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

Christmas Message from Kate

Page 4 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 20:51

Christmas is going to be foie gras poëlé with toasted raisin bread and a chilled Sauterne, a quail with gratin dauphinois and a red Bordeaux and then a simple Tarte Tatin with whipped cream  and a ristretto with almond biscuits and chilled chocolates :-)

ETA some days one has to forget about vitamins and stuff like that ...

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by canada12 on 19.12.13 20:56

"JIT" could also be an acronym for

Just in Time...
Jane ( ) Tanner....

?

canada12

Posts : 1457
Reputation : 185
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 21:00

I think that's far-fetched. She's trying to radiate, she's still in control. IMO
The order in which she mentioned both the abbreviation and its meaning has been discussed here before :-)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 21:03

@aiyoyo wrote:
@canada12 wrote:I think they are terrified. And I don't think they insisted on the review / investigation. I think they got word that the case was going to be investigated by SY and belatedly issued a notice asking for the investigation to happen. I think they'd already found out it was going ahead and needed to give the impression it was their idea. I don't actually believe it was their idea at all.

Yeap, from MET response to FOI, it would appear the Mccanns were like fiddle by the Politician and Newspaper.
The decision to participate in the Portuguese Review was already underway prior to Mccanns' Letter.

It makes sense too.  Because when you think about it, their approach/es to Home Office  was/were  rejected, then suddenly through NOTW campaign they got their review instantaneously accepted by the PM literally overnight.  No if no but, unlike previous approaches, so what has changed in the interim time?
No time lapse for inter-office/inter-department/inter-authorities conferring amongst politicians and Police before the decision just doesn't gel.
Leaving one to conclude this was already mis-en-place behind-the-scene prior to their letter request.  

I, too, believe their call for review was a bluff.
They were playing this silly games to make them look good, banking on historical records that No 10 had never ever granted Review for crime of this nature, especially a crime committed outside of UK Jurisdiction.  
They couldn't possibly turn down Rebecca Brooks offer to help them campaign No 10 as it would be showing up their bluff.
I bet they didn't reckon for a mere Editor to have the power to persuade No 10; little realising mighty Mdm Brooks is not any mere Editor and little realising this madam has source in No 10 feeding her privileged info; let alone realising that the Portuguese were reviewing their case on the quiet anyway.

I think the Mccanns scored their own goal there with a little manipulation by the Newspaper that happens to suit the purpose of No. 10 just fine for that instant.

What do you think is Rebecca Brooks' motivation?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 19.12.13 21:14

Châtelaine wrote:Christmas is going to be foie gras poëlé with toasted raisin bread and a chilled Sauterne, a quail with gratin dauphinois and a red Bordeaux and then a simple Tarte Tatin with whipped cream  and a ristretto with almond biscuits and chilled chocolates :-)

ETA some days one has to forget about vitamins and stuff like that ...

Gracious a true feast for two - sounds delicious!
I especially love Tarte Tatin done the old fashioned way.

aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 19.12.13 21:16

Dee Coy wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@canada12 wrote:I think they are terrified. And I don't think they insisted on the review / investigation. I think they got word that the case was going to be investigated by SY and belatedly issued a notice asking for the investigation to happen. I think they'd already found out it was going ahead and needed to give the impression it was their idea. I don't actually believe it was their idea at all.

Yeap, from MET response to FOI, it would appear the Mccanns were like fiddle by the Politician and Newspaper.
The decision to participate in the Portuguese Review was already underway prior to Mccanns' Letter.

It makes sense too.  Because when you think about it, their approach/es to Home Office  was/were  rejected, then suddenly through NOTW campaign they got their review instantaneously accepted by the PM literally overnight.  No if no but, unlike previous approaches, so what has changed in the interim time?
No time lapse for inter-office/inter-department/inter-authorities conferring amongst politicians and Police before the decision just doesn't gel.
Leaving one to conclude this was already mis-en-place behind-the-scene prior to their letter request.  

