Re: WOW A MUST READ -Madeleine clues hidden for five years - Sunday Times Full article now on Page 1

by jozi 27.10.13 9:42

Just wondering when the dawn raid in Rothley will begin ?

by TMH 27.10.13 9:42

Can this really be the beginning of the end?? *does a happy dance* exalt

Not long now folks ! woohooo

by **PeterMac** 27.10.13 9:44

TMH wrote:Can this really be the beginning of the end??
Not long now folks !

But Madeleine is still missing - probably dead.
We must never forget that.

by Guest 27.10.13 9:47

PeterMac wrote:
TMH wrote:Can this really be the beginning of the end??
Not long now folks !
But Madeleine is still missing - probably dead.
We must never forget that.

Hopefully someone will 'fess up soon and tell the police where she is.

by Woofer 27.10.13 9:49

candyfloss wrote:
Woofer wrote:A few years ago, we weren`t allowed to mention Henri Exton`s name - can`t remember if it was this forum or another one I was on. A lawyer`s letter had threatened action if his name was mentioned. Anyone remember this?
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/11/censurable-censure.html

Ah ha, you treasure CF - how do you remember all these links?

Seems he was planning on writing his memoirs about MI5 under a pseudonym and he got Bindmans to apply a D Notice. Should we still be blacking his name out? Suppose not if he`s given permission for the Sunday Times to publish it.

by Cristobell 27.10.13 9:49

Well goodness gracious me. Taken ages to reach end of this thread! And what joyous reading, finally the truth is out there, and from the Sunday Times no less! No wonder McCanns are asking for press restraint, the coming week may well be filled with fireworks.

by Dr What 27.10.13 9:49

I wonder how Clarrie is feeling at the moment? Clever? Smug? ...or a bit queasy?

' would be distracting' if made public!! Distracting to what? The pursuit of the truth?

I wonder if Clarrie actively suppressed this info, or colluded with the McCanns to have it suppressed? Either way, this man is a Conservative candidate for the election.Truth and honesty and transparency still have a long way to go with him.

by Smokeandmirrors 27.10.13 9:50

PeterMac wrote:http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/perverting_the_course_of_justice_-_rape_and_dv_allegations/

Perverting the course of justice
The Offence
3. Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offence is committed where a person:

does an act (a positive act or series of acts is required; mere inaction is insufficient)
which has a tendency to pervert and
which is intended to pervert
the course of public justice.

4. The course of justice includes the police investigation of a possible crime (it is not necessary for legal proceedings to have begun). A false allegation which risks the arrest or wrongful conviction of an innocent person is enough. The word pervert can mean 'alter' but the behaviour does not have to go that far - any act that interferes with an investigation or causes it to head in the wrong direction may tend to pervert the course of justice. All the prosecution needs to prove is that there is a possibility that what the suspect has done "without more" might lead to a wrongful consequence, such as the arrest of an innocent person (Murray (1982) 75 Cr. App. R. 58).

5. Intention is not the same as motive. (However, the motive of the suspect is likely to be important if the public interest stage is reached.) The prosecution must prove an intention either to pervert the course of justice or to do something which, if achieved, would pervert the course of justice. All that is necessary is proof of knowledge of all the circumstances, and the intentional doing of an act which has a tendency, when objectively viewed, to pervert the course of justice.
And anyone who has acted with them, with the knowledge of what they were dong is by definition guilty of Conspiracy to Pervert.
The fact that you are a lawyer, or a spokesman, would not, of itself, be an excuse.
How many of the Directors of the Fund knew ?

So it looks like the deliberate suppression of information, leading to the innocent Crecheman being trumpeted as the abductor for years, and the deliberate suppression of other information which Scotland Yard have proclaimed to the world to be of central importance, would constitute perversion of justice. As would Tanners positive ID of Murat leading him to be Arguido and ruining his life. As would washing items KNOWING detection dogs were en route. As would lying about deleted phone messages, proof of which the Yard have in their possession. As would lying about smashed/jemmied/broken shutters.

And IF perversion of justice charges are brought and are successful, certain people COULD be sentenced to a life term.

I wonder how many people are choking on their full English?

by uppatoffee 27.10.13 9:51

The link candyfloss gave had the details of the letter regarding Exton and his investigative work, which has been available online for a while. SY must have picked up some info from the files they took from Metodo 3 offices.

by sami 27.10.13 9:52

Dr What wrote:I wonder how Clarrie is feeling at the moment? Clever? Smug? ...or a bit queasy?

