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.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


This just gone on to Daily Mail.

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

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 27.01.15 15:14

@j.rob wrote:In March 2014 Scotland Yard announced that a lone intruder sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006. The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls.
The four incidents, one of which involved two girls, were among 12 in which men had entered holiday accommodation in the area, including two incidents in Praia da Luz. The force also said it was looking at 38 “people of interest” and were researching the backgrounds of 530 known sex offenders, including 59 regarded as high interest
-----
Where are the press reports of this? Surely it would have received press coverage?


"The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls." What an odd sentence. Given that the proceeding sentence makes it clear that this same man was a lone intruder who sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 years old.  Why the need to state that his interest in young white girls was "very, very unhealthy." Surely this is self-evident. 

Where's this from?

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 27.01.15 15:24

@ScarletLaw wrote:
@j.rob wrote:In March 2014 Scotland Yard announced that a lone intruder sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006. The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls.
The four incidents, one of which involved two girls, were among 12 in which men had entered holiday accommodation in the area, including two incidents in Praia da Luz. The force also said it was looking at 38 “people of interest” and were researching the backgrounds of 530 known sex offenders, including 59 regarded as high interest
-----
Where are the press reports of this? Surely it would have received press coverage?


"The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls." What an odd sentence. Given that the proceeding sentence makes it clear that this same man was a lone intruder who sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 years old.  Why the need to state that his interest in young white girls was "very, very unhealthy." Surely this is self-evident. 

Where's this from?
Several paragraphs from the end of the article:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/11078595/Madeleine-McCann-are-we-any-closer-to-knowing-the-truth.html

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 27.01.15 15:33

"The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls."


-------


Didn't the Gaspers - or at least Mrs Gasper - reach a conclusion a bit similar to this with regard to David Payne? 


“I remember thinking whether he would look at my daughter and other little girls in a different way than I or others do. I imagined that he had perhaps visited internet sites related to little children. In a word, I thought that he could be interested in child pornography on the web. During our holiday in Majorca, each parent would bath the children in turn. I was keen to stay near the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children. I remember I said to Savio to be careful and to be close by if Dave was helping to bathe the children and my daughter in particular. I did this [stay hear the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children] quite obviously because hearing what he said had troubled me and I didn’t trust him bathing ‘A’ [our first child].

“When I heard Dave say this for the second time, it reinforced what I had already been thinking concerning his thoughts about little girls. 


“The first time I heard the terrible news regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on the radio, my thoughts raced immediately to Dave. I asked Savio if Dave was also on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal, but he didn’t know. I watched TV to catch the coverage of the news and eventually discovered that Dave was there with the McCanns.

“Then I saw him on TV a few days after Madeleine disappeared. I therefore believed that he was on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal. 







http://thegaspersstatement.blogspot.co.uk/

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 27.01.15 15:38

@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Not only that.  The MSM newspapers are not doing them any favour by stating it as a 'libel" case and repeating the libel - that Maddie died in the apt and her parents were involved etc....

Can't blame the press really as it is what the Mcs been telling the press all along.
They are hanged by their own silly game.They spined their own reputation demise.

I wonder if they are going to sue the MSM outlets for causing them pain, insomnia, depression etc for repeating the Court proceedings?  Amaral was sued for repeating the investigation process.
So would the correct term for the Trial be specifically a "Damages Trial"? For any pain & suffering to the McC's because of the book & Documentary? Surely they must of known as parents of a missing child that the police would investigate them first to rule out any foul play by the parents? This is usually what happens in most missing child cases to my knowledge. And as to who last saw the child alive. Investigators can only go by forensic and other evidence they have to try and decipher what could possibly have happened. And most high profile cases of missing children have a cloak of suspicion on the parents, until more information is revealed to possibly rule them out. And most innocent parents would do all in their power to help the police and investigating authorities to help locate their child, not hinder an investigation and sue a lead investigator in their case that was there to help them.
But i think as we all know by now everything the McC's have done appears to be for their own reputation and name, first & foremost, and shut anyone up that sees them in a negative way. And what does that say about them as parents of a missing child? Not much, IMO.
 This is from 2013 Joss in statistics. In the vast majority of cases, children who are homicide victims are killed by a parent. Figures from England and Wales over the last decade, on average around 70% of child homicides where there was a suspect were committed by a parent.
Just over 16% were committed by another family member, a friend, or an acquaintance, while the remaining 15% were committed by strangers (figures are rounded). Around one in 165,000 children aged one to four are killed each year out of statistics.

