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

Blacksmith

Page 3 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by plebgate on 15.06.13 9:12

Never read his blog(s) unless something is posted on here.

Ignoring the dung is best Tony.   He has also referred to the posters here as cowards.

I read your post into the Murat statement and believe it was genuine research.

Who cares what any other bloggers think of this site or the posters on it.   Although I do think the comment about  sketching drawings of Maddie is an terrible thing to blog and as you say Tony, it came from his mind, not yours.

Name calling comes from the "pro" camp, so maybe that tells us something about his postings?

plebgate

Posts : 5447
Reputation : 1164
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Guest on 15.06.13 9:22

:goodpost:plebgate.
 
I remember commenting before that he sounded more likely to be the one drawing pictures and that provoked an outpouring of bile!
 
He (or they?) have had some great moments in the past - the McCann alphabet was hilarious - but now, I think I can safely say, he has joined the ranks of Bonnybraes and Bren.

P.S. The icons are playing up again - there should be one where it says: good post.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Guest on 15.06.13 12:05

goodpost

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by sallypelt on 15.06.13 12:07

The Blacksmith Bureau Saturday, 15 June 2013

I've posted this on the SY threat too, so admins, please remove one if you think it's necessary


Now we're talking…

"Under the plan, Yard detectives will seek the assistance of the Portuguese to carry out some inquiries on their behalf. British police do not have jurisdiction in Portugal but they have the right to investigate and prosecute any British suspects who might be linked to Madeleine’s disappearance."
As Goncalo Amaral has  said repeatedly, the original investigation was "incomplete". The Attorney-General's department in the archiving summary detailed the ways in which it was incomplete. The common factor was that  the British persons of interest  were beyond reach. If the review, which we remind readers is a joint review, had led to the re-opening of the case in  Portugal then the authorities there would be faced with exactly the same problem that they had then: no way of forcing those people back and  insufficient evidence to seek European arrest warrants. That will not be the case if the Yard take over the inquiry. The only "persons of interest" to the investigation are the holiday group: the others are now dead.
Forget the forthcoming rumours  that the Portuguese will be upset by the decision – that is a Scotland Yard steer and untrue. The fact is that the two countries have finally found a way to cut the Gordian knot. Everyone who wants the truth to come out, such as the parents of the child and their supporters, will welcome the news. Hooray!

sallypelt

Posts : 3305
Reputation : 524
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tigger on 15.06.13 18:54

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6008-blacksmith-unmasking-himself?highlight=blacksmith

Blacksmith: "Quite how an internet movement which began by investigating the lies of Kate & Gerry McCann has become a sex and crime obsessed clique of self-righteous losers that thinks it’s acceptable to defame honourable men like McAlpine defeats me.
What a truly wicked thing to do! [...] I only regret that McAlpine is too gentle a man to make the Twitter users who’ve defamed him pay the appropriate price – personal ruin – for their behaviour, instead of settling with them, as he probably will.
I've been rude or satirical about McCann forum people lately to disassociate myself from what I consider is now a disgusting activity.
unquote

Below is what I wrote at the time:
Surely Blacksmith could have found a simpler method than rudeness or satire to dissociate (disassociate isn't the best word here JB) himself from the likes of us? Especially if he now considers the majority of 'us' to be engaged in 'disgusting activities'.

The language in defending LMcA is curiously non-Blacksmith. 'What a wicked thing to do' would fit an elderly aunt's profile. Next we have a statement that
'McAlpine is too gentle a man'. Very nice if he's your uncle, but we're straying into territory and adjectives more suited to someone who has a personal interest, rather than that of an observer.

This gentle man, as I pointed out earlier, was and probably still is, a business man.

From the Oz 2000 interview:
‘McAlpine’s advice on dealing with the media?
Spread false defeat to gain public sympathy; or false accusation and then arrange for it to be exposed as such – so the accuser will forever be treated with suspicion.’ unquote
ref: http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/lord-mcalpine-shock-new-question-from-australia/

This gentle man too, wrote a book on the New Machiavelli.

So why is Blacksmith presenting us with a gentle man, who is the victim of wicked people like us? Because we haven't said a thing about him before the media did.
unquote

Below (apologies for the long post) is a copy of the BS article  and in particular the references to Payne being totally innocent (he published a picture of a Middle East lynching alongside it) There is no reference to the Gaspar statement, which clearly accused Payne. Here we go, the language getting ever more  - let's say vulgar.


