Re: LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:49

LHL News ‏@LHLNews · 13 hrs
@Bishop_Basher Amaral's lawyer has been allowed to ask questions of Kate #McCann, arguing that there's been no hindrance to the search for M

by joel27 08.07.14 13:50

sallypelt wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.

I get the discredit bit and the judge shutting him up, but, something is bothering him, something that means he has to get out the discredit of the dog evidence. I cannot believe he was not word perfect practiced for today in court but its the bits when your finished that catches you out. Somewhere into his mind there was a need to discredit the dogs and the evidence of blood. Its I am not sure "trigger in his head" its not about impact of the book the conclusion of the findings. Blood in the apartment nose bleed anything could explain it the dog finding it but that trigger says it has to be explained. Ok its small thing but just my first thought.

by True Liberty 08.07.14 13:51

Sallypelt please provide link to masonry ordination of 33rd degree.

Did anyone see in the Daily Wail the first image of Gerry, touching his ear and his nose looking like it had been photoshoppped to be Pinnochio.

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:52

True Liberty wrote:Sallypelt please provide link to masonry ordination of 33rd degree.

Did anyone see in the Daily Wail the first image of Gerry, touching his ear and his nose looking like it had been photoshoppped to be Pinnochio.

True Liberty, they are copied and posted tweets, so if you want to read them yourself, you'll find them here:

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

by Guest 08.07.14 13:52

True Liberty wrote:Sallypelt please provide link to masonry ordination of 33rd degree.

Did anyone see in the Daily Wail the first image of Gerry, touching his ear and his nose looking like it had been photoshoppped to be Pinnochio.

Yes, we don't know if that is true. I don't want this thread to get into a freemason debate. Please discuss on a relevant thread....thanks.

by Seek truth 08.07.14 13:53

Kate spoke about how amaral damaged the search, and the Madeleine foundation ?
How foolish, this leads to the question, Why refuse to mention the police files?

maybe Martin Brunt was going to mention the PJ files who knows, there was a lot of pausing in his speech.

sarcastic

by Angelique 08.07.14 13:54

joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.
I get the discredit bit and the judge shutting him up, but, something is bothering him, something that means he has to get out the discredit of the dog evidence. I cannot believe he was not word perfect practiced for today in court but its the bits when your finished that catches you out. Somewhere into his mind there was a need to discredit the dogs and the evidence of blood. Its I am not sure "trigger in his head" its not about impact of the book the conclusion of the findings. Blood in the apartment nose bleed anything could explain it the dog finding it but that trigger says it has to be explained. Ok its small thing but just my first thought.

Yes - I agree - something is bothering him about the dogs and blood. He knows OG has had dogs in PdL but I wonder if they have searched somewhere which is sensitive.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.07.14 13:54

'Most viewed' current news item on the BBC right now, posted by BBC 13.38 -

It's about Sean's comment re Goncalo Amaral

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

by Watchingthespincycle 08.07.14 13:55

Sean's question (if it happened) was convenient.
I would like to know if he's ever asked if they used to leave the children alone, and if so, why? If I was asking questions at that age, I'd want to know if and why my parents neglected me.

by Miraflores 08.07.14 14:00

Shame the BBC isn't allowing comments on the statement that Sean is supposed to have made. I would be very very easy to point out that the McCann's had Amaral's book banned in September 2009, before Sean could have heard anything either on a radio or in the playground.

But carry on MSM - you have been sycophantic to the McCanns so why change now.

by sallypelt 08.07.14 14:00

Miraflores wrote:Shame the BBC isn't allowing comments on the statement that Sean is supposed to have made. I would be very very easy to point out that the McCann's had Amaral's book banned in September 2009, before Sean could have heard anything either on a radio or in the playground.

But carry on MSM - you have been sycophantic to the McCanns so why change now.

Maybe the Daily Mail will allow them

by Guest 08.07.14 14:01

Gerry McCann wrote:Whoever took Madeleine is still out there and whoever the person is they must have been laughing these past six years.

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

by joel27 08.07.14 14:03

Angelique wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.
I get the discredit bit and the judge shutting him up, but, something is bothering him, something that means he has to get out the discredit of the dog evidence. I cannot believe he was not word perfect practiced for today in court but its the bits when your finished that catches you out. Somewhere into his mind there was a need to discredit the dogs and the evidence of blood. Its I am not sure "trigger in his head" its not about impact of the book the conclusion of the findings. Blood in the apartment nose bleed anything could explain it the dog finding it but that trigger says it has to be explained. Ok its small thing but just my first thought.

Yes - I agree - something is bothering him about the dogs and blood. He knows OG has had dogs in PdL but I wonder if they have searched somewhere which is sensitive.