 So for the McCanns not to be looked at would be severe negligence on Amarals part because there's a large difference between 70 and 15%.
Thanks for the info. ScarletLaw. Yes most of those cases involve a parent/s, or another family member. Wow that's a phenomenal amount of children that die each year. It's like a damn epedemic actually. Poor babies. sad
 And yes,  Mr. Amaral was just doing his job as an investigator on the case. The McC's should be ashamed of themselves for the damage they have caused IMO.

____________________
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1958
Reputation : 190
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 27.01.15 15:41

@j.rob wrote:
@ScarletLaw wrote:
@j.rob wrote:In March 2014 Scotland Yard announced that a lone intruder sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006. The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls.
The four incidents, one of which involved two girls, were among 12 in which men had entered holiday accommodation in the area, including two incidents in Praia da Luz. The force also said it was looking at 38 “people of interest” and were researching the backgrounds of 530 known sex offenders, including 59 regarded as high interest
-----
Where are the press reports of this? Surely it would have received press coverage?


"The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls." What an odd sentence. Given that the proceeding sentence makes it clear that this same man was a lone intruder who sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 years old.  Why the need to state that his interest in young white girls was "very, very unhealthy." Surely this is self-evident. 

Where's this from?
Several paragraphs from the end of the article:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/11078595/Madeleine-McCann-are-we-any-closer-to-knowing-the-truth.html
I agree, with the amount of papers that our press sell with Madeleine's face-they'd be all over it like  a rash. The stories I've come across about the abductor or gang on blogs etc, have all been planted by people with either Scotland or London on their profiles and that always tells me, Clarrie Mitchell. With Gerrys family (highly abusive btw) and their so-called supporters. I did ask someone in Interpol about the gang before and he denied all knowledge, I think there was one death but it was a family member. I also think I heard Amaral say it was nonsense too.

 This appearing now shows me that this will probably be Scotland Yards so called evidence. This abductor was the perpetrator but they can't find him so will hand it over to the authorities and close the case. They couldn't get Murat as the fall-guy; or make it stick with the public that he is, so this is the next best thing.
  I've never believed in crèche man and I think he's totally fictitious.

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Gaggzy on 27.01.15 15:43

@j.rob wrote:"The man, who has never been caught, was said to have a “very, very unhealthy interest” in young white girls."


-------


Didn't the Gaspers - or at least Mrs Gasper - reach a conclusion a bit similar to this with regard to David Payne? 


“I remember thinking whether he would look at my daughter and other little girls in a different way than I or others do. I imagined that he had perhaps visited internet sites related to little children. In a word, I thought that he could be interested in child pornography on the web. During our holiday in Majorca, each parent would bath the children in turn. I was keen to stay near the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children. I remember I said to Savio to be careful and to be close by if Dave was helping to bathe the children and my daughter in particular. I did this [stay hear the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children] quite obviously because hearing what he said had troubled me and I didn’t trust him bathing ‘A’ [our first child].

“When I heard Dave say this for the second time, it reinforced what I had already been thinking concerning his thoughts about little girls. 


“The first time I heard the terrible news regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on the radio, my thoughts raced immediately to Dave. I asked Savio if Dave was also on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal, but he didn’t know. I watched TV to catch the coverage of the news and eventually discovered that Dave was there with the McCanns.

