Summers & Swan Ch 25 + 26

The Rooster wrote:I agree with you Mr Bennett, the Government involvement is unprecedented in a child disappearance, rather akin to that of a high ranking diplomat or royal family member abduction or break in or theft etc.  But for the likes of the McCanns! It suggests something very important is at the center of the affair.  How Gerald McCann has been allowed to swagger in drunken like joy at the attention he receives must gall the politicians who have protected him thus far.  Let Paxman re-question him!

aquila wrote:Two experts paid (?) for their opinions.

Firstly it depends upon what was presented to the experts.

Secondly, if a hundred experts were asked to give their opinion and two of them gave the opinion sought it's those opinions that will be published....if you have an agenda that is.

Crikey, Janner had 4 doctors to say he's non compus mentis whilst he continued to run a company and speak in the H.O.L.

What's remarkable is the timing of the original release of the book and the very swift update which still speaks of 'haters', and now seeks to further diss the dogs with two expert opinions.

A swift update on a book when simply nothing has happened in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance is questionable isn't it?

Just my opinion.

PeterMac wrote:Fascinating how desperate they are to rubbish and decry and dismiss the dogs' alerts.
It is clearly one of the main things that worries TM.  They had not expected British dogs to be brought in, and have no response
Not even Mitchell "answers to anything the police may or may not find" cannot come up with anything remotely plausible.

Let us remember
Jeanette Zapata.
Bianca Jones
Kate Prout
Susan Pilley
Cori Baker
Etan Patz
Lauryn Dickens
Caylee Anthony,
Kirsi Gifford-Hull   R.I.P.
and many more.

The Rooster wrote:I just tried to search for the interview but couldn't find it.  I'm certain it was there a couple of month ago!

Tony Bennett wrote:

The Rooster wrote:Why are Summers and Swan, Tracey and Donal, Clarence Mitchell and the other salaried/ paid supporters - all retro-fitting up the McCanns abduction theory for years.  Why is there a need for this type of 3rd party reputation management? Why from the outset didn't the advisors just say to the McCanns, "if you are innocent of any wrong doing and want to demonstrate this, then empirically answer your accusers questions, clear your name and get on with the important job of finding your daughter. You can achieve this by simply...

1.  Doing the lie detector test, don't worry about a bad result, it can happen agree to do the test again and then again if necessary.
2.  Answering the good policeman's 48 questions
3.  Explain the SMS activity and name the recipients (provide affidavit's if necessary)
4.  Doing the reconstruction of events of May 3rd 2007
5.  Tell the public why you said what you said on the airport transfer bus
6.  Tell the public why you were joking at the terrace doors of someone apartment only days after you daughter disappearance.
7.  etc etc  The good members of this forum can add countless other items to the list

If you do this you will have no need to sue individuals for libel or newspapers for libel nor Mr Bennett for defamation because there simply won't be any libel or defamation and guess what... the fund, yes the fund will grow like no fund has grown before."

I suspect the advisors did say this, because it's so straightforward and sensible and the McCanns, Gerald in particular knew the downside of coming clean and went on his own hell bent and perverted course of reputation management and this is what we see today, Gerald's Frankensteins... Summers and Swan, Tracey and Donal, Clarence Mitchell and the other salaried/paid supporters - all retro-fitting up the McCanns abduction theory.

@ The Rooster

It's a while since we've seen you here - and the wait has been worth it, as IMO this is the best post I've ever seen from you.

