Child Killer to be quizzed on Maddie - Express 1/11/2015

I've never understood why they were allowed to leave Portugal.

There is no way that if it happened in Britain they would be allowed to go.

How the hell did that happen?

Seems like there's nothing about this case that excites the public anymore just some occasional typical dribble that any clown could write and to think that OG went back to the beginning and didn't notice any discrepancies in the original statements and act on that very scary for most people (normal people) but must be a delight for some. You would expect detectives to do their job properly what is it 8 years on millions spent and they are still linking the case with foreigner's in other countries how convenient but since K&G are probably running the show go figure.

BlueBag wrote:I've never understood why they were allowed to leave Portugal.

There is no way that if it happened in Britain they would be allowed to go.

How the hell did that happen?

Madeleine McCann is reported ABDUCTED on 4th May 2007 by UK media.

Madeleine's parents are given arguido status September 2007 and leave Portugal.

Amaral is off the case October 2007.

I wonder what Amaral says about them leaving Portugal.

Surely he would not have wanted that.

These people were on the verge of being charged according to their own family.

At the time the little girl was dubbed 'the German Maddie' (or however that translates into the German language).  See here..

http://quer-denken.tv/index.php/1541-vermisste-inga-wer-bestellt-kleine-maedchen

Abysmal as google translate might be, you can still get the gist from this article.  The only similarity I can detect between the two cases is the month of May, the words disappearance + search + abducted + no body found.  That's where it begins and ends - still 'tis that time of year again.

ETA:  The story is clearly not 'news' - more like 'olds'.  I guess it helps Operation Grange continue for at least the next year.

Verdi wrote:The poor little girl Inga Gehricke, one of the victims Silvio S has confessed to having murdered, disappeared early May 2015.  At the time the little girl was dubbed 'the German Maddie' (or however that translates into the German language).  See here..

http://quer-denken.tv/index.php/1541-vermisste-inga-wer-bestellt-kleine-maedchen

Abysmal as google translate might be, you can still get the gist from this article.  The only similarity I can detect between the two cases is the month of May, the words disappearance + search + abducted + no body found.  That's where it begins and ends - still 'tis that time of year again.

ETA:  The story is clearly not 'news' - more like 'olds'.  I guess it helps Operation Grange continue for at least the next year.

Operation Grange will go on and on and on. It will be reassuring to the public that someone is looking for Madeleine and having done everything possible 4 members of staff are still on the team sitting alongside an MIT team with all available resources at their disposal.

That's it. That's it for Madeleine McCann. The whole tripe of Operation Grange will be smothered in honey after the incredibly high profile activity.

Madeleine will be trawled out by UK media forever and a day. The 'fascination' is what this little girl has become.

That's it.


Sick isn't it

The fact that this is in a newspaper should be enough to know that this person is not a suspect and that OG are not thinking he is.

This article (as with all other articles) is based on speculation and media manipulation to sell papers only.

No live case tells the press genuine information about what they are going to do and why as it can have a detrimental affect on the investigation.

Basically  "someone has killed a child + add Madeleine to the story = double sales"

Next....

I wonder whether the Sunday/Daily Express are taking the p***, after their legal encounter a few years ago.

Ladyinred wrote:I wonder whether the Sunday/Daily Express are taking the p***, after their legal encounter a few years ago.

I'm inclined to agree.

Verdi wrote:At the time Inga Gehricke was dubbed 'the German Maddie' (or however that translates into the German language).  See here..

http://quer-denken.tv/index.php/1541-vermisste-inga-wer-bestellt-kleine-maedchen

Abysmal as google translate might be, you can still get the gist from this article.  The only similarity I can detect between the two cases is the month of May, the words disappearance + search + abducted + no body found.  That's where it begins and ends - still 'tis that time of year again.

ETA:  The story is clearly not 'news' - more like 'olds'.  I guess it helps Operation Grange continue for at least the next year.

ETA:  It's rightly been brought to my attention that Silvio S has NOT confessed to having murdered Inga Gehricke.  I have therefore deleted the reference.

Seems I haven't deleted the reference in the original post because the 'edit' button 'aint there, hence I've replied to myself.  This is getting a bit confusing.

Ladyinred wrote:

Verdi wrote:

Verdi wrote:At the time Inga Gehricke was dubbed 'the German Maddie' (or however that translates into the German language).  See here..

http://quer-denken.tv/index.php/1541-vermisste-inga-wer-bestellt-kleine-maedchen

Abysmal as google translate might be, you can still get the gist from this article.  The only similarity I can detect between the two cases is the month of May, the words disappearance + search + abducted + no body found.  That's where it begins and ends - still 'tis that time of year again.

ETA:  The story is clearly not 'news' - more like 'olds'.  I guess it helps Operation Grange continue for at least the next year.