I, too, believe their call for review was a bluff.
They were playing this silly games to make them look good, banking on historical records that No 10 had never ever granted Review for crime of this nature, especially a crime committed outside of UK Jurisdiction.  
They couldn't possibly turn down Rebecca Brooks offer to help them campaign No 10 as it would be showing up their bluff.
I bet they didn't reckon for a mere Editor to have the power to persuade No 10; little realising mighty Mdm Brooks is not any mere Editor and little realising this madam has source in No 10 feeding her privileged info; let alone realising that the Portuguese were reviewing their case on the quiet anyway.

I think the Mccanns scored their own goal there with a little manipulation by the Newspaper that happens to suit the purpose of No. 10 just fine for that instant.

What do you think is Rebecca Brooks' motivation?

What business was she in? Go figure.

aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by ultimaThule on 19.12.13 21:28

Dee Coy wrote:
What do you think is Rebecca Brooks' motivation?

Rebekah's motivation would have been increasing sales of the newspaper(s) she once edited.

To my mind, there's something of the minx about Rebekah and I see her as the type who'd sell all but her very nearest and dearest down the river if it would make good copy.  

I suspect the McCanns were putty in her hands as their arrogance has caused them to believe that they wag the dog, whereas the acutely observant and astute Ms Brooks' was wagging them.

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 19.12.13 21:46

I believe she got serialisation right to that woman's frightful bewk in exchange for doing the campaign.
Quid pro quo it's called.
Win Win for both sides money wise.

In the finished only one party can wag the dog.

aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 21:56

Obviously she wants to sell her rags, goes without saying. What I meant was, does she have something that she knows would break this case if it was properly investigated? Has she even contributed to the evidence?

Or does she believe the McCanns and her motives are to support them?

I'm inclined to believe the former as the resulting publicity if they're found culpable would be cataclysmic. I think the public are cynical now of the sycophancy and newspaper sales wouldn't uplift much as a result of yet more of the same.

Aiyoyo, I don't need to 'go figure', my thoughts are those above. I was asking for your thoughts. You obviously considered that an irritant. I'll not ask again.

Ultima, I agree with your assessment of the woman's character.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by ultimaThule on 19.12.13 22:06

I very much doubt that Rebekah is in possession of any information which would 'break' this case - if she had, she would have used it as a bargaining chip in her own run-ins with the police.

As Ms Brooks' trial is ongoing, it may be that she will unwittingly - or, more likely, wittingly, - reveal something that may cause the McCanns more discomfort than they are already experiencing. 

2014 is shaping up to be an interesting year  yes

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 22:17

Of course, the only paper to thus far release hitherto unknown evidence of the McCanns', er, selectivity in choosing which bits of info to release, namely the suppression of the e-fits, is NewsCorp's Sunday Times. Murdoch adores Brooks, regarding her as almost a daughter, I believe. Perhaps a trade-off could still happen?

Wildest speculation, of course. smilie 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 19.12.13 22:23

BTW, about the missing Donate button, this is from Gerry's Blog.


Statement by the Board of  Madeleine’s Fund:
Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited

12 September 2007

The Fund would like to thank everyone for their kindness, support and generosity.
Madeleine’s Fund was set up to:

Find Madeleine;
Support the Family; and
Bring the abductor or abductors to justice
and subject to that to help other missing children.

With the sudden dramatic and unexpected turn of events at the weekend the directors had to consider whether legal defence costs could be paid for by the Fund.  

The Board has taken advice from Bates Wells & Braithwaite London LLP and Christopher McCall QC.  The Board has been advised that payment of Gerry and Kate’s legal defence costs would be legally permissible subject to conditions about repayment in the event of a guilty conviction.  

The directors of the Fund discussed this today.  The two family directors, Brian Kennedy and John McCann withdrew from the meeting when the decision was made. Esther Mcvey chaired the meeting.

The Fund directors realise that there is not only a legal answer and recognise the spirit which underlies the generous donations to Madeleine’s Fund, which it
is the directors’ responsibility to steer.