“Then I saw him on TV a few days after Madeleine disappeared. I therefore believed that he was on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal. 







http://thegaspersstatement.blogspot.co.uk/

Following head-on collisions of motor vehicles, those involved often claim not to have even seen the vehicle which slammed into them.

Mr Jones : 'I'm sorry, officer. I suppose I should have seen what was in plain sight, but I didn't.'

Plod : 'Don't worry about it, Mr Jones, it happens to the best of us. Did you hear the story about 38 Met police ...?'
avatar
Gaggzy

Posts : 488
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2014-06-08
Location : North West.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 27.01.15 15:53

And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 27.01.15 16:02

@j.rob wrote:And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html
Was he the one who had a nervous breakdown afterwards?

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by tiny on 27.01.15 16:03

@j.rob wrote:And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html
Why would he have that number on his phone(if he did)hmmmm,i just hope that sy have chat with him.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Rogue-a-Tory on 27.01.15 16:13

@Joss wrote:
@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Not only that.  The MSM newspapers are not doing them any favour by stating it as a 'libel" case and repeating the libel - that Maddie died in the apt and her parents were involved etc....

Can't blame the press really as it is what the Mcs been telling the press all along.
They are hanged by their own silly game.They spined their own reputation demise.

I wonder if they are going to sue the MSM outlets for causing them pain, insomnia, depression etc for repeating the Court proceedings?  Amaral was sued for repeating the investigation process.
So would the correct term for the Trial be specifically a "Damages Trial"? For any pain & suffering to the McC's because of the book & Documentary? Surely they must of known as parents of a missing child that the police would investigate them first to rule out any foul play by the parents? This is usually what happens in most missing child cases to my knowledge. And as to who last saw the child alive. Investigators can only go by forensic and other evidence they have to try and decipher what could possibly have happened. And most high profile cases of missing children have a cloak of suspicion on the parents, until more information is revealed to possibly rule them out. And most innocent parents would do all in their power to help the police and investigating authorities to help locate their child, not hinder an investigation and sue a lead investigator in their case that was there to help them.
But i think as we all know by now everything the McC's have done appears to be for their own reputation and name, first & foremost, and shut anyone up that sees them in a negative way. And what does that say about them as parents of a missing child? Not much, IMO.
 This is from 2013 Joss in statistics. In the vast majority of cases, children who are homicide victims are killed by a parent. Figures from England and Wales over the last decade, on average around 70% of child homicides where there was a suspect were committed by a parent.
Just over 16% were committed by another family member, a friend, or an acquaintance, while the remaining 15% were committed by strangers (figures are rounded). Around one in 165,000 children aged one to four are killed each year out of statistics.

 So for the McCanns not to be looked at would be severe negligence on Amarals part because there's a large difference between 70 and 15%.
Thanks for the info. ScarletLaw. Yes most of those cases involve a parent/s, or another family member. Wow that's a phenomenal amount of children that die each year. It's like a damn epedemic actually. Poor babies. sad
 And yes,  Mr. Amaral was just doing his job as an investigator on the case. The McC's should be ashamed of themselves for the damage they have caused IMO.
Those are very similar statistics to ones I've posted on here to different threads, IIRC are in GA's book. 70% of parents are responsible for child abductions or disappearances, 96% are done by people known to the child. So that's 1 in 25 chance that MBM disappeared at the hands of a complete stranger. A 1 in 25 chance that a complete stranger broke into the apartment, took Madeleine, leaving no trace of entry or exit and no forensic clue that they were there at all.

"So DCI Wall, with such a overwhelming weight of statistical evidence at your disposal, why didn't you look at the parents or their friends?" - would be the first question any defence solicitor would ask of any 'patsy' OG wishes to put on trial.
avatar
Rogue-a-Tory

Posts : 557
Reputation : 396
Join date : 2014-09-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 27.01.15 16:14

@tiny wrote:
@j.rob wrote:And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html
Why would he have that number on his phone(if he did)hmmmm,i just hope that sy have chat with him.
Is the Met police child abuse team in the U.K. for reporting child abuse? Did DP know someone there, and was he perhaps reporting about Madeleine or something else to do with her disappearance? I don't know why he would be calling them otherwise?