ETA:  It's rightly been brought to my attention that Silvio S has NOT confessed to having murdered Inga Gehricke.  I have therefore deleted the reference.

Seems I haven't deleted the reference in the original post because the 'edit' button 'aint there, hence I've replied to myself.  This is getting a bit confusing.

Verdi, I've deleted the reference in your original post.

Thankee!

Lest we 'forget'!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brutality-lies-and-the-tragedy-of-la-petite-typhaine-1838774.html

Brutality, lies, and the tragedy of 'la petite Typhaine'

For six months, the parents of Typhaine Taton maintained that she had been abducted. Then an even more horrific story emerged

By John Lichfield in Paris Sunday 23 October 2011 01:46 BST

France has been stunned by the fate of la petite Typhaine, a little girl lost in a disturbing saga of parental brutality, brazen lies and the failings of the social safeguards which are meant to protect children.

The case, which bears striking similarities to the death of Baby P and the false abduction of Shannon Matthews, revolves around Typhaine, a five-year- old with a cheeky round face. She was reported to have been abducted from under her mother's nose on 14 June. According to her mother, Anne-Sophie Faucheur, 24, the little girl "vanished in the space of a second" as she ran a few yards ahead of her on the streets of Maubeuge, a depressed industrial town in northern France.

When the investigation made no progress, Ms Faucheur gave a tearful press conference in which she accused the police of feet-dragging and incompetence. "One thing is sure," she said, sobbing in front of the TV cameras. "We will get her back. We miss her so much. She is in our hearts always."

Sitting beside her, nodding in sympathy, was her partner, Nicolas Willot, Typhaine's stepfather, who is also 24.

This week, almost six months later, Willot, a hospital porter and voluntary fireman, led French and Belgian police to Typhaine's shallow grave in woodland in south central Belgium, 50 miles from their home. A few days earlier he told French investigators that Typhaine had died after she was hurled naked into a cold shower by her mother. This was, he said, a punishment for wetting the bed – a punishment that "went wrong".

Ms Faucheur at first insisted that there had been an "accident in the shower". She later confessed that her partner's version was correct.

The case is one of a series in recent years involving child abuse or extreme neglect amongst poor white French families, especially in the depressed ex-industrial towns of northern France. The case has also revived disturbing memories for the people of Belgium. The body of little Typhaine was found close to the village of Marcinelle, once the home of the convicted child murderer, Marc Dutroux.

Mr Willot told police the girl had frequently been "tortured" by her mother and that she had become the "whipping child of the family" (which included an older sister and a baby half-sister).

If so, Typhaine's martyrdom had not lasted long. One of the most disturbing facts of the case is that Ms Faucheur had herself kidnapped her daughter from outside a kindergarten in Lille only five months before. Until then, the little girl had been living with her paternal grandmother and her natural father, François Taton.

No attempt was made by the French legal system or social services or Mr Taton himself to reclaim the child. When Ms Faucheur and Mr Taton separated four years earlier, they had agreed informally to take one daughter each. Typhaine had gone with her father and her mother is said to have hardly known her before turning up at the school gates in Lille.

Ms Faucheur abducted the child by telling teachers that Typhaine's father was ill and could not come to collect her. Awkward questions are now being asked about why nothing was done to challenge Ms Faucheur's action, or at least investigate Typhaine's well-being in her new home. Raphael Théry, a lawyer representing Typhaine's father, said that his client had decided to accept the situation because "he placed his confidence in the mother. If a mother comes to claim her child, you imagine it is to give her affection and love".

It is now believed that Typhaine had been dead for four days before her disappearance was reported to police. Her body was kept for at least two days in the cellar of the family house at Aulnoye-Aymeries, near Maubeuge.

While Typhaine's body still lay in the cellar, her mother invited friends and family to a restaurant to celebrate the christening of her baby daughter. When they asked why Typhaine was not there, Ms Faucheur said that the little girl had been left at home to watch videos in case her natural father "took advantage of the party" to steal her back.

Willot explained to police that he had loaded the dead child into his van when he set out on one of his frequent trips across the border to Belgium to buy cheaper petrol. His choice of a burial place near the village once inhabited by Marc Dutroux, convicted in 2004 for multiple child murders, is believed to be a macabre coincidence.

The websites of French newspapers have been flooded with messages expressing shock at the "cold-blooded cheek" of the child's mother, who "made us all believe in her suffering". But many messages also query the legal and social welfare systems' failure to see the danger signs. The same questions are being asked by investigators and local politicians.

"It is easy to be wise after the event but there was a disturbing pattern," said one politician, who asked not be named. "Apart from the unchallenged abduction by her mother, there was the fact that Typhaine did not go to school and was rarely seen outside the house."