Friday, 23 November 2012
Saying sorry is the easiest thing

John Blacksmith writes again: Well now. Somebody mailed me to check out one of the forums where a poster was devoting an inordinate amount of time and multi-coloured ink to me. I did. The post I skimmed was actually quite harmless and amusing but it was some of the other stuff on this "Madeleine McCann Site" which caught my eye.

As we know, Lord McAlpine was libelled and he has taken action against a number of the libellers. Nobody has stood up to claim that the libel was anything more than a grotesque pack of lies. The reason why the libel was so serious, of course, was the current climate of mass hysteria about paedophilia which the forums on the one hand and Witchfinder Rebekah and her peers on the other have whipped up.

In such a climate the accusation is absolute dynamite, far more serious than being accused of murder. Readers have only to look at the treatment of Raymond Hewlett, the man whom the McCanns' employees publicly targeted as a possible "suspect" in the MM case, to see how he became overnight the target of gross and disgusting abuse and accusations and was pursued right onto his deathbed, treatment which the Bureau described with contempt as "pissing into his oxygen mask".

It is this climate which has resulted in a number of deaths of suspected paedophiles at the hands of lynch mobs. Beaten to death. In England. In the twenty-first century. To make the accusation is to put the person at risk.

Now the anti-McCann sites have form in this regard. With gloating fascination they have accused David Payne of being a paedophile time and time again. We've always refused even to discuss the filth people have thrown at him after dribbling over the "evidence" which demonstrates his wickedness, just as we've always refused to discuss the claims that one of the Head Witchfinders was caught with his erect cock in his moving hand in a public lavatory some time ago. We could do so, of course, and we could use the McCann forum techniques to demand that the suspect answers our questions and demonstrates his innocence. We have the absolute right, don't we, to know whether he was watching, or fantasising about, an adult or a child while he was busily occupying himself. And what sex was that person? Justice for Maddie (from Norbury) demands the truth!

Did Payne's accusers ever consider what the consequences might be for him? Did they actually hope that a mob might descend on his house and start trying to burn it down ? Or were they just too dim to see that words cause real-world events?

Unquote



____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Tony Bennett on 15.06.13 19:23

tigger,

We have already seen on this thread the lavatorial language of 'blacksmith' (quite apart from the frequent swearing) plus his capacity to imagine others drawing a scantily-clad Madeleine.

Now you have added these two comments from 'blacksmith' in your post above (I'm very reluctant to re-quote them and only do so to illustrate a point)::

(1), QUOTE: "...treatment which the Bureau described with contempt as "pissing into his oxygen mask"

(2), QUOTE: ".... we've always refused to discuss the claims that one of the Head Witchfinders was caught with his erect cock in his moving hand in a public lavatory some time ago..."

These and other comments are more than unpleasant - and quite unnecessarily graphic.

Regarding the Dr David Payne allegtions, these facts must be remembered:

* Two fully qualified GPs broke the convention of standing shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow medics by alerting Leiecestershire Police to their serious concerns about Payne's remarks, and

* Leicestershire Police took nearly 6 months (and waited until Dr Goncalo Amaral was safely out of the way) before sending the Gaspars' statement to Portugal.

Against that background, you would think that a purported serious journalist/researcher on the Madeleine McCann case would show at least some concern.

But, no. Instead, he rails against 'the filth people have thrown at him after dribbling over the 'evidence' which demonstrates his wickedness".

And he describes forums like this as "a sex and crime obsessed clique of self-righteous losers", referring to Lord McAlpine as  'gentle'.

These matters enable us to work out some of the things which go on in 'blacksmith's mind - they are, if you like, pointers to his prejudices, views and inclinations

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Guest on 15.06.13 19:31

The filth that Blacksmith is now peddling destroys all the credibility he or they once had.

