Re: Would this account for the unprecedented high level of political support?

by diatribe Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:51 am

Deleted, misplaced post

by suep Sat Mar 01, 2014 6:27 am

In Chapter 3 of his book "The Truth of the Lie" S. Amaral writes about how, right from the start, his investigation was hampered by British involvement. At first its down to delays in getting hold of much needed information,

"We're not getting any response from Great Britain. We've had no reports on the subject of the couple, their children and their friends, which doesn't help us to tighten up the investigation. We would like, for example, to know if Madeleine was adopted by the couple, which would allow us to eliminate the hypothesis of parental abduction. If the information is not reaching us, it's obviously reaching the British Ambassador. We are astonished by this prompt mobilisation of the English authorities. So, who are the McCanns? Who are their friends? We don't need diplomatic intervention: what we would like, is answers to the questions sent to the British police authorities by Glen Power."

But then a more sinister note creeps in. Writing of a discussion the PJ had on May 5th he says,

"Until now, the results have hardly been conclusive. New means - in all other investigations, they would already have been put in place - must be deployed.

- Why not monitor and tap the phones of the parents and friends? Their statements are far from convincing. The story about the window is unsound, and Jane's witness statement is not convincing either.

- In that way new details could be obtained.

- We have already discussed it. That would be ideal...Only, we have to get the judge to give us authorisation with the scant details we have at our disposal. And if the parents get wind of it, we risk having the sky fall on our heads....

Later I learn that the English secret service had already placed the couple under telephone surveillance. If that's true, the Portuguese police were never informed."

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/chapter-3.html

What does this mean, exactly? David Payne had arranged for new phones to be delivered to them on May 4th through a contact, hadn't he? Were those phones actually arranged by MI5? If so, how did that happen? And why? Does it have anything to do with the odd late night phone call he made to Jim Gamble's outfit?

by Guest Tue Mar 04, 2014 10:10 pm

Suep are you saying that DP was a plant all along to catch somebody doing something on that holiday?

Hmmm - this is a totally new scenario to me but some things spring to mind...

- He was allegedly the last independent witness (discountng the MO checking farce) to see MBM alive in that last meeting with Kate on the 3rd - what was said in that meeting? Cld it be that case that Kate realised in that meeting that she and GM were rumbled and therefore MBM had to be 'disappeared' quickly?

- The alleged Gaspar statements - was DP trying to draw GM out?

- DP was allegedly recognised by someone from social services/protection(?) in P de Luz - could this have been someone he had previously worked with in that sector?

- His non-appearance on Crime Watch - this was noticable by it's absence.

- He was the one that allegedly organised the holiday

- And yes the late night call to Jim Gambles outfit - he would hardly be reporting himself would be? What and who was he reporting?

- And weren't his interviews were different from the rest of the tapas - wasn't he the only one not interviewed in the presence of the PJ - I think this is correct I will check this. And when asked if he had anything else to add to the interview he allegedly said something along the lines of it wasn't the right forum to say it - what on earth did that mean?

Pls correct me if I am wrong about any of the above - I will look up the links tomorrow, sorry am too tired now.

I have always thought of DP as a baddie becos of the alleged Gaspar statements but hmmm you have really got me wondering now...

by Guest Tue Mar 04, 2014 10:27 pm

BlackCatBoogie wrote:[...]
- The alleged Gaspar statements - was DP trying to draw GM out?
[...]

***
Interesting thought. After all, GM didn't slap him in the face, did he?
This also reminds me of DP's end of the rogatory interview:
1485 "Is there anything that you consider pertinent or relevant to establish the material truth''
Reply "Err the, there are a few things but I don't think this is the right forum for bringing those up.'

by Guest Tue Mar 04, 2014 10:33 pm

Yes I have just looked DP's rogatory interview and after DP says it is not the right forum the interviewer just says ok and then immediately changes the subject:-

"Okay. And finally, Mr PRIOR touched on the re-enactment earlier on, I think the etc etc ....."

What? How come he wasn't pressed further on this or asked what he meant, where was the right forum etc?

by Guest Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:11 pm

BlackCatBoogie wrote:Yes I have just looked DP's rogatory interview and after DP says it is not the right forum the interviewer just says ok and then immediately changes the subject:-

"Okay. And finally, Mr PRIOR touched on the re-enactment earlier on, I think the etc etc ....."

What? How come he wasn't pressed further on this or asked what he meant, where was the right forum etc?