Even now, investigators are not convinced they have uncovered the full facts of the case. They fear that both mother and stepfather may have systematically mistreated Typhaine. For the time being, the couple have been accused of "mistreatment causing accidental death". A postmortem examination on the child's body will attempt to decide whether her injuries point to something more deliberate.

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/typhaine-taton-mother-and-step-father.html

Sunday, 27 January 2013

Typhaine Taton: Mother and Step-father Guilty of Murder and FAKING 'Disappearance'

Anne-Sophie Faucheur and Nicolas Williot during a press conference on Typhaine's alleged disappearance on June 24th 2009 in Maubeuge (Nord Département)

At the Douai (Nord Département) Court of Assizes on January 25th 2013, Anne-Sophie Faucheur, aged 26, was sentenced to 30 years in prison, to serve a minimum term of 20 years, for the murder of her five-year-old daughter Typhaine in June 2009. Her partner, Nicolas Willot, aged 27, received the same sentence.

The verdict met with silence from the accused and members of Typhaine's father's family, who all wore white T shirts bearing an image of the little girl.

'Abducted' while leaving school.

The couple were also found guilty of making false statements to make people 'believe' the child had 'disappeared'  

(ala, 'Madeleine WAS ABDUCTED'?)

Which only, ONLY, G&K McCann, Madeleine's parents, have 'stated'!

And around THAT 'statement', ('pedantic', i know, but does just THREE 'WORDS' constitute a 'statement'?) BY ONLY G&K McCann, is an 'entire' £15+ million, taxpayer 'funded', full time, 38 detectives and police 'staff', 4 1/2 years, police 'investigation'........SOLELY 'based' upon.

WITHOUT 'QUESTION', apparently.
---------------------------------

Just 'saying'.

I'm sorry, it's not funny, but in true crap journalistic style they manage to slip in:
 
‘The body of little Typhaine was found close to the village of Marcinelle, once the home of the convicted child murderer, Marc Dutroux.’
 
Typhaine was first reported ‘abducted’ in June 2011.
 
Dutroux was arrested in 1996, four years after the disappearance of his victims had begun, and has been in prison ever since, though he briefly escaped in April 1998.
 
Doh!
 
So 100% completely & utterly irrelevant, but why spoil a good story link?
 
Seems like Pinkie has missed a trick, it’s only just across a couple of borders and a mere 2200 km away.
 
Oh, bugger, Dutroux was in jail in 2007. Never mind. I’m sure the Daily Star could still make a front page out of it.

DCI Wall, 'lead' IO@OG, will 'not' go anywhere 'near' a 'LIVE' erm, 'suspect', imo.

Imagine, the LIVE 'suspect' DEMANDING 'a court appearance' and the 'awkward' questions that may be 'raised'!

Imagine, if you will, the LIVE 'suspect' has 'read, extensively' the PJ 'files' and T7 'statements', riddled with 'discrepancies and contradictions' (that OG have 'glossed' over, imo)

'leading', possibly, to awkward questions, by the 'defence', TO..........OG!

Imagine the 'witnesses' the LIVE 'suspect' could, DEMAND to be 'called' to a 'trial', and 'cross examined' UNDER OATH.

Nah, DCI Wall's 'rump', will not, be going anywhere 'near' a 'patsy', LIVE, 'suspect', imo.

OG, may 'talk' out of their 'rump', but they are not......... 'that stoopid'!

AIMO, 'obviously'!

Hi jeanmonroe,
Clarence did not miss a trick with regard to the death of the girl in France, because it could be too close to Home?

Amazing comments in the above article. Allowed to stand.


Comments (12)

A German child murder may be questioned by cops over Madeleine McCann
11:40am Mon 2 Nov 15 David Duckworth says...

Something tells me the MET are barking up the wrong tree here and they know it...
Barking being the appropriate term here in relation to Eddie the cadaver dog who gave 11 indications of a corpse and "all" related to the Mccanns and has never been wrong on the over 200 cases prior to this one and the full video of the official police sniffer dog search is freely available on youtube ...I have little doubt that this comment that breaks no rules will be deleted such is the press censorship over this case...!..A case where it appears commenting on the case "facts" are banned...!

If anyone can see where I have broken house rules I would be grateful for any info that can be provided...

