Re: Today's Sun - 7th September 2014

by Liz Eagles 09.09.14 8:23

2 snips from yesterday's Sun (8th September 2014). Please excuse typos - I'm copy typing.

Kate found her missing at 10pm and the police arrived by 11pm and others with dogs at 1.15am. But the animals were trained primarily in 'public order work, not tracking'.

Search and rescue dogs only arrived the following morning.

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

The most damaging turn in the investigation was the Portuguese police decision to name the couple as suspects after 'cadaver' and 'blood' dogs had apparently alerted them in the McCanns apartment.

But the authors write 'The discoveries the British sniffer dogs had apparently made had utterly changed the direction of the investigation. Had the dogs not been brought in, it is fair to say there would have been no Portuguese police decision to declare Madeleine's parents suspects'.

'A careful reading of the case files however, indicates that the decision that was made was premature and grew out of a perhaps understandable Portuguese misinterpretation of a poorly worded but key forensic finding in a preliminary email from the British Forensic Science Service.

'The British liaison officer who passed the email on to the Policia judiciaria appears to have warned them to wait for the arrival of the formal laboratory report.

'The PJ team, however, seem not only to have ignored the liaison officer's caution but the caveat in the report of the British specialist who had handled the dogs in Praia da Luz. 'No evidential or intelligence reliability' could be made as the result of a dog having 'alerted', handler Martin Grime had written. 'Unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence'.

'Corroborating forensic evidence that Madeleine had died in the McCanns' apartment, had bled there - indeed had even been there - never would materialise.

'Two veteran dog handlers told the authors that without forensic evidence, no reliance can be put on the alert indications the dogs made in the Madeleine case'.

by Guest 09.09.14 8:35

That is an outrageous slant on the dogs and the DNA evidence and the Forensic reports.

S&S are writing this book for TM.

There is no doubt.

by nglfi 09.09.14 9:38

I have to say this is starting to make me quite depressed. The only possible small positive from this is that there must be a reason Kate and Gerry McCann feel they need to write this book now, perhaps they fear a court case and sentence are in the horizon. On the other hand, it could be the cherry on the cake to top off winning their damages trial against Amaral, which I sincerely hope doesn't happen. I've always felt the media are only interested in what will sell papers, and if they thought Kate and Gerry's guilt would sell then they would publicise it. Hopefully the day comes when there is enough evidence to charge them and an absolute avalanche of s**t hits the pair. Otherwise I'm starting to despair.

by Bishop Brennan 09.09.14 10:10

BlueBag wrote:That is an outrageous slant on the dogs and the DNA evidence and the Forensic reports.

S&S are writing this book for TM.

There is no doubt.

That is quite correct, there is no doubt at all. This was the missing link in the whitewash - how to deal with the dogs. The police could not criticise them for obvious reasons, and the McCanns just looked guilty when they tried. The answer was to use 'independent', 'respected' investigative authors. It is now clear that the book is designed to be the public, highly-promoted, 'agreed by all parties', shelving report of Operation Grange.

You have to grudgingly take your hat off to the organisers of the whitewash - it's been an absolute classic: wide-ranging, long-lasting, well-financed and fully integrated. As for the book, I cannot think of any other non-fiction (sic) book that has ever received such wall-to-wall publicity. We are watching a master at work here, and he or she hasn't missed a beat since the start.

by **Tony Bennett** 09.09.14 10:23

Bishop Brennan wrote:
You have to grudgingly take your hat off to the organisers of the whitewash - it's been an absolute classic: wide-ranging, long-lasting, well-financed and fully integrated.

And if it is this, Bishop B, and if you are a British taxpayer as I am, a lot of it has been carried out at our expense!

by plebgate 09.09.14 10:32

Snipped from the article posted by Aquila today:

"
'Two veteran dog handlers told the authors that without forensic evidence, no reliance can be put on the alert indications the dogs made in the Madeleine case'.

I do wish people would name names when using quotes or info gleaned from other people.

So how is this new info?

It could also be said that no reliance can be put on the abduction "thesis" as so far there has been no forensic evidence provided.

Where does that leave the case?

Well we are waiting to find out, but IMO it certainly does not show that Maddie was abducted.

