The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

PM reopens Maddie files

Page 4 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 13:23

@Ringo wrote:
Stella wrote:

A report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida to the
Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation



Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

10 September 2007
(Processo: VOL ,X, p. 2587-2602)




Does the above earlier interim report trump the subsequent findings of the Attorney General?

'In an order issued today ... the investigation into the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann has been halted because no evidence was discovered of any crime committed by the suspects.'


I know who you are now Ringo and no that was not an interim report. It was filed first thing on the Monday morning after the McCann's fled Portugal. No where on the actual document does it state that it was an interim report and you know it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Dougall on 13.05.11 13:24

@Ringo wrote: the dogs were clearly led and directed to alert to the car and the soft toy as anyone can see from watching the videos - it was all a complete shambles.


Then you can apply the same logic to state that they were "clearly led" to many other areas where they DIDN'T alert! When I saw the video I saw the handler focussing the dogs' attention on many different spots, they alerted when they detected something, not because the handler wanted them to!

Dougall

Posts : 26
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2010-09-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 13:33

@Ringo wrote:

Does the above earlier interim report trump the subsequent findings of the Attorney General?

'In an order issued today ... the investigation into the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann has been halted because no evidence was discovered of any crime committed by the suspects.'


That was not the findings of the Attorney General, it was from a letter SENT TO the Attorney General by the Portuguese Prosecutors, who chose to ignore what was in the files to shelve the case.

The bottom of the letter said;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.

Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.

Portimão, 21.07.08

The Republic's Prosecutor

(José de Magalhaes e Menezes)

The Joint General Prosecutor

(signature)

(Joao Melchior Gomes)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Redgoblin on 13.05.11 13:36

Hi this is my first post to the forum

Sorry to butt in, as some of you were talking about the dogs - I wanted to stay within the topic of this thread.

Despite the heartfelt pleas of GM and KM by having their own team investigate "some" of the files. Surely the PJ must have some evidence about the couple /group which they would obviously not want to share with the McCann's, I suppose that evidence could be incriminating and they wouldn't hand that information to private detectives - I assume it would be available to Scotland Yard.

Which raises the question - Why would the McCann's seek this out if they knew it might lead to their own arrests?

a) Either they are completely innocent and have nothing to lose.

b) They don't believe the PJ have anything concrete to pin on them, and by reviewing the files they hope Scotland Yard draws a blank and the case (from a legal and lawful aspect) will be closed.

Redgoblin

Posts : 4
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Age : 44
Location : Wales

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 13:37

09-Processos Vol IX Pages 2462 to 2465
09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2462

09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2463

09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2464

09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2465

Verbal Report by Martin Grime Relating to the Searches Carried out with the Dogs in the Ocean Club Apartments
 
Transcription/Translation
 
Apartment 5 A

Ok what was done was we deployed the victim recovery dog into the apartment and by experience and the training of the dog what I first noticed is that as soon as I came in that the dog was very excited and as a handler I can pick up his body language etc and it would appear to me that as soon as he has come into the house he's picked up a scent that he recognises and he has then gone through the apartment trying to source where that scent source has come from and as he has worked through the house the only two places where he picks up enough scent to give me the bark alert are in this bedroom, in this corner where he was barking.

What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief.

Moving onto the other rooms once he's found what he thinks he's looking for in this room, and we go into the bathroom and come into this bedroom he loses his interest because he's actually found the source that he was looking for, until we come over here and I think you've got it on video that when he first came in he was quite interested in the sofa but he didn't have access to the back of the sofa and when he's gone behind the sofa what I saw was that approximately in the centre of the wall where the window is, just along the tile area between the tiles and the wall, he's been scenting there a lot stronger than he has anywhere else and the when he's gone out there the second time he has decided yes that's what I'm looking for and that's when he has given me the bark indication.

What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.

The second dog that we've seen work today is the crime scene dog Keela. She will only indicate to me when she has found human blood, only human blood and it is only blood and there must be something there physically for her to be able to alert to me that's she has actually found something. At this point over here where the victim recovery dog has indicated, as you saw on the video, the crime scene dog had actually given me what we call a passive indication where she freezes in this spot here which would indicate to me that there is some human blood there. She will find blood that's historically very old and she will find anybody's blood, any human blood, which is important to make sure that everybody knows.

The fact that there is other scientific methods being used may stop you recovering any DNA but if you try we'll see what happens. But she is very, very good and when she indicates there is always blood there.

Apartment B

We've searched this apartment with the victim recovery dog and he has shown no interest in the flat for what he he trained to find at all so we finished.

Apartment 5 D

We've put the victim recovery dog through this apartment, the only interest has been in some food that he has found, other than that there is no interest in anything that he has been taught to tell me that he has found.

Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.


Apartment 4 G

We searched the apartment using the victim recovery dog. No response. Negative search.