OG is that means that Redwood has some faith or someone in OG has faith in their use, so you might be right there is something they found explains the cryptic tweet from WilliamThomas possibly......

by Guest 08.07.14 14:04

Babalou ‏@B_balou · 2 mins
@LHLNews OMG - they look terrified on some of those! [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] … I almost feel sorry for them.
#McCann pic.twitter.com/q8QNjdbtvp

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

by sallypelt 08.07.14 14:05

joel27 wrote:
Angelique wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.
I get the discredit bit and the judge shutting him up, but, something is bothering him, something that means he has to get out the discredit of the dog evidence. I cannot believe he was not word perfect practiced for today in court but its the bits when your finished that catches you out. Somewhere into his mind there was a need to discredit the dogs and the evidence of blood. Its I am not sure "trigger in his head" its not about impact of the book the conclusion of the findings. Blood in the apartment nose bleed anything could explain it the dog finding it but that trigger says it has to be explained. Ok its small thing but just my first thought.

Yes - I agree - something is bothering him about the dogs and blood. He knows OG has had dogs in PdL but I wonder if they have searched somewhere which is sensitive.
OG is that means that Redwood has some faith or someone in OG has faith in their use, so you might be right there is something they found explains the cryptic tweet from WilliamThoms possibly......

It will be interesting to know what it was that SY "sent away" when they did their search in Portugal, last month.

by Brian Griffin 08.07.14 14:06

jeanmonroe wrote:GM said (verbatim) "whoever took Madeleine is still out there, whoever that person is, or, or persons, they must have been laughing during these last 6 years at what's been told in the book, that there was no abduction that, that, y'know there's no predator out there, there is and he may str, he or SHE or THEY might strike again"

SHE? SHE? WHO the fcuk is SHE?

Guess that BLOWS 'Tanner MAN' right off their website then!

Unless, of course, Tannerman could have been a 'drag' artist!

But i reckon 'eagle eyed' Jane would have seen through that 'disguise', in an instant, even FROM the 50 (FIFTY) METRES as BOTH the McCanns in sworn, written, SIGNED, statements have said THAT was the 'distance' JT 'SAW' the 'abductor/predator' carrying Madeleine off, FROM!

Can't wait for their 'new' FEMALE 'suspect' to take her place, on their website!

Probably KM, (K Middlleton).............they wish!

Would add a nice touch of 'class' though, wouldn't it?

"Our Maddie WAS 'abducted' by royalty, we'd expect nothing less really, to be honest, as she was the most 'beautiful child that was ever born, Ask Jon'

Strangely though, NO 'predator' had 'abducted' any child in PDL in the 7 YEARS 'before' they went there, and NO 'predator' has 'abducted' any child in PDL 'since' they left there!

That's NOT a good 'strike' rate is it?

Oh dear! This looks like a precedent to a whole new round of investigations, Crime Stoppers, jollies for the Met. Hell no! Not all that again!

by Indricotherium 08.07.14 14:06

Whether they have something to hide or not, I think they have really missed a PR opportunity- it would look a lot better if they were insisting all this money was to be given to children's charities rather than themselves.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.07.14 14:07

sallypelt wrote:Love Don't Live Here ‏@PoveySarah · 13 hrs
GM was ordained to the highest 33° Sovereign Inspector rank, at 1330 on Friday 13 July 2007, at Freemasons Hall, London .#mccann

Well, maybe, maybe not.

But Gerry McCann was just a few minutes' walk away from Freemasons Hall on that Friday the thirteenth - as his blog for that day [mis-spelling of his daughter's name as per original - T.B.] confirms [acknowledgement: Pamalam]:

QUOTE

Spent a large part of the day at the Child Exploitation and Online Protecetion (CEOP) headquarters in London. The work they are doing in the prevention and detection of child exploitation is fantastic and I have no doubt they are world leaders in many aspects of their work.

The statistics of child abduction in the UK, both attempted and sucessful cases, are stagggering with over 1000 reported cases in 2003/4 and the figures show a year on year increase. The scale of the problem is much larger than Kate and I ever imagined and worryingly there does not appear to be reliable statistics for many countries in Europe. Clearly a lot of work has to be done to tackle this growing problem.

Kate and I believe that someone, somewhere knows something about Madleines abduction.

The events of recent weeks and the high profile of Madeleine reassure us that when the key piece of information comes in, to any law enforcement agnecy, it will be treated seriously and fed into the inquiry quiickly and actioned.

UNQUOTE

by Seek truth 08.07.14 14:11

candyfloss wrote:Babalou ‏@B_balou · 2 mins
@LHLNews OMG - they look terrified on some of those! [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] … I almost feel sorry for them.
#McCann pic.twitter.com/q8QNjdbtvp

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

Yikes !!!! Look at her face.

devi1

by Guest 08.07.14 14:11

That tweet has nothing to do with this thread ontopic

by Miraflores 08.07.14 14:12

Indricotherium wrote:Whether they have something to hide or not, I think they have really missed a PR opportunity- it would look a lot better if they were insisting all this money was to be given to children's charities rather than themselves.

Quite.

Nor do I feel sorry for them. If they had never changed their stories, but instead admitted that they had been fools, their daughter had paid I high price and asked people to learn from their mistakes, then I might. But even last Autumn Kate was declaring that it wasn't their fault.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.07.14 14:16

Irish newspaper just reported this:

Kate McCann tells libel trial of moment son asked about police chief's claims she hid Madeleine

Jul 08, 2014 12:02 By Paul Byrne

Kate and Gerry are suing Goncalo Amaral, the ex cop who wrote a book about the disappearance of their daughter, writes Paul Byrne in Lisbon

Kate McCann told a Portuguese court today how one of her twin children had asked her about claims she had hidden Madeleine.

