Re: BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added**

#51 · by Patience 04.05.17 21:04

I've not got much to add as there have been some really good observations.

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned yet, (unless I missed it) is when Bilton showed the McCanns driving to Huelva and suggested that the PJ thought this was when they 'disposed' of Madeleine's body and how could that have been possible when they had a camera crew in tow?!
BUT - wasn't it their friend Jon Corner who filmed it, along with the video of Gerry loading the car boot?

Also, I noticed that Clarence went off script!
When he was jabbering on about how Kate found the room with the curtains flapping - he forgot the most important part - the door that SLAMMED SHUT - before the curtains WHOOOOOOOOOOOOSHED!

Tut tut Clarence! liar

#52 · by sandancer 04.05.17 22:18

Give him a break now , Kate has changed the story So many times how can Clarrie be expected to remember when Kate herself can't remember her " version of the truth "

titter

#53 · by The Rooster 04.05.17 22:53

I think it is the best documentary yet. Damning of the McCanns and making a laughing stock
of the Met Police theory. It will raise many questions for the British who watched it. It could have gone further and scored a goal but at the least it had a kick of the ball. I hope someone breaks rank. Come on lest it disappears forever into the past!

#54 · by MRNOODLES 04.05.17 23:44

Just my opinion. The programme seems to suggest that, a section of gov wants this covered up and buried. While there seems to be another group who want to expose it by suggesting OG is not what it seems.

So who is knocking around now who appears to be in the cover it up group. None other than Theresa May. The same Theresa May who wasn't at all fussed regarding alleged MPs over spending in the last election. The same Theresa May who has played Brexit like a chess game to maneuver herself where she is now and call an early election to keep herself there.

Towards the end of the programme. The usual cliche is said, 'Loyalties change blah blah'. regarding the Mccann case itself. However IMO loyalties are more likely to change in gov that might get to the bottom of this farce.

#55 · by jeanmonroe 05.05.17 12:49

Miss Pandora wrote:B
I am appalled that Bilton was allowed by the BBC to interview a vulnerable man and broadcast this interview without clarification In regard to if this man understood what he was being asked, consented to being filmed and was aware of his rights. I would very much like to know if he was paid and if he realised by that by giving the interview it would be broadcast on British TV and likely worldwide thereafter.

I really feel angry about this and am concerned for this individual, who's mental capacity and understanding of the English language is debatable

Safeguarding the rights of others remains as pertinent today as it was 10 years ago.

I am NOT 'appalled' at all with 'interview' with the 'vulnerable' man by Bilton.

This is 'classic' police 'modus operandi' (via their 'lapdog' Bilton?)

' Find the 'local nutter' and it was 'im wot dunnit'

I'm of an 'age' where I've seen these, 'stitch ups/fit ups', time and again, by the MET.

And 'this' particular one fits 'right in'.

AR, after 3 1/2 years, 'identifies' 3 or 4 'locals' and requests PJ 'arguido' them.

'We got suspects' he proclaims.(to the world)

Trouble is, that he hasn't!

He's 'hoping' that 'people' will 'think'............'he/they look well dodgy, hmmm, could he/they have done it?'

It was NO 'coincidence' that SY/MET came out 'before' the BBC programme was 'aired' saying 'NONE of Andy's 'suspects' have been charged with anything, relating to MM'

'They' (MET/SY) had seen the 'programme' well before 'time' and just knew, KNEW, what it would 'look like', with this AR 'suspect' on 'record' and how that would be 'perceived'

Andy's old 'boss' at OG, HC, used this 'same MO' with BG. (that didn't 'end well' for the MET, did it?)

The 'apple never falls far from the tree'!

It IS a 'disgrace' that police officers do NOT 'investigate' properly, and, instead, 'go for' the 'easy target' to get 'a result'. ('back slaps' all round!)

But with CS almost 'whistle blowing' OG, for what it appears now to be, nothing seems to have changed, imo.

Until the MET 'investigate' a child's disappearance without 'fear or favour, ill will or malice, and to whoever's door it may lead' nothing will 'change' at OG.

But, it would 'appear',............they've been 'rumbled'!

