The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Mm11

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Regist10
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Mm11

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Regist10

Possible Action Against The Times

Page 7 of 16 Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 11 ... 16  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 02.08.14 23:41

How do we know that she wasn't happy with how she saw herself on that occasion?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFCdbMc0qZc

Here she is in all her loveliness......
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 02.08.14 23:49

joel27 wrote:
It's where I disagree lets take the revelation moment it gives them the chance to take down the Tannerman pictures from the web-site declare publicly that Smithman is the main suspect. No way will they , they cannot and could never because of the September statements forever linkGerry  to Smithman.. Smithman is the elephant in the room if you like, you have to prove where Gerry was without doubt at the appropriate time to make Smithman viable.

@ joel27:  Think very hard please about the totality of the Smiths' evidence. If you were prosecuting the McCanns, would you for one moment want to bring Martin Smith along as a prosecution witness for your cliam that the man they saw was really Gerry McCann? Any defence barrister would rip his defence to shreds in minutes, a hundred times more effectively than I have tried to do here. The very idea is a total non-starter, isn't it?

They cannot, there are the missing minutes around the same time where he was out looking. (happy to be corrected if there is a timeline with independent verification). Smithman could only be the abductor seen by Tannerman. The reason of wandering around for 45 minutes is easier to be explained - taken somewhere for 40 minutes.  

@ joel27: There is IMO more than adequate evidence that Gerry McCann was around the Ocean Club at the time of the Smiths' alleged 'sighting', and the very idea that he would carry around his dead daughter hours after she died at the very moment they [Tapas 9] have all agreed to raise an almighty alarm does not IMO deserve serious consideration. No-one else saw this man carrying a child all the way from Apatrment G5A to near the beach - around 700 yards. 

The revelation moment to me is the dawning on the McCanns that OG are not buying the story so carefully planted for 7 years. It points to me that the lack of publicity by the McCanns since, in the vocal support of OG, the urging to find Smithman is not the sign of support I would expect if their headache was removed.

@ joel27: I am not quite understanding your words here, they are not making complete sense to me. If you think that DCI Redwood is carrying out a cunning plan here to 'get the McCanns', I fear you re badly mistaken.  

@ ShuBon and @ Google Gaspar Statements

Regarding Kate looking 'shocked' and 'terrified' when the efits were shown on Crimewatch.

REPLY: I don't think so. Is there not more than a hint or two that Dr Kate McCann might be able to 'switch on' the depressed  and harassed look when required? 

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by TheTruthWillOut 02.08.14 23:49

Depends on the nature of the crime? Not sure what you mean here Gollum!? Could you expand on this for me? I'm a bit thick...!


The BBC are hardly holier than thou are they? No doubt they aren't Gollum, Savile case to name one, which is why I would be shocked if they are actively partaking in a whitewash of arguably the most infamous case in modern history now.


 I'm sure Crimewatch is invaluable in many circumstances but watching the October 2013 update I thought it was more like a fictional crime style soap opera.  For a start, the so called reconstruction that was supposed to be portraying the nearest to the truth ever before seen (or words to that effect) and yet a group of actors was used, in a location totally unlike the Ocean Club, using the Tapas group witness accounts for scripting.



I'm holding out hope that there is method in what we see as madness...this is a unique case where we have the almost complete case files to compare with unlike any other case.






 
TheTruthWillOut
TheTruthWillOut

Posts : 733
Activity : 754
Likes received : 19
Join date : 2011-09-26

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by ShuBob 02.08.14 23:52

@ Tony

Except that to me she didn't look either depressed or harassed. She looked positively petrified. Why? I have no idea!
avatar
ShuBob

Posts : 1896
Activity : 1983
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2012-02-07

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 02.08.14 23:53

joel27 Today at 11:14 pm
 
"The revelation moment to me is the dawning on the McCanns that OG are not buying the story so carefully planted for 7 years. It points to me that the lack of publicity by the McCanns since in the vocal support of OG the urging to find Smithman is not the sign of support I would expect if their headache was removed."

