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

LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Page 38 of 40 Previous  1 ... 20 ... 37, 38, 39, 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 25.09.13 16:58

@ShuBob wrote:
@Monty Heck wrote:
@marconi wrote:I wonder why Amaral asked for a hearing behind close doors. Certainly not because of the McCanns' witnesses, also because he did not and does not know what they were and are planning to say.

I believe it has to do with his witnesses and imo they could be bringing new evidence that supports Amaral's book.

Let us hope,let us hope.

He does not want to shock the siblings (who does?).

In my opinion, Mrs. Susan Healy could chose for the truth, to free her daughter and son-in-law of their suffering
.
They are lost anyway, the truth will help them to feel less tension.
And it will be better for the siblings.
How will they ever trust their families on both sides if each of them is lying?

And the truth is about to be known??

Agree, there may well be very damaging evidence to come which, thanks to the McC's "winning" the argument re publicising the case will be published.  Rather than protecting their children from potential harm they claim arises soley from GA's book and nowhere else (how can they make these claims straight faced when they are fully aware of the official material in the public domain, availalble for all to view) these parents have ensured their children's exposure to what they are seeking to hide.  How will they divert their attention from the newspapers they will see, or stories they may see on the news, or read in the book written by their own mother?  When this risk is weighed against a slim chance that they may come across GA's book on the internet at some future point this makes no sense whatever. 

It can only be hoped that SH or some family member will care enough about the McCs and their children to finally make them see their own folly, first of all in fleeing Portugal and forcing the abandonment of the official investigation, their only hope.  All of this would have been over long ago and supporting them in these kinds of actions is not showing kindness or solidarity but is in fact cruelty of the worst kind.  It is the emperor's new clothes and someone who cares about them needs to make them realise this and bring it to an end, for the sake of their children's future if nothing else.  Even people like Susan Hubbard, the wife of a priest, encourages her friend in this folly, feeding her anger and desire for vengeance by giving her unquestioning assistance time and time again.  That is not Christian.  SH should counsel her friend to confess for the sake of her and her family's emotional welfare, or if truly innocent, to seek peace and normality for them all.  Is there nobody in that extended family, or a true friend who is capable of ending this war of attrition by making the McCs see the light, that they are the authors of their own destruction and have done more harm to their own family than the media, or the internet, or any book ever could.
I couldn't have written it any better. Well said Monty Heck clapping 

How is Michael Wright helping the twins by revealing in open court that Amelie encountered some unhelpful links when she allegedly googled her name?

PS: I don't believe Amelie googled her name. I think it's more likely that in looking for ammunition to strengthen their case, the McCanns and/or their media monitors googled the twins' names to see what links will come up.


Shame on you Micheal Wright. Shame on you Kate and Gerry.

Well said your post Shubob.

Amelie would have only been 5 years old when she supposedly googled her name I think I read somewhere.

Five years old - she must have been a very good reader and speller at that age is all I can say.

plebgate

Posts : 5445
Reputation : 1160
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 25.09.13 18:58

@jeanmonroe wrote:plebgate

"Let us not forget that if anybody is sued again, any witnesses on their behalf would have to swear on oath that they had never registered as a member on any forum and written threatening/abusive posts or posts designed to get any forums investigated and closed down."
________________________________________________________________

Well if Mr Wrong has 'screenshots' saved for NYP then the nasty posters names will be on them, won't they?

If we ever get to know those nasty peoples name, and i believe that Mr Wrong has had to produce hard copies, for the court, for all to see, then it shouldn't take ex 3A's admin to long to confirm if those particular 'members' had been on there a long or short time.
If for example the 'threats' were made by a 'newbies' who only posted 1,2,3 times, and who then 'disappeared' it could well be Mr Wrong and his 'pranksters' screenshotting the 'posts' for future use in ,say, a libel case.
I doubt that any of the 3A admin or moderators will provide that information. The Brendas and JJPs might still sit on a lot of member information only to use it for blackmail or to embarrass people.

____________________
"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 : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 25.09.13 19:01

Poe wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:
PS: I don't believe Amelie googled her name. I think it's more likely that in looking for ammunition to strengthen their case, the McCanns and/or their media monitors googled the twins' names to see what links will come up.