I may not be remembering very well, but wasn't it the British police who suggested that the dogs be brought in?

Why would the Brit. police think it a good idea to do that then I wonder?

I cannot see how the Pt. police will not speak out if this is indeed the way any kind of whitewash is going to take place.

Rocky will not shut up, of that I am sure.

No way can a whitewash take place in my view on the opinion of two authors. Nonsense.

by notlongnow 09.09.14 11:00

Surely this is the best and yet the worst whitewash in history.

by Bishop Brennan 09.09.14 11:28

plebgate wrote:
I cannot see how the Pt. police will not speak out if this is indeed the way any kind of whitewash is going to take place.

Rocky will not shut up, of that I am sure.

No way can a whitewash take place in my view on the opinion of two authors. Nonsense.

I wish I could share your optimistic view. But there won't be any PJ speaking out, because I don't believe they are running any kind of investigation. As Amaral himself told us on TV, the PJ reopened the file because legally they had to. They couldn't assist SY with the ILRs otherwise, it's just not permitted of them. Of course they had to present a 'reason' for it, but using Tractorman (who they quickly and officially ruled out) was simply a device to get it open. There never was a second investigation, there never was any 'new evidence', and so unfortunately there will be no new revelations from them.

As for Amaral - well he's been defending libel cases since the book was published back in 2008, and he will most certainly continue. I hope beyond hope that he wins this latest round against the McCanns, and if he does then I suspect he will call it a day (a few chat-shows to make up some of his losses first perhaps). He's been the star in this entire story - and nobody (other than on the internet) has supported him. He remains Madeleine's only champion - a lone public voice doing battle with the massed ranks of whitewashers.

by jeanmonroe 09.09.14 11:56

He's been the star in this entire story - and nobody (other than on the internet) has supported him. He remains Madeleine's only champion - a lone public voice doing battle with the massed ranks of whitewashers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today's Sun - 7th September 2014 - Page 3 Mitche11

Today's Sun - 7th September 2014 - Page 3 Mitche11

And that's an old compilation of Team McCann!

We can now add, imo,

Summers&Swan
BHH&AR&HC&SF.
TMay&D Cameron.
J Gamble
Brookes&Murdoch
Entire BBC&CW.

And there are many, many, more now ranged against the 'truth' seekers.

And no matter how many 'more' TM add, they just can't 'out balance' to the British Public, to 'believe', in their 'favour'

If someone possibly could 'update' the 'old' compilation of TM. Thx in advance.

"We're gonna need a bigger pair of 'scales'"

by HelenMeg 09.09.14 12:06

Like the scales!! big grin

But I think the person sitting at the top of those scales - above Kate and Gerry is the person whose
presence in PDL needed to be protected and hidden at all costs. Whoever he / she / they were / was.

by jeanmonroe 09.09.14 12:27

HM wrote:
"But I think the person sitting at the top of those scales - above Kate and Gerry is the person whose
presence in PDL needed to be protected and hidden at all costs. Whoever he / she / they were / was."
-------------------------------------------
Today's Sun - 7th September 2014 - Page 3 Scale10

Today's Sun - 7th September 2014 - Page 3 Scale10

Yeah. Adds rather a nice 'Symmetry' dosen't it?

The 'missing piece' of the jigsaw, 'EVERYONE' is always being asked to 'find'?

by Bishop Brennan 09.09.14 12:34

jeanmonroe wrote:

And no matter how many 'more' TM add, they just can't 'out balance' to the British Public, to 'believe', in their 'favour'

If someone possibly could 'update' the 'old' compilation of TM. Thx in advance.

"We're gonna need a bigger pair of 'scales'"

That's a great pic - hadn't seen it before big grin

And you make an important point. For as professional and expensive as this whitewash is, parts of the British Public do remain unconvinced. Admittedly large numbers take no real interest at all, but there is still a large minority that suspect that the parents may well have been involved. And when SY finally throw in the towel, the niggling thought "I guess it must have been the parents after all" will always remain as a cloud.

by Harriet94 09.09.14 19:40

Going by the snippet posted above, Summers and Swan claim that there is no corroborating evidence that Madeleine was ever in apartment 5A. What are we supposed to deduce from that?

by Guest 09.09.14 19:58

Harriet94 wrote:Going by the snippet posted above, Summers and Swan claim that there is no corroborating evidence that Madeleine was ever in apartment 5A. What are we supposed to deduce from that?