____________________
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1958
Reputation : 190
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 27.01.15 16:17

@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Not only that.  The MSM newspapers are not doing them any favour by stating it as a 'libel" case and repeating the libel - that Maddie died in the apt and her parents were involved etc....

Can't blame the press really as it is what the Mcs been telling the press all along.
They are hanged by their own silly game.They spined their own reputation demise.

I wonder if they are going to sue the MSM outlets for causing them pain, insomnia, depression etc for repeating the Court proceedings?  Amaral was sued for repeating the investigation process.
So would the correct term for the Trial be specifically a "Damages Trial"? For any pain & suffering to the McC's because of the book & Documentary? Surely they must of known as parents of a missing child that the police would investigate them first to rule out any foul play by the parents? This is usually what happens in most missing child cases to my knowledge. And as to who last saw the child alive. Investigators can only go by forensic and other evidence they have to try and decipher what could possibly have happened. And most high profile cases of missing children have a cloak of suspicion on the parents, until more information is revealed to possibly rule them out. And most innocent parents would do all in their power to help the police and investigating authorities to help locate their child, not hinder an investigation and sue a lead investigator in their case that was there to help them.
But i think as we all know by now everything the McC's have done appears to be for their own reputation and name, first & foremost, and shut anyone up that sees them in a negative way. And what does that say about them as parents of a missing child? Not much, IMO.
 This is from 2013 Joss in statistics. In the vast majority of cases, children who are homicide victims are killed by a parent. Figures from England and Wales over the last decade, on average around 70% of child homicides where there was a suspect were committed by a parent.
Just over 16% were committed by another family member, a friend, or an acquaintance, while the remaining 15% were committed by strangers (figures are rounded). Around one in 165,000 children aged one to four are killed each year out of statistics.

 So for the McCanns not to be looked at would be severe negligence on Amarals part because there's a large difference between 70 and 15%.
Thanks for the info. ScarletLaw. Yes most of those cases involve a parent/s, or another family member. Wow that's a phenomenal amount of children that die each year. It's like a damn epedemic actually. Poor babies. sad
 And yes,  Mr. Amaral was just doing his job as an investigator on the case. The McC's should be ashamed of themselves for the damage they have caused IMO.
Those are very similar statistics to ones I've posted on here to different threads, IIRC are in GA's book. 70% of parents are responsible for child abductions or disappearances, 96% are done by people known to the child. So that's 1 in 25 chance that MBM disappeared at the hands of a complete stranger. A 1 in 25 chance that a complete stranger broke into the apartment, took Madeleine, leaving no trace of entry or exit and no forensic clue that they were there at all.

"So DCI Wall, with such a overwhelming weight of statistical evidence at your disposal, why didn't you look at the parents or their friends?" - would be the first question any defence solicitor would ask of any 'patsy' OG wishes to put on trial.

Somebody told me that it's very rare that the little girl would've been taken at her age too if they were abducting her for sick pleasure and would've most likely waited until she was around the age of 10. So that lessens the odds even more.

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 27.01.15 16:20

@Joss wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@j.rob wrote:And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html
Why would he have that number on his phone(if he did)hmmmm,i just hope that sy have chat with him.
Is the Met police child abuse team in the U.K. for reporting child abuse? Did DP know someone there, and was he perhaps reporting about Madeleine or something else to do with her disappearance? I don't know why he would be calling them otherwise?

 In London. A pang of conscience I think Joss and then obviously bottled it. This actually fits in with my theory that Gerry is behind what happened and I'm pretty sure he was going to report what he knew. (If everything I read is factual and not made up)

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 27.01.15 16:49

@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@j.rob wrote:And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. Which he claims not to remember having made late that evening.

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/david-paynes-call-to-child-abuse.html
Why would he have that number on his phone(if he did)hmmmm,i just hope that sy have chat with him.
Is the Met police child abuse team in the U.K. for reporting child abuse? Did DP know someone there, and was he perhaps reporting about Madeleine or something else to do with her disappearance? I don't know why he would be calling them otherwise?