For goodness sake!  OG has now been involved for over 3 years, firstly reviewing all the files and ancillary information and then apparently conducting a full blown investigation.  They have full reign within the UK and unlimited resources at their disposal and yet they are still playing cops and robbers.  If there be a revelation moment worthy of investigating, surely they would have solved the case long before now?  What exactly is the e-fit published during the Crimewatch production?  Two full frontal facials of two entirely different people who could be any one of a million walking the streets, they didn't even have the common decency to give the mug shots a body.  If (very bit if) these e-fits were genuinely based on the man the Smith family saw on the night of the 3rd why have OG failed to give a description of the clothing worn?  Iirc, the Smiths were more precise about the physical appearance and the clothing of the person they saw, that the visage and yet OG don't seem to think this important.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by unchained melody 02.08.14 23:57

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:How do we know that she wasn't happy with how she saw herself on that occasion?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFCdbMc0qZc

Here she is in all her loveliness......

It wasn't that bit she looked "spooked".
Sorry, my mistake about the dress. I thought she was wearing a dress.

Sorry for derailing but I still think she may be responding to her look rather than the E-fit
avatar
unchained melody

Posts : 161
Activity : 167
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2013-10-16

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Brian Griffin 03.08.14 0:05

Casey5 wrote:
Praiaaa wrote:

MW = Mark Warner - the holiday company.
I read that DP negotiated a discount for the non-availablilty of baby listening- this is a service MW offer in some of their locations (we used it as parents years ago in Greece on a MW holiday) although not PdL as it is not an exclusive hotel complex like their usual resorts, and so not safe to leave children alone.
this is something I read about on the Mirror Forum, all those years ago, so cannot link...
Praiaaa, I've looked at David Payne's rogatory interview (I deserve a medal)
[color:b3eb=000000]Qu[color:b3eb=000000]o[color:b3eb=000000]te:-   http://www.mccannfiles.com/id251.html
[color:b3eb=000000]Reply    ”And err you know just for the record, embarrassingly or as it turns out now in err retrospect you know it’s a small change but you know the Mark Warner had also advertised that you know they were gonna discount the holiday by ten percent you know not long after we booked, which slightly irritated me, given the fact that we booked it and then he said well actually we don’t have this, we don’t have this, so I’d had correspondence probably being a bit cheeky just to say what, what, you know you can knock us ten percent off as well and they gave us some discount, which you know looking back just seems, you know, ridiculous.”
Ah! Such eloquence!
Brian Griffin
Brian Griffin

Posts : 577
Activity : 582
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2013-10-15

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 03.08.14 0:12

Gollum wrote: If (very big if) these e-fits were genuinely based on the man the Smith family saw on the night of the 3rd why have OG failed to give a description of the clothing worn?  Iirc, the Smiths were more precise about the physical appearance and the clothing of the person they saw, than the visage and yet OG don't seem to think this important.
The detailed account given by little Aoife Smith at the time (aged 12 or 13) agrees with you, Gollum. She had truly remarkable powers of observation in the dark Praia da Luz night:

Aoife Smith was able to give the following detailed description, although she added that “she would probably not be able to recognise the individual or the child again”:

- the man was white

- ‘light-skinned’ but ‘of normal complexion’

- between 20 and 30 year old

- 1.75m to 1.8m in height (5’ 9” to 5’ 11”)

- of ‘normal physique’

- thinks he was clean-shaven, doesn’t remember any tattoos, scars or earrings

- had thickish, light brown hair, cut short

- was wearing trousers which were beige in colour,

- his trousers were made of cotton

- his trousers possibly had buttons on them

- she can’t say what he was wearing on top because ‘the child he was carrying covered him completely from the top’

- he was walking ‘normally’

- the child he was carrying was female, and had straight, long, light or light brown hair down to the neck, she says she was about four years old ‘because her niece (who was in the group) is of the same age and same height’; she didn’t see the child's face because she was lying vertically against the man’s left shoulder; she appeared to be sleeping; her arms were suspended along her body and were not around the man’s neck; she thinks the child was white; she had no covering; she was wearing light, white or light-pink trousers that ‘may have been pyjamas, made of light material’ and‘ could have been cotton’. She can’t remember if they were patterned as it was dark. She also had ‘a light top, with long sleeves’. She can’t remember seeing any shoes on her feet.