But I think one further element is missing from your analysis if I may say so - and that's the level of government involvement, as in:

* Phone calls from Brown to Gerry
* Phone calls from Blair to Gerry & Kate
* Top man of the media Monitring Unit (CM) despatched post haste to Praia da Luz
* CM told by the government that this was 'a clear case of stranger abduction'
* MI5 and security services involved in 'profiling' Robert Murat as the abductor
* Bob Small of Leics Police having a long chat to Jane Tanner the very day she later identified Murat as the man she had seen on 3 May
* Involvement of Control Risks Group - government-related risk management company
* Investigators close to government intelligence agencies: Kevin Halligen (MoD), Henri Exton (Ex-head of MI5 Covert Intelligence Department), Tim Craig-Harvey (close connections with government security services), Gary Hagland (Hong Kong intelligence services and with friends at MI6)  
* Special Branch escorting the McCanns on journeys in England
* High-powered team involving government departments set up by Leics Police 8 May 2007
* Cameron deciding on Operation Grange
* Current DPP Alison Saunders visiting Portuguese Police in 2013

...and there is so much more

notlongnow wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/7936305.stm

@headlinepg

Tony Bennett wrote:

The Rooster wrote:Why are Summers and Swan, Tracey and Donal, Clarence Mitchell and the other salaried/ paid supporters - all retro-fitting up the McCanns abduction theory for years.  Why is there a need for this type of 3rd party reputation management? Why from the outset didn't the advisors just say to the McCanns, "if you are innocent of any wrong doing and want to demonstrate this, then empirically answer your accusers questions, clear your name and get on with the important job of finding your daughter. You can achieve this by simply...

1.  Doing the lie detector test, don't worry about a bad result, it can happen agree to do the test again and then again if necessary.
2.  Answering the good policeman's 48 questions
3.  Explain the SMS activity and name the recipients (provide affidavit's if necessary)
4.  Doing the reconstruction of events of May 3rd 2007
5.  Tell the public why you said what you said on the airport transfer bus
6.  Tell the public why you were joking at the terrace doors of someone apartment only days after you daughter disappearance.
7.  etc etc  The good members of this forum can add countless other items to the list

If you do this you will have no need to sue individuals for libel or newspapers for libel nor Mr Bennett for defamation because there simply won't be any libel or defamation and guess what... the fund, yes the fund will grow like no fund has grown before."

I suspect the advisors did say this, because it's so straightforward and sensible and the McCanns, Gerald in particular knew the downside of coming clean and went on his own hell bent and perverted course of reputation management and this is what we see today, Gerald's Frankensteins... Summers and Swan, Tracey and Donal, Clarence Mitchell and the other salaried/paid supporters - all retro-fitting up the McCanns abduction theory.

@ The Rooster

It's a while since we've seen you here - and the wait has been worth it, as IMO this is the best post I've ever seen from you.

But I think one further element is missing from your analysis if I may say so - and that's the level of government involvement, as in:

* Phone calls from Brown to Gerry
* Phone calls from Blair to Gerry & Kate
* Top man of the media Monitring Unit (CM) despatched post haste to Praia da Luz
* CM told by the government that this was 'a clear case of stranger abduction'
* MI5 and security services involved in 'profiling' Robert Murat as the abductor
* Bob Small of Leics Police having a long chat to Jane Tanner the very day she later identified Murat as the man she had seen on 3 May
* Involvement of Control Risks Group - government-related risk management company
* Investigators close to government intelligence agencies: Kevin Halligen (MoD), Henri Exton (Ex-head of MI5 Covert Intelligence Department), Tim Craig-Harvey (close connections with government security services), Gary Hagland (Hong Kong intelligence services and with friends at MI6)  
* Special Branch escorting the McCanns on journeys in England
* High-powered team involving government departments set up by Leics Police 8 May 2007
* Cameron deciding on Operation Grange
* Current DPP Alison Saunders visiting Portuguese Police in 2013

...and there is so much more

PeterMac wrote:
I would guess if what he says is correct, that he has spoken to Philomena, who was involved, if not the sole instigator of the Dossier of death

Enid O'Dowd wrote:Surely a publisher brings out a new/updated edition of a book when

(1)  the first print run is sold out or almost sold out 

and

 (2) the publisher anticipates reasonable sales of the new edition, enough to cover printing and marketing costs as an absolute minimum.