Shame on you Micheal Wright. Shame on you Kate and Gerry.
@ShuBob wrote:
PS: I don't believe Amelie googled her name. I think it's more likely that in looking for ammunition to strengthen their case, the McCanns and/or their media monitors googled the twins' names to see what links will come up.

Shame on you Micheal Wright. Shame on you Kate and Gerry.
If you have eight year olds, you put parental controls on all computers that they can access.

As well as blocking the usual "nasties" you can also block key words e.g. Amelie, Sean, McCann, Madeleine etc. etc. You then sit beside them while they surf the net just in case.

If it's true that Amelie is allowed unfettered and unsupervised access to the internet, it shows that the McCanns parenting skills haven't improved one iota.
Of course it has not improved, remember they practiced responsible parenting.
So we can expect the type of parenting that suits the parents, not protects the children. The last choice to have the trial open is another example of that.

____________________
"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 : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 25.09.13 19:03

@Monty Heck wrote:
Poe wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:
PS: I don't believe Amelie googled her name. I think it's more likely that in looking for ammunition to strengthen their case, the McCanns and/or their media monitors googled the twins' names to see what links will come up.

Shame on you Micheal Wright. Shame on you Kate and Gerry.
@ShuBob wrote:
PS: I don't believe Amelie googled her name. I think it's more likely that in looking for ammunition to strengthen their case, the McCanns and/or their media monitors googled the twins' names to see what links will come up.

Shame on you Micheal Wright. Shame on you Kate and Gerry.
If you have eight year olds, you put parental controls on all computers that they can access.

As well as blocking the usual "nasties" you can also block key words e.g. Amelie, Sean, McCann, Madeleine etc. etc. You then sit beside them while they surf the net just in case.

If it's true that Amelie is allowed unfettered and unsupervised access to the internet, it shows that the McCanns parenting skills haven't improved one iota.
Have just done a google search on Amelie McCann.  The first item of 185 results which come up is a Telegraph article from 4 days ago headlined "Gerry McCann contcted police after abduction threat to twins" and carrying a thumbnail of G McCann beside the intro.  She would know immediately this is about her and her family, without even opening the link.  So the first thing this child sees, if googling, is an article concerning a physical threat which would indeed cause any child fear and alarm but is only available for her to read online because her parents chose to make public their ridiculous court action.  Having only glanced at the first 3 pages of the search results there is no mention of GA nor any link to his book, although there are articles there in abundance which would cause anguish and upset to the McCs children, the majority of which are there as a result of media coverage of the present case or because they have been press released by the parents' PR. 

It is thoroughly despicable to place witnesses on the stand in Lisbon claiming that a book available only on the internet and would need to be deliberately sought out may in the future cause these children harm when a wealth of horrors for which their own parents are directly responsible can be found within one click of the mouse.  The McCs, despite their protests about merely seeking justice, seem hell bent on a vendetta to destroy GA in every way, including financially.  They know what is there on the internet and are aware of the part they have played in getting it there yet focus on a microcosm in comparison to the material on the web, in expectation that they will make 1.2m Euro from that.  So they have a motive for that, it enriches them, but what of the other sychophants who have taken the stand on their behalf?  MW knows absolutely there is a bigger threat to the McC children's well being tjhere than anything GA has written yet states on oath this book may at some point in the future cause them more harm.  There is a high likelihood that irreparable damage will already have been done to these children from material they will find on the internet, long before they would ever come across GA's book, if they ever did.  These children will surely one day find all this out and wonder why their parents, their uncles, their aunts, their grandparents, their parents' friends and associates all lied about these matters, creating yet more publicity and an unwelcome focus on them. 

In taking this action, the McCs have committed an atrocity on their own family, more cruel and wounding than anything a stranger in a foreign country could do by publishing his findings, by dragging their friends and relations onto a witness stand they will not enter themselves as part of what can only be termed a deceit.  Are none of them able to work this out for themselves or are they afraid they will be cut off if they fail to give the support asked?  I can only say that if any of my children asked me to participate in a venture like this purportedly to protect their children, they would be told in no uncertain terms that the ensuing damage to themselves and their children would not be worth 100x the damages they are seeking, but unfortunately there seems to be no-one in their circle with the sense or conviction or wisdom to so.
goodpost 

____________________
"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 : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Woofer on 25.09.13 19:09

I second that - all so true.