I suspect that this story has been planted in the press by the Mccanns extremely expensive PR spokesman Clarence Mitchell at the expense of the publicly donated "find Madeleine fund" ...The man who boasts he "controls what goes out in the press"...I could point to "countless" similar non stories over the past eight years and is just following the same old pattern of "misinformation" ..This story has now been removed from the Mirror website after a few hours and no other mainstream media have bothered to mention it...Perhaps they've worked the Mccanns PR team out but there's always a "new suspect" reported on the anniversary of the poor young girl's disappearance along with the old the "search fund is about to run out"...I would suggest that if they reserved the publicly donated funds for what they were intended for and not spent pursuing countless libel actions the funds may stretch a great deal further..Unless of course these libel actions are the stones which they refer to as "unturned"...The reason for these libel actions "according" to the Mccanns is that the defendants are writing articles that are damaging to the search for Madeleine...One could be forgiven for feeling that not cooperating with the police who are trying to solve their daughter's disappearance "more" damaging to the search..A police force their PR team have wrongly tried to discredit just as they have to anyone who challenges the abduction account..

This couple, who vowed to "leave no stone unturned" in their search for Madeleine "refused" to return to Portugal for a reconstruction based on their witness statements that was intended to "help" the Portuguese police solve her disappearance...It is still officially classified as a disappearance and "not" an abduction...

Kate Mccann went as far as using insulting language in her book towards an elderly female witness living directly above the Mccanns apartment who stated that she had heard Madeleine cry for 75 minutes on an evening prior to her disappearance and that this was not consistent with the Mccanns claim that they were checking their children every half hour in an apartment that had according to the Mccanns, been left "unlocked" with 3 children under the age of "4" and not for the first time, indeed this was the 5th evening they had chose the routine...Of course it took poor Gerry almost a week to retract his original statement where he claimed he used a key to the front door, remembering 6 days later that this was not the case and that he had been using the "allegedly" open sliding patio.. Sadly this elderly lady has now passed away..

It is high time the press began reporting this case accurately for the benefit of the public that this couple court when it suits their and their funds needs...A fund that registered as a limited company and not a charity allowing the Mccann family to divert the cash from its intended use...Indeed the Mccanns even felt two mortgage payments from the fund were justified...

It should be noted that this case is no longer being titled in the press as an abduction which does not have "a single shred of evidence to support" it but rather correctly titled "disappearance" and should be backed up further and reported on by way of "evidence" based reporting instead of Team Mccann spin... Begin putting this young girl first...It's what the Mccanns continuously "claim" they want..It almost seems that the parents have bought themselves the role of the victims, funded by the public, but their not..."Madeleine" is...
Score: 5
1:58pm Mon 2 Nov 15 Stephen Gill says...

"This couple, who vowed to "leave no stone unturned" in their search for Madeleine "refused" to return to Portugal for a reconstruction based on their witness statements and was intended to help the Portuguese police solve her disappearance"

They might have been washing their hair that day !!!
Score: 1
2:09pm Mon 2 Nov 15 David Duckworth says...

The Mccanns and Jane Tanner were available to do one in Portugal prior to this with their "own" film team directing and witnesses placed in locations which contradicted the witness statements...However the MET have entirely ruled out Tanner's sighting after mysteriously locating the English tourist involved after six years...Mmmmm...One must wonder how it took an English tourist who was at the same resort at the same time as the Mccanns 6 years to come forward...Are the Germans more clued up on this case than us...?..A case that has had more Clarence Mitchell controlled press coverage than the death of Princess Diana ..!

Washing the "facts" perhaps Stephen...Just as they washed their daughters cuddle cat with her scent on it just before the dogs were called in and an indication of a "human" corpse was still given from cuddle cat..

One forensic expert commented that this was "bizarre behaviour" to wash your missing daughters scent from her most prized possession away "forever"...It had become grubby according to Mrs Mccann.....Of course her explanation for this cadaver odour is that she took Madeleine's cuddle cat to work with her when she was "allegedly" handling dead bodies...As is common knowledge our GP's spend their time hugging dead bodies to certify death, with their eldest daughter's comfort toy that Madeleine carried with her every where she went and they dress in their holiday clothes while doing so.."Holiday clothes" that the dog also indicated had been in contact with a "human" corpse...The Mccanns PR, Clarence Mitchell informs the "public" that these are "perfectly innocent explanations". These "perfectly innocent explanations" by Kate would appear to be giving some credibility to the dogs but yet when interviewed by a Portuguese reporter and asked about the evidence of the dogs, Gerry tells the female interviewer to "ask the dogs" and then goes on to tell us that Gerry's research indicates that cadaver dogs "are incredibly unreliable"...Gerry when making this comment was well aware that the cadaver dog in question had "never" been wrong in over 200 cases...So it appears Kate dismisses the dogs indications as "credible" and it was due to her taking cuddle cat to work while wearing her holiday clothes and coming into "lengthy" contact with a human corpse while certifying a death..Then we have Gerry disagreeing with Kate and stating that a dog that has "never" been wrong in over 200 cases prior to this one is extremely unreliable...

Having considered the above one would surely be within their rights to consider that the vast amount of resources spent on this case somewhat unjust as after all this expense there is still not one single shred of evidence to support an abduction ever took place...