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by unchained melody 03.08.14 0:15

Brian Griffin wrote:
Casey5 wrote:
Praiaaa wrote:

MW = Mark Warner - the holiday company.
I read that DP negotiated a discount for the non-availablilty of baby listening- this is a service MW offer in some of their locations (we used it as parents years ago in Greece on a MW holiday) although not PdL as it is not an exclusive hotel complex like their usual resorts, and so not safe to leave children alone.
this is something I read about on the Mirror Forum, all those years ago, so cannot link...
Praiaaa, I've looked at David Payne's rogatory interview (I deserve a medal)
[color:9f5f=000000]Qu[color:9f5f=000000]o[color:9f5f=000000]te:-   http://www.mccannfiles.com/id251.html
[color:9f5f=000000]Reply    ”And err you know just for the record, embarrassingly or as it turns out now in err retrospect you know it’s a small change but you know the Mark Warner had also advertised that you know they were gonna discount the holiday by ten percent you know not long after we booked, which slightly irritated me, given the fact that we booked it and then he said well actually we don’t have this, we don’t have this, so I’d had correspondence probably being a bit cheeky just to say what, what, you know you can knock us ten percent off as well and they gave us some discount, which you know looking back just seems, you know, ridiculous.”
Ah! Such eloquence!

Ha! He should put that on the banner for the website of his new practice ;-)
avatar
unchained melody

Posts : 161
Activity : 167
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2013-10-16

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Gaggzy 03.08.14 4:17

margaret wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:So, McCanns vs Murdoch?

OMG Jeanmonroe, Murdoch would wipe the floor with their skinny ass's!!   lol! rotfl pop2 


Ladies and Gentlemen. Welcome to this super heavyweight world title bout at the High Court Arena in London.

In the RED corner, weighing in at approximately 50 billion pounds, it's Smokin' Joe Murdoch.

And in the BLUE (bag) corner, weighing in at 27 pounds and 51 pence, ten quid's worth of Green Shield stamps, (and three mortgage payments in arrears), it's Muhammad McCann and Kate the Hit Woman Healy.

Ladies and Gentlemen,  this fight promises to be another
Tyson v Spinks.

Bugner v Dunn.

Jeremy Kyle v Spotty-faced lager lout.

It could be all over with one punch.

Hang on to your hats, it's going to be a bumpy ride.   bomb
Gaggzy
Gaggzy

Posts : 488
Activity : 514
Likes received : 26
Join date : 2014-06-08
Location : North West.

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Gaggzy 03.08.14 5:40

noddy100 wrote:Their confidence knows no limits

Their confidence knows no limits.
Their arrogance knows no limits.
Their stupidity knows no limits.
Gaggzy
Gaggzy

Posts : 488
Activity : 514
Likes received : 26
Join date : 2014-06-08
Location : North West.

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by canada12 03.08.14 6:20

I wonder if The Times was being deliberately provocative in their stories. Would it be beyond reasonable to think that perhaps the editorial staff at The Times published these stories with the hope that they WOULD be sued? And they have no intention at all of settling out of court, and the ultimate aim was to drive the McCanns into court, so that they would have to take the stand and testify and answer questions? It would put the McCanns in a very difficult position - they'd either have to withdraw their suit (and consider what message that sends), or go to court and defend their position - and risk being asked some very pointed questions.
avatar
canada12

Posts : 1461
Activity : 1698
Likes received : 211
Join date : 2013-10-28

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 03.08.14 7:01

Are we very very sure the MC's phone wasn't hacked by NI?
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Brian Griffin 03.08.14 7:52