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aquila on 25.09.13 19:27

Just a little snippet from the Espresso Interview of 6th September 2008



Q – Did you ever get to know Gonçalo Amaral?

 

Kate – The question is the other way around: did he get to know us?

..................................................................................................................



It seems to me that GA's role was not to 'get to know' the McCanns. He was in charge of an investigation. He didn't need to 'get to know' the McCanns
How many of the McCann many NHS patients did they 'get to know' when they were executing their duties - duties which deal with people's lives.

What a thoroughly arrogant statement imo. Just goes to show this sense of trumped up entitlement and self importance.

ETA: Is it possible for mods to take out
all the gobblydegook that's appearing in my post please?

Thanks for the editing Candyfloss.

aquila

Posts : 7953
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 25.09.13 21:34

@aquila wrote:Just a little snippet from the Espresso Interview of 6th September 2008



Q – Did you ever get to know Gonçalo Amaral?

 

Kate – The question is the other way around: did he get to know us?

..................................................................................................................



It seems to me that GA's role was not to 'get to know' the McCanns. He was in charge of an investigation. He didn't need to 'get to know' the McCanns
How many of the McCann many NHS patients did they 'get to know' when they were executing their duties - duties which deal with people's lives.

What a thoroughly arrogant statement imo. Just goes to show this sense of trumped up entitlement and self importance.

ETA: Is it possible for mods to take out
all the gobblydegook that's appearing in my post please?

Thanks for the editing Candyfloss.
Seems to me KHs question can now be answered with: Yes, he did. We all did.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by suzyjohnson on 25.09.13 23:19

The situation regarding the twins and what they will be able to read on the internet has IMO been made about 10 times worse with the latest libel trial, because the twins year group would all have been toddlers when MM disappeared and consequently know next to nothing about the case. Now, with the most recent headlines, any of them could start looking the case up. 

I presume the McCanns wanted the case heard in open court because they wanted sympathetic exposure from the British press. I am not sure why Amaral's team asked for a closed courtroom, however I wonder whether they have been exceptionally clever here?

By asking for a closed hearing, his team have in effect pushed the McCanns to insist on an open court. Now no one can say that this wasn't the McCanns decision, and so the consequences of that decision are entirely the McCanns.    

From here Amaral's side could rightly claim that the McCanns have brought all the latest publicity upon themselves. So, really, it counters everything the McCanns witnesses could say about the effect on the twins doesn't it?

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1004
Reputation : 132
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by marconi on 26.09.13 1:50

Any of you who knows who is coming tomorrow?

marconi

Posts : 1082
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by The Rooster on 26.09.13 2:01

Well said Suzy J. The McCanns have no peripheral vision and no depth of field. Their planning in this regard is going to hit them where it hurts the most... In the pocket.

____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"

The Rooster

Posts : 379
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 70
Location : Virginia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by marconi on 26.09.13 2:12

@marconi wrote:Any of you who knows who is coming tomorrow?
The twins friends could have older siblings that could show them the last news on internet. According to Gerry there were even adults  who were telling them that Madeleine is dead.

The McCanns can not stop that tsunami of publications.

All those lies will be a schock to those two children.
If the McCanns love them as much as they love themselves, of even more, they have to be honest to them.
The truth is about to come out and they are treating their children as half valid human beings.
The families from both sides are being extremely irresponsible.

marconi

Posts : 1082
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by marconi on 26.09.13 2:23

Within a short time, Kate will start writing another book, " The Account of the New Truth" again for the twins.

Can you imagine the day they will be old enough to read "Madeleine" and find out the much their parents and especially Kate lied?

marconi

Posts : 1082
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 26.09.13 8:48

I wonder if the google search fairytale has already been used on the twins to manipulate them.

K & G have said during interviews that they were surprised how much the twins remembered. Any awkward memories can be dismissed as an over-active imagination coupled with the rubbish they've read on the internet.