Since the first edition flopped and there must have been heavy marketing costs, why would a publisher produce an updated edition at this point in time to add to losses?


This makes me suspect that this new edition has been paid for by a supporter or from the Fund. I can’t see that any publisher wanting to stay in business would  throw good money after bad.

aiyoyo wrote:Pathetic !

Who ever heard of acclaimed writer adding addendum chapters to replug book, blaming trolls for his first edition flop?

Using expert's opinion (expert he cannot name) on blood pattern forensic to discredit the cadaverine detection dog is a joke.  What has dog positive signals on cadaverine detection got anything to do with blood splatter pattern forensic?

How credible is his claim that his colleague is his source for the data on trolls and tweets?
For one thing, writer does not have colleague. For another thing, even if he (Summers) has one, why would his colleague who is not associated to, not related to, and not knowing Kate & Gerry be interested in anti-Mcs trolls, let alone be interested to monitor and keep tabs on anti mcs activities on social media?

The type of details/data on trolls and tweets included in chapter 25 can only have come from a source close to McCanns.  And, they wonder why people believe they are another arm of Pro-Mcs propaganda !

Enid O'Dowd wrote:Surely a publisher brings out a new/updated edition of a book when

(1)  the first print run is sold out or almost sold out 

and

 (2) the publisher anticipates reasonable sales of the new edition, enough to cover printing and marketing costs as an absolute minimum.

Since the first edition flopped and there must have been heavy marketing costs, why would a publisher produce an updated edition at this point in time to add to losses?


This makes me suspect that this new edition has been paid for by a supporter or from the Fund. I can’t see that any publisher wanting to stay in business would  throw good money after bad.

onehand wrote:s-and-s, are quite funny people, first the tell us there is a brittish senior police officer working on an ongoing investigation, in breach of his oath of silence.

But, but, then they also tells us the brittish police did not a very best job , while they had to fulfill the job of advisors in the gathering of the forensic material in portugal.

They also send out some horrible unreliable bad brittish dogs.

And then even an irish forensic expert that was asked for a opinion, based on a file that is partly translated by an amateur anti.
I tried that over here, but no chance any forensic expert would comment his opinion, without a authorized translation. They told me that would be highly inappropriate in their profession.

Well , it means that grange can leave keep their money in the pocket, for retesting the forensic material that is left, as your dr. maureen s. made it clear it would not stand up in court because of lack of quality. Isn't that hindering a active investigation? Nice job s-and-s!

onehand wrote:s-and-s, are quite funny people, first the tell us there is a brittish senior police officer working on an ongoing investigation, in breach of his oath of silence.

Quote S&S "The authors' conversations with sources over several months , however, suggest a different reality. A senior source told the authors it was 'business as usual. We're just working through the jobs, one by one."

A sr source (in the Police) without name !  And we are supposed to buy that !
Lying through as many teeth comes to mind.......



And then even an irish forensic expert that was asked for a opinion, based on a file that is partly translated by an amateur anti.
I tried that over here, but no chance any forensic expert would comment his opinion, without a authorized translation. They told me that would be highly inappropriate in their profession.

We are led to believe Mcs spent 100K having the files translated.  
So it's possible they got a copy from the Mcs. Nonetheless that is still not certified official copy,  just mc-translated copy.


Well , it means that grange can leave keep their money in the pocket, for retesting the forensic material that is left, as your dr. maureen s. made it clear it would not stand up in court because of lack of quality. Isn't that hindering a active investigation? Nice job s-and-s!

How dare you? Ha Ha....
It's supposed to the newest, the latest version of definitive account.  Wonder how many more "definitive" accounts they have to play with?  You'd think "definitive" account means just that "definitive"....

aquila wrote:Definitive......

I looked up antonyms for 'definitive' and here are a few....

ambiguous

imprecise

indefinite

inexact

questionable

uncertain

incomplete

inconclusive

interim

temporary