Flash.. cleans surfaces without scratching.

by Harriet94 09.09.14 20:15

It will be interesting to see if Summers and Swan shed light on who forensically cleaned apartment 5A and when. I agree BlueBag, Flash has excellent cleaning properties, but would bleach be better for getting rid of all traces of blood and DNA?

by sammyc 09.09.14 21:05

BlueBag wrote:
Harriet94 wrote:Going by the snippet posted above, Summers and Swan claim that there is no corroborating evidence that Madeleine was ever in apartment 5A. What are we supposed to deduce from that?

Flash.. cleans surfaces without scratching.

Flash bathroom - to clean up after Kate had to have a bath and then a shower shortly after, for what reason we do not know.

Flash kitchen - to clean up after the fridge which was said to be broken and had to be dumped?

Flash bleach spray - to attempt to disguise and get rid of bloodstains behind the sofa and on the wall.

Flash cleansing wipes - to get rid of all DNA traces of anybody having been in 5a.

Flash anti bacterial - to get rid of cadaver odour but Kate forgot to use them.

Flash all purpose/all surface spray - this would have the best one to buy but Hey!, the Fund was up and running and money then became irrelevant.

by Guest 09.09.14 21:14

Anti-cadaverine-bat-spray would have been better.

by sammyc 09.09.14 21:20

The Baptista supermarket didn't stock it BlueBag. nah

by MRNOODLES 09.09.14 21:48

'Two veteran dog handlers told the authors that without forensic evidence, no reliance can be put on the alert indications the dogs made in the Madeleine case'.

IMO the meaning of the sentence above depends on how Summers wishes to twist the words. ie Summers wants to paint the picture the same as Gerry, the dogs are unrelialble full stop. However the sentence can also mean the dogs' alerts cannot be relied on as evidence on their own without anything else to get a conviction in a court. Therefore the dogs are still correct there was a body there, but you still need DNA to prove which body. (Even though common sense answers that as no other death has been reported there)

by HelenMeg 09.09.14 22:16

jeanmonroe wrote:HM wrote:
"But I think the person sitting at the top of those scales - above Kate and Gerry is the person whose
presence in PDL needed to be protected and hidden at all costs. Whoever he / she / they were / was."
-------------------------------------------

Yeah. Adds rather a nice 'Symmetry' dosen't it?

The 'missing piece' of the jigsaw, 'EVERYONE' is always being asked to 'find'?

Thanks Jean Monroe! He / she who sits 'at the top' sure is getting a lot of support and protection. If the face is ever revealed I bet most of us wont even know who it is, that's the stupid thing about this.

by aiyoyo 09.09.14 22:38

aquila wrote:

But the authors write 'The discoveries the British sniffer dogs had apparently made had utterly changed the direction of the investigation. Had the dogs not been brought in, it is fair to say there would have been no Portuguese police decision to declare Madeleine's parents suspects'.

'A careful reading of the case files however, indicates that the decision that was made was premature and grew out of a perhaps understandable Portuguese misinterpretation of a poorly worded but key forensic finding in a preliminary email from the British Forensic Science Service.

'The British liaison officer who passed the email on to the Policia judiciaria appears to have warned them to wait for the arrival of the formal laboratory report.

'Corroborating forensic evidence that Madeleine had died in the McCanns' apartment, had bled there - indeed had even been there - never would materialise.

Are S&S for real? They said:
"Had there been a Burglators Warning Notice on the wall, the Mccanns would not have left the patio door unlocked." (not verbatim but words to that effect)
What? Would they then, because of the notice, have locked the door leaving their children alone nonetheless inside the dark apt ?

Had the dogs not been brought in, the Mccanns would not be declared as suspects?
Precisely! Because the dogs marked Mcs apt and items belonging to Mcs, and to no other places/items despite been given other venues to work through.