Another possibility is that the twins have been removed from the McCanns and, like Shannon Matthews, given new names. It would certainly explain why the McCanns are happy to use them without sparing a thought for their psychological wellbeing.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 26.09.13 8:54

Poe wrote:
Another possibility is that the twins have been removed from the McCanns and, like Shannon Matthews, given new names. It would certainly explain why the McCanns are happy to use them without sparing a thought for their psychological wellbeing.
Sadly I very much doubt that the twins have been that fortunate.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 26.09.13 9:03

@suzyjohnson wrote:The situation regarding the twins and what they will be able to read on the internet has IMO been made about 10 times worse with the latest libel trial, because the twins year group would all have been toddlers when MM disappeared and consequently know next to nothing about the case. Now, with the most recent headlines, any of them could start looking the case up. 

I presume the McCanns wanted the case heard in open court because they wanted sympathetic exposure from the British press. I am not sure why Amaral's team asked for a closed courtroom, however I wonder whether they have been exceptionally clever here?

By asking for a closed hearing, his team have in effect pushed the McCanns to insist on an open court. Now no one can say that this wasn't the McCanns decision, and so the consequences of that decision are entirely the McCanns.    

From here Amaral's side could rightly claim that the McCanns have brought all the latest publicity upon themselves. So, really, it counters everything the McCanns witnesses could say about the effect on the twins doesn't it?
Well observed! 

You also noticed where Isabel Duarte announced her victory in Court on this issue; of 'winning' and defeating GA when he asked for closed doors stating it was out of consideration towards Maddie. No, they had to 'win' form GA, notregarding the ill effects for their living children.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 26.09.13 9:36

I posted this on the 12th Sept (first day)

martinbrunt ‏
[ltr]@skymartinbrunt[/ltr]
1m
#madeleine Mr Amaral loses bid to have media excluded and libel trial under way. First witness is Susan Hubbard, friend and priest's wife
_______________________________________________

Smart move by GA?
Knowing the McS love of publicity maybe it was his intention to actually get this in an open courtroom.
And can now be reported on by press.

ETA: (today)They were never going to have it behind closed doors, NO PHOTOGRAPHERS there!
NOW they would like it behind closed doors!
After their mate MW has been exposed, to the world, as a internet cyber per....., imo.
Well what do you call a person taking 'screenshots' of who knows what?
WHY didn't any of the 'families or friends' who we know watch us like hawks 'report' people to the police?
Seems like MW and GM are the only ones in the world who did.
IF i had seen 'threats' to the twins I would have reported it, MYSELF!

The only 'threats' to the twins, imo, were from their very own mother, who stated publicly that she wanted to 'take them ALL with her' (at least TWICE) in suicidal thoughts she had.
I did actually report those 'threats' (to the twins) to LSS as did other concerned people.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by margaret on 26.09.13 9:43

Poe wrote:
Another possibility is that the twins have been removed from the McCanns and, like Shannon Matthews, given new names. It would certainly explain why the McCanns are happy to use them without sparing a thought for their psychological wellbeing.
A stretch too far IMO, we've seen absolutely no evidence of that.  Their names wouldn't be allowed to be on the case against Snr.Amaral if so.

It's impossible for the twins to be given new identities at their age, they are too old and remember too much, if the McCanns were guilty and SY caught up with them who is going to bring those poor children up?  The whole family would be complicit.

I feel really sorry for Sean and Amelie, they deserved none of this.

margaret

Posts : 585
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-09-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 26.09.13 9:47

[quote="jeanmonroe"]I posted this on the 12th Sept (first day)

martinbrunt ‏
[ltr]@skymartinbrunt[/ltr]

1m
#madeleine Mr Amaral loses bid to have media excluded and libel trial under way. First witness is Susan Hubbard, friend and priest's wife
_______________________________________________

Smart move by GA?
Knowing the McS love of publicity maybe it was his intention to actually get this in an open courtroom.
And can now be reported on by press.

ETA: (today)They were never going to have it behind closed doors, NO PHOTOGRAPHERS there!
NOW they would like it behind closed doors!
After their mate MW has been exposed, to the world, as a internet cyber per....., imo.
Well what do you call a person taking 'screenshots' of who knows what?
WHY didn't any of the 'families or freinds' who we know watch us like hawks 'report' people to the police?
Seems like MW and GM are the only ones in the world who did.
IF i had seen 'threats' to the twins I would have reported it, MYSELF!