 In London. A pang of conscience I think Joss and then obviously bottled it. This actually fits in with my theory that Gerry is behind what happened and I'm pretty sure he was going to report what he knew. (If everything I read is factual and not made up)
You could be right with that theory.
avatar
Joss

Posts : 1958
Reputation : 190
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by cbeagle on 28.01.15 5:19

j.rob wrote: And David Payne's 100 second phone call to the Met police child abuse team made late in the evening of Friday 4th May. 


Along with his comment along the lines of he had more to tell, but it was not the right forum.


If Operation Grange is to be open and transparent then surely they need to have demonstrated they resolved these outstanding issues.

cbeagle

Posts : 86
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2014-08-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Loving Mom on 28.01.15 7:34


@j.rob

Thank you for posting about the Telegraph article. After reading it, I got the distinct impression that writer seemed to be quoting the Mc's  (my opinion only). Do you think Team Mc made a request for certain things to be written and he obliged but in fairness also reported important facts too?  I wonder if he will be sued next?

Did anyone else here that read it feel that way?

The part in bold I have not heard before (maybe someone else here has):

In early September 2007, according to Kate McCann, she was told by the Portuguese police that if she admitted that Madeleine had died in the apartment and she had hidden her body she might only serve a two-year sentence and Gerry McCann would not be charged at all. On September 7 the couple were both made arguidos.

Loving Mom

Posts : 86
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-12-11
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 28.01.15 7:45

@Loving Mom wrote:

@j.rob

Thank you for posting about the Telegraph article. After reading it, I got the distinct impression that writer seemed to be quoting the Mc's  (my opinion only). Do you think Team Mc made a request for certain things to be written and he obliged but in fairness also reported important facts too?  I wonder if he will be sued next?

Did anyone else here that read it feel that way?

The part in bold I have not heard before (maybe someone else here has):

In early September 2007, according to Kate McCann, she was told by the Portuguese police that if she admitted that Madeleine had died in the apartment and she had hidden her body she might only serve a two-year sentence and Gerry McCann would not be charged at all. On September 7 the couple were both made arguidos.


The statement in bold was denied by Amaral and legally he wouldn't have been able to even propose such an offer under Portugese law. That was "another" of Kate McCanns lies to try and discredit him. I think the Telegraph were just trying to be fair to everybody involved and remain impartial. Currently they still have Carter Ruck on side who are not known for being nice in court, put it that way, so the press have to be fair to the McCanns. Slowly they're starting to turn though because the money for their powerful lawyers is running out.

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Loving Mom on 28.01.15 8:03

@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Loving Mom wrote:

@j.rob

Thank you for posting about the Telegraph article. After reading it, I got the distinct impression that writer seemed to be quoting the Mc's  (my opinion only). Do you think Team Mc made a request for certain things to be written and he obliged but in fairness also reported important facts too?  I wonder if he will be sued next?

Did anyone else here that read it feel that way?

The part in bold I have not heard before (maybe someone else here has):

In early September 2007, according to Kate McCann, she was told by the Portuguese police that if she admitted that Madeleine had died in the apartment and she had hidden her body she might only serve a two-year sentence and Gerry McCann would not be charged at all. On September 7 the couple were both made arguidos.


The statement in bold was denied by Amaral and legally he wouldn't have been able to even propose such an offer under Portugese law. That was "another" of Kate McCanns lies to try and discredit him. I think the Telegraph were just trying to be fair to everybody involved and remain impartial. Currently they still have Carter Ruck on side who are not known for being nice in court, put it that way, so the press have to be fair to the McCanns. Slowly they're starting to turn though because the money for their powerful lawyers is running out.
Maybe the person who wrote the article was told the part in bold above by KM (he wrote, according to KM). In my opinion, Team Mc may have requested the article and what was requested may have been stated but what's important is a lot more than what they may have requested was also stated. Seems to be a case of be careful what you wish for. Yes, there seems to be a definite shift/increase in fair reporting in this article and the more recent articles. The truth will come out and the sooner the better for everyone involved.