It's up to anyone else of course if they decide to copy any blogs here but I'll be quite happy never to hear from him again; he has in my view reduced himself to the level of the worst cesspit sites.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Tony Bennett on 15.06.13 19:35

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:It's up to anyone else of course if they decide to copy any blogs here but I'll be quite happy never to hear from him again...
AGREED

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tigger on 15.06.13 20:20

@Tony Bennett wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:It's up to anyone else of course if they decide to copy any blogs here but I'll be quite happy never to hear from him again...
AGREED

I certainly won't do this again, but I thought the graphic content of these  openly published articles illustrate the BS problem clearly. It may be the reason he deleted them.

For reasons best known to the BS bureau, nearly all articles were deleted and none to be added. Now we find new articles and I thought the above might serve as a reminder.

Admin: please feel free remove or edit my posts above, it really is quite unsavoury  now I see them again I'm sorry I posted it. Or could you blank out the relevant words?omg

Only rational reason for the above example of his/their work I can think of is that BS is part of Editorial Intelligence and is now frustrated that we don't answer using the same language.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by bobbin on 15.06.13 21:55

@tigger wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:It's up to anyone else of course if they decide to copy any blogs here but I'll be quite happy never to hear from him again...
AGREED

I certainly won't do this again, but I thought the graphic content of these  openly published articles illustrate the BS problem clearly. It may be the reason he deleted them.

For reasons best known to the BS bureau, nearly all articles were deleted and none to be added. Now we find new articles and I thought the above might serve as a reminder.

Admin: please feel free remove or edit my posts above, it really is quite unsavoury  now I see them again I'm sorry I posted it. Or could you blank out the relevant words?omg

Only rational reason for the above example of his/their work  I can think of is that BS is part of Editorial Intelligence and is now frustrated that we don't answer using the same language.
I think it is rather important to leave the material here.
Just as Lord A M wrote a book showing how to debase other people and render them disrespected and disbelieved, just as this same man 'cleaned' his wiki pages, was it around the time that Ovenden was being looked at? Blacksmith has shown in print and on the record, what his mind is like.
Unpleasant as it is to read this sort of thing, wiping it off the record does not make him a nice person all of a sudden, and people deserve to be able to make their own judgment, which they can only do if they are properly informed.
I don't think any of us would be happy to be party to 'white-washing' either BS or Lord A M

bobbin

Posts : 2030
Reputation : 119
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Angelique on 16.06.13 6:40

candyfloss wrote:
@Angelique wrote:candyfloss

Can you help - I seem to have lost any "little boxes" at the top and no smilies either. Maybe its because I am using Apple perhaps?

Might be, lots of people having problems too on other forums. They are trying to sort it out.

http://help.forumotion.com/t124671p360-only-topic-new-editor#831718

Thank you for your reply :)

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

and more

Post by russiandoll on 16.06.13 17:48

How it all began: "Mummy, mummy, it's dark and I'm scared…Mummy…Mummy?"
On the surface  the latest story appears to be a complete invention since nowhere is the headline "UK police to take over" backed up by any recorded statement, official or otherwise:  the supposed confirmatory quotations are fake, that is they do not relate to the "take over" story but are stock quotations from the past to turn an organized leak into a news item.
Nevertheless we believe that the story is basically true and will be confirmed. It was clearly released to multiple  media outlets simultaneously, together  with an embargo on giving the exact source but a verbal assurance that it represented the true situation. Who by – Yard or Home Office? They're  not saying. If the story is untrue, or a power play,  then one of the two will issue a formal rebuttal. Neither of them have done so yet, which implies the decision is indeed joint and agreed.  Whether  a potential leak prematurely prompted the release of information – as Amaral's comments did in April 2012 – or whether it is the outcome of  the discussions about the review's future that we forecast in January, is immaterial, as is the possibility that it is a "flyer" in Whitehall terms: release the principle unofficially and see if the treasury or MPs object and then put the nuts and bolts together in peace.
The Bureau's apparently lone belief that it is a masterstroke, intentional or accidental, which means that British persons of interest cannot evade questioning by refusing to return to Portugal  is, if anything,  stronger after reflection than it was before. Readers should note that if the change is confirmed and the UK police question UK citizens, then for the first time since May 3 2007, the case becomes subject to UK contempt of court laws: that means potential limits on  what twitter and UK forums and, much more importantly, on spokesmen, or "crooked, lying, contemptible  shits"  as they are sometimes  known, can say.  Note how Max Clifford, the biggest mouth around, has had to behave since his member he was put on police bail: any spin and he is in contempt of court.