The only 'threats' to the twins, imo, were from their very own mother, who stated publicly that she wanted to 'take them ALL with her' (at least TWICE) in suicidal thoughts she had.
I did actually report those 'threats' (to the twins) to LSS as did other concerned people.[/quote



Yes, I would have reported them myself too and I would also have made darn sure I knew the outcome of any reporting of the incident.






plebgate

Posts : 5445
Reputation : 1160
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 26.09.13 9:53

Anyone know why KM used her name K HEALY in their latest charity 'hi-jack'?

Embarrassed in case there were going to be headlines like "Kate McCann hi-jacks yet another charity run to get herself publicity"?

Good charity, but where were the mentions of the ORDINARY 'fund raising' people that had been supporting it for YEARS?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Woburn_exile on 26.09.13 9:56

@margaret wrote:
Poe wrote:
Another possibility is that the twins have been removed from the McCanns and, like Shannon Matthews, given new names. It would certainly explain why the McCanns are happy to use them without sparing a thought for their psychological wellbeing.
A stretch too far IMO, we've seen absolutely no evidence of that.  Their names wouldn't be allowed to be on the case against Snr.Amaral if so.

It's impossible for the twins to be given new identities at their age, they are too old and remember too much, if the McCanns were guilty and SY caught up with them who is going to bring those poor children up?  The whole family would be complicit.

I feel really sorry for Sean and Amelie, they deserved none of this.
Spot on there margaret. Can you imagine having to live the lies your parents have told for years without question? Children have memories, if they cannot trust their parents to tell them the truth then who can they trust. Their "uncle David Payne" perhaps? I sincerely hope Social Services are reading this.

Woburn_exile

Posts : 239
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-05-30
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 26.09.13 9:59

I just can't get my head round Kate agreeing to do something for someone else's benefit with so little publicity. There would be no headlines in the mainstream media as JeanM suggests, only from the likes of we vile trolls!

I'm hoping that there are photos (undoctored ones, pun fully intended) to prove that she was there.

A woman often reverts to her maiden name when her marriage breaks up - not suggesting anything here of course!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 26.09.13 10:01

Woburn_exile

"Spot on there margaret. Can you imagine having to live the lies your parents have told for years without question? Children have memories, if they cannot trust their parents to tell them the truth then who can they trust. Their "uncle David Payne" perhaps? I sincerely hope Social Services are reading this."
__________________________________________________________

SCREENSHOT THAT!... MICHAEL 'CYBER STALKER' WRONG!



jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 26.09.13 10:03

@jeanmonroe wrote:Anyone know why KM used her name K HEALY in their latest charity 'hi-jack'?

Embarrassed in case there were going to be headlines like "Kate McCann hi-jacks yet another charity run to get herself publicity"?

Good charity, but where were the mentions of the ORDINARY people that had been supporting it for YEARS?
I would not be surprised to hear that there were one or two (and more parents) hacked off by their presence and despite their Supreme Highnesses, presence only £500 was raised. The family could well afford to bung in a grand between them and not notice I would guess, but maybe their friends and celeb friends are getting a bit tired of sponsoring them on their little "look at us" runs. I know I would be.





____________________
Judge Judy to shifty  witnesses   -    LOOK AT ME  -   Um is not an answer.

If I forget to add it to a post everything is In My Opinion and I don't know anything for sure.
Rolling Eyes

plebgate

Posts : 5445
Reputation : 1160
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 26.09.13 10:06

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I just can't get my head round Kate agreeing to do something for someone else's benefit with so little publicity. There would be no headlines in the mainstream media as JeanM suggests, only from the likes of we vile trolls!

I'm hoping that there are photos (undoctored ones, pun fully intended) to prove that she was there.

A woman often reverts to her maiden name when her marriage breaks up - not suggesting anything here of course!


Of course you are not suggesting anything just stating a fact that many do.


plebgate

Posts : 5445
Reputation : 1160
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 26.09.13 10:14

What must she have been thinking, on her latest 'run' knowing that the person running alongside her possibly didn't believe her "version of events"?

The organisers should have conducted a straw poll at the finisning line asking people if they believed that the 'guest runners' had anything to do with their child's 'disappearance'

I know of nobody i know (100%) that dosen't believe they were involved, either in her demise or if it's a 'scam'!

All say "what mother, in this world, is GLAD that the investigation into their missing child, is closed and that it dosen't matter if the case is re-opened, or NOT"

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 38 of 40 Previous  1 ... 20 ... 37, 38, 39, 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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