' would be distracting' if made public!! Distracting to what? The pursuit of the truth?

I wonder if Clarrie actively suppressed this info, or colluded with the McCanns to have it suppressed? Either way, this man is a Conservative candidate for the election.Truth and honesty and transparency still have a long way to go with him.

I guess his usual pink blush is now turning a rotten shade of green. wow

by **PeterMac** 27.10.13 9:52

Just nip back and look at the Hagland thread - use the search box.
He, I believe, was persuaded to speak to SY about his secretive car-park assignations with Gerry
and left the team shortly after.

It is all beginning to fall into place.

by Tangledweb 27.10.13 9:53

Last time I felt as hopeful as this, was when Gerry and Kate were made Arguidos!

How damning.

There they were, throwing law suits around like confetti with one hand, whilst dipping into the fund raised by school cake sales with the other to pay their private detectives. Then they knowingly and deliberately suppress the findings.

The findings that could help them find Madeleine, which is why they had the fund and the detectives in the first place.

No PR team in the world can spin this one. The Sunday Times isn't a rag, it isn't the People or the Mirror with their 'Maddie in Greece' crap. It's got a credibility about it that goes way back and is read the world over.

Kate's rabbit-in-the-headlights appearance on Crimewatch makes sense perhaps...being confronted with Efits that she thought were dead and buried...thinking of the implications...what if the Press find out?

Well they have.

How can anybody, reading today's article, defend their decision to sit on this information?

by TMH 27.10.13 9:53

PeterMac wrote:
TMH wrote:Can this really be the beginning of the end??
Not long now folks !
But Madeleine is still missing - probably dead.
We must never forget that.

That goes without saying! And those who had part in her demise will get their just desserts and when they do, hopefully we will then know where she is pray2

by worriedmum 27.10.13 9:54

PeterMac wrote:
TMH wrote:Can this really be the beginning of the end??
Not long now folks !
But Madeleine is still missing - probably dead.
We must never forget that.

Totally agree Peter. It's a tragedy for all the McCann children.

by SeeIyay 27.10.13 9:58

Searcher wrote:So far, BBC tv news at 9 am (BBC2), and review of papers on Andrew Marr, have omitted any reference to Sunday Times Insight article. They have chortled on about such major issues as the BBC, the US, Prince Charles, the weather - but nerry a word of the stunning revelations today. I wonder why not.

This is not a problem yet forTM. Most of the public won't be swayed by the article. Most won't get it's significance. What would get the rest of the media on board would be a double page spread with ST's famous graphics about the wider problems with the case.

'An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.'

If there is a follow up piece showing that at the time MC's statements about the JT sighting were anomalous and sat alongside inconsistencies in T7 statements then we have a big story likely to go into the full news cycle.
Basically this story would be that anomalies led to cover ups.
There would have been a call to TM to tell them this story was going to run on the Sunday. Insight are old school and will invite comment. TM are running with a plausible exclusion line right now ie they didn't want distraction from the JT sighting. It looks like a judgement call. All that changes if this story shifts to what else the spooks uncovered. If the next story is that double page spread with graphics drilling down into anomalies and inconsistencies that led to a suppression of evidence because of a cover up then the wider media have a meta story to run with. That TM had efits and didn't release them for years is not the story that will get traction but you can bet Insight are ready with the Why?
For anyone outside the UK this is not another Daily Mail/Express type story. The ST Insight team are one of the most credible outfits in journalism and are known for their campaigns. This may be the preface story to a wider investigations. Again if whistleblowers know Insight will hear them it is a gamechanger. Right now we are still in glitch country.

by Mirage 27.10.13 9:59

Not a mention of the article in Andrew Marr Show during the review of newspapers. Not even sight of the article on screen.

Now Harriet Harman is on talking about Leveson and press regulation. Victims of crime who have been abused by the press, the Dowlers and- wait for it - the McCanns ......

Just disgusting in the light of that article still sitting on the studio table under her nose, still not mentioned.

Now Greg Dyke (one of the earlier reviewers so he know what's in the paper) in a conversation with Harman about press regulation and still nothing mentioned

Well that's the BBC for you. What we have come to expect.

ETA Sorry Searcher, see you've posted about the review. The Harriet Harman interview was right at the end.

by sallypelt 27.10.13 10:01

Smokeandmirrors wrote:I so dearly hope you are right about your assessment of Redwood Russiandoll.

This makes me so cross, all the bullcrap, hyperbole, weaselling words we have been subjected to.