Kate and Gerry are suing Goncalo Amaral, the ex cop who wrote a book about the disappearance of their daughter.

He claimed Madeleine had died in their holiday apartment and Kate and Gerry had covered up her death.

At the libel trial in Lisbon today, Kate spent 55 emotional minutes detailing the distress the book and follow-up TV documentary had caused them.

And she revealed the details of his outrageous claims had even reached their nine-year-old young children.

She said: “Sean asked me in October last year: 'Mr Amaral said you hid Madeleine, didn’t he?’

“I just said ‘he did, and he has said a lot of silly things.”

She said her son had heard abut the contents of the book on a radio news bulletin as he travelled on his school bus.

Kate, wearing a black and pink floral dress, also told of the devastating effects the book had had on their family.

She said: “I believe after the book things got worse and were compounded because we were in a more desperate situation and felt defeated.”

As she finished her evidence Kate, 46, said: “I do believe in freedom of speech, but I don’t believe freedom of speech means the freedom to slander.”

Madeleine, who was nearly four, disappeared from her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in the Algarve on May 3 2007.

Her parents say Amaral’s false allegations damaged the hunt for their daughter and increased their anguish.

But the former cop, 56, insists everything written in the book was already contained in the public police and court case files.

The hearing continues.

by Cristobell 08.07.14 14:23

Odious woman using her son to squeeze sympathy and cash. How will Sean feel seeing his name and his words on the tabloid front pages, and will he take the blame when the McCanns lose?

by Angelique 08.07.14 14:27

"As she finished her evidence Kate, 46, said: “I do believe in freedom of speech, but I don’t believe freedom of speech means the freedom to slander.”

But he hasn't slandered anyone - he has never said anything that could be construed as slander. His Book only repeated that which is in the PJ Files.

Where is the evidence GA has slandered the McCanns ?

How come now this is about slander?

by VeraWannabe 08.07.14 14:28

Look at those laughter lines....! What could have been THAT funny?

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

by sallypelt 08.07.14 14:29

Angelique wrote:"As she finished her evidence Kate, 46, said: “I do believe in freedom of speech, but I don’t believe freedom of speech means the freedom to slander.”

But he hasn't slandered anyone - he has never said anything that could be construed as slander. His Book only repeated that which is in the PJ Files.

Where is the evidence GA has slandered the McCanns ?

How come now this is about slander?

Angelique, let her keep talking music

The more she talks, the deeper the hole she digs.

by Guest 08.07.14 14:30

Cristobell wrote:Odious woman using her son to squeeze sympathy and cash. How will Sean feel seeing his name and his words on the tabloid front pages, and will he take the blame when the McCanns lose?

Well I certainly don't think he or any of the pupils at his school will be missing the story this time round, Kate has made quite sure of that. It all seems so tacky. They're happy to talk when they think they can get some money out of Goncalo Amaral but refuse to answer a few simple questions about their missing child when the police are searching for her. As a Brit I feel quite embarrassed by it.

by jeanmonroe 08.07.14 14:30

Ooops!

Kate Burley has just said 'Gerry McCann was in Portugal talking about whoever 'abducted' or 'MURDERED' his daughter Madeleine!

Really Kate?

Really, i didn't hear him say 'murdered' but, if he did..............................then you've just got yourself a WORLD EXLUSIVE!

You must have better 'lugs' than me, and i'm wearing a neck brace, in case you want to come 'round' and THROTTLE me!!

WAS going to 'correct' my post for mis spelling (Kay instead of Kate) but won't bother as KAY Burley is an 'honourable' McCann anyway!

by Tangled Web 08.07.14 14:32

Cristobell wrote:Odious woman using her son to squeeze sympathy and cash. How will Sean feel seeing his name and his words on the tabloid front pages, and will he take the blame when the McCanns lose?

Any 'normal' parent would not thrust their child into the news like this, no matter what they had said. If this whole 'libel' case is hinged on what Sean 'said' last October (not when they inititated proceedings in 2009?) then they are in big trouble. Once again, it's the children I feel sorry for. Poor Sean, I wonder if he gets teased because he cried the night before Madeleine went missing when the 'abductor' did a 'practise run'.

I have a near nine year old son and it's quite a self conscious age to be at. The only people damaging the twins are their own parents sad

Absolutely despicable.

by Latetothecase 08.07.14 14:32

Cristobell wrote:Odious woman using her son to squeeze sympathy and cash. How will Sean feel seeing his name and his words on the tabloid front pages, and will he take the blame when the McCanns lose?

Exactly Cristobell, and what if his little friends tell their families, who subsequently tell everyone else, 'we can't even hear the driver's radio on the school bus 'coz it's noisy'.

Because you ain't telling me small children are played news radio on a PA on their school bus of a morning and they sit there politely listening to it.

The twins are now being dragged into the stories even before hitting double figures it seems?