This will never go the distance. The McMasons will intervene, if, of course, Gerry is a Mason. Failing that, he'll be on the blower to Dave to get him to fix things. Just in my opinion. Allegedly. Etc.
Brian Griffin
Brian Griffin

Posts : 577
Activity : 582
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2013-10-15

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 03.08.14 9:04

Brian Griffin wrote:This will never go the distance. The McMasons will intervene, if, of course, Gerry is a Mason. Failing that, he'll be on the blower to Dave to get him to fix things. Just in my opinion. Allegedly. Etc.
Dave has already fixed if for Gerry, he gave him the Review and the Investigation.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 03.08.14 9:21

dantezebu wrote:Are we very very sure the MC's phone wasn't hacked by NI?

That was my first thought, dantezebu. Rhys Ifans and Michael Barrymore have just received "substantial" payouts:
 http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/490678/Rhys-Ifans-and-Michael-Barrymore-settle-hacking-cases and the McCanns love their money.

I also wondered about who now owns the serialisation rights to Kate's diary. If the agreement was that any News International title could publish excerpts at any time, the McCanns must now be seriously panicking about the implications. 

Can you imagine if Sr Amaral sells the serialisation rights to his book to The Times and sections of both books are published side by side:

Gonçalo Amaral wrote:the purpose of this work is to contribute to finding the truth so that justice can finally be done in the investigation known as the "Maddie case"

Kate McCann wrote:Gonçalo Amaral deserves to be miserable and feel fear

I'm not wading through pages of Smithman so apologies if this has already been mentioned.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 03.08.14 9:28

canada12 wrote:I wonder if The Times was being deliberately provocative in their stories. Would it be beyond reasonable to think that perhaps the editorial staff at The Times published these stories with the hope that they WOULD be sued? And they have no intention at all of settling out of court, and the ultimate aim was to drive the McCanns into court, so that they would have to take the stand and testify and answer questions? It would put the McCanns in a very difficult position - they'd either have to withdraw their suit (and consider what message that sends), or go to court and defend their position - and risk being asked some very pointed questions.
Quite possibly Canada. 

Looking at the past relationship between McCanns and the media moguls, it has been a rocky ride.  They were great chums with Rupert and Rebekah when Kate was writing her book (past transgressions obviously forgotten), and the Sun and the Times got the serial rights and 'I couldn't make love to Gerry' headlines.

Then we had the Leveson Enquiry.  I think the McCanns were seriously miffed when the hacking victims began to receive large payouts and even though they had been handsomely rewarded by NI and claimed never to have been hacked, they volunteered to assist the enquiry with stories of how they had suffered at the hands of the newspapers.  Having given the greedy pair a secret payout of £125,000, I doubt News International remained so kindly disposed towards them as they had been. The mighty Rupert Murdoch was not only forced to give evidence at a public hearing, he was also splattered with a custard pie and shat on by the McCanns and the British establishment.  I doubt very much he is in the mood in the mood to give Kate and Gerry another large cash sum, and he has the cash and resources to fight their legal big guns with legal big guns of his own.  Should be interesting.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Carrry On Doctor 03.08.14 9:32

Other than the Daniel Douglas tweet, is there anything further to confirm action is being taken ?
Carrry On Doctor
Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 391
Activity : 586
Likes received : 199
Join date : 2014-01-31

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by noddy100 03.08.14 9:32

If Murdoch 'knows' them why hasn't he exposed them already ?
He is the master of a story at any cost and getting the scoop so why not get the biggest story of the last. 10 years
avatar
noddy100

Posts : 701
Activity : 760
Likes received : 39
Join date : 2013-05-17

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 03.08.14 9:33

Poe wrote:
dantezebu wrote:Are we very very sure the MC's phone wasn't hacked by NI?

That was my first thought, dantezebu. Rhys Ifans and Michael Barrymore have just received "substantial" payouts:
 http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/490678/Rhys-Ifans-and-Michael-Barrymore-settle-hacking-cases and the McCanns love their money.