Just want someone to get on with bringing this to a swift conclusion now and for the McCanns to be stopped from producing all this hideous obfuscation.

From my understanding of A Redwood's methods , all he did on CW was throw back what the McCann's themselves have said. Even the efits were in the McCann's PI files. A Redwood is no idiot. He wouldn't be in the position he is in, if he was.

"This has gone on far too long" - Andy Redwood

by cssharp59 27.10.13 10:02

Beanie wrote:Amazing news, and we now know why the McCanns never sued Halligen.

My thoughts exactly Beanie! all makes sense now..

by Praiaaa 27.10.13 10:03

[quote="worriedmum. It's a tragedy for all the McCann children.[/quote]Yes, but IF they are guilty is a tragedy if they are or aren't brought to justice.

Please everybody, instead of your usual paper, if you buy one, buy TWO paper copies of the ST - one to read, and one to leave casually on a train/coffee shop with the article highlighted... If the MSM can see they will sell more papers (or subscriptions) maybe the other will see money in the truth and start to man up. Well wortth a few quid to get this out there.

Whatever spin is spun - the genie is out of the bottle now.

by lj 27.10.13 10:03

This puts Kate's opemimg remark: "it is not we did anything wrong" in a new licht!

by loopzdaloop 27.10.13 10:06

Okeydokey wrote:And this is clearly a claim that Redwood knowingly misled the British people!:

"One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said."

We know it was Redwood who claimed it was a "revelation moment". So that is a very serious charge.

Redwood has nothing to do with this, in fact it was he who released the information via Crimewatch so trying to slag him off here shows your true colours. It was the MCCANN's that surpressed the information and according to Pat Brown threatened legal action should they divulge the Smith Sighting.

Pat Brown

WOW! I am shocked! It has just come out in the news that the #McCanns kept the Smith e-fits under wraps for 5 years! That they threatened their PIs with a lawsuit if they divulged the Smith sighting info. I knew that they ignored the Smith sighting but I didn't know they had e-fits that they could have put in Kate's book but didn't! Maybe there IS hope if this is actually in the news!

I know the veracity of the Smith Sighting was being discussed in the other thread, but surely it must be agreed that the Smith's are credible now?

by Guest 27.10.13 10:06

Just got hubby to get the paper edition, it is on Page 4 same article as online. Heading is Investigators had E-fits five years ago Big quote bolded 'The report question 'anomolies' in the McCanns statements' Pic of Madeleine with tennis balls, and one of McCanns posing. Plus the 2 e-fits.

clapping

by sallypelt 27.10.13 10:08

Has anyone contacted The Sunday Times to commend them on having balls? I, for one, will be doing it asap

by Woofer 27.10.13 10:13

SeeIyay wrote:
Searcher wrote:So far, BBC tv news at 9 am (BBC2), and review of papers on Andrew Marr, have omitted any reference to Sunday Times Insight article. They have chortled on about such major issues as the BBC, the US, Prince Charles, the weather - but nerry a word of the stunning revelations today. I wonder why not.
This is not a problem yet forTM. Most of the public won't be swayed by the article. Most won't get it's significance. What would get the rest of the media on board would be a double page spread with ST's famous graphics about the wider problems with the case.

'An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.'

If there is a follow up piece showing that at the time MC's statements about the JT sighting were anomalous and sat alongside inconsistencies in T7 statements then we have a big story likely to go into the full news cycle.
Basically this story would be that anomalies led to cover ups.
There would have been a call to TM to tell them this story was going to run on the Sunday. Insight are old school and will invite comment. TM are running with a plausible exclusion line right now ie they didn't want distraction from the JT sighting. It looks like a judgement call. All that changes if this story shifts to what else the spooks uncovered. If the next story is that double page spread with graphics drilling down into anomalies and inconsistencies that led to a suppression of evidence because of a cover up then the wider media have a meta story to run with. That TM had efits and didn't release them for years is not the story that will get traction but you can bet Insight are ready with the Why?
For anyone outside the UK this is not another Daily Mail/Express type story. The ST Insight team are one of the most credible outfits in journalism and are known for their campaigns. This may be the preface story to a wider investigations. Again if whistleblowers know Insight will hear them it is a gamechanger. Right now we are still in glitch country.

Thanks for that Seelyay. Just hope nothing will prevent any follow-ups.

by Smokeandmirrors 27.10.13 10:15

Woofer, even if we don't get follow ups, the best thing is it is in hard copy print, and not just online awaiting vaporisation by the "Whoosh" machine owned by Pinky!!

Log in for more topics