her captive, and what he (she? they?) might be doing to her. It is the sudden and brutal loss of one's child without explanation or closure; an agonising state of limbo that is without doubt the most traumatising and torturous experience imaginable. There can be no worse pain in the world. You CANNOT, as a parent, face a camera day after day in that hellish scenario without the abject horror and unendurable terror of it showing clearly on your face, in your eyes, in the tremor of your sob-choked voice. 

          But it's not just about the conspicuous absence of any of the typical signs of grief, of numb devastation, frantic red-eyed panic and/or stunned disbelief in almost every single one of their interviews and photographs, from May 2007 to the present day; it's the stark absence of remorse, of desperate parental instinct, of wretched regret, of yearning, of pleading, of *prioritising their missing child before and above everything else*. 

          Grief and trauma naturally instils a palpable vulnerability and emotional volatility even in the most ordinarily composed and controlled individual. Yet both parents - BOTH of them - have epitomised an almost bionic level of focus, frosty indomitability and unwavering self-control. They were in the driver's seat from the start (especially Gerry), and they knew exactly where they were going and how they were going to get there. How is such remarkable composure and steely determination possible when, as Gerry said, their whole world had been "shattered"?

          The answer is: it's not. It would be highly unusual to see any degree of hard-heartedness or level-headedness in just one parent in such extreme circumstances, but in *both* of them? Nope. They are expecting us to believe in an impossible event, and have reacted to that impossible event in impossible ways. As former US prosecutor Wendy Murphy might say, "I'm not buying it".

          "But they're doctors, they are accustomed to dealing efficiently with stressful situations!"

          ... I call bullshit on that, too! While it's true that individuals on the psychopath spectrum are over-represented in the medical professions, most doctors are decent, caring and compassionate people. Besides which, remaining stoical and professional in an emergency, for example in the event of the sudden cardiac arrest of a patient, is one thing; behaving in a similarly disconnected way in the event of losing one's own child is quite another. You cannot apply the same coping mechanisms to all circumstances - life simply isn't that clean-cut and clinical... UNLESS, that is, you *ARE* a psychopath. *. 


          So the very people defending the McCanns in this blindsided way are in fact inadvertently suggesting that the McCanns must be innocent *because* they are displaying psychopathic tendencies. Applying the bare minimum of the most basic common sense logic, my suggestion is that they're probably *not* innocent for the very same reason.

          But it's actually more than that, even. I am deeply perturbed by the unwillingness (or inability?) of both parents to consistently reference their daughter as someone vital, vibrant and real, as a multi-dimensional, characterful and adored member of their family. Even in her book, Kate fails to bring her daughter to life for the reader, bestowing her with only the most rudimentary, generic and clichéd descriptions and recalling only insipid, non-specific and contrived memories. 

          When talking publicly, they regularly use the 'right' (i.e. expected) words and phrases, such as "shock", "grief", "despair", "devastated", "pain" and "anguish", while nothing in their eyes, their body language, their demeanours or their coldly calculated actions has revealed the pertinence of those words. 

          We are all familiar with the numerous 'post-abduction' photos of the McCanns beaming with unimpeded joy - smiling not just with their mouths but with their eyes, the whole face appearing illuminated with unmoderated merriment. Their body language also radiated a relaxed self-assurance so at odds with "child abduction" that it often felt like those of us prepared to draw attention to it were doing nothing more ground-breaking than observing that the emperor is naked. 

          A photo is, of course, nothing more than a literal split-second snapshot of a fleeting moment in time, and in isolation it cannot realistically be considered an accurate and reliable representation of the person photographed. 

          It could be (and has been) argued by their supporters that the McCanns are just remarkably self-controlled and stolid people; that they both possess the heroic 'strength' and restraint required to ensure that none of the hundreds of camera crews focused intrusively on their every move ever managed to capture them looking as utterly desolate, desperate and beside themselves with sorrow as they truly were. It could be (and has been) argued by their supporters that nobody has the right to question the McCanns' outward appearances anyway, or to make judgements and assumptions about their internal emotions based solely on such superficial observations. 

          And so this is the upshot: for every photograph/ video still of the McCanns 'appearing' to look appropriately subdued, distraught, fearful or tearful, there are dozens of images of them looking carefree, self-satisfied, radiant with happiness, defiant or even relieved. 