***
That's why I brought it up again.
It's bizarre ...

by diatribe Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:14 pm

Châtelaine wrote:
BlackCatBoogie wrote:Yes I have just looked DP's rogatory interview and after DP says it is not the right forum the interviewer just says ok and then immediately changes the subject:-
where was the right forum etc?

Perhaps he was referring to this forum and is just waiting for an invite.

by **tigger** Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:00 am

suep wrote:In Chapter 3 of his book "The Truth of the Lie" S. Amoral writes about how, right from the start, his investigation was hampered by British involvement. At first its down to delays in getting hold of much needed information,

"We're not getting any response from Great Britain. We've had no reports on the subject of the couple, their children and their friends, which doesn't help us to tighten up the investigation. We would like, for example, to know if Madeleine was adopted by the couple, which would allow us to eliminate the hypothesis of parental abduction. If the information is not reaching us, it's obviously reaching the British Ambassador. We are astonished by this prompt mobilisation of the English authorities. So, who are the McCanns? Who are their friends? We don't need diplomatic intervention: what we would like, is answers to the questions sent to the British police authorities by Glen Power."

But then a more sinister note creeps in. Writing of a discussion the PJ had on May 5th he says,

"Until now, the results have hardly been conclusive. New means - in all other investigations, they would already have been put in place - must be deployed.

- Why not monitor and tap the phones of the parents and friends? Their statements are far from convincing. The story about the window is unsound, and Jane's witness statement is not convincing either.

- In that way new details could be obtained.

- We have already discussed it. That would be ideal...Only, we have to get the judge to give us authorisation with the scant details we have at our disposal. And if the parents get wind of it, we risk having the sky fall on our heads....

Later I learn that the English secret service had already placed the couple under telephone surveillance. If that's true, the Portuguese police were never informed."

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/chapter-3.html

What does this mean, exactly? David Payne had arranged for new phones to be delivered to them on May 4th through a contact, hadn't he? Were those phones actually arranged by MI5? If so, how did that happen? And why? Does it have anything to do with the odd late night phone call he made to Jim Gamble's outfit?

Imo it means that the political 'help' (see the topic Amber alert, the Prum treaty etc) wanted to know if they could launch their pet project on the back of this event. Nothing to do with DP who got them new phones. clarrie, iirc, also brought phones with him.
But all the same it may have been gerry's blog which had to convey messages to those in the know.
Imo the helpers, incl. MI5 first of all worked out in five minutes flat that the McCann's story wouldn't stand up without a lot of external help and adjustments (MW obliged as did a number of 'witnesses').
It was therefore of prime importance for MI5 to find out where the body was buried, not speaking metaphorically.

DP and FP changed their original statements in July I believe iirc to the effect that they couldn't put Gerry at the table at 10.00 pm.

by watendlath Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:07 am

WorldOfLiars wrote:It doesn't seem to me that the Microchipping Theory is able to stand up - given that the British Governments and the media haven't started a massive debate about it, in the wake of the "abduction" and of all the fuss about the Madeleine case, in order to exploiting it and obtain the consensus of the public opinion - seven years have passed and nothing of the sort emerged. So I don't think that this explanation convincingly accounts for the involvement of the establishment, for the protection of the McCann, the cover up and its persistence.

Hello WorldOfLiars
Why would they bring in the subject of microchipping at this stage?
What has happened so far is that a child has gone missing and hasn't been found.
And her parents left her unsupervised.

So any 'debate' on the subject isn't likely to help the microchipping agenda, since most people will probably say that they are quite capable of looking after their children themselves, thank-you very much, (whereas the McCanns did not).

But I think what has happened after seven years of 'Madeleine' is that everyone, whatever their views on the McCanns, is now much more aware of dangers to children that maybe we didn't know much about before.

Also, anyone who has taken an interest of any sort in this case, no matter whether pro or anti McCann, feels some emotional attachment to Madeleine, not the same as you feel towards your own children, but something similar.

In other words, the ground has been prepared. People know more about the dangers to children, and their emotions regarding this subject can easily be activated, by way of Madeleine.

Read this article: One generation is all they need.

Written in 2006, it originally appeared in the Toronto Star and the author looks at how easily and quickly microchipping could be introduced in a society.

This paragraph is highlighted in the thread:

At this juncture, an unfortunately common tragedy of modern life will occur: A small child, likely a photogenic toddler, will be murdered or horrifically abused. It will happen in one of the media capitals of the Western world, thereby ensuring non-stop breathless coverage.
Chip manufactures will recognize this as the opportunity they have been anticipating for years. With their technology now largely bug-free, familiar to most citizens and comparatively inexpensive, manufacturers will partner with the police to launch a high-profile campaign encouraging parents to implant their children "to ensure your own peace of mind."