One of the 20 suspects identified by UK police
Indeed anything which offers the prospect of staunching  the discharges from Mitchell's orifice, together with a ban on his multi-gendered and psychologically disturbing identity role-playing – "pal", "friend", "source" "family friend" "crooked lying contemptible shit" –  eerily reminiscent of the latest mad Wallender suspect who strips to his undies  and indulges in face-painted masturbatory droolings  ahead of his next crime, should be welcomed for that service alone.
Equally, when the various British paedophiles and toddler snatchers  identified by the Yard – the Ink Blots as we believe they are known—are called in for questioning they will be uneasily aware that  lawyers for a couple of previous arguidos, or "persons of complete innocence" as Gerry McCann's Portuguese phrase book translates the term, went for a "use the public via the media to avoid extradition"  defence. That won't be much of a help here, will it? Oh, and Panorama programs made to expunge a belief in the essential innocence and goodness of stealing toddlers to order will be banned as well. 
Lastly it's good to know that the far-sighted  Leicester police refused to allow access to their Madeleine files in 2008 and 2009, despite prolonged attempts to get at them by persons of complete innocence. Just imagine if they had somehow fallen into the hands of all those Hewitts and other paedophile filth pin-pointed by the Yard! Why, knowing all the evidence and the operational weaknesses in the case against them might well have enabled monsters to escape, mightn't it?  As Kate McCann said in her book, if memory serves us,  "Well done chief constable!"
 
 

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by PeterMac on 16.06.13 21:48

And the picture he used to illustrate the piece. . .

Sleep well, twins.

In case some people don't get the allusions this is from WIKI. . .

Saturn Devouring His Son is the name given to a painting by Spanish artist Francisco Goya. According to the traditional interpretation, it depicts the Greek myth of the Titan Cronus (in the title Romanised to Saturn), who, fearing that he would be overthrown by his children, ate each one upon their birth. The work is one of the 14 Black Paintings that Goya painted directly onto the walls of his house sometime between 1819 and 1823. It was transferred to canvas after Goya's death and has since been held in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.06.13 22:04

'blacksmith' - unnecessarily graphic picture, and then this:

"...crooked lying contemptible shit" – eerily reminiscent of the latest mad Wallender suspect who strips to his undies and indulges in face-painted masturbatory droolings ahead of his next crime..."

No change there, then

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13977
Reputation : 2149
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Nina on 16.06.13 22:29

@PeterMac wrote:And the picture he used to illustrate the piece. . .

Sleep well, twins.

In case some people don't get the allusions this is from WIKI. . .

Saturn Devouring His Son is the name given to a painting by Spanish artist Francisco Goya. According to the traditional interpretation, it depicts the Greek myth of the Titan Cronus (in the title Romanised to Saturn), who, fearing that he would be overthrown by his children, ate each one upon their birth. The work is one of the 14 Black Paintings that Goya painted directly onto the walls of his house sometime between 1819 and 1823. It was transferred to canvas after Goya's death and has since been held in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.

Ye gods I saw that picture last week whilst on holiday in Madrid, very gruesome.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2627
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by lj on 17.06.13 0:11

recently there have been 2 cases where a mother, and a separate case the father, ate the baby.

Now of course CR I am not saying Kate and Gerry ate Madeleine, but in a allegoric kind of way I can see  a story.

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

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3276
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tigger on 17.06.13 7:18

From BSabove:
'Lastly it's good to know that the far-sighted  Leicester police refused to allow access to their Madeleine files in 2008 and 2009, despite prolonged attempts to get at them by persons of complete innocence.'


Iirc it was the court which refused them access to the documents as they would have needed a court order to see the police files?  The police may (I imagine) not allow anyone access to the documents in any case?  


Iirc too, the McCanns were on holiday in Canada (Auntie Norah again?) when the case was heard. 

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by aiyoyo on 17.06.13 8:25

@Tony Bennett wrote:'blacksmith' - unnecessarily graphic picture, and then this:

"...crooked lying contemptible shit" – eerily reminiscent of the latest mad Wallender suspect who strips to his undies and indulges in face-painted masturbatory droolings ahead of his next crime..."