Outside perimeter of apartments

We've searched the outer perimeter, there is some interest here but it will take some further examination to see what's going on.

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






So, nothing detected in any other of the apartments in this statement, only 5a, strange that. We know no-one else died in that apartment because the PJ checked. Oh I forget, it must have been the second hand furniture they had in there, that had been in a dead person's house previously titter


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by ufercoffy on 13.05.11 13:40

Stella wrote:That was not the findings of the Attorney General, it was from a letter SENT TO the Attorney General by the Portuguese Prosecutors, who chose to ignore what was in the files to shelve the case.

Looks like Ringo got it from a newspaper Rolling Eyes

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/464743--portuguese-police-close-madeleine-mccann-case

____________________
Whose cadaver scent and bodily fluid was found in the McCann's apartment and hire car if not Madeleine's?  Shocked

ufercoffy

Posts : 1641
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2010-01-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 13:42

@Redgoblin wrote:Hi this is my first post to the forum

Sorry to butt in, as some of you were talking about the dogs - I wanted to stay within the topic of this thread.

Despite the heartfelt pleas of GM and KM by having their own team investigate "some" of the files. Surely the PJ must have some evidence about the couple /group which they would obviously not want to share with the McCann's, I suppose that evidence could be incriminating and they wouldn't hand that information to private detectives - I assume it would be available to Scotland Yard.

Which raises the question - Why would the McCann's seek this out if they knew it might lead to their own arrests?

a) Either they are completely innocent and have nothing to lose.

b) They don't believe the PJ have anything concrete to pin on them, and by reviewing the files they hope Scotland Yard draws a blank and the case (from a legal and lawful aspect) will be closed.


Hi Redgoblin welcome to the forum welcome


there could hypothetically even be a (c) in that it was a bluff, to keep asking for this in front of the public, knowing or thinking it would never happen?? Just a thought, not saying this is the case.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 13:56

Stella wrote:
@Ringo wrote:
Stella wrote:

A report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida to the
Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation



Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

10 September 2007
(Processo: VOL ,X, p. 2587-2602)




Does the above earlier interim report trump the subsequent findings of the Attorney General?

'In an order issued today ... the investigation into the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann has been halted because no evidence was discovered of any crime committed by the suspects.'


I know who you are now Ringo and no that was not an interim report. It was filed first thing on the Monday morning after the McCann's fled Portugal. No where on the actual document does it state that it was an interim report and you know it.

Begging your pardon, I am not actually a McCann scholar so sometimes I get the terminology wrong - however let me re-phrase the question. Does the report from 2007 actually supercede (either legally or generally) the Attorney General's final report that appeared the following year?

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:00

@Dougall wrote:
@Ringo wrote: the dogs were clearly led and directed to alert to the car and the soft toy as anyone can see from watching the videos - it was all a complete shambles.


Then you can apply the same logic to state that they were "clearly led" to many other areas where they DIDN'T alert! When I saw the video I saw the handler focussing the dogs' attention on many different spots, they alerted when they detected something, not because the handler wanted them to!

You didn't see the dogs whizz by the first few cars as the handler strolled past them, and then as he stopped by the McCanns car and the dog whized past that one, he called it back - several times - until finally he got an alert out of it? WE must've been watching different videos then.

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:02

Stella wrote:
@Ringo wrote:

Does the above earlier interim report trump the subsequent findings of the Attorney General?

'In an order issued today ... the investigation into the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann has been halted because no evidence was discovered of any crime committed by the suspects.'


That was not the findings of the Attorney General, it was from a letter SENT TO the Attorney General by the Portuguese Prosecutors, who chose to ignore what was in the files to shelve the case.

The bottom of the letter said;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.

Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.

Portimão, 21.07.08

The Republic's Prosecutor

(José de Magalhaes e Menezes)

The Joint General Prosecutor

(signature)

(Joao Melchior Gomes)

"no indications of the practise of any crime"

Quite.

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:05

[quote]
@Redgoblin wrote:Hi this is my first post to the forum

Sorry to butt in, as some of you were talking about the dogs - I wanted to stay within the topic of this thread.

Despite the heartfelt pleas of GM and KM by having their own team investigate "some" of the files. Surely the PJ must have some evidence about the couple /group which they would obviously not want to share with the McCann's, I suppose that evidence could be incriminating and they wouldn't hand that information to private detectives - I assume it would be available to Scotland Yard.

Which raises the question - Why would the McCann's seek this out if they knew it might lead to their own arrests?

a) Either they are completely innocent and have nothing to lose.


Is the correct answer!

b) They don't believe the PJ have anything concrete to pin on them, and by reviewing the files they hope Scotland Yard draws a blank and the case (from a legal and lawful aspect) will be closed.