Had they done proper extensive research, they would have known historical records proved that cases taken to court on dogs evidence alone sans body had resulted in successful prosecutions. Also, had the Mcs been held in custody at the time of being declared suspects they would have been in prison by now.
They state the obvious yet ironically fail to grasp the blinking obvious staring them in the face. Their noses are too close to Mcarse methinks. A fat lot of good their "definitive" gibberish-ful account embellishing the data on files which grow arms and legs under their pens (err.. fingers I think ? keyboard and PC vs pen and paper?) would do to enlighten their readers.

They did not say -- had there been a notice on the wall, the Mccanns would not have left their children alone - if they did not say it, we can't say it for them. I learned a lot, thanks to Hobs.

You'd expect a pair of established novelists (writing to put food on the table), to output something if not of substance for lack of trying and objectivity, then at the very minimum to produce a definitive plausible version. Instead we were given a tall tale full of their twisted interpretations.

Priceless!

by Okeydokey 10.09.14 1:00

aiyoyo wrote:
aquila wrote:

But the authors write 'The discoveries the British sniffer dogs had apparently made had utterly changed the direction of the investigation. Had the dogs not been brought in, it is fair to say there would have been no Portuguese police decision to declare Madeleine's parents suspects'.

'A careful reading of the case files however, indicates that the decision that was made was premature and grew out of a perhaps understandable Portuguese misinterpretation of a poorly worded but key forensic finding in a preliminary email from the British Forensic Science Service.

'The British liaison officer who passed the email on to the Policia judiciaria appears to have warned them to wait for the arrival of the formal laboratory report.

'Corroborating forensic evidence that Madeleine had died in the McCanns' apartment, had bled there - indeed had even been there - never would materialise.

Are S&S for real? They said:
"Had there been a Burglators Warning Notice on the wall, the Mccanns would not have left the patio door unlocked." (not verbatim but words to that effect)
What? Would they then, because of the notice, have locked the door leaving their children alone nonetheless inside the dark apt ?

Had the dogs not been brought in, the Mccanns would not be declared as suspects?
Precisely! Because the dogs marked Mcs apt and items belonging to Mcs, and to no other places/items despite been given other venues to work through.

Had they done proper extensive research, they would have known historical records proved that cases taken to court on dogs evidence alone sans body had resulted in successful prosecutions. Also, had the Mcs been held in custody at the time of being declared suspects they would have been in prison by now.
They state the obvious yet ironically fail to grasp the blinking obvious staring them in the face. Their noses are too close to Mcarse methinks. A fat lot of good their "definitive" gibberish-ful account embellishing the data on files which grow arms and legs under their pens (err.. fingers I think ? keyboard and PC vs pen and paper?) would do to enlighten their readers.

They did not say -- had there been a notice on the wall, the Mccanns would not have left their children alone - if they did not say it, we can't say it for them. I learned a lot, thanks to Hobs.

You'd expect a pair of established novelists (writing to put food on the table), to output something if not of substance for lack of trying and objectivity, then at the very minimum to produce a definitive plausible version. Instead we were given a tall tale full of their twisted interpretations.

Priceless!

Summers and Swan are not stupid. They've seen how horrendously pro-McCann the British judiciary are (Hogg declared them innocent before the Portugese authorities lifted their arguido status, and had cosy tete a tetes with the McCanns while they were still arguidos).They've seen the libel settlements .They've seen how powerful people like Murdoch have swung behind the McCanns after initial scepticism.

They must have noticed how information about MMcC being a ward of court has been effectively suppressed, how transmission of the Gaspar letter to the Portugese authorities was delayed for several months. Surely they must - since they have been sifting through the evidence.

And they have, quite legitimately as writers, seen just how wonderfully lucrative a McCann book could be as long as it didn't fall foul of the authorities.

But have they addressed all the many and serious anomalies identified on this site? The answer would appear to be a resounding NO.

by Liz Eagles 10.09.14 2:04

Written in the Sun 8th September 2014 (no link I have copy typed it from the paper copy).

WE OWE IT TO MISSING KIDS

BRITISH Maddie cop Jim Gamble, below, warned that a shake-up is needed to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

He said: "We need a UK national centre to co-ordinate child protection activity, a body that is at arm's length from government.

"Collaboration is key, and in Europe our efforts should be consolidated through Europol."