I also wondered about who now owns the serialisation rights to Kate's diary. If the agreement was that any News International title could publish excerpts at any time, the McCanns must now be seriously panicking about the implications. 

Can you imagine if Sr Amaral sells the serialisation rights to his book to The Times and sections of both books are published side by side:

Gonçalo Amaral wrote:the purpose of this work is to contribute to finding the truth so that justice can finally be done in the investigation known as the "Maddie case"

Kate McCann wrote:Gonçalo Amaral deserves to be miserable and feel fear

I'm not wading through pages of Smithman so apologies if this has already been mentioned.
Should Goncalo Amaral decide to sell the serialisation rights of his book, I am sure there would be a bidding war between the UK tabloids and Dr. Amaral's financial troubles will be over.  Just needs the libel trial to end!
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by joel27 03.08.14 9:42

Tony Bennett wrote:
joel27 wrote:
It's where I disagree lets take the revelation moment it gives them the chance to take down the Tannerman pictures from the web-site declare publicly that Smithman is the main suspect. No way will they , they cannot and could never because of the September statements forever linkGerry  to Smithman.. Smithman is the elephant in the room if you like, you have to prove where Gerry was without doubt at the appropriate time to make Smithman viable.

@ joel27:  Think very hard please about the totality of the Smiths' evidence. If you were prosecuting the McCanns, would you for one moment want to bring Martin Smith along as a prosecution witness for your cliam that the man they saw was really Gerry McCann? Any defence barrister would rip his defence to shreds in minutes, a hundred times more effectively than I have tried to do here. The very idea is a total non-starter, isn't it?

They cannot, there are the missing minutes around the same time where he was out looking. (happy to be corrected if there is a timeline with independent verification). Smithman could only be the abductor seen by Tannerman. The reason of wandering around for 45 minutes is easier to be explained - taken somewhere for 40 minutes.  

@ joel27: There is IMO more than adequate evidence that Gerry McCann was around the Ocean Club at the time of the Smiths' alleged 'sighting', and the very idea that he would carry around his dead daughter hours after she died at the very moment they [Tapas 9] have all agreed to raise an almighty alarm does not IMO deserve serious consideration. No-one else saw this man carrying a child all the way from Apatrment G5A to near the beach - around 700 yards. 

The revelation moment to me is the dawning on the McCanns that OG are not buying the story so carefully planted for 7 years. It points to me that the lack of publicity by the McCanns since, in the vocal support of OG, the urging to find Smithman is not the sign of support I would expect if their headache was removed.

@ joel27: I am not quite understanding your words here, they are not making complete sense to me. If you think that DCI Redwood is carrying out a cunning plan here to 'get the McCanns', I fear you re badly mistaken.  

@ ShuBon and @ Google Gaspar Statements

Regarding Kate looking 'shocked' and 'terrified' when the efits were shown on Crimewatch.

REPLY: I don't think so. Is there not more than a hint or two that Dr Kate McCann might be able to 'switch on' the depressed  and harassed look when required? 
Tony as an opinion, and for debate purposes, Firstly I agree the Smith evidence does not stand up in court. My error I apoligise if there is clear evidence elsewhere that Gerry was independently verified as being elsewhere.
Where we depart in views is that OG is cover up. So a few points. If Tannerman is removed why have the McCanns not been pushing the line of the failure of the Portugeses police, why have they not been pushing the Smithman , its the abducter even with the Gerry connection ? I would even argue that they have tried to do the exact opposite the more recent comments from them are far more centered on a "they" or "he/she" . The only way they could go innocent or involved in my opinion is support the OG view.. Take the view they are innocent Tannerman was 7 years of wasted effort because the Portugese police failed to find him , I would be screaming about the failure it proves we were right. 
Have an opinion that Tannerman was a set up by the McCanns , by OG saying they found him you still have to sing the failure of the Portugese police, by not doing so you are going to set alarm bells ringing.  Assume Tannerman is false as the Mcanns you know he can never be found but OG say they have,  by not supporting it  what have you achieved ? The best I can come up with it leaves the doubt and any court case in the future can still use him , a get out of jail free card if you like.
The last paragraph was an attempt to suggest that its dawned (revelation) on the McCanns that the OG set up by them pushing for it was not going to clear them in fact it could well set thier attempts to prove innocence back further.  Even worse if through the early years of OG they were convinced that it was all going there way. Again the words since Crimewatch the he/she they, the outburst in court regarding dogs (trusted by OG)