And breathe...

jta: It is now 48 HOURS 'later' from the Panorama/Sky broadcasts, and STILL not a 'peep' from SY/MET that OG 'is totally impartial and kosher' about investigating a child's 'disappearance'.

#56 · by ChippyM 05.05.17 13:30

MRNOODLES wrote:Just my opinion. The programme seems to suggest that, a section of gov wants this covered up and buried. While there seems to be another group who want to expose it by suggesting OG is not what it seems.

So who is knocking around now who appears to be in the cover it up group. None other than Theresa May. The same Theresa May who wasn't at all fussed regarding alleged MPs over spending in the last election. The same Theresa May who has played Brexit like a chess game to maneuver herself where she is now and call an early election to keep herself there.

Towards the end of the programme. The usual cliche is said, 'Loyalties change blah blah'. regarding the Mccann case itself. However IMO loyalties are more likely to change in gov that might get to the bottom of this farce.

I think this could be true. Or something similar where they may have had enough time to 'clean up' certain connections to people and minimise the fall out for them, so the people at the lower end of the chain don't matter so much any more.

If there is any conclusion to the mystery, I'm sure we will have an inquiry and 'lessons learned', maybe even a dead politician or public figure that the cock up of Op. Grange and original political interference could be blamed on....or at least a different government.

#57 · by Sceptic 05.05.17 13:58

ChippyM wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:Just my opinion. The programme seems to suggest that, a section of gov wants this covered up and buried. While there seems to be another group who want to expose it by suggesting OG is not what it seems.

So who is knocking around now who appears to be in the cover it up group. None other than Theresa May. The same Theresa May who wasn't at all fussed regarding alleged MPs over spending in the last election. The same Theresa May who has played Brexit like a chess game to maneuver herself where she is now and call an early election to keep herself there.

Towards the end of the programme. The usual cliche is said, 'Loyalties change blah blah'. regarding the Mccann case itself. However IMO loyalties are more likely to change in gov that might get to the bottom of this farce.

I think this could be true. Or something similar where they may have had enough time to 'clean up' certain connections to people and minimise the fall out for them, so the people at the lower end of the chain don't matter so much any more.

If there is any conclusion to the mystery, I'm sure we will have an inquiry and 'lessons learned', maybe even a dead politician or public figure that the cock up of Op. Grange and original political interference could be blamed on....or at least a different government.

We've aalready had a different ggoverngovernmentgovernment labour were in concontrol when thithis startstarted

SorrSorry forfor repeated wwords but this forforum is sso buggy while usiusing androandroid

#58 · by ChippyM 05.05.17 14:06

Sceptic wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:Just my opinion. The programme seems to suggest that, a section of gov wants this covered up and buried. While there seems to be another group who want to expose it by suggesting OG is not what it seems.

So who is knocking around now who appears to be in the cover it up group. None other than Theresa May. The same Theresa May who wasn't at all fussed regarding alleged MPs over spending in the last election. The same Theresa May who has played Brexit like a chess game to maneuver herself where she is now and call an early election to keep herself there.

Towards the end of the programme. The usual cliche is said, 'Loyalties change blah blah'. regarding the Mccann case itself. However IMO loyalties are more likely to change in gov that might get to the bottom of this farce.

I think this could be true. Or something similar where they may have had enough time to 'clean up' certain connections to people and minimise the fall out for them, so the people at the lower end of the chain don't matter so much any more.

If there is any conclusion to the mystery, I'm sure we will have an inquiry and 'lessons learned', maybe even a dead politician or public figure that the cock up of Op. Grange and original political interference could be blamed on....or at least a different government.
We've aalready had a different ggoverngovernmentgovernment labour were in concontrol when thithis startstarted

SorrSorry forfor repeated wwords but this forforum is sso buggy while usiusing androandroid

Yes we've had different governments but maybe other things have been sorted out now that weren't previously. Blaming a different government is always an excuse IMO, especially if you think the people in government are not the ones at the top of the chain and they're just there to make us think there is some semblance of discussion and choice in what happens.
....I'm probably wandering off topic now and getting a bit 'tinfoily' big grin

#59 · by **Jill Havern** 05.05.17 14:07

Sceptic wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:Just my opinion. The programme seems to suggest that, a section of gov wants this covered up and buried. While there seems to be another group who want to expose it by suggesting OG is not what it seems.