The only way they could know for certain that the PJ don't have anything concrete to pin on them is if they are indeed innocent.

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:06

@Ringo wrote:

Begging your pardon, I am not actually a McCann scholar so sometimes I get the terminology wrong - however let me re-phrase the question. Does the report from 2007 actually supercede (either legally or generally) the Attorney General's final report that appeared the following year?

I don't think you mean the Attorney General's final report do you?

I think you are referring to the PJ final report?

If so, that is a different ball game altogether.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by *~Melody~* on 13.05.11 14:07

@Ringo wrote:
@Dougall wrote:
@Ringo wrote: the dogs were clearly led and directed to alert to the car and the soft toy as anyone can see from watching the videos - it was all a complete shambles.


Then you can apply the same logic to state that they were "clearly led" to many other areas where they DIDN'T alert! When I saw the video I saw the handler focussing the dogs' attention on many different spots, they alerted when they detected something, not because the handler wanted them to!

You didn't see the dogs whizz by the first few cars as the handler strolled past them, and then as he stopped by the McCanns car and the dog whized past that one, he called it back - several times - until finally he got an alert out of it? WE must've been watching different videos then.

In the video I saw Eddie didn't put his nose in the air til he got near the McCanns car. He could clearly smell something and was rushing around with his head up indicating he was close. Martin Grime brought Eddie back to the car and tapped various places which didn't interest Eddie. Eddie then barked at the passenger side door sill where the scent was coming from. As he said in his report the air can make the smell circulate and accumulate anywhere, not necessarily where the body was.

*~Melody~*

Posts : 24
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-01-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:10

@*~Melody~* wrote:
@Ringo wrote:
@Dougall wrote:
@Ringo wrote: the dogs were clearly led and directed to alert to the car and the soft toy as anyone can see from watching the videos - it was all a complete shambles.


Then you can apply the same logic to state that they were "clearly led" to many other areas where they DIDN'T alert! When I saw the video I saw the handler focussing the dogs' attention on many different spots, they alerted when they detected something, not because the handler wanted them to!

You didn't see the dogs whizz by the first few cars as the handler strolled past them, and then as he stopped by the McCanns car and the dog whized past that one, he called it back - several times - until finally he got an alert out of it? WE must've been watching different videos then.

In the video I saw Eddie didn't put his nose in the air til he got near the McCanns car. He could clearly smell something and was rushing around with his head up indicating he was close. Martin Grime brought Eddie back to the car and tapped various places which didn't interest Eddie. Eddie then barked at the passenger side door sill where the scent was coming from. As he said in his report the air can make the smell circulate and accumulate anywhere, not necessarily where the body was.

It's interesting though that Grime stopped by the McCanns car for so long though don't you think? He didnt walk on as he had with the other cars, didn't follow the dog on to the cars that it had run towards - why was that? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the car was plastered in posters of Madeleine? Anyway - all now completely irrelevant as no evidence was found.

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:11

Quite right Melody and welcome.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:12

Ringo, how can you say no evidence was found? Eddie barked and Keela alerted in the boot. They can't both be wrong.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:13

So he led the dogs until he finally got an alert out of them titter

He also led the dogs into various different apartments and villa's, namely the tapas 7, Robert Murat, and even the new villa the mccanns were in, no alerts at any of them. Only at 5a the original apartment from where Madeleine disappeared. Strange that!!!

So, basically what you are saying Ringo is that Martin Grimes purposely wanted to incriminate the McCanns, if he led them to the car, why on earth would he do that? What difference would it make to him whether the dogs alerted anywhere or nowhere.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:15

Stella wrote:
@Ringo wrote:

Begging your pardon, I am not actually a McCann scholar so sometimes I get the terminology wrong - however let me re-phrase the question. Does the report from 2007 actually supercede (either legally or generally) the Attorney General's final report that appeared the following year?

I don't think you mean the Attorney General's final report do you?

I think you are referring to the PJ final report?

If so, that is a different ball game altogether.

I am talking about the Attorney General's conclusions based on the final police report.

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:16

@Ringo wrote:
It's interesting though that Grime stopped by the McCanns car for so long though don't you think? He didnt walk on as he had with the other cars, didn't follow the dog on to the cars that it had run towards - why was that? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the car was plastered in posters of Madeleine? Anyway - all now completely irrelevant as no evidence was found.



Plastered in posters, you are so hillarious.

Evidence was found in the car Ringo, corpse bodily fluids with 15 markers matching to Madeleine. Get over it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:17

@Ringo wrote:
Stella wrote:
@Ringo wrote:

Begging your pardon, I am not actually a McCann scholar so sometimes I get the terminology wrong - however let me re-phrase the question. Does the report from 2007 actually supercede (either legally or generally) the Attorney General's final report that appeared the following year?

I don't think you mean the Attorney General's final report do you?