My opinion and only for the purpose of debate of course
avatar
joel27

Posts : 38
Activity : 38
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2014-06-10

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 03.08.14 9:59

joel27 wrote:

Tony as an opinion, and for debate purposes, Firstly I agree the Smith evidence does not stand up in court.

Agreed, and therefore in this case it is worthless evidence.

My error I apologise if there is clear evidence elsewhere that Gerry was independently verified as being elsewhere.

I think it is sufficiently clear

Where we depart in views is that OG is cover up. So a few points. If Tannerman is removed why have the McCanns not been pushing the line of the failure of the Portugeses police,

They do it all the time

why have they not been pushing the Smithman

They are! They have made statements fully supporting DCI Redwood's investigation; moreover when you click on the 'Find Madeleine' site, their 'splash' page (i.e. first page you come to) has the two large EXTON EFITS on it!

it's the abductoe even with the Gerry connection? I would even argue that they have tried to do the exact opposite the more recent comments from them are far more centered on a "they" or "he/she" .

Not sure about that

The only way they could go innocent or involved in my opinion is support the OG view.

Which they do - see above

Take the view they are innocent. Tannerman was 7 years of wasted effort because the Portugese police failed to find him, I would be screaming about the failure, it proves we were right.

No. The 'wasted effort' is entirely down to Jane Tanner for creating Tannerman and the McCann Team for 7 years for claiming Tannerman was the man we are looking for as the abductor 

Have an opinion that Tannerman was a set up by the McCanns, by OG saying they found him, you still have to sing the failure of the Portugese police, by not doing so you are going to set alarm bells ringing. Assume Tannerman is false as the Mcanns you know he can never be found - but OG say they have, by not supporting it what have you achieved ? The best I can come up with it leaves the doubt and any court case in the future can still use him, a get out of jail free card if you like.

I agree to the extent that the crafty Redwood can boast: "I found Crecheman; the PJ failed".

The last paragraph was an attempt to suggest that its dawned (revelation) on the McCanns that the OG set up by them pushing for it was not going to clear them in fact it could well set thier attempts to prove innocence back further. Even worse if through the early years of OG they were convinced that it was all going there way. Again the words since Crimewatch the he/she they, the outburst in court regarding dogs (trusted by OG). My opinion and only for the purpose of debate of course

I couldn't disagree more. As I've said, Grange, the BBC, the top brass of the Met, the British security services (who have been across this case from Day One), the Home Secretary, the Prime Minister, Rebekah Brooks and the Murdoch empire plus of course the McCann Team are all rock solid behind Smithman.

Which is quite remarkable, since there is good evidence that the Smiths did NOT help to create these two efits of different-looking men
 


____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Justformaddie 03.08.14 10:18

Is there a credible, non tapas witness, someone who hasn't lied or has no reason to lie who can place gm at the table at 10pm? Could it also be either rob or mo? They do look alike IMO. Could it also be that smiths was so sure that it was gm he was able to do the efit that's so like gm?

____________________
Parents=protection high5 
Justformaddie
Justformaddie

Posts : 540
Activity : 541
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-05-13
Location : On my iPad

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 03.08.14 10:34

noddy100 wrote:If Murdoch 'knows' them why hasn't he exposed them already ?
He is the master of a story at any cost and getting the scoop so why not get the biggest story of the last. 10 years
Good question Noddy.  Indeed, why haven't any of the newspapers exposed them?