So far we have the photogenic toddler; the media capital of Western world...(several countries are involved in this, hence the various productions of the Crimewatch appeal); and the non-stop breathless coverage.

What we don't know yet is what actually happened to Madeleine, did she have an accident as the PJ concluded or did something far worse happen to her.
I'm worried that if this is a scam they will produce the sort of ending suggested in this article,and make it so horrific that a significant number of people will be moved to accept some sort of microchipping scheme.

Such people might not have been moved to do so seven years ago but now the additional knowledge they have of danger to children coupled with the emotions they feel about what has happened to a child they feel some connection with, might be enough to tip the balance for them.

by Bellajoy Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:30 am

Hi everyone, this is the first thread ive clicked on to read. Im drawn to reply in defence of J.Rob and as a new poster myself. I made this account I have no idea when....must have been years ago and let it fall inactive. I have however been following this case since the beginning and was a regular poster on the Express (I think it was, but its a long time ago now I cant remember) Forum befor eit was shut down and also a member of the old 3 Arguidos forum. Since that was closed down I sort of gave up following the case except around the time the McCanns started to sue the portuguese cop (cant remember his name either) .

I have tried to ignore the never ending stories in the papers about suspects as it sll so mych crap imo .

I stumboled across this website again yesterday when googling around after my interest was renewed by the digging in portugual stories in the media and was surprised to discover I was a member here and so logged in (after reactivating my account).

So in one respect I know a HUGE amount about the case already and in other respects I still know absolutely nothing.

The theories newest to me being is MM buried under RM driveway and the recent digging.

Its nice to get back on board but im not holding my breathe this case will ever be solved, it would be so easy for the whole case to be solved today even but not in a way any of us anticipate ie justice being served. I doubt that would ever happen. It would be incredibly easy to say remains have been found (we cant see inside the tents) then video of forensics in their coveralls carrying out a box of "remains" thats all they ever produce after years is a plastic box with the remains in. DNA tests would say it was MM remains. Cause of death and even a suspect not even necessary, they could if they want speculate it was a dead paedo. parents then have a media funeral and get their closure and then public interest would wane rapidly, parents off the hook completgely, normal trade (worth billions) restored between britain and Portugual............. so imo this dig is the perfect opportunity to find "remains" and none of us would be the wiser. No matter what the truth of the matter it would be impossible to charge anyone with MM's death in the absence of a confession.

The way I understand it as a lay person is that by refusing to answer questions in Portugual is the same as the british no comment. Its down to the police in either country to bring charges or release someone, so in some respects they didnt flee the country they had no reason to stay there after refusing to answer the questions.

Other than that nit picking aspect I have no idea where MM is or who is responsible, although I think it all doesnt add up and cant help but think her parents were involved .

Ive never believed the abduction theory, so the whole charade of admitting to leaving the kids unattended was to set up a window of opportunity for the mythical abductor.

This is the lesser of 2 evils for the McCanns although they must cringe at people thinking they would leave the kids only complete scumbags would neglect kids like that, this is one of their crosses to bear because its preferrable to being charged with her death accidental or otherwise.

I suspect MM was only left alone that night to fabricate the abduction story, I happen to think she was dead long before they went out for a meal that night and out of that large group of people going out on the lash every night im sure they did take it in turns to check on the kids or get one of them to babysit every night for all we know.

If I had to come up with a theory it wouldnt involve dumping a body down a drain or on scrubland or on a beach

To me it would involve the Priest who had a breakdown (I think), the mystery of the dumped fridge, possibly even RMs help, maybe even framing RM (burying the body on his property) as for the forensics in the hire car that has to be down to 2 things only, one of them ludicrous to borrow a phrase.

Ludicrous scenario number 1...somehow the sardine munching plod stuck DNA evidence in the car (rolls eyes) to incriminate the McCanns .... expect that would mean they had access to MMs body

which leaves only one other solution MM was transported dead in that car from mystery place A to B. Wasnt it Gonco whatisname who suggested the body had been chilled/frozen and then transported for the bodily fluids to leak and be fluid at all after that length of time. Therefore it is my belief that the parents or someone in their circle who had access to that hire car is/was responsible and there was never a reason to search further afield. Wasnt it Sherlock Holmes who said when everything else is eliminated, what remains, no matter how improbable is usually the truth?