So who is knocking around now who appears to be in the cover it up group. None other than Theresa May. The same Theresa May who wasn't at all fussed regarding alleged MPs over spending in the last election. The same Theresa May who has played Brexit like a chess game to maneuver herself where she is now and call an early election to keep herself there.

Towards the end of the programme. The usual cliche is said, 'Loyalties change blah blah'. regarding the Mccann case itself. However IMO loyalties are more likely to change in gov that might get to the bottom of this farce.

I think this could be true. Or something similar where they may have had enough time to 'clean up' certain connections to people and minimise the fall out for them, so the people at the lower end of the chain don't matter so much any more.

If there is any conclusion to the mystery, I'm sure we will have an inquiry and 'lessons learned', maybe even a dead politician or public figure that the cock up of Op. Grange and original political interference could be blamed on....or at least a different government.
We've aalready had a different ggoverngovernmentgovernment labour were in concontrol when thithis startstarted

SorrSorry forfor repeated wwords but this forforum is sso buggy while usiusing androandroid

I shall go over to the support forum and see if they're aware of this issue and if there's a fix!

#60 · by jeanmonroe 05.05.17 14:35

@ Get'emGonçalo

"I shall go over to the support forum and see if they're aware of this issue and if there's a fix!"
-------------------------------------

Forget the 'support forum'!,.............. "Go to OG. Move directly to OG, Do not pass Belgravia. Do not collect evidence."

THEY are outstandingly professional, in 'fixing' erm, y'know, um,...'annoying thingy's'

However, not very good at finding a single 'missing' child, in Portugal, after 6 years.

#61 · by **Jill Havern** 05.05.17 14:36

jeanmonroe wrote:@ Get'emGonçalo

"I shall go over to the support forum and see if they're aware of this issue and if there's a fix!"
-------------------------------------

Forget the 'support forum'!,.............. "Go to OG. Move directly to OG, Do not pass Belgravia. Do not collect evidence."

THEY are outstandingly professional, in 'fixing' erm, y'know, um,...'thingy's'

#62 · by polyenne 05.05.17 15:09

I think the point is being missed...........IMO the HUGE issue which lies behind all of this (the reason high ranking officials got involved so quickly and deeply, the alleged involvement of the spooks, the reason Madeleine's body can NEVER be found, the "pact of silence" by the Tapas 9 etc etc) is still as valid today as it always was.

Whether paedophilia, medical or whatever, the "reason" will continue to be protected by whatever means are available. You're talking about major players on the circuit with big money at stake......nothing and no-one stands in their way.

All my personal viewpoints of course................

#63 · by MRNOODLES 05.05.17 18:22

polyenne wrote:I think the point is being missed...........IMO the HUGE issue which lies behind all of this (the reason high ranking officials got involved so quickly and deeply, the alleged involvement of the spooks, the reason Madeleine's body can NEVER be found, the "pact of silence" by the Tapas 9 etc etc) is still as valid today as it always was.

Whether paedophilia, medical or whatever, the "reason" will continue to be protected by whatever means are available. You're talking about major players on the circuit with big money at stake......nothing and no-one stands in their way.

All my personal viewpoints of course................

Yes this is why they have to keep a lid on it. I totally believe (my opinion) Clarrie is the gatekeeper.

So what are the chances of this happening?

OG suddenly gets wound up around June 8th or slightly later even.. Clarrie gets paradropped into a very winnable Tory seat in the GE as a reward? Ah but he stood in Brighton before. Yes, it was smoke and mirrors he had no chance of winning then.