          I am aware of just one brief clip of the McCanns apparently "unified in their shared grief", i.e. both of them making noises and facial expressions not dissimilar to crying, yet with no tears. This was filmed three days after the 'abduction'. Even at that early stage, the McCanns had been made aware of public scepticism, those 'unkind' and 'insensitive' accusations that they were "not behaving like the parents of an abducted child are expected to behave". And so this is how they tried to silence those doubters; this is how the McCanns do a one-off blink-and-you'll-miss-it "devastated" double-act:

          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XdodhZJ4GR0
          It's painful to watch, and it's equally painful to listen to. But not painful in the way they clearly hoped and assumed it would be.

          The McCann MSM campaign, which was necessarily both defensive and offensive, was - and incredibly, still is - a relentless gaslighting operation on an unprecedented scale. We were, in effect, being ordered to believe in the opposite of what we could see and hear and 'feel'.

          This jarring and unsettling incongruence represents a deeply troubling aspect to the McCanns' personalities and the very crux of the pernicious media onslaught that gave shameless credence to their lies. The stark dichotomy is particularly clear, for example (and has been extensively remarked upon) when you observe the photos of Kate and Gerry walking out of the church, all smiles, on what would have been Madeleine's fourth birthday (12th May 2007, nine days after the disappearance) and then read what Kate wrote in her book about that day - see 'Fact 16' at http://laidbareblog.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/20-facts-about-disappearance-of.html?m=1

          Their stoical, sangfroid acceptance of their daughter's death - consistently referred to, mantra-like, as 'abduction' - their acceptance that she was never coming home, that they did not even WANT her to come home (despite their numerous dispassionate proclamations to the contrary) - was a 'fait accompli'. And that in itself is truly harrowing, because in my opinion it means that neither an abduction nor a sudden and unexpected death are feasible explanations for Madeleine's disappearance. Which frankly only leaves the bleakest of possibilities.

          So while I fully understand and respect that everyone grieves differently, and adopts different coping mechanisms to get them through the grieving process, my repulsed and incredulous reaction to the McCanns wasn't just about the strangeness and seeming inappropriateness of their behaviour. It wasn't just the clear lack of what could realistically be described as a normal (or even an abnormal) grief response; it was the *clear and undisguised existence of the opposite*: a blasé, disengaged acquiescence; a distastefully expedient acceptance and cynical exploitation of something so horrific and final and ruinous that any ordinary parent would take years - an entire lifetime - to process it. Most couples would separate under the pressure, and go demented with guilt, torment and agony. Not the McCanns. They built a multi-million pound self-promoting empire from it, without so much as a blush or a pause. 

          So we can safely and emphatically conclude that the McCanns aren't"most couples". They are not"a very normal couple thrown into something extraordinary". There is nothing 'normal' about either of them. And everything 'extraordinary' about this case directly correlates with and corresponds to their myriad abnormalities.

          During their interview with Ian Woods on 25th May 2007, three weeks after their daughter had disappeared/died, Gerry states they have to stay strong for the twins and then goes on to say (hesitantly, because he realises how bloody awful it sounds even before the words come out of his mouth): "you can't... y'know... grieve... one..."(meaning, you can't grieve for the one child you have lost when you have two others to 'stay strong' for). He then hurriedly says "we did grieve, of course we grieved..."

          He reiterates this flabbergasting disclosure in another interview on the same day, this time for the BBC: "We are determined", he says,  with sanguine bravado, "having gone through the grieving phase..."

          Three weeks after the abduction (or ACCIDENTAL death?) of their firstborn child, and they're already through with their grieving? Amazing. It should be the point at which a parent is only just *starting* to, reluctantly, through an unbearable fog of self-recriminations and sedatives, come to terms with the full horror of what's happened.

          During pre-arranged interviews, even these first ones, mere weeks after losing their firstborn child, they are polished and composed. Just look at them. Listen to their words, and ask yourself: are these parents of a little girl who has been suddenly and unexpectedly taken from them? Parents who don't have a clue where their precious child is, who is with her, and what is happening to her - or what has already happened to her?

          Gerry says:"We'd worked tirelessly behind the scenes to put support mechanisms in place, including a legal team..."