If that was enough to bring charges in Portugual at that time then the McCanns should have been extradited and faced trial.

by MrsC Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:35 am

Bellajoy wrote:

Wasnt it Gonco whatisname

How rude! The gentleman's name is Dr Gonçalo Amaral.

by Bellajoy Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:41 am

I assure you I was not intending to be rude, just eager to get my post up before getting on with my housework. So I apologise, after 6/7 years I could only remember his first name. Hence the Gonco whatsisnname, sad

ETA please take my post in the spirit it was meant, Im on his side basically and was about to find somewhere else in the forum to make a request about him, I understand he has had to pay some of his libel trial stuff himself and would genuinely like to make a donation to him to keep on fighting the McCanns, does anyone know anywhere on the internet if he has a page where people like me can make a paypal donation? many thanks in advance.

It seems hugely infair that a policeman investigates something, comes to his conclusions then faces financial ruin for stating what he believes happened that night. That seems grossly unfair to me.

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:16 am

http://goncaloamaral.webs.com/support.htm

Details of Mr Amaral's support fund.

by j.rob Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:35 am

Looking at the 'people of interest' staying at Ocean Club in and around that fateful week, on page 14 of this thread there is a list of people who stayed in block 4. In G4B from 06/05 there is an entry that reads: PSICOLOGO/ Martin J Alderton. An odd entry - I premiere referring to some kind of crisis management person brought in to counsel the poor, grieving parents? Has anyone looked into exactly who these people were and what their role was? Would be interesting know more...

by worriedmum Tue Jul 01, 2014 11:39 am

diatribe wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
BlackCatBoogie wrote:Yes I have just looked DP's rogatory interview and after DP says it is not the right forum the interviewer just says ok and then immediately changes the subject:-
where was the right forum etc?

Perhaps he was referring to this forum and is just waiting for an invite.

Oh please, if you are er, reading, er this,David, er will you post on the er, forum. It's er definitely the right one!

by Sonmi-451 Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:20 pm

j.rob wrote:Looking at the 'people of interest' staying at Ocean Club in and around that fateful week, on page 14 of this thread there is a list of people who stayed in block 4. In G4B from 06/05 there is an entry that reads: PSICOLOGO/ Martin J Alderton. An odd entry - I premiere referring to some kind of crisis management person brought in to counsel the poor, grieving parents? Has anyone looked into exactly who these people were and what their role was? Would be interesting know more...

'Psicologo' is French for Psychologist. There's a Psychologist called Martin Alderton whose LinkedIn profile says that in 2007 he was employed by CCP, (The Centre for Crisis Psychology) as "A member of the management team with responsibility for marketing, sales strategy and product development. A member of CCP's travelling team providing direct clinical support to the staff and customers of client organisations who suffered distress due to trauma, tragedy or other life events. "

His 'role' seems to fit in with the pedigree and backgrounds of the other people supporting TM. I wonder if it's him and if so who booked his/their services? It does say that he worked with ABTA, so maybe if it was around that time it may have been via Mark Warner?

by j.rob Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:51 am

Thanks. It would seem likely that he was called in by Mark Warner. They seemed to pull out the 'crisis' tea quite quickly. I wonder when exactly this person - if he is indeed the same person as on Linkedin - was contacted by Mark Warner? He was certainly on the scene quite quickly. I wonder why the entry is written in capital letters? It makes it stand out in a peculiar way. When was the room booked?

by **Tony Bennett** Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:58 am

j.rob wrote:Thanks. It would seem likely that he was called in by Mark Warner.

All explained in this article posted 14 May 2007 in North Yorkshire newspaper, the Craven Herald:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Monday 14th May, the Craven Herald [Yorkshire Newspaper] had carried the following report:

“Two specialist trauma counsellors from Skipton have flown out to Portugal to help the devastated parents of missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann. Consultants Alan Pike and Martin Alderton from the Centre for Crisis Psychology (CCP), based at Broughton Hall, have been by the side of Gerry and Kate McCann since their daughter Madeleine was abducted…The two experts were appointed by Mark Warner, the company which manages the resort, to assist Mr and Mrs McCann, both 38, on how best to deal with the stress and trauma of their terrible ordeal…

“Mr Pike, who is leading the team, flew over to the resort with Mark Warner managing director, David Hopkins, the day after Madeleine disappeared. Mr Alderton, who has counselled those affected by major disasters across the country, arrived the following day. A spokesman for Mark Warner said: ‘The Centre for Crisis Psychology (CCP) came highly recommended by industry partners and have been known to us for some time. Their experience in dealing with a variety of incidents is second to none’.