Loving Mom

Posts : 86
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-12-11
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 28.01.15 8:15

@Loving Mom wrote:
@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Loving Mom wrote:

@j.rob

Thank you for posting about the Telegraph article. After reading it, I got the distinct impression that writer seemed to be quoting the Mc's  (my opinion only). Do you think Team Mc made a request for certain things to be written and he obliged but in fairness also reported important facts too?  I wonder if he will be sued next?

Did anyone else here that read it feel that way?

The part in bold I have not heard before (maybe someone else here has):

In early September 2007, according to Kate McCann, she was told by the Portuguese police that if she admitted that Madeleine had died in the apartment and she had hidden her body she might only serve a two-year sentence and Gerry McCann would not be charged at all. On September 7 the couple were both made arguidos.


The statement in bold was denied by Amaral and legally he wouldn't have been able to even propose such an offer under Portugese law. That was "another" of Kate McCanns lies to try and discredit him. I think the Telegraph were just trying to be fair to everybody involved and remain impartial. Currently they still have Carter Ruck on side who are not known for being nice in court, put it that way, so the press have to be fair to the McCanns. Slowly they're starting to turn though because the money for their powerful lawyers is running out.
Maybe the person who wrote the article was told the part in bold above by KM (he wrote, according to KM). In my opinion, Team Mc may have requested the article and what was requested may have been stated but what's important is a lot more than what they may have requested was also stated. Seems to be a case of be careful what you wish for. Yes, there seems to be a definite shift/increase in fair reporting in this article and the more recent articles. The truth will come out and the sooner the better for everyone involved.

Could be that they were told to write it. I don't understand why they've told so many lies personally, that goes for Clarence too with some of the things he's said on camera. I'm glad they have lied though because i feel these will bring them all down in the end. I agree, that the truth will come out too but it won't be Scotland Yard.

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Loving Mom on 28.01.15 8:33

I meant to say that the truth is coming out (there is a big shift recently) and the sooner it all comes out of the mouths who know (and surely someone knows) the better for Madeleine and everyone who cares about her. Ugh, IMO.  It's also IMO that we should never have to write IMO. For goodness sakes whose opinion would it be if I'm writing it, Jeesh!  This has really gotten out of control, whatever happened to freedom of speech?

Loving Mom

Posts : 86
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-12-11
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 9:32

@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@ScarletLaw wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Not only that.  The MSM newspapers are not doing them any favour by stating it as a 'libel" case and repeating the libel - that Maddie died in the apt and her parents were involved etc....

Can't blame the press really as it is what the Mcs been telling the press all along.
They are hanged by their own silly game.They spined their own reputation demise.

I wonder if they are going to sue the MSM outlets for causing them pain, insomnia, depression etc for repeating the Court proceedings?  Amaral was sued for repeating the investigation process.
So would the correct term for the Trial be specifically a "Damages Trial"? For any pain & suffering to the McC's because of the book & Documentary? Surely they must of known as parents of a missing child that the police would investigate them first to rule out any foul play by the parents? This is usually what happens in most missing child cases to my knowledge. And as to who last saw the child alive. Investigators can only go by forensic and other evidence they have to try and decipher what could possibly have happened. And most high profile cases of missing children have a cloak of suspicion on the parents, until more information is revealed to possibly rule them out. And most innocent parents would do all in their power to help the police and investigating authorities to help locate their child, not hinder an investigation and sue a lead investigator in their case that was there to help them.
But i think as we all know by now everything the McC's have done appears to be for their own reputation and name, first & foremost, and shut anyone up that sees them in a negative way. And what does that say about them as parents of a missing child? Not much, IMO.
 This is from 2013 Joss in statistics. In the vast majority of cases, children who are homicide victims are killed by a parent. Figures from England and Wales over the last decade, on average around 70% of child homicides where there was a suspect were committed by a parent.
Just over 16% were committed by another family member, a friend, or an acquaintance, while the remaining 15% were committed by strangers (figures are rounded). Around one in 165,000 children aged one to four are killed each year out of statistics.