          Three weeks, and they've established a campaign, a fund, a website, and a comprehensive support network including a legal team. Trademark. Online store. PayPal donations. Ward of Court application. Press conferences. Travel itineraries. Countless television, press and radio interviews. And through it all, barely a tear shed.

          It's. Just. Not. Possible.

          Watch from around 5:20 - a genuine smile from Kate when the interviewer mentions the twins. The stark contrast between her feelings for her firstborn and for her twins is so startlingly obvious that it chills me to the bone: she glows animatedly when she talks about the twins... Yet she is robotic, stilted and awkward when she is asked to describe Madeleine. Where there should be a natural, rapturous flow of words there is noticeable hesitancy and paucity in her speech.

          Later during the Ian Woods interview, Gerry waffles on about how it could have been "worse than your worst nightmare" if *all three children had been taken* and not just Madeleine. (It reminds me of a comedy scene from Blackadder Goes Forth in which Blackadder sardonically says; "A fate WORSE than a fate worse than death? Hmm, pretty bad.")

          GM: "Certainly, you know, at the end of that first week there was so much emotion that we had spent and we actually had a period where we discussed this openly that we felt devoid, completely devoid of emotion. The analogy that I like to use is a bit like when we were students and you'd got to your overdraft limit and you'd gone beyond it and there was just nothing left in the tank."

          I have no words to sufficiently convey my disgust and disdain for the crass vulgarity of this statement. The man is truly depraved.

          In her book, Kate talks about feeling 'grief' as early as the night of the 'abduction' - a time when formidable torrents of pure adrenaline would be pumping like wildfire through any normal parent, sending them into an uncontrollable tailspin of breathless panic and an invigorated, superhuman determination to find their child no matter what. (Not to stay indoors because it was 'too dark' outside.)

          Succumbing to grief/ despair - in effect, allowing hope to fade - would not come until much, much later, but for the McCanns this natural order of things was oddly reversed: they had 'physical shutdown' for the first few days, and then they apparently felt "buoyed" and "uplifted" and "found strength from somewhere":

          "At some point, Emma Knights, the Mark Warner customer-care manager, came in and sat on the bed near me. She was very nice and tried her best to comfort me, but my grief was so agonizing and so personal that I wasn’t sure whether I wanted her there or not. I didn’t really want anyone around me but people I knew well."

          A few pages on, still within a week of the abduction, Kate complains about the fact she's judged as emotionless, again using the word 'grief' long before the word should be considered entirely applicable:


          "... in the following weeks and months I would be subjected to cruel comments describing me as ‘cold’ and ‘poker-faced’. Had these critics not seen the television pictures? Or is it that people have short and selective memories? It is true that as I grew a little stronger I was better able to control my grief in public. I was also terrified to show my emotions after the warnings I’d been given that this might influence Madeleine’s abductor. So if I seemed ‘poker-faced’, is it any wonder? But that was beside the point, really. Who were these people to dictate how the mother of a missing child should appear?"

          Kate takes umbrage to the fact that the very people she is appealing to for support (i.e. cash, sympathy) are not all quite as gullible as she requires them to be. How dare they question her lack of maternal warmth, what accursed sacrilege! She's as pissed off as a puff adder in a piñata that anybody should dare doubt her veracity and her status/starring role of 'victim'."Who were these people?" She demands, with her typical unbecoming petulance. I'll answer that one, Kate: they are all of us, and we have every right to question the most questionable story ever told, especially when it's being so woodenly acted out by two of the most audacious liars in world history.

          And I'll say it again: the absence of discernible, 'obvious' grief is not even the issue here. Nobody is entitled to 'dictate' how a *genuinely grieving* parent should process the horrendous, tumultuous tsunami of their emotions. It's an intensely personal experience. An unwillingness to break down in tears in public is understandable, and it is just as 'normal' and 'acceptable' as uninhibitedly sobbing all day every day. But Kate has the unmitigated gall to tell the public that the *reason* for her lack of tears is because she believes that an outpouring of emotion"might influence Madeleine's abductor"... 

          This is such an unbelievably crass statement to make that it is in fact beneath contempt and not worthy of further comment.
          By chapter 11, Kate is giving herself pep talks to snap out of her 'grief' - after all, feeling sorry for oneself helps nobody, right?