He added: "It would be a legacy of sorts for the McCanns and for other parents of missing or murdered children."

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

I'm struggling to comment on this without spitting feathers.

ETA: I think this is worthy of a separate topic. If Admin agrees can they please do it.

by **PeterMac** 10.09.14 7:39

aquila wrote:
BRITISH Maddie cop Jim Gamble, below, warned that a shake-up is needed to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

He said: "We need a UK national centre to co-ordinate child protection activity, a body that is at arm's length from government.

There is a National Centre to coordinate child protection activity.

It is call the English law, and is administered by the Courts. Wilful neglect, deliberate abandonment, and failure to protect your child is an offence known to law.

by jeanmonroe 10.09.14 9:53

BRITISH Maddie cop Jim Gamble, below, warned that a shake-up is needed to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

He said: "We need a UK national centre to co-ordinate child protection activity, a body that is at arm's length from government.
---------------------------------------------------

"WITH ME, HONEST JIM GAMMBLE, AS THE BOSS, er NATRUALLY!" (with the same terms and conditions as a PCC, where i set my own 'salary' AND i can't EVER be 'sacked' by ANYONE.)

Just remind me,

Has Gammble taken ANY responsibility, for all the recently exposed child EXPLOTATION cases, in Derby, Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford, the 4 towns just last week, with offences dating back to 'coincide' with Gammble's tenure at CEOP, which ALL happened ON HIS 'WATCH', when he was the BIG BOSS at CHILD EXPLOITATION online PROTECTION?

How did this child 'protection' GURU possibly MISS all of these appalling 'cases' ..............or.....OR...................did he KNOW?

But said nothing, did NOTHING, because the perpetrators were (almost) exclusively, non-white, Asian males!

Don't worry Gammble you ain't been 'rumbled'!

And all this BS from a 'man' who won't even SAY, vocally and in print, that Madeleine McCann 'was ABDUCTED'!

JG:
"but the fact that a child was, you know, has... was... did go missing... is still missing, and that those parents are tortured..."

"And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened," ( I BET YOU DON'T WANT TO 'SPECULATE' GAMMBLE!)

So, a bit like,

"all those THOUSANDS of children who may, or may not, have been exploited, ON MY 'WATCH', while i was the CEO at the CHILD EXPLOITATION online PROTECTION fiefdom"

IMO, this is the very last man, on Earth, who should be anywhere near 'protecting' vulnerable exploited children.

He 'protected' NONE of the girls abused and exploited by mainly Pakistani males! ON HIS 'WATCH'!........................NONE!

Young, vulnerable, underage girls do NOT need 'protection' BY self appointed, self proclaimed, child protection 'experts', middle aged men, they need 'protecting' FROM middle aged men and 'others'! (imo)

"HEY, GAMMBLE?,........ LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE!"

by fred c dobbs 10.09.14 14:17

jeanmonroe wrote:BRITISH Maddie cop Jim Gamble, below, warned that a shake-up is needed to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

He said: "We need a UK national centre to co-ordinate child protection activity, a body that is at arm's length from government.
---------------------------------------------------

"WITH ME, HONEST JIM GAMMBLE, AS THE BOSS, er NATRUALLY!" (with the same terms and conditions as a PCC, where i set my own 'salary' AND i can't EVER be 'sacked' by ANYONE.)

Just remind me,

Has Gammble taken ANY responsibility, for all the recently exposed child EXPLOTATION cases, in Derby, Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford, the 4 towns just last week, with offences dating back to 'coincide' with Gammble's tenure at CEOP, which ALL happened ON HIS 'WATCH', when he was the BIG BOSS at CHILD EXPLOITATION online PROTECTION?

How did this child 'protection' GURU possibly MISS all of these appalling 'cases' ..............or.....OR...................did he KNOW?

But said nothing, did NOTHING, because the perpetrators were (almost) exclusively, non-white, Asian males!

Don't worry Gammble you ain't been 'rumbled'!

And all this BS from a 'man' who won't even SAY, vocally and in print, that Madeleine McCann 'was ABDUCTED'!

JG:
"but the fact that a child was, you know, has... was... did go missing... is still missing, and that those parents are tortured..."