No change there, then


SHOCKING!

He defended the Lord Mc******** to the hilt.  
Rubbish the entire forum over theory of  Gaspars' statement, yet he thought nothing about repeating allegation fabricated by the vile murat*** going even further by doing it in a depraved graphic manner.

Is this hypocrisy, double standard, or a certain flaw in his make-up in the same manner as  depraved pervert with a hidden agenda.  Not saying, just saying.

If he disagrees with the alleged accusation of innocent people ie the two doctors and one Lord because it is against his principle, that's fine.  
By that logic, why does he not apply the same principle to the person be labelled as witch hunter.

Would it be because he's an attention seeker who does not like to be overshadowed by an ex-lawyer's work because he's jealous. You have to wonder don't you?

Either he's against the principle of accusing innocent people or he's not - can't be selective about it, else it's not a principle but personal discrimination/biased especially when circumstantial evidence exists in those cases his defended vs no evidence against one innocent man he persecuted in a graphic manner.

He's lost people's respect.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Guest on 17.06.13 9:33

Some more unappetising meal time reading!
 
In my view Blacksmith is now on the same level as muratfan and there's not much lower anyone can go than that!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tiny on 17.06.13 11:03

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:'blacksmith' - unnecessarily graphic picture, and then this:

"...crooked lying contemptible shit" – eerily reminiscent of the latest mad Wallender suspect who strips to his undies and indulges in face-painted masturbatory droolings ahead of his next crime..."

No change there, then


SHOCKING!

He defended the Lord Mc******** to the hilt.  
Rubbish the entire forum over theory of  Gaspars' statement, yet he thought nothing about repeating allegation fabricated by the vile murat*** going even further by doing it in a depraved graphic manner.

Is this hypocrisy, double standard, or a certain flaw in his make-up in the same manner as  depraved pervert with a hidden agenda.  Not saying, just saying.

If he disagrees with the alleged accusation of innocent people ie the two doctors and one Lord because it is against his principle, that's fine.  
By that logic, why does he not apply the same principle to the person be labelled as witch hunter.

Would it be because he's an attention seeker who does not like to be overshadowed by an ex-lawyer's work because he's jealous.  You have to wonder don't you?

Either he's against the principle of accusing innocent people or he's not - can't be selective about it, else it's not a principle but personal discrimination/biased especially when circumstantial evidence exists in those cases his defended vs no evidence against one innocent man he persecuted in a graphic manner.

He's lost people's respect.



good post,

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by Casey5 on 17.06.13 21:05

@tigger wrote:From BSabove:
'Lastly it's good to know that the far-sighted  Leicester police refused to allow access to their Madeleine files in 2008 and 2009, despite prolonged attempts to get at them by persons of complete innocence.'


Iirc it was the court which refused them access to the documents as they would have needed a court order to see the police files?  The police may (I imagine) not allow anyone access to the documents in any case?  


Iirc too, the McCanns were on holiday in Canada (Auntie Norah again?) when the case was heard. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole of the transcript of the case can be viewed at the mccann files link below.

The McCanns' lawyers take Leicestershire Police (LP) to the High Court to force the release of police information. However, the legal bid is withdrawn after LP agree to release 81 pieces of information (note: not files) out of a total of over 11,000 pieces of information held. The released information relates to phone calls made to the McCanns' solicitors and passed on to the Leicester control room at the start of the inquiry.

During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id130.html

Casey5

Posts : 321
Reputation : 18
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tigger on 17.06.13 21:32

@Casey5 wrote:
@tigger wrote:From BSabove:
'Lastly it's good to know that the far-sighted  Leicester police refused to allow access to their Madeleine files in 2008 and 2009, despite prolonged attempts to get at them by persons of complete innocence.'


Iirc it was the court which refused them access to the documents as they would have needed a court order to see the police files?  The police may (I imagine) not allow anyone access to the documents in any case?  


Iirc too, the McCanns were on holiday in Canada (Auntie Norah again?) when the case was heard. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole of the transcript of the case can be viewed at the mccann files link below.

The McCanns' lawyers take Leicestershire Police (LP) to the High Court to force the release of police information. However, the legal bid is withdrawn after LP agree to release 81 pieces of information (note: not files) out of a total of over 11,000 pieces of information held. The released information relates to phone calls made to the McCanns' solicitors and passed on to the Leicester control room at the start of the inquiry.