 So for the McCanns not to be looked at would be severe negligence on Amarals part because there's a large difference between 70 and 15%.
Thanks for the info. ScarletLaw. Yes most of those cases involve a parent/s, or another family member. Wow that's a phenomenal amount of children that die each year. It's like a damn epedemic actually. Poor babies. sad
 And yes,  Mr. Amaral was just doing his job as an investigator on the case. The McC's should be ashamed of themselves for the damage they have caused IMO.
Those are very similar statistics to ones I've posted on here to different threads, IIRC are in GA's book. 70% of parents are responsible for child abductions or disappearances, 96% are done by people known to the child. So that's 1 in 25 chance that MBM disappeared at the hands of a complete stranger. A 1 in 25 chance that a complete stranger broke into the apartment, took Madeleine, leaving no trace of entry or exit and no forensic clue that they were there at all.

"So DCI Wall, with such a overwhelming weight of statistical evidence at your disposal, why didn't you look at the parents or their friends?" - would be the first question any defence solicitor would ask of any 'patsy' OG wishes to put on trial.

Somebody told me that it's very rare that the little girl would've been taken at her age too if they were abducting her for sick pleasure and would've most likely waited until she was around the age of 10. So that lessens the odds even more.
Unfortunately, there are different types of sick paedos out there who will only target one specific age group, whether <1, 1,2,3,4,5,6.......etc, therefore, therefore any statistics about the number/probability are useful for data collection and prevention, but in an investigation such as this, it is just that...statistics. 

The 1 perp was obviously targeting Madeleines age group and that's what he got, hence leaving the twins and any older kids in the complex.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Guest on 28.01.15 10:01

Which perp?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Tony Bennett on 28.01.15 10:04

@Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14900
Reputation : 2991
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

??

Post by Guest on 28.01.15 10:16

Why does he/she believe that?

Has he/she seen any evidence to support that thesis?

Could he/she refer us to its source, then?

Im sure that would me much appreciated by many
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ChippyM on 28.01.15 10:21

@woodforthetrees wrote:

Unfortunately, there are different types of sick paedos out there who will only target one specific age group, whether <1, 1,2,3,4,5,6.......etc, therefore, therefore any statistics about the number/probability are useful for data collection and prevention, but in an investigation such as this, it is just that...statistics. 

The 1 perp was obviously targeting Madeleines age group and that's what he got, hence leaving the twins and any older kids in the complex.


You've got to be kidding right?!     The statistics are a tool that law enforcement can use to tell them how likely a scenario is, so of course they apply. 

   Have a look here,  https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/196467.pdf

   What supposedly happened to MM is unbelievably rare ,   'age of non-family abuction victims 0-5 ye ars old , 7%'
                                                                                        'childs location prior to event, own home or yard  5%'
About 80% of children are abducted from public places, not homes!


So combine those odds and add in doubts about the crime scene (no hairs, fibres or skin cells from an abductor) and the scenario put forward by the parents is highly unlikely to have occurred. Police have seen hundreds of cases and are familiar with crime scenes that have been 'staged'.  In many of these false kidnap or covered up murder cases 'verbal staging' takes place, ie. 'we know the person was abducted', 'we saw a strange man'.....sound familiar?    

Big red flags to the police are the verbal staging but no signs of break in, nothing or only certain objects taken and illlogical points of entry for the burglar or abuctor.........  Logically the police are right to strongly suspect the parents and not some mythical abductor that almost never occurs in real life!     Funnily enough even the McCann's PR team have changed the focus from an impossible sex offender that prowls holiday apartments instead of crowded parks or beaches in recent years to a burglar that suddenly became an abductor by accident?!

ChippyM

Posts : 1334
Reputation : 467
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 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