I think you are referring to the PJ final report?

If so, that is a different ball game altogether.

I am talking about the Attorney General's conclusions based on the final police report.

Would you be so kind as to post a copy of this document here please.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:21

candyfloss wrote:So he led the dogs until he finally got an alert out of them

He also led the dogs into various different apartments and villa's, namely the tapas 7, Robert Murat, and even the new villa the mccanns were in, no alerts at any of them. Only at 5a the original apartment from where Madeleine disappeared. Strange that!!!

So, basically what you are saying Ringo is that Martin Grimes purposely wanted to incriminate the McCanns, if he led them to the car, why on earth would he do that? What difference would it make to him whether the dogs alerted anywhere or nowhere.

I am only saying what I saw, and it looked very much to me like Grime allowed bias (wittingly or unwittingly) to influence the dog alerts.

I am not going to comment any further on Grime than that.

It doesn't matter now - no evidence was found. That is really the only thing that matters.


Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Redgoblin on 13.05.11 14:24

@Ringo wrote:
candyfloss wrote:So he led the dogs until he finally got an alert out of them

He also led the dogs into various different apartments and villa's, namely the tapas 7, Robert Murat, and even the new villa the mccanns were in, no alerts at any of them. Only at 5a the original apartment from where Madeleine disappeared. Strange that!!!

So, basically what you are saying Ringo is that Martin Grimes purposely wanted to incriminate the McCanns, if he led them to the car, why on earth would he do that? What difference would it make to him whether the dogs alerted anywhere or nowhere.

I am only saying what I saw, and it looked very much to me like Grime allowed bias (wittingly or unwittingly) to influence the dog alerts.

I am not going to comment any further on Grime than that.

It doesn't matter now - no evidence was found. That is really the only thing that matters.

Evidence was found there was just not enough markers in Portuguese law for it to be valid.

Redgoblin

Posts : 4
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Age : 44
Location : Wales

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:24

@Ringo wrote:
candyfloss wrote:So he led the dogs until he finally got an alert out of them

He also led the dogs into various different apartments and villa's, namely the tapas 7, Robert Murat, and even the new villa the mccanns were in, no alerts at any of them. Only at 5a the original apartment from where Madeleine disappeared. Strange that!!!

So, basically what you are saying Ringo is that Martin Grimes purposely wanted to incriminate the McCanns, if he led them to the car, why on earth would he do that? What difference would it make to him whether the dogs alerted anywhere or nowhere.

I am only saying what I saw, and it looked very much to me like Grime allowed bias (wittingly or unwittingly) to influence the dog alerts.

I am not going to comment any further on Grime than that.

It doesn't matter now - no evidence was found. That is really the only thing that matters.





What are these markers?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Ringo on 13.05.11 14:25

Stella wrote:
@Ringo wrote:
It's interesting though that Grime stopped by the McCanns car for so long though don't you think? He didnt walk on as he had with the other cars, didn't follow the dog on to the cars that it had run towards - why was that? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the car was plastered in posters of Madeleine? Anyway - all now completely irrelevant as no evidence was found.



Plastered in posters, you are so hillarious.

Evidence was found in the car Ringo, corpse bodily fluids with 15 markers matching to Madeleine. Get over it.

This is all very neatly diverting away from the question I posed to you some pages back which is why would the McCanns have been lobbying hard for a full and independent review of the case if they were guilty. Perhaps you could let me have your opinion on that subject first before we go any further?

Ringo

Posts : 265
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: PM reopens Maddie files

Post by Guest on 13.05.11 14:26

@Ringo wrote:
candyfloss wrote:So he led the dogs until he finally got an alert out of them

He also led the dogs into various different apartments and villa's, namely the tapas 7, Robert Murat, and even the new villa the mccanns were in, no alerts at any of them. Only at 5a the original apartment from where Madeleine disappeared. Strange that!!!

So, basically what you are saying Ringo is that Martin Grimes purposely wanted to incriminate the McCanns, if he led them to the car, why on earth would he do that? What difference would it make to him whether the dogs alerted anywhere or nowhere.

I am only saying what I saw, and it looked very much to me like Grime allowed bias (wittingly or unwittingly) to influence the dog alerts.

I am not going to comment any further on Grime than that.

It doesn't matter now - no evidence was found. That is really the only thing that matters.


No, it does matter, you said he led them to the car until he finally got an alert out of them. As I said that sounds like you are saying he wanted to place suspicion on the McCanns. Why would you say that, and more to the point what earthly reason would he have to do that to the parents of a missing child. Think about it. Wittingly or unwittingly doesn't cut the mustard I'm afraid. As I pointed out previously, the dogs were taken to all the apartments and villas closely connected, and no alerts there, why would he want to make his dogs alert to just the McCanns apartments and car?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum