Stephen Birch uncloaks himself

by monkey mind 06.01.13 1:20

I’ve been away from the forum for a month or so therefore I don’t know if this has been covered if so Admin please delete

I remember when Stephen Birch first popped out of the ether and on to this forum some of us were of the opinion that he whilst appearing to be in search of truth much of what he said tended to confirm the McCann story and ultimately he would sing fully on their behalf.

In May 2012 Danie Krugel (remember him?) appears to have uploaded a video to you tube. In the comments feed below the video Stephen Birch writes the following...

“The UK & Portuguese government have covered -up the case after Portuguese Police recovered Maddies body in the Murat yard and planted Maddies BODY FLUID taken off her corpse in the Mc Cann hire vehicle, in order to solicit a confession from the parents. The case was closed to to prevent a diplomatic crisis and protect 3 billion rands worth of bi-lateral trade between both countries.Madeleine Mc Cann lies buried under Robert Murat rear gravel driveway.... “

So there you have it. According to Mr Birch, the McCanns were stitched up by the nasty Portuguese police who dug up M’s body and planted the evidence in the poor doctors hire car. Bummer.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 06.01.13 1:44

Happy New Year, monkey mind!
bummer indeed!

The Krugel story, him coming through customs without his
magic device examined, gave me a rash. And it is still itching.
South-Africa, diamond country - not examined at the border??
Thank you for posting, woke that one up again!

kindest regards

a scratching parapono

by monkey mind 06.01.13 2:13

Happy New Year Parapono!!

Hope this wil be a fine year for painting :^)

by Guest 06.01.13 2:21

Doing my utmost (I guess that's not spelled right) to make it a beautiful year.

Sending you my love
parapono

by aiyoyo 06.01.13 3:27

Happy New Year.

21/`12/12 proves not to be end of the world but it certainly addled my mind somewhat with all the rubbish going on.
So am I reading correctly that Krugel and Birch is the same man? But Krugel's pic is not that of Birch's as far as I know. Weird!

by Guest 06.01.13 9:12

No I don't think they can possibly be one and the same. This is Stephen Birch.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He's just taking the chance to publicise his own research such as it is.

by monkey mind 06.01.13 11:04

Aiyoyo,
No I wasn’t implying that Krugel and Birch were the same man rather I started this thread to illustrate that Birch has now shown us exactly which side of the fence he sits. When he first appeared much of what he said and did made little sense whilst seeming to point away from the McCanns. The McCann silence on the affair was also a bit of a mystery. I thought one day he would come out fully on there side and I’m sure others did. He has now done that, two weeks ago he stated that the McCanns were fitted up by the Portuguese police who had found Madeleine’s body and planted DNA in the hire car.

by Guest 06.01.13 14:08

That wasn't a new statement, Monkey Mind. He said it here in October under the topic Could Maddie Be In The Garden of Casa Liliana?

He appears to have been off his head on drink or drugs most of the time.

by monkey mind 06.01.13 14:18

Thanks Jean,
I did say in my original post that I didn’t know if this had been mentioned already, not been able to be on the forum as much as I would have liked these last couple months.

by rainbow-fairy 06.01.13 15:13

A few thoughts;

1)Is this not *roughly* the same story Kate wrote in her novel 'madeleine'? IE fitted up?

2)Is what Mr Birch has written not highly libellous of the PJ? Poor Tony is being taken to court for repeating FACTS, this man is spouting fanciful nonsense (where are the facts to back this up?)

3)WHY would Robert Murat being guilty cause a 'diplomatic incident' therefore meaning the PJ would attempt to 'fit up' two Drs instead?

4)Putting common sense aside for one minute. Let's say what he writes we take at face value (stop giggling at the back and bear with me Wink

)
Does he REALLY BELIEVE (and worse, expect others to believe) that the PJ found Maddie, took fluids, put them in 5A and the hire car, yet LEFT her body? Why would they not move the body if they were indeed intent on 'fitting up' the McCanns? Why would they do such a pathetic half-baked job? WITH a body they would have had an iron-clad case surely???

I find it utterly amazing that we, the sceptics who DARE to not believe any one of the McCann's 'accounts of the truth' are accused of being 'conspiracy theorists'. Surely what Mr Birch has written is a bigger conspiracy than any of us have ever suggested (and highly libellous to boot)???

by Guest 06.01.13 15:54

I just told 94-year-old Maman about Birch's theory. She's still choking for laughter.

Despite her age she still takes big interest in this case. I have to spoon-feed news and discussions, though, as she tends to get very excited or rather agitated by every single new or repeated "lie", which is not so good for her old "system". So this was a welcome difference ;-)

by Lance De Boils 06.01.13 16:53

Ok, let's just try to put aside, just for a minute, that this guy is probably nothing more or less than a raving lunatic.
There is another way of looking at this which is not exactly "pro McCann";

Just supposing the PJ did find Maddie's body OR items belonging to her which proved her death...
... and that they knew from other information they had that the parent(s) were fully aware of Maddie's death and were involved either directly in her death or the concealment of her death...
... but without a body/a confession they could not nail that final piece of the jigsaw in place...
... they misguidedly tried to force a confession by "planting" evidence....

IF this was the sort of scenario Birch alludes to, then it could not be said that he is necessarily on the McCann's "side".
What does NOT fit with this, though, is the idea that Maddie's body would have been left in situ. I do not believe that for one moment. If they found anything, I would think it more likely clothing or other items of evidence (whether in Murat's yard or elsewhere.)

I'm not saying I believe any of what I have written above to be true (I don't know what the hell to believe, I just know what I don't believe,*) just that what Birch wrote isn't necessarily in the McCanns' favour. (It also doesn't imply Murat's guilt.)

Even IF the PJ did plant evidence, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the parents were innocent. Not necessarily at all.

But of course if they DID plant evidence and if there was proof of that, that alone would probably be enough explanation for their continued "getting away with it" and their cockiness.

* That nonsense abduction tale.

by rainbow-fairy 06.01.13 20:12

Lance De Boils wrote:Ok, let's just try to put aside, just for a minute, that this guy is probably nothing more or less than a raving lunatic.
There is another way of looking at this which is not exactly "pro McCann";

Just supposing the PJ did find Maddie's body OR items belonging to her which proved her death...
... and that they knew from other information they had that the parent(s) were fully aware of Maddie's death and were involved either directly in her death or the concealment of her death...
... but without a body/a confession they could not nail that final piece of the jigsaw in place...
... they misguidedly tried to force a confession by "planting" evidence....

IF this was the sort of scenario Birch alludes to, then it could not be said that he is necessarily on the McCann's "side".
What does NOT fit with this, though, is the idea that Maddie's body would have been left in situ. I do not believe that for one moment. If they found anything, I would think it more likely clothing or other items of evidence (whether in Murat's yard or elsewhere.)

I'm not saying I believe any of what I have written above to be true (I don't know what the hell to believe, I just know what I don't believe,*) just that what Birch wrote isn't necessarily in the McCanns' favour. (It also doesn't imply Murat's guilt.)

Even IF the PJ did plant evidence, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the parents were innocent. Not necessarily at all.

But of course if they DID plant evidence and if there was proof of that, that alone would probably be enough explanation for their continued "getting away with it" and their cockiness.

* That nonsense abduction tale.

BUT - Mr Birch said they'd found Maddie's body and planted fluids from it, so they weren't without a body, were they?
You are right. She would not have been left 'in situ'. Its ridiculous.

by Lance De Boils 06.01.13 20:44

Still speaking hypothetically, they wouldn't have needed an actual body to get fluids from; what if they'd found e.g. clothing or a blanket which had come into contact with body fluids, or even just the "scent" of death? That would be enough.

by Guest 06.01.13 20:59

Not speaking hypothetically ... Police digs up the dead body of a missing girl. Isn't that what they were supposed to do? Find the girl, dead or alive. And then ... they put her body back into the hole and cover it up. And leave it there till the present day? Go figure. IMO Birch falls into the category of the mad, correction madeiran lawyer ... whether paid or not.

by aniandr 06.01.13 22:45

the police find the body of the dead girl. They Dig her grave up, Takes dna from her, put her bag in the ground, plant the dna in her parents car.when realising what they did, they close the case becoz it may harm the trade between 2 nations.

Ye. Sure. Ok daft1

by Guest 08.01.13 9:02

I have heard other stories though which are very silly and they are believed by many people; not just Sun readers either!

I still would like to know if there is any independent confirmation that Stephen Birch is a successful property developer as he claims to be. There is nothing about him on the Internet except for his hilarious LinkedIn profile; no website for his business which is highly unusual these days.

by Ciawoman 08.01.13 9:59

I could buy some of Mr Birch,s theory. He says the hole was dug in Murats back yard around 9 and Maddy was buried there At ten (making the Smith,s sighting correct). This happening without Murat's Knowledge. Then the finger is pointed at Murat by Jane Tanner. Murat would have took the wrap.

What I don't buy is that the PJ would find the body and plant evidence knowin Murat was being framed. Though sometimes fact is stranger than fiction.

I have noticed Stephen Birch has gone silent. Maybe the men in the white coats have taken him away.

by roy rovers 08.01.13 18:20

aniandr wrote: the police find the body of the dead girl. They Dig her grave up, Takes dna from her, put her bag in the ground, plant the dna in her parents car.when realising what they did, they close the case becoz it may harm the trade between 2 nations.

Ye. Sure. Ok [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Reminds me of the joke:

An old Italian gentleman lived alone in New Jersey. He wanted to plant his annual tomato garden, but it was very difficult work, as the ground was hard. His only son, Vincent, who used to help him, was in prison. The old man wrote a letter to his son and described his predicament:

Dear Vincent,
I am feeling pretty sad because it looks like I won’t be able to plant my tomato garden this year. I’m just getting too old to be digging up a garden plot. I know if you were here my troubles would be over. I know you would be happy to dig the plot for me, like in the old days.
Love, Papa

A few days later he received a letter from his son.

Dear Papa,
Don’t dig up that garden. That’ s where the bodies are buried.
Love, Vinnie

At 4 a.m. The next morning, FBI agents and local police arrived and dug up the entire area without finding any bodies. They apologized to the old man and left. That same day the old man received another letter from his son.