"And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened," ( I BET YOU DON'T WANT TO 'SPECULATE' GAMMBLE!)

So, a bit like,

"all those THOUSANDS of children who may, or may not, have been exploited, ON MY 'WATCH', while i was the CEO at the CHILD EXPLOITATION online PROTECTION fiefdom"

IMO, this is the very last man, on Earth, who should be anywhere near 'protecting' vulnerable exploited children.

He 'protected' NONE of the girls abused and exploited by mainly Pakistani males! ON HIS 'WATCH'!........................NONE!

Young, vulnerable, underage girls do NOT need 'protection' BY self appointed, self proclaimed, child protection 'experts', middle aged men, they need 'protecting' FROM middle aged men and 'others'! (imo)

"HEY, GAMMBLE?,........ LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE!"

by aiyoyo 10.09.14 14:46

Okeydokey wrote:

And they have, quite legitimately as writers, seen just how wonderfully lucrative a McCann book could be as long as it didn't fall foul of the authorities.

But have they addressed all the many and serious anomalies identified on this site? The answer would appear to be a resounding NO.

I dont think they would concern themselves about falling foul of the authorities or not.
It's the Mcs they should be wary of falling foul of? It would appear they took care of that going by the pre-release previews. They condoned the Mcs for children neglect; it was a mummy that did it having checked the creaky gate beforehand etc -- that pretty much tells us they would paint the Mcs as fault-free victims. No negative or criticism of the mccanns would be in the book. They definitely aimed at penning a sue-proof book, otherwise no publisher would touch it, as publisher would also be wary of lawsuit from the litigious Mcs.

I believe the selective few in team Mccann that S&S interviewed acted as springboard for the authors to apprise the Mccanns' reaction to their book. If S&S had access to JG that's pretty much as good a gateway to the Mcs as it can get, this is on top of having access to close members of the team Mccann, yet they did not interview the Mccanns. Assuming it wasn't due to lack of access to the Mccanns, then it could well be that friends/family members of Mcs they interviewed were source/conduit of relay communications between the authors and the Mcs; and that seemed sufficient for the authors purpose.

If the authors' purpose for writing the book had nothing to do with finding the truth of what really happened to Madeleine, then the fate that befell Madeleine wasn't a primary concern to them. It was not about Madeleine nor about her parents for that matter. IMO, the authors' motive was to take advantage of a high profile controversial case and to make money from writing about it, simple as that. That had been the pattern of the type of literatures they'd produced and made money from going by their records.

by XTC 11.09.14 23:46

PeterMac wrote:
aquila wrote:
BRITISH Maddie cop Jim Gamble, below, warned that a shake-up is needed to make sure the same mistakes are not made again.

He said: "We need a UK national centre to co-ordinate child protection activity, a body that is at arm's length from government.

There is a National Centre to coordinate child protection activity.

It is call the English law, and is administered by the Courts. Wilful neglect, deliberate abandonment, and failure to protect your child is an offence known to law.

Exactly.

Is it possible because they were British that they thought the same penalties could have applied in Portugal?

Let's put it this way: despite being professional middle class couples were they really all in the same boat - vis child neglect and its legal implications and effects?

Payne's had a monitor - better than MW's baby listening in Greece?

Checks every 30 mins - better than other offers by holiday companies MW et al?

If that was the problem- what's the problem?

All you have to prove is that you were checking.

A reconstruction could have pointed towards that fact.

Or at least indicated towards it.

They so called Tapas 9 didn't want to do one as they didn't see how it would further the investigation.

What can you say apart from what the AG's said?

Seven years plus later we are no nearer to the truth.

I don't think you can blame the so called " haters ". They weren't there, but the Tapas 9 were. They know what they saw and did.

I'm not a hater . All I want to know is what happened?

No-one is saying and no-one is likely to say.

S&S are in no way adding to the evidence neither.

I have always thought tha Mr Amaral and his team were on the right track- until the train was derailed and no book - no Crimewatch or alleged experts will convince me otherwise.

Trenchant maybe, but the freshest evidence is normally the best. Everything else becomes an added layer of confusion as history and time passes.

The opposite of a peeling onion to get to the core. Layers are added in order to hide or disguise the core.

Opinion though.