I can guarantee that this will not be the last non story to appear in the mainstream British media...

Furthermore I would like to extend my extreme gratitude to the Evening Times for allowing the "entirely factual" comments that I have posted...
Score: 3
5:49pm Wed 4 Nov 15 Anna Kondha says...

Or perhaps they were busy having drinks with friends
Score: 1
5:00pm Mon 2 Nov 15 thomas wilson says...

David, An excellent well structured post. As you say I am surprised it has been passed. I have echoed every point that you have made since day 1 and have posted on various threads. And they dont get published. All those digs in Portugal? what was the result of those? And remember the many housebreakers and abductors who have been interviewed with arrests imminent..? What happened to all those.? And when you return home to find your child missing who has the immediate assumption she has been abducted. Surely the first reaction is where has she wandered off to. Especially when the 2 younger children remain still asleep and undisturbed? THEY said she had been abducted not the police as to date there is no proof she has been. She is missing!!!!!!! And yes who has been paying Clarence' s high salary these past EIGHT years?? and why does this pair STILL need a family spokesman 8 years later? any other family of a missing child get a spokesman immediately appointed by the then Prime Minister, even though he is a close family friend?? Thought not..The whole sorry mess stinks to high heaven my friend.
Score: 4
6:59pm Mon 2 Nov 15 Carol Daly says...

The mum is best of friends with Esther McVey the ex Tory MP, it would explain the friends in high places thing keeping their case in the media.
Score: 2
8:50pm Mon 2 Nov 15 David Duckworth says...

Your right Carol but I find it hard to believe the ease with which those people in high places refuse to accept the realities of this case, considering the subject matter...
Their lack of cooperation with the Portuguese authorities is absolutely shameful and it must be extremely frustrating for Ben Needham's mother having watched the level of resources that have been poured into this case knowing that her young son was abducted...Of this there is no doubt but has received nothing like the sort of support the Mccanns have been given...
I have no beef with the case being kept in the media but the omissions and the facts that aren't being reported is truly staggering...
All their TV interviews are tightly controlled by their PR and they are given a platform to promote their own version of events...They are "never" challenged over the dark areas which they know exist but plainly refuse to acknowledge...
I find so many issues hard to accept in this regard.
The "statement" of Gerry using his key to open the door on the night she vanished and then changing this a week later once it became known the shutters could not be open from the outside and forensics "proving" that "no one" could have entered or left the apartment via the window...Very hard to believe..
Washing the cuddle cat before the cadaver dog was sent in...
Mrs Mccann refusing to answer 48 of 49 questions...
The twins sleeping through the entire event and continuing to sleep through all the commotion and moving hours later to another apartment and still not once waking...
Knowingly altering their version of the reconstruction and refusing to take part in an official reconstruction for the Portuguese police who were trying to solve the "disappearance".
The 11 indications of the cadaver dog which had "never" been wrong in the more than "200" prior cases and 3 by the blood dog...
The dog indicating the presence of a corpse in the car that was rented three weeks "after" the fact.
Leaving the car boot open at "all" times...
Offering and then refusing to take a polygraph test..A test that offered a very powerful tool to divert the attention fully back to searching for their daughter...A test that "innocent" loving parents, presented with the facts would surely grasp with both hands and would offer their two remaining children reassurance when they're old enough to research the case themselves and see the "facts" before them...
The Smith sighting describing what Mr Smith believed was Gerry Mccann

I would suggest that the Mccanns are still lying today if they claim that they will leave no stone unturned and continue to knowingly ignore the stones I have stated above...

One must hope that the cadaver dog that has "never been wrong" in his previous 200 cases, has on this occasion been wrong in his eleven indications for the past presence of a corpse and that this young girl returns and that the countless inconsistencies are all just "bad luck"...

I suspect hope on this occasion may sadly not suffice...
Score: 2
1:51am Tue 3 Nov 15 Angus McKay says...

In Kate McCann’s book there is a chapter titled, “The good, the bad, and the mad.” The good were those who offered the parents condolences. The bad were those who were offensive. The mad were those who were downright abusive. Allow the parents to grieve and continue their search for Madeleine without animosity. It’s not about the parents, a child is missing. I wish the McCanns success in their search for Madeleine.
Score: 0
8:48am Tue 3 Nov 15 David Duckworth says...