#64 · by willowthewisp 05.05.17 18:57

Hi Mr Noodles,The UK Government From Gordon Brown through to Theresa May,CEOP have had full access to Madeleine McCann's disappearance,reported as 3 May 2007.
When "Restricted Pamphlets"were found in an Apartment,that they should not have had access to and at the Time they where Found coincided with the claimed Abduction of their Eldest missing daughter Madeleine McCann?
It is quite obvious that a Cover Up was began in Portugal to either divert attention away from certain parties?
Which has been influenced by benefactors from Private sources and Public resources being utilised over the past Ten Years?
Scotland Yard and the Metropolitan Police Service have knowingly allowed a"Gold Group"Remit to be drafted in to the Operational procedure of firstly a review of a case,then it was processed as an"Investigation" of the same case,That was unfit for the purpose of its requirement in the disappearance/Homocide Investigation of a Three Year old child,of whom they owed a Duty of care to being a Resident of the UK.
The Assistant Commander has stated that as part of the Original Review,that a certain known group of people who had known Madeleine McCann,were Not suspected of any involvement in her disappearance,that since Operation Grange in October 2011 have not had an Interview Under caution?
Yet Seemingly Metropolitan Police Service Officers openly show E-fits to Portugal residents,of the likeness to the E-fits and then Interview them as suspects for over Three years?
They have reported to the press of having Investigated over 600 suspects of involvement to Madeleine McCann's disappearance and are now reportedly looking for a female suspect after nearly six years of Investigations,IPCC anyone?

#65 · by Mirage 05.05.17 19:45

willowthewisp wrote:
Yet Seemingly Metropolitan Police Service Officers openly show E-fits to Portugal residents,of the likeness to the E-fits and then Interview them as suspects for over Three years?

In other words, the Met were riding roughshod over the Portuguese investigation like a colonial throwback, demanding to interview this one or that one with their vexatious Letters of Request.

And then, the umpteen million pound Crimewatch extravaganza hatched by DCI Redwood and the BBC leaving the Paynes out of that travesty of a reconstruction while denying broadcasting rights to ... wait for it ... Portugal where the crime took place.

#66 · by Phoebe 05.05.17 20:16

Did the dear old Met ever bother to ask questions of Cat Baker or any of the other relevant nannies who were whisked away out of reach of the P.J. with unholy haste despite their contradictory statements and record keeping? It appears not. This farce also failed to re-question the parents or the Tapas 7, basically anyone who should have been able to throw light on the mystery. It's a bit like a program exploring a play or film without mentioning the main characters - Hamlet, without the prince.

#67 · by Verdi 05.05.17 23:54

If you take the time to analyze and weigh-up the pros and cons of this weeks BBC Panorama production and the Sky Documentary, one thing is apparent - at least to me.

Think of the primary focus of McCann sceptics across cyberspace - the dog alerts; the remit and performance of Operation Grange; the McCanns behaviour; the infamous treatment of Goncalo Amaral; the Portuguese investigation v. the Metropolitan Police review/investigation.

Then think of the focal points of both the BBC and Sky productions - much the same? Yes, I think so!

The McCanns defence league have publicly admitted they monitor the internet, as the McCanns have openly admitted that this information is fed back to them. So, the 'trolls' main concerns have been monitored and documented and for this monumental 10th anniversary have formed the basis of these two televised documentaries. Was it not said a while ago that Scotland Yard would be collaborating with the media and coordinating a couple of television productions to mark the 10th anniversary of Madeleine McCann's disappearance?

Reverting to the content and purpose of the televised productions - the main points frequently raised and discussed by the McCann critic lobby were taken on board as a matter of serious concern as regards the case of Madeleine McCann and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

After this weekends customary blitz of media rubbish following the 10th anniversary celebrations, I'm hoping matters will return to some semblance of normality and CMoMM can continue it's pursuance of justice for little Madeleine McCann - the only person of any real importance in this pathetic circus of deception.

#68 · by Phoebe 06.05.17 0:38

Verdi wrote:If you take the time to analyze and weigh-up the pros and cons of this weeks BBC Panorama production and the Sky Documentary, one thing is apparent - at least to me.

Think of the primary focus of McCann sceptics across cyberspace - the dog alerts; the remit and performance of Operation Grange; the McCanns behaviour; the infamous treatment of Goncalo Amaral; the Portuguese investigation v. the Metropolitan Police review/investigation.

Then think of the focal points of both the BBC and Sky productions - much the same? Yes, I think so!

The McCanns defence league have publicly admitted they monitor the internet, as the McCanns have openly admitted that this information is fed back to them. So, the 'trolls' main concerns have been monitored and documented and for this monumental 10th anniversary have formed the basis of these two televised documentaries. Was it not said a while ago that Scotland Yard would be collaborating with the media and coordinating a couple of television productions to mark the 10th anniversary of Madeleine McCann's disappearance?