          "After a troubled night, we got up, dressed and went down to breakfast. I couldn’t focus on the day ahead, on what we were trying to accomplish. Every now and then, by taking a few deep breaths and giving myself a firm talking-to, I gained a little control, only to collapse minutes later into a blubbering wreck. I was so angry with myself. Stop crying. Just stop it. You have to help your daughter. You will achieve nothing if you spend the whole day crying and wallowing in your grief. But trying to ‘snap out of it’ when every thought, every action, every breath is polluted by anguish is easier said than done. As I continued to sniffle over my untouched cup of tea, Gerry said, ‘Kate, you don’t have to do this. We don’t have to do any of this. These meetings can be cancelled quite easily.’ I knew he meant it but I also knew that I’d persecute myself later if I pulled out."

          She literally could not have martyred herself more in that passage. But then she outdoes herself further on in the book:
          "No relationship, however strong, can emerge unscathed from what is probably the most painful and terrifying ordeal any parent could suffer. Inevitably, we sometimes reach certain stages, or go through phases, at different times and find different ways of coping with our anguish. Gerry was functioning much sooner than I was. I felt a tinge of resentment that he was managing to operate and I wasn’t; sometimes I found it almost offensive, as if somehow he wasn’t grieving enough. On other days I would feel I was a failure for not being capable of doing as much for Madeleine as he was. It was equally difficult for Gerry. He needed my help and support and I was so consumed by my own grief that I simply couldn’t give anything."

          I will end with two more quotes from the McCanns that in my opinion quite succinctly sum up their priorities, their leviathan self-obsession and their pitiless emotional destitution:

          Gerry: We are not characters in a book or a soap opera, we are real people, with real feelings, we have got a real family and we've got other children to protect while we're searching for our other daughter.

          Kate: Since our series of campaign trips, it had become apparent that, with coverage having reached saturation point, the press were exploring different angles. Their appetite for the ‘human-interest’ aspect seemed insatiable. No longer was it about our lovely missing daughter: it was becoming the Kate and Gerry show. 


          A mother's jealousy

          $
          0
          0
          By special guest author - Blaze.


          For as long as she lives, ordinarily a mother will love and nurture and protect and prioritise her child fearlessly and uncompromisingly, with all her heart and every ounce of her strength. 


          If something dreadful happens to her child, a normal mother will be virtually annihilated by grief and guilt.


          These are just two of the (many) unspoken but universally understood 'rules' of motherhood. The 'rules' assume that every woman is innately equipped for motherhood. 


          But some women are not. 




          Some women do not, or cannot, feel love for their child. Some mothers abuse their child: this can be physical, verbal and/or sexual (active) and emotional, mental/psychological and/or religious/spiritual (passive) abuse. In particularly dysfunctional and damaging homes, it can even be all of them. Implicit within every type of abuse is the most prevalent form: neglect.


          Most child abuse is hidden - domestic abuse is, by definition, "behind closed doors". The vast majority of child abuse is never reported, rarely even suspected by those outside the family. The vast majority of abusers do not look (or openly act) like abusers; they look (and openly act) like regular mums and dads.


          Obviously the examples of ill-equipped or dysfunctional mothers that make news headlines tend to only be the most severe and extreme examples. For every inadequate, shockingly neglectful, abusive or even murderous mother who does make the news headlines, there are millions of others who don't, and never will - either because their mistreatment of their child/ren is more subtle and/or covert (e.g. emotional abuse rather than physical violence), or they have a 'higher-functioning' mental illness or disorder and are therefore well-versed at duping and deceiving.


          Before I go on, I must make it clear that having a mental illness does not mean a woman cannot be an excellent mother. I am referring here to very specific mental, emotional and psychological issues, and I know from experience that women with depression, bipolar, addictions, schizophrenia or borderline personality disorder, for example, are often brilliant mums and with sufficient support, they can even overcome or at least significantly improve their mental illness.



          With Kate McCann, I believe we are talking about a full suite of very grave but generally well-concealed maladies, imbalances and maladjustments, which combine to create a woman who is as perplexing as she is certifiable. Mental health issues that, occurring co-morbidly in one woman, are disastrously incompatible with motherhood. She is, I believe, insane in the purest and most absolute and literal sense of the word. The fact she is high-functioning (i.e. very capable of leading and maintaining an ostensibly 'normal' life) unfortunately means this insanity is secreted beneath a fragile but compelling veneer of respectability, credibility and superficial success.


          I have read Kate McCann's book in great detail. Based on her numerous public appearances and statements, and the contents of this astoundingly egomaniacal and disingenuous book, many believe that she is afflicted with at least one of the following: childhood trauma (past abuse), mental illness, drug dependency/ addiction, (post natal) depression/psychosis, and personality disorder/s. We will likely never know for sure, and it is of course speculation, but I maintain that the truth of WHY this extraordinarily conflicted and cold woman is the way she is represents part of the answer to how this unprecedented mystery has happened. 


          While I would never describe her as a 'victim', I do strongly believe she is totally and utterly controlled - by her own dire personal shortcomings at least as much as she is by the heartless heart specialist she's married to. (It would appear that they are in a torrid and mutually deleterious codependent relationship - far from being the "happy, harmonious, argument-free" (!!) marriage they are keen to portray.)



          As a malignant narcissist - and I personally have no doubt whatsoever that the label is entirely applicable to Dr Healy; frankly the signs are flashing at us in sky-high technicolor neon - she is motivated solely by a seething, swirling cluster of negative emotions, which necessarily preclude the emotion we all associate with happiness and fulfilment: love. These emotions that plague her psyche are fear, fury and jealousy. Sometimes one of those is the more dominant, but typically they form an unholy trinity, resulting in behaviour that is erratic at best and evil at worst.


          Kate McCann is - in my opinion - a deeply disturbed woman, a deluded fantasist who was both envious and resentful of her daughter, and fearful and angry about the fact that those emotions are obviously not what a 'good' mother is supposed to feel about her daughter.


          Maybe once in a while, when a woman yearns for motherhood so much, desires it so badly, that when she finally becomes a mother, and it (perhaps unsurprisingly) fails to meet her expectations for some reason... or rather she fails to meet her own impossibly high standards, an 'ideal' of motherhood... it creates an unbearable internal conflict. The reality bears no resemblance to the dream. She assumes she will love her child unconditionally with all her heart, and glows blissfully throughout her long-awaited pregnancy, but when she finally gives birth, after years of excitedly planning and preparing for parenthood, what if that love doesn't come? 


          What if it doesn't feel as natural and dazzlingly positive and life-affirming as she expected? What if she looks at her new baby, knowing she should feel overwhelmed with adoration and yet feels... nothing? Or worse: nothing good. 


          From Goncalo Amaral’s book “The Truth of the Lie”:



          "A child psychiatrist explains that there is a huge difference between wanting a child and later raising the child. Having been wanted doesn’t necessarily mean being loved and happy. It is quite possible that a baby, eagerly awaited by the parents, later becomes a responsibility that the latter do not manage to assume. Consequently, the child becomes unwanted."



          What if she watches her husband - a man whose full attention she had enjoyed for many years - doting on the baby and feels potent pangs of an emotion normally associated with green-eyed monsters rather than misty-eyed mothers? 


          What if that baby disrupts her life to such an extent that she finds herself wishing she'd never bothered with motherhood at all? 


          What if the costs and disadvantages far outweigh the rewards and benefits? What if she feels so exhausted, exploited and disillusioned by the experience of sharing her previously self-indulgent, carefree life with a relentlessly demanding newborn, and so profoundly ashamed of those (natural and relatively common) feelings, that she refuses to seek help and instead the feelings deepen and worsen?


          What if there happens to be something about *that specific child* that is so far away from the mother's preconceived notions of the 'perfect child' (or maybe more accurately something about HER that is so far away from her preconceived notions of the 'perfect mother'), that the seeds of resentment fester and grow into something insidious, sinister and all-consuming? 


          What if this mother, an only child herself of two baby-boomer parents who perhaps spoiled, engulfed and coddled her, is told by her father, a man she has misguidedly hero-worshipped for her entire life:"I think I might love your baby more than I love you"...?



          After a full year of feeling sick and tired and stressed-out and helpless and emotionally decimated, and yet still so very, very desperate to prove to herself that she definitely can be a 'good' mother, actually a perfect mother, what if this mother conceives again - and this time hits the jackpot with a 'perfect' boy/girl twinset? 


          What then becomes of the first baby, the lost little child who is so difficult to love; the loud, needy, wilful, photogenic girl with the hypnotically wide, strange, soulful eyes who pleased her daddy and his friends in so many ways and yet failed to make her mummy happy at all? Such an innocent, spirited, effervescent little girl, so pretty and sassy and endearing that she takes the spotlight off her vain and insecure mother... The long-awaited firstborn who shattered her mummy's dreams by not being remotely like the demure and placid and manageable child her mummy imagined and wished for.


          .... The hyperactive, challenging, gorgeous little girl who can't help feeling ever more sidelined and neglected when her siblings arrive, to great fanfare, three months before her second birthday.


          There can be no doubt that motherhood deepened or worsened an existing mental frailty in Kate McCann. Possibly there was postnatal depression to the point of psychosis. She tried, desperately, to bond with her first baby, but she couldn't. Kate McCann's book tells us virtually nothing about the crucial period of Madeleine's life between her birth and the arrival of her siblings. Why does Kate omit such vital information about her daughter, about the supposed 'star' of the book? The first 12-18 months (at least) of first-time parenthood is a golden, beatific haze of skin-to-skin snuggles, milky burps, soft babygros and tiny socks, a thousand photographs, inhaling the scent of your baby's downy little head as if it's the best drug on earth, feeling disproportionately delighted with their every sound, facial expression, quirk, giggle and bowel movement. Feeling so deliriously in love that you can just watch them sleep for hours on end. Committing to memory every milestone: first smile, first word, first tooth, first steps.


          There is none of that in Kate's book. None. It is the book's most telling feature.


          This failure to bond (which isn't actually uncommon at all, and can ultimately be remedied if the mother is sane and willing to accept help) represented a turning point. When the twins were born, and the bonding with them was instant and natural (perhaps their very purpose was to temporarily fill an unfillable void), the failure to bond with her firstborn was no longer Kate's failure, it became *Madeleine's failure*. It was a guilty burden that Kate was only too glad to pass to the headstrong outcast daughter who had the nerve to effortlessly outshine and deplete her mother and steal away too much of her father's attention. Madeleine was the faulty one. And now she'd been replaced with two easy-to-love, easy-to-manage children who were not faulty, indeed they just about met their mother's arbitrary ideals of 'perfection'. 


          Kate McCann's dream of 'perfect' motherhood was therefore finally realised on 1st February 2005, and although Madeleine was still just a baby herself then, more in need than ever of a 'perfect mother' (or even a 'just about adequate' mother would have sufficed), tragically I believe her fate was sealed from that date. Even more tragically, nobody in her wider family recognised her vulnerable situation or loved her enough to protect her from the fatal chain of events leading up to 3rd May 2007, and the relentless, shameless commodification of her memory that followed.


          The part of KM's book that clarified for me that she is a woman consumed with envy and raging resentment is towards the end of chapter 2. (There are abundant indications, but this is a standout, in my opinion.)





          She quotes something her father said to her shortly after Madeleine was born. It might seem inconsequential to a casual reader, but as she rarely quotes anyone verbatim (and certainly not Madeleine), I think it is significant. 



          "[my dad once told me] that if he were able to design his own granddaughter and have her knitted for him, Madeleine would be it. ‘I think I might love her even more than I love you,’ he added. I wasn’t too sure whether that was intended as a compliment but, knowing how much he loved me, I gave him the benefit of the doubt."



          What a strange and insensitive thing for a father to say to his daughter! And if there were no vestiges of envy before such a statement was uttered, those words would instantly provoke a fearsome shitstorm of uncontrollable anger and jealousy in an already cripplingly insecure, unstable, hormonal, entitled and disordered woman who clearly already feels like an abject failure and a woefully inadequate mother.


          I believe Gerry was obsessed enough with his capricious wife and more specifically with his hard-won lifestyle that he was prepared to do *whatever it took* to keep his family 'together' and create an illusion not just of normalcy but of perfection. Like his wife, he is a person who acts not out of love but out of fear. 


          Poor, poor Madeleine Beth McCann.


          I reiterate that the above is my opinion, it is only speculation based on my own experiences and an intimate knowledge and understanding of toxic familial relationships and the various destructive ways in which these can be manifested. 


          I am not necessarily suggesting that either parent is a murderer, or even that they are directly responsible for Madeleine's death, but those potential scenarios certainly cannot be ruled out. 


          If a child is unfortunate enough to have two disordered and morally insane parents, frankly all bets are off.
          Viewing all 84 articles
          Browse latest View live