Yeah Angus we've all read the "Mccanns account" of events...Allow the parents to grieve Angus..?..It's the parents who seek the publicity to raise awareness and public donations.Donations that have been used to sue those who refuse to accept their account based on the "known facts" of the case...Who only grant interviews to those who promise not to question the dark areas of the case...Donations that have been used to pay their mortgage..."Every single thing I have commented on here about this case is FACTUAL"...I have not indulged in speculation at any time...Indeed it took Gerry a full 6 days to retract his original statement and suddenly remember that he hadn't entered the apartment via the front door using his key...He suddenly remembered that he had used the patio door which now after six days he remembered he had left open and what's more he suddenly remembered that he had also done this on previous evenings...This is a vital piece of evidence for the following reasons.."If" an abduction occurred then this would have been the "only" means by which an abductor could have gained entry and exit as the window was forensically examined and the investigation are "certain" that no one had gained access via the window...In essence this means that an abductor "if" an abduction occurred, entered via the "allegedly open" sliding patio door that Gerry Mccann 6 days later remembered had been left open it is "claimed" for this very purpose (to allow the Mccanns to enter without waking the children "it is claimed")...The abductor "if" there was one now decided to enter the children's bedroom and before exiting via the same route decided to open the bedroom curtains, window and then the noisy shutter..."All" done without waking any of the three children or leaving "any" trace before fleeing with the still sleeping Madeleine...Not even glove marks...The same Madeleine who the night previous had woken for no reason and cried for her parents for 75 minutes...Before it is "claimed" the abductor fled by the open patio door and was kind enough to close the patio curtains and then the door before fleeing with Madeleine in his arms who was still making "no" sound audible to the neighbouring apartments...Kate Mccann states clearly in her statements that on returning to discover an "abduction" that the patio curtains were "closed"...So the "abductor" had managed to mysteriously open the bedroom curtains, window and shutter, lift Madeleine from her bed, close the patio curtains and patio door with Madeleine in their arms without waking her...
The "only" prints found, were on the window and were those of Kate Mccann, the shutter being opened by means of a rotating cord..
There is a saying in the legal world that states: "if something doesn't make sense it usually isn't true"...

Yeah Angus I,ve also read Gonçalo Amaral’s book ( the truth of the lie) and the entire police case files containing all the actual witness statements that are freely available online..A book the Mccanns spent a fortune of publicly donated funds (to find Madeleine) unsuccessfully attempted to have banned..Strange why this woman chose to discuss her sex life in her book but yet knowingly chose to "omit" so much factual case evidence...The book was after all meant to be about "Madeleine's disappearance"...I mean she tells us the dogs detecting the scent of a corpse in 11 different locations (all associated to the Mccanns) "isn't exactly science" but chose to omit that Eddie the cadaver dog had never been wrong in over 200 previous cases...Indeed this dog's skills are so highly sought after that he has now been recruited by the world's top law enforcement agency...The FBI..Oddly this same dog "never" gave any other indications in any of the other locations it examined..Should Mrs Mccann's book be beyond critical review Angus..?

The slight problem with their account being, that there is not one shred of evidence to support their account...Not a single piece of evidence...One would imagine that when a child has disappeared that the "factual" evidence should not be ignored when searching for one's beloved child...I'm "well aware" that there is other "factual evidence", pointing in another direction from that, that the Mccanns and their PR team feed us...Is it wrong for the public to expect the "factual evidence" in a case where their donations are sought to expect those investigating the case to consider this "factual evidence"...

Is it wrong for the public to expect the Mccanns to tell and "allow" the true facts to be considered by the public...?..The public whose donations the Mccanns seek to keep their search going when their not being used to sue those who question the "facts" of the case...Funds when they do chose to spend them, they're spent on private detective agencies who have "no" experience in finding missing children and indeed specialise in money laundering and have also been convicted of firearm offences and ironically enough "illegal phone tapping"... Is it wrong for the public whose donations are sought by the Mccanns and their PR and legal team to expect that the innocent parents of a missing child "cooperate" with the police trying to solve their daughter's "disappearance"..?

I'm not sure what category Mrs Mccann would put me in out of the three but I'm sure it wouldn't be in the first of the three...But why..?..I would love to see this case solved as much as the Mccanns themselves...

I wonder what category you would put me in Angus, “The good, the bad, and the mad.”...Whichever is irrelevant but perhaps you could tell me and explain your reasons...I believe my posts above are "FACTUAL" and "focused" on the one person who really matters but has sadly been forgotten...That person being "the only victim", Madeleine...!

Kate never did mention in her book into which category she would put those who have done nothing other than consider the gathered facts of the case on which to base an opinion....Unless of course considering the gathered "facts" of the case is considered by Kate Mccann to be "bad" or "mad"..Perhaps Kate feels the public whose donations they seek for their "limited company" not a charity should not be privy to an opinion...Perhaps Kate considers me "bad" or "mad" or "both" for daring to comment on "case facts" where the family and extremely expensive legal team seek mine and your contributions..

Are my "factual" comments "bad", offensive..?
Are my "factual" comments "mad", abusive...?
Or are my comments mere comments based on the "evidence" gathered in the case...?
Is the Mccann's PR strategy now bearing fruit and anyone now daring to question the accounts of the Mccanns based on the "facts" being labelled as wicked trolls...?
Or are those doing this labelling without being "fully aware" of the facts doing the Mccanns and their extremely expensive PR team's bidding...?

Incidentally Angus I began researching the "known truth" of this case on hearing the Sky news report were one such troll who was doorstepped by Sky's Martin Brunt went on to kill herself...!

I assume from the nature of your post Angus and in spite of the above "facts", that you would be of the view that the Mccanns would pass a polygraph examination..?

I have included a link to the official witness statements and case files for you to examine Angus if you or others so wish...

http://themaddiecase
files.com/?sid=64e9a
725d17c52151c2ef17f8
05ed4e4
Score: 1
9:35pm Tue 3 Nov 15 Angus McKay says...

You are obviously of the opinion the McCann parents should be accountable for their daughters disappearance.

IF the parents were active in their daughters disappearance (not my opinion) the McCanns could have allowed this case to “disappear” years ago. They have not. They have toiled non-stop to keep Madeleine and the case in public. IF guilty, why attract continuing attention and publicity on oneself? For money? - I think not. As you quote: "if something doesn't make sense it usually isn't true"...

You follow up with: “I would love to see this case solved as much as the Mccanns themselves” - why would the McCanns wish to see the case solved IF, in your opinion, they are guilty? ("if something doesn't make sense it usually isn't true”).

That which you are posting will not trouble the McCann parents. You, me, and the above article are serving to keep Madeleine in the media.

On this one, I wish the McCann parents the strength to keep searching. Madeleine is growing up and she will require credible identification as to who she is, where she is from and her background. Somewhere something will click.

I’ll leave you to it, I can understand your fixation with a legal case, I have the same fixation with the Oscar Slater case.

Cheers.
Score: 1
10:59pm Tue 3 Nov 15 David Duckworth says...

You're perfectly entitled to your opinion Angus but you can't now say you're unaware of the facts Angus..."Facts" that these parents refuse to acknowledge...
The Mccanns have "not" toiled non stop to keep Madeleine in the public eye...They took a break when the Portuguese investigation team asked them to cooperate and participate in a reconstruction which was to be based on their inconsistent witness statements...They "all" refused Angus...That's right refused to take part in a reconstruction that's aim was to solve their daughter's disappearance..An odd stance from a couple that vowed to "leave no stone unturned" when launching the Madeleine fund..They knowingly left this one unturned when they refused to cooperate....

The Mccanns have toiled to keep Madeleine in the public eye but the thing they pursued with far greater vigour is the abduction claim and after eight and a half years and the £11m spent by the MET alone, there's still not "one" credible piece of evidence to support this claim...Not one Angus...Indeed Angus the Mccanns didn't toil too much at the very start of this case when Madeleine had just vanished...In fact they didn't toil at all...They sat back and allowed everyone else to search for their missing child....A missing child who they feared had been "abducted" but who obviously felt instantly that any search would be fruitless..


Furthermore Angus the current PR team was in place 48hrs after Madeleine vanished and the world wide press they brought into the equation...That's right 48 hours..They brought in none other than Tony Blair's ex head of media spin, Clarence Mitchell...Clarence Mitchell is still retained by the Mccanns today and is funded by the find Madeleine fund...They've had "top" legal guidance from the start at a very "expensive cost"...They could have never buried this case years ago with the extensive world press attention they have had due to this...They're on a roller coaster ride that's still got a way to go...Events overtook them Angus, of this there is little doubt..Lets just wait to see what the MET say...We already "know" that the officers on the initial investigation agreed with the findings of the Portuguese police...The Portuguese police releasing the case files into the public domain "for all to see" only served the need to continue even more...It makes far more sense than "I took cuddle cat to work with me while wearing my holiday clothes and hugging dead bodies" and appears to be Kate unwittingly giving the dog who has never been wrong some credibility ...This perfectly innocent explanation doesn't explain the other indications given by the dog who has never been wrong in the apartment, car, bible and car key...The indication on the bible is really quite bizarre unless she also took this to work with her...Perhaps cuddle cat had been reading it...All equally perfectly innocent explanations..."If something doesn't make sense then it usually isn't true".

Your reason for believing in their innocence appears to based on:
" IF guilty, why attract continuing attention and publicity on oneself? For money? - I think not".. your belief clearly demonstrates that it is a plausible tactic to divert suspicion but this couple's own private detective agency has been responsible for providing the MET with so much "useless" information...

On top of this they will have to be able to demonstrate some sort of effort to their children who are rapidly growing older and will definitely become aware of the "facts"...One wonders how they will feel when they learn what anyone who looks for the facts, finds...Such as the "facts" I make known now..There out there for all to see...