For this reason the Fund directors have decided not to pay for Gerry and Kate’s legal defence costs.  We stress that Gerry and Kate have not asked for these costs to be paid.  However, people have already called in offering their financial support.  Any such fund to pay legal defence costs would have to be separately set up and administered.    

At the heart of this campaign and Fund is a little girl confused, lonely and in need of her parents.  This Fund’s money will be focused on finding that little girl and leaving no stone unturned.

At that meeting, the majority (if not all) of the Fund Directors were independent members.
Since then a few directors had resigned without replacement.
Of the six directors currently on the Board more than half of them are not independent members - namely Kate & Gerry, Jon Corner, and Brian Kennedy (uncle).
One is their in-house lawyer ES and the other one Mr Linnen.
It would be of interest to know whether that decision (not to use Fund for Legal costs) has been reversed.
 If not, who EXACTLY is funding their legal costs?  More importantly, WHY? Since the sum involved was hefty and still mounting.

More pertinently, it would be of interest to know what be their definition of legal costs, as in, in respect of what it is prohibited or in what respect it is not prohibited to be borne by the Fund.  Since their Fund accounts as of 2009 were as transparent as brick wall it is difficult to discern whether that 'Decision' was observed.

aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by PeterMac on 19.12.13 22:27

Have we ever seen in the accounts, or accounted for elsewhere, who paid for the legal costs of the prolonged series of trials an action to ban Dr Amaral's book.

For the benefit of the pros watching this site.
They LOST, and therefore had to pay the costs of the action.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 19.12.13 23:04

Dee Coy wrote:Obviously she wants to sell her rags, goes without saying. What I meant was, does she have something that she knows would break this case if it was properly investigated? Has she even contributed to the evidence?

Or does she believe the McCanns and her motives are to support them?

I'm inclined to believe the former as the resulting publicity if they're found culpable would be cataclysmic. I think the public are cynical now of the sycophancy and newspaper sales wouldn't uplift much as a result of yet more of the same.

Aiyoyo, I don't need to 'go figure', my thoughts are those above. I was asking for your thoughts. You obviously considered that an irritant. I'll not ask again.

Ultima, I agree with your assessment of the woman's character.

Dont over read into my brief reply as it was not meant that way.

As for my view, it's not easy to second guess which way inclined is Mdm Brooks where the Mccans culpability or otherwise is concerned.

In the trade that she was in, she was probably privy to a lot more info, and probably sitting on a gold mine of dirts.
IMV possibly she is (in fact likely) skeptical about the Mccanns' tale. Given her apparent shrewd nature I would say she's someone who would play her cards rather well where each show of hand would be perfectly timed for the right moment.
Had she still be in the job and come the day that the pair are charged I have absolutely no doubt the titles under her would not spare the pair, au contraire in fact, they would be slain mercilessly, put it this way. There's nothing more sensationalising than being able to turn the table playing at how they were fooled.



aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 19.12.13 23:20

@aiyoyo wrote:

Dont over read into my brief reply as it was not meant that way.

As for my view, it's not easy to second guess which way inclined is Mdm Brooks where the Mccans culpability or otherwise is concerned.

In the trade that she was in, she was probably privy to a lot more info, and probably sitting on a gold mine of dirts.
IMV possibly she is (in fact likely) skeptical about the Mccanns' tale.  Given her apparent shrewd nature I would say she's someone who would play her cards rather well where each show of hand would be perfectly timed for the right moment.
Had she still be in the job and come the day that the pair are charged I have absolutely no doubt the titles under her would not spare the pair, au contraire in fact, they would be slain mercilessly, put it this way. There's nothing more sensationalising than being able to turn the table playing at how they were fooled.



Thanks for clarifying roses . I agree with all of that, but still feel she may have deliberately twisted Cameron's arm in the knowledge that of the investigation was true and thorough, the explosive outcome she desired would materialise. And she was party to something she knew would give that outcome. Some sort of knowledge, heresay or evidence. All IMO.

A theoretical question: If this notorious and emotive case was finally solved due to evidence gleaned as a result of phone hacking, would that temper the public's appalled attitude to hacking? And consequently improve Brooks' current position?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by aiyoyo on 20.12.13 0:38

Dee Coy wrote:
A theoretical question: If this notorious and emotive case was finally solved due to evidence gleaned as a result of phone hacking, would that temper the public's appalled attitude to hacking? And consequently improve Brooks' current position?

One hell of a good question.

There is no logic why the Mccanns in particular were spared the hack by Brooks team, especially since literally every Tom Dick and Harry under the Sun that the Public has heard of was targeted. Very odd indeed!

aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Cristobell on 20.12.13 1:19

Can anyone remember at what point the McCanns turned on the press and volunteered to speak at the Leveson Enquiry.  Its late, and I should do the research, but I was wondering if it tied in with their clinching that Review they wanted with David Cameron?  It was obviously a case of be careful what you wish for, and the McCanns (thinking ahead) may have foreseen a time in the future when they would again be at the mercy of the press and they wanted the gags in place.

Of course, being cynical, one might wonder if the McCanns saw other (genuine) press victims, such as the parents of Milly Dowler, being offered millions in compensation, and they wanted to return for seconds.  

I have always been curious as to why the McCanns turned on the press, who had of course helped them create the phenomenal marketing ploy that was their missing daughter.  

Rebekah Brookes is by no means stupid.  The McCanns sell tabloids, even now, and when this story breaks, newspaper sales will rocket.  I think Rebekah called their bluff when she offered to put their appeal to David Cameron on the Sun's front page, and the domino has had its effect.  The Review has led to an investigation, the re-opening of the case in Portugal, and probably a race/competition between the forces of SY and the PJ to fit that final piece of the puzzle into place.  As someone said earlier, looks as though 2014 will be a very interesting year.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by ultimaThule on 20.12.13 3:13

@PeterMac wrote:Have we ever seen in the accounts, or accounted for elsewhere, who paid for the legal costs of the prolonged series of trials an action to ban Dr Amaral's book.

For the benefit of the pros watching this site.
They LOST, and therefore had to pay the costs of the action.
Your thread http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8250p100-fraudulent-fund#208342 has relevance here, PeterMac. 

The McCanns' limited company's accounts for 2013 should be available for perusal early next month, but I doubt they will be any more transparent than those of previous years.

I estimate the overall cost to the McCanns of the ongoing libel trial as being not far off 600,000e.  However, this is a conservative estimate which does not include any sums they were ordered to pay when the Supreme Court of Portugal ruled against them in respect of their attempts to ban the sales of Dr Amaral's book. 

If the judge grants the McCanns' applications to appear as witnesses they will incur further expense in respect of travel/accomodation in addition to their legal costs, which will continue to rack up until the trial ends. 

Should judgement be made against them, they will be liable for the costs of the trial and those of the 4 defendants, together with any sums the Court may see fit to award by way of damages/recompense.

In view of the earlier judgements made against them in this matter by the Appellate and Supreme Courts, I very much doubt they will be advised to appeal if they lose this case.  IMO they should have thrown in the towel when the Supreme Court ruled against them - as I suspect they were advised to do by their lawyers both in the UK and in Portugal. 

As it appears they have retained the services of high end English and Portuguese lawyers who specialise in matters of civil, and in criminal, law for almost 7 years, the question of what sums the McCanns have expended in legal fees since May 2007 is a subject I intend to incorporate in the libel trial thread at some point after the festive season.

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by PeterMac on 20.12.13 7:57

And the question still remains, Who is funding all this litigation ?
And the corollary - Why ?

Carter-Ruck took a hit of a third of a million - since their accounts could not possibly be false !
TB is paying his costs at the rate of £100 a month for the next ten thousand years or something equally ludicrous
But is it conceivable that they would not want the money from somewhere ?
ID is being paid by someone
The previous trials for injunctions against GA's book, which they won, then lost, then lost again carry with them the costs of both sides.