During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id130.html
[b]

Thanks for looking that up.  I knew they were given some information but it's interesting to see how much they didn't get.  My point was that they'd have to go to court to do so as the police is not allowed to give out information in such cases. Imo it's rather like the McCanns to assume they would be able to access the police files.

So these were the IFL people and it was as early as July 08 when they tried that. Yet they must still have been arguidos at that time.
I wonder if they knew at the time that the PJ files would be published.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by aiyoyo on 18.06.13 6:35

@tigger wrote:
@Casey5 wrote:
@tigger wrote:From BSabove:
'Lastly it's good to know that the far-sighted  Leicester police refused to allow access to their Madeleine files in 2008 and 2009, despite prolonged attempts to get at them by persons of complete innocence.'


Iirc it was the court which refused them access to the documents as they would have needed a court order to see the police files?  The police may (I imagine) not allow anyone access to the documents in any case?  


Iirc too, the McCanns were on holiday in Canada (Auntie Norah again?) when the case was heard. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole of the transcript of the case can be viewed at the mccann files link below.

The McCanns' lawyers take Leicestershire Police (LP) to the High Court to force the release of police information. However, the legal bid is withdrawn after LP agree to release 81 pieces of information (note: not files) out of a total of over 11,000 pieces of information held. The released information relates to phone calls made to the McCanns' solicitors and passed on to the Leicester control room at the start of the inquiry.

During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id130.html
[b]

Thanks for looking that up.  I knew they were given some information but it's interesting to see how much they didn't get.  My point was that they'd have to go to court to do so as the police is not allowed to give out information in such cases. Imo it's rather like the McCanns to assume they would be able to access the police files.

So these were the IFL people and it was as early as July 08 when they tried that. Yet  they must still have been arguidos at that time.
I wonder if they knew at the time that the PJ files would be published.

I dare say they most definitely know nothing that shelving obliges files to be released else they would not have asked for the shelving (yes it was them who pushed for the shelving according to Dr Amaral) without first taking the legal route to block the release

At the end of the day I suspect it is not a question of choice -  they desperately wanted the case shelved because they were desperate for their aguidos status to be shelved along it.  Anyhow I cant see Portugal Court entertaining the odious pair, or making any exception for them against their existing system, even if they'd wanted to apply to ban the release.

It was a case of shelved with files release, or leave the case in situ - as in cold awaiting new development - but in the latter their arguidos status will remain also in situ. I don't know how long is the time statute a person can be held as suspect (arguido) but would imagine quite a few years under the Portuguese system for as long as the investigation was alive. And the mccanns most certainly did not want the investigative to remain alive when the investigation focus was on them.

 Personally, I believe once they got over the initial shock, they are not too bothered now because they made sure the release files are not in the mainstream.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by tigger on 18.06.13 7:13

They were desperate to be released from their arguido status as they were negotiating amongst others a 2+ million film deal, there was a bidding war for Oprah Winfrey said to be over 1 million and there was a documentary they wanted to bring out - none of that could happen whilst they were still arguidos. 
All this as early as December 07 and January 08!

So once the files were released and all in Portuguese of course, they had time to ring-fence them. TM made good use from the list of sightings and 'missed chances' - very good spin so once again imo not Clarrie.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Blacksmith

Post by PeterMac on 21.06.13 22:46

today's offering.
Friday, 21 June 2013
It must be "operational"


The Bureau no longer does old ground
Redbrick Rothley Manor appears to be in information lock-down, for the first time since September 2007.  Then, though, the outlook for the pair,due to a number of  grievous misunderstandings, was  temporarily rather grim, whereas now it seems that  the Yard and CPS are closing in on the monsters  who carried the child out of apartment 5A.
Obviously the parents must have been fully briefed by Scotland Yard and the Crown Prosecution Service on the new developments and  may have very good reasons for their discretion. But it's still frustrating not to hear from them.  Perhaps their supporters on Facebook or  twitter, who always seem to be very knowledgeable about the case, will tell us what's going on. Otherwise we  amateur bloggers will just have to wait  for real journalists like K. Simmons and David James Smith to spell it all out.  

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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