As for the Mccanns wishing to see the case solved...I'm only quoting what the couple themselves say but yet they "refused" to cooperate with the detectives investigating the case and I would refer to this as "something not making sense, then it's usually not true"...I would certainly like to see it solved Angus as you say yourself it's about a missing young girl...

If you read my post Angus you will see the only thing I say the Mccanns are guilty of, is lying...They've chosen the best lawyers money can buy but oddly cannot choose an equally reputable private detective agency...Instead the ones they have chosen have been responsible for numerous false leads and misinformation landing up in the press...All supporting an "abduction"...

Wouldn't you agree Angus that bringing in a PR team 48 hours after your daughter has vanished is a little odd...?

The "fact" this couple have lied is not an opinion Angus it's a fact. A fact you or anyone else can check via the provided link...A fact Kate left out of her rather lopsided book...

The rest are just the "facts" of the case but the statements the Mccanns gave contained "proven" lies...Surely the facts matter Angus.
..
The only thing Madeleine requires Angus, is for the cadaver dog to be "wrong" 11 times because if it's not and it never has been before then the "fact" is, Madeleine is very sadly gone...It can be proven "with all certainty" that no one else had ever died in the apartment or the hire car....This is an indisputable "fact" Angus...!...If the cadaver dog evidence was accepted by the law in its entirety Angus instead of intelligence, then the Mccanns would now (rightly or wrongly) be serving a prison sentence..The other dog Keela, the blood dog corroborated Eddie's evidence when finding human blood in three of the locations that Eddie had given strong indications...Under the window behind the sofa and in the car boot...A car that was "not" rented till more than three weeks after Madeleine disappeared..A car that a neighbour gave a statement, stating was "always" left parked at the villa next to hers with the boot left open at "all" times..

Martin Grimes the dog handler in the case in his actual case "summary" states:
"The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and locate human remains or Human blood.
The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as evidence".

Gerry Mccann when asked about these "facts" by a Portuguese interviewer told her to "ask the dogs Sandra"..

Should one refuse to consider this evidence, do you refuse to consider this evidence... ?..If so why..?..Is it abusive to consider the relevant evidence...?...Is it not more abusive to Madeleine "not" to consider it...?

I notice in your comment Angus you don't appear to address the issue of the strong evidence in the case but are prepared to ignore it but yet wish Madeleine well...I note from your previous comment Angus that you have read Kate Mccann's book...Perhaps if you're interested enough to buy the book you should read the ex head detective in the case's book...Ironically titled "the truth of the lie"...It's always better to see it from both sides before forming an opinion...Because there's definitely another side to this one...And only "one" with some evidence to support it and some of it is very "strong" albeit circumstantial although there is DNA with 15 out of 19 markers being matched to Madeleine, the other 4 were degraded but who's to say that future improvements in this technology may still bring this case to a conclusion, because had those 4 degraded markers out of the nineteen been able to be identified then this case may well be solved...The other 15 that were identified "matched" Madeleine. 4 unidentifiable markers that may have provided corroboration for the cadaver odour in the 11 locations "all connected to the Mccanns" ...

On the other hand we can accept the Mccanns word for it even though it's now known that they were not "honest" in their statements...As for the money Angus, they couldn't do all this without it and their legal expenditure dwarfs that spent on the search...Over £4m Angus, £4m that the public donated to help the "search for Madeleine"...In legal costs and they were never even charged with anything...Bet she didn't mention that in her book either....

Angus this sort of PR and legal practise isn't a new concept both Lance Armstrong and Jimmy Savile used identical tactics when they were challenged..The one difference in this instance was that they provided their own funding..Another interesting point to make Angus is that dogs don't know how to tell lies...

I wonder what category of the three Kate mentions in her book she would put leaving three young children (all under the age of four) alone in an "unlocked" apartment...“The good, the bad, and the mad.”
I don't think she ever touched on this issue Angus but one thing is for sure...It "wasn't" the abductor who left them in this situation...
It is a little odd why the two twins who were confined to their cots and couldn't get out never came to harm...Alas it was "poor little" Madeleine who "could" exit her bed and even the "unlocked" apartment that has suffered...

My fixation Angus, isn't with the legal aspect of this case...It's got more to do with the Mccanns attempts at bullying the public into believing their version of Madeleine's disappearance...A version that has not one shred of credible evidence to support it...Having read this couples various witness statements, credible they certainly are not...!...Just as are the different versions given regards doors and keys which are "incredible".


I agree, somewhere, something will click...The DNA perhaps

On this one I wish those investigating the case the strength to find the "truth"...




Now I'll leave it to you..

Cheers
Score: 3
1:39am Wed 4 Nov 15 Angus McKay says...

David Duckworth ...

I leave you in friendship.
Score: 1