I have pondered occasionally that there might be some sort of 'D' Notice over the case, but it is probably the most simple explanation.  Kate and Gerry are notoriously litigious, and they have already stung several news outlets for large payouts.  While the case remains in limbo, the McCanns have the law on their side - they are innocent until proved guilty.  Galling as that is, it explains why they have been able to strut the world stage with impunity.  'There's no Evidence' as Gerry keeps reminding us. 

I often look at similar cases to gain an understanding of the McCanns and their actions.  I was recently studying the case of Sabrina Aisenberg, a 5 month old baby stolen from her cot in 1997.  No forced entry, strange behaviour from parents, lack of emotion, laughing etc, and 17 years on, no proof of abduction.  The police believe it to be a case of accidental death and cover up by the parents, yet they remain free and continue to campaign with age progression pictures of their missing baby. The McCanns are far from unique.

This is another reason, I do not believe there will be a cover up in the case of Madeleine.  Scotland Yard are actively investigating this case, and have even gone so far as to physically examine the ground near Apartment 5A - we might not know what they are doing, but we can see they are doing something. 

History has shown how difficult it is for police to convict parents in these circumstances.  In the case of the Aisenbergs, no-one can doubt that the police knew who the suspects were, as they also knew in the case of Jonbenet Ramsey and strongly suspect in the case of Lisa Irwin.  Some could say the police in the case of Sabrina, Jonbenet and Lisa carried out whitewashes to let the parents off the hook, but we know that isn't the case.  The parents walked because there simply wasn't enough evidence to prosecute them. 

In the Madeleine case, we know that Scotland Yard and the PJ are actively looking for evidence.  They are not letting this particular sleeping dog lie, their remit is to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann, and to intents and purposes, that's what is appears they are doing. 

Their US counterparts however were truthful with the media and the public who pay their wages, and informed the public they were not looking for anyone else.  They did not waste public money and resources trying to find a patsy to blame*.   However, in fairness to Scotland Yard, the publicity surrounding Madeleine's case would make the lives of the McCanns, the tapas gang and their wider family, intolerable if there was so much as a hint they were involved.  It is impossible to evaluate what the backlash will be when the truth comes out.  As George Galloway once said, this will be 'the Mother of all crimes'.  Probably why it is all taking so long.


*I don't think that is what they are doing.  I actually think they are ticking boxes.  That is, they are pre-empting all lines of defence.  The McCanns could argue that leads such as the weirdo climbing into the beds of small, blonde British girls were never followed for example.  I don't however think the digging exercise came from Team McCann, that was down to Eddie and Keela.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 7 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 03.08.14 10:35

Justformaddie wrote:Is there a credible, non Tapas witness, someone who hasn't lied or has no reason to lie, who can place GM at the table at 10pm?

But you would have to do much more than that, wouldn't you?

If, as a few here still seem to think, GM carried his dead child in full view across the streets of Praia da Luz towards its centre near the beach at around 10pm - the very time the alarm was being raised - you have to account for his not being seen on the way, AND you would have to establish that he was not at the table or anywhere else in the immediate vicinity whilst he was

* collecting his dead child's body

* carrying it out of Apt G5A

* walking through the streets with Madeleine

* placing her body somewhere where it wouldn't be found, and

* returning to the Ocean Club.

To put it kindly, that is a very very tall order.
    

Could it also be either RO'B or MO? They do look alike IMO. Could it also be that Smiths was so sure that it was GM he was able to do the efit that's so like GM?

Er...

1. It doesn't IMO look 'so like Gerry'. It does however look like tens of thousands of other middle-aged British blokes

2. He was never 'so sure'. At the most he was '60% to 80%' sure, and then he seems to have gone back on that

3. Why, if he was so sure , did he and the other Smiths (if they did, see next point) allow a SECOND efit to be generated that looked like an entirely different bloke?

4. How could they draw up an efit if they never saw him properly, only for a few seconds in the dark, and a year before they (allegedly) drew up the efits?

5. Did they actually see anyone at all? 

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 16 Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8 ... 11 ... 16  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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