Reverting to the content and purpose of the televised productions - the main points frequently raised and discussed by the McCann critic lobby were taken on board as a matter of serious concern as regards the case of Madeleine McCann and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

After this weekends customary blitz of media rubbish following the 10th anniversary celebrations, I'm hoping matters will return to some semblance of normality and CMoMM can continue it's pursuance of justice for little Madeleine McCann - the only person of any real importance in this pathetic circus of deception.

Spot on. I think they have also firmly tried set the time from which the story, and therefore any behaviour deserving of investigation, begins. Everything focuses on after Gerry's check at 9.10/9.15 nicely airbrushing the events up to this from picture. The clear message is that nothing which happened before this has any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance, a hypothesis the "trolls" question.

#69 · by Guest 06.05.17 7:10

Verdi wrote: and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

How did they diss the dogs?

(I've not watched either propaganda piece).

#70 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 8:18

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote: and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!
How did they diss the dogs?

(I've not watched either propaganda piece).

Bilton said the dogs alerts were only 'indications' - the footage may have looked damning but it didn't prove anything.

And then went on to show the FFS reports that said "the results didn't back up the barking dogs" the results were "weak and inconclusive".

Of the 66 samples none directly matched Madeleine McCann.

BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added** - Page 3 110

BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added** - Page 3 210

No evidence
No evidence
No evidence

and so on.

Jim Gamble "Madeleine's parents were using that car. 50% of the DNA would have come from each parent, so to have some cross-over of DNA is not unusual".

And he questions the professionalism of anyone who drew conclusion of evidence. (or words to that effect but with emphasis on professionalism)

And that the PJ misinterpreted the results.

Bilton: The theory was falling apart and Amaral was removed from the case. Amaral blamed political interference (showing Gordon Brown and Socrates, the former Prime Minister who was shown sneering at Amaral)

You should watch it from 13.30 - although you should watch the whole thing.

#71 · by Mirage 06.05.17 8:36

Gamble also craftily addressed Gerry's cold demeanour, which he found off-putting at the outset.

He obviously got over it and warmed to the fellow. Bingo. Yet another "troll" concern over Gerry McCann's red flag behaviour ticked off the list.

Jta. Good try. It doesn't wash for normal people, Mr Gamble. The following is just one of hundreds of reasons why ...........

"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?" Gerry

#72 · by nglfi 06.05.17 8:56

The programme wilfully deceived with its description of the dogs. It deliberately confused the issue by implying that the dogs alerted positively to DNA. They did not. They alerted positively to BLOOD. Samples were then taken from the areas they alerted, and DNA containing 15/19 markers from Madeleine were found. This was not at all explained and was probably the worst part of the programme for me.

#73 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 8:58

#74 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 9:08

John Lowe tells us the blood in the back of the car MATCHED Maddie... Either MADELEINE WAS IN THE CAR or it was a CHANCE MATCH. If it was a 'chance' match, how can it be explained? Two or more relatives leave 15 markers of the DNA they share with Maddie, in the same sequence, in EXACTLY the same tiny BLOOD spot?

Forensic results in the case have been discussed and scrutinised since the day they were revealed. Efforts to discredit the dogs and the findings run rampant.

Fact is, for the record, that if a BLOOD dog alerts, then they have found BLOOD (Keela alerts to nothing else) Forensics being retrieved from that area CONFIRMS the dog was successful.

We are told that 15 of Madeleine's 19 markers were found in the trunk of the car (among 37 markers altogether) and with 4 more of her markers would have been conclusive. Had any of the other markers in her sequence NOT been hers then it could NOT have been Maddie's DNA, but the results reveal, according to John Lowe, that it is a MATCH to Maddie.

The question he asks, was the match GENUINE or a CHANCE match.

Was Madeleine in the car or was the match deposited by family members?

We now KNOW that DNA that Matches Madeleine WAS IN THE CAR, we just need to find out HOW 15 of Madeleine's DNA markers could be deposited in a tiny blood spot in the back of the car? Her relatives share some of the same markers.

How many combinations of DNA from her relatives would need to have produced 15 of Madeleine's markers in the EXACT spot that Keela alerted to and in the same sequence?