“Staff from the Skipton centre also visited Mark Warner's head office in London to offer counselling to employees last Wednesday. A spokesman for the Skipton centre said: ‘We are working with Mark Warner and cannot discuss any information because of commercial confidentiality. We have got two trauma consultants working on the incident. Everyone all over the country has been gripped, it is a very difficult case’. Mr Pike's experience in trauma work includes domestic violence and abuse, child abuse, emergency planning and assessment, and adoption.

Since joining CCP in 2004, he has been involved in consulting with companies following road traffic accidents, personal attacks, terrorist bombings, shootings, robberies, drowning and staff bereavement. Mr Alderton provided clinical support following the 2003 Manchester motorway minibus crash in which seven people died”.

by Sonmi-451 Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:47 am

Aha... Tony, thanks for confirming.

by Baldrick Wed Jul 16, 2014 4:41 pm

I wonder why Clement Freud invited the Mccanns to dinner, I assume this was before they were made aguidos

He certainly knew some dubious people

https://twitter.com/charlesfrith/status/319017100872122368

by ScepticAl Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:17 pm

Perhaps Madeleine died while having a chip inserted/removed in a non hospital environment by one of the Tapas. Perhaps the children were essential to this conference, live props to show the potential investor the efficacy of this marvellous money spinning child surveillance system. A presentation, if you will.
Imagine trying to explain a sudden infant death under these circumstances, when the people staying nearby are by purest coincidence of course, all involved in promoting said product. How bad for business would THAT be?
How bad for the Labour Government, to have such close links to such an enterprise?
IMO G&K were bought off in the aftermath of the cover up in order to keep the microchip project alive. Hence the willingness of the powers that be to protect and sympathise. They did lose a child, probably not by their hands and for the greater good were rewarded for their starring roles. Wee Lorraine can genuinely ooze sympathy (to salve her conscience) while sucking up to her paymasters.
Then the political landscape changed. Microchipping did not take off as hoped. G&K become a very entitled millstone, one that gets heavier with every passing year, whose protectors would like to drop, but can't. No one told Lorraine Wink

The negotiated solution begins.
Of course this is purest fantasy and not to be taken at all seriously.
(And no, although I'm a newbie poster and this is my first post, I'm not a troll of any flavour. Just an old DM forum poster who became disgusted by the way we are treated as stupid children by those who want us to swallow utter nonsense. I stopped reading anything about poor M for years, it was too infuriating. Then I saw a news item about another piece of MM nonsense and Google brought me here...)

by Sonmi-451 Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:45 pm

ScepticAl wrote:"Perhaps Madeleine died while having a chip inserted/removed in a non hospital environment by one of the Tapas"

Would that be a French Fry or a MCain's/McCann's Oven Ready chip?

I call B/S on you and your attempt to devalue the serious topic of trying to solve the (likely) death of, and keep alive the need for justice for, Madeleine.

Claiming "Chips, Aliens, Bionical Eyes, etc. etc.", and all those other spurious (& equally unlikely) 'motives', seems simply to undermine and derail the very serious matter about how very easily 'justice' can be ignored and manipulated by the people our taxes employ.

by ScepticAl Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:53 pm

I am not attempting to derail anything. I understand why you would be suspicious, hence the disclaimer above.
Please feel free to contact Admin to check me out.
Admin, my email address is my name. The first name is correct (I blame my mother). I have a FB account under my name. If you send me a request, I will accept it so you can see my life in its entirety.

by Sonmi-451 Wed Jul 16, 2014 7:13 pm

ScepticAl wrote:I am not attempting to derail anything. I understand why you would be suspicious, hence the disclaimer above.
Please feel free to contact Admin to check me out.
Admin, my email address is my name. The first name is correct (I blame my mother). I have a FB account under my name. If you send me a request, I will accept it so you can see my life in its entirety.

... I have at least 40 'live' email accounts that I use... I have a rolling number of 'live/deleted' Facebook accounts that I use... I have not used my 'real' name on any legal documentation in somewhere approaching 12 years... None of my bills are in my 'birth name'. I even write to my MP, reasonably regularly, under my 'Nom de Plume' and he writes back...

... So your point is?

Look... If you think 'implanting or removing a chip' is more likely a factor in the MBM case than (i) covering up neglect and/or (ii) covering up abuse, then I SERIOUSLY question your motives.