Who paid them ?
Even the "Fund" would not have sufficient for all of this considering they managed to squander more than a million on useless and fraudulent PIs (In which I do not include the ones who are just clueless !)

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by PeterMac on 20.12.13 8:03

And I still cannot make a donation ! Bother.
I was full of Christmas cheer, and hoping for a breakthrough in the first suspect they show on the site. (Tannerman / bundleman)

But it seems the other 8 suspects have been ruled out, since they have now been removed.
So that's all right.
So glad that progress is being made.

Just Tannerman to find then.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 20.12.13 8:17

@PeterMac wrote:And I still cannot make a donation !   Bother.

Fret not about Paypal, Peter, Clarence Mitchell said you can just send money in an envelope marked Kate and Gerry in Rothley, it'll get there. Remember?

Please don't use the lack of their 'Add to Cart' thingy as an excuse not to pay them for concealing their daughter's corpse and getting away with multiple crimes for nearly seven years.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by PeterMac on 20.12.13 8:22

@admin wrote:
Fret not about Paypal, Peter, Clarence Mitchell said you can just send money in an envelope marked Kate and Gerry in Rothley, it'll get there. Remember?

I wonder if will do that same with Donations to the Party from his constituents ?
Just put Pinkie, Brighton. It'll get there !

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by AndyB on 20.12.13 8:34

@PeterMac wrote:
The previous trials for injunctions against GA's book, which they won, then lost, then lost again carry with them the costs of both sides.

Who paid them ?
I don't think anyone has yet. My understanding is that they are only payable once the libel trial finishes

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by marconi on 20.12.13 9:03

@Cristobell wrote:Can anyone remember at what point the McCanns turned on the press and volunteered to speak at the Leveson Enquiry.  Its late, and I should do the research, but I was wondering if it tied in with their clinching that Review they wanted with David Cameron?  It was obviously a case of be careful what you wish for, and the McCanns (thinking ahead) may have foreseen a time in the future when they would again be at the mercy of the press and they wanted the gags in place.

Of course, being cynical, one might wonder if the McCanns saw other (genuine) press victims, such as the parents of Milly Dowler, being offered millions in compensation, and they wanted to return for seconds.  

I have always been curious as to why the McCanns turned on the press, who had of course helped them create the phenomenal marketing ploy that was their missing daughter.  

Rebekah Brookes is by no means stupid.  The McCanns sell tabloids, even now, and when this story breaks, newspaper sales will rocket.  I think Rebekah called their bluff when she offered to put their appeal to David Cameron on the Sun's front page, and the domino has had its effect.  The Review has led to an investigation, the re-opening of the case in Portugal, and probably a race/competition between the forces of SY and the PJ to fit that final piece of the puzzle into place.  As someone said earlier, looks as though 2014 will be a very interesting year.

Already in August 2007, Gerry wanted the media to slow down( interview in Edinburg).
In January 2008 they sued the Express.

marconi

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Christmas Message from Kate

Post by Guest on 20.12.13 9:14

@ultimaThule wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:
What do you think is Rebecca Brooks' motivation?

Rebekah's motivation would have been increasing sales of the newspaper(s) she once edited.

To my mind, there's something of the minx about Rebekah and I see her as the type who'd sell all but her very nearest and dearest down the river if it would make good copy.  

I suspect the McCanns were putty in her hands as their arrogance has caused them to believe that they wag the dog, whereas the acutely observant and astute Ms Brooks' was wagging them.

The "abducted" Madeleine story had effectively reached the end of it's shelf life when the review was announced - there's only so many sightings of little blonde girls with swarthy foreigners that even the most gullible will swallow. To generate massive sales revenue similar to 2007, the press need the truth to come out.

Perhaps the Times & Sun went behind paywalls in preparation - they serialised the book & probably have information that other papers don't.

Be under no illusions about Ms Brooks, she is a shark. Gerry may think that she is his friend but in reality he is her chum.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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