Re: Madeleine McCann parents still under investigation in Portugal

by Guest 27.04.16 23:22

petunia wrote:Verdi,Karma has well and truly bit the McCanns on the arse with the Amaral verdict,that's good enough for me. A reminder to Kate and Gerry never go near a court room again always try settle out of court rather than in a court.

Can't argue that petunia, as a stand alone issue - they really haven't got a leg to stand on before the beak have they? Alas, chances of them ever being dragged before a criminal court to answer questions relating to their missing daughter are but a pipe dream. sad

Guess I should be thankful for small mercies.

by Guest 27.04.16 23:28

Doug D wrote:These are GA’s comments following on from the snippet relating to this bit of video, posted by Joana above:

Anchor - Gonçalo, do you believe things at this moment are being routed for the process to be archived here in Portugal?

Gonçalo Amaral- I have no doubts whatsoever, what was done by Scotland Yard is practically at an end. What they wanted to do was basically to, and I had said this before, was to in a certain way to give credence to the couple and remove all suspicions that existed concerning the couple. They did a reconstitution here in Portugal, not with the couple but with actors; constituted a series of arguidos that have nothing to do with the case, just for the sake of constituting arguidos; they followed a number of false leads. Now they have reached an end, after having spent a lot of money, maybe there isn't any more money to spend, maybe the British public fund does not does not support such expenditure. And it will be archived, I can't see the Judiciary Police resuming the investigation when Scotland Yard ends theirs. In the end, the process was re-opened almost only and by the Scotland Yard, and when they leave the process will be archived just like before.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It takes a man from Portugal, the man vilified by the UK media and the McCann machine to suss out something that is right under the nose of the great British public?

Hate to resort to the much overstated word xenophobia but it makes you wonder doesn't it? I was rather taken aback when Scotland Yard took over the helm as quoted to be Britain's finest - if not the world's. Such unparalleled arrogance!

by Guest 27.04.16 23:28

petunia wrote:What a waste of £12 million pounds.

12 million and still rising..

by suzyjohnson 27.04.16 23:29

Better still the McCanns might consider stopping suing people altogether.

They've always been able to give their side of the story in the media, they didn't need to sue anyone at all.

by Guest 27.04.16 23:31

maff2016 wrote:It is interesting to note that in the media recently it has been reported that grange is soon to be finished apart from one line of inquiry that involves private investigators in the UK asking for a report from the PJ. The McCann's response was they 'they fully understood and thanked the UK police for their work thus far'. Richard D Hall mentions in his video that the McCann's seem to have the habit of thanking people for not finding their daughter while also sporting big smiley faces and being nicey nicey about it all. Having three children of my own as well as three grand children my response would be somewhat more jaded, probably along the lines of 'you useless set of idiots, I demand you keep looking for her and investigating'.
When will people wake up and see that genuine parents with genuine concerns are not nicey nicey no matter who is listening?

Kate McCann had her day - 'f****** t*****'s I think were her words when referring to Portuguese officers of the law. Not a forum myth but indelibly printed for posterity.

What a legacy!

by Guest 27.04.16 23:36

suzyjohnson wrote:Better still the McCanns might consider stopping suing people altogether.

They've always been able to give their side of the story in the media, they didn't need to sue anyone at all.

But people were saying such nasty things about them weren't they - what choice did they have but to shut the nasty people up and make a nice stash of cash into the bargain?

Something tells me they won't be going down that road again with or without influential assistance. violin

by MayMuse 27.04.16 23:49

This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.

by Guest 28.04.16 0:42

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Your post is a trifle confusing but I'll try to respond best I can.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - the point I was trying to make regarding the UK investigation is that OG have, officially at least, looked into and discounted every single one of the leads they had (bar one ongoing, we are told).

Here I question what leads (official or unofficial) you refer to. The only information available to Operation Grange as regards Madeleine McCann's disappearance, is the 'official' investigation undertaken by the PJ. So in effect they were going over old ground but digging up new ground and creating imaginary leads by concentrating on every tom dick and harry that happened to be somewhere on the Algarve between the years 1953 and 2011 - ignoring every important factor within the PJ files e.g. the dogs leads (pun intended).

Strange way of getting to the crux of the matter but in effect that is what they have done, working from the outside in.

I don't believe they worked from the outside in or the inside out. By all intents and purposes, Operation range is nothing but a charade - as Mr. Amaral has just reportedly said, to exonerate the parents McCann from all culpability for the loss of their child.

So yes, Snr Amaral and the PJ reached a similar conclusion very early on but they certainly couldn't state at that stage that every other line of inquiry had been investigated and found to be fruitless.

If by 'similar conclusion' you are referring to the absence of any evidence to indicate abduction, then I ask that you explain where, when and how the Operation Grange team have reached this conclusion. I have seen nothing to suggest they have finally conceded that the abduction theory was but fabrication so can thus be eliminated.

'At that stage' (early in the investigation) the PJ did eliminate many lines of inquiry in line with customary policing which steered the investigation more towards the parents McCann. The reason this wasn't divulged at the time was the result of Portuguese secrecy law in force at the time.

Now they can. OG must be considered to have been a success in that respect - every abduction 'lead' they had, has come to zero.

To my knowledge Operation Grange never had any abduction lead to follow - no surprising if the net result was zero.

The bizarre thing is that instead of saying 'OK - let's adjust our mindset and see where that gets us,' they are saying, 'OK - that's it then, we're never going to solve this.'

Nothing bizarre about it. If Operation Grange were conducting a bona-fide police investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann (which incidentally they are in no position so to do - but that's another story), their first port of call would be to investigate the parents of Madeleine, relatives and their circle of friends. Police do not adjust their mindset to suit the occasion - they follow evidence, leads and intelligence until they can build a picture and then work outwards towards a solution.

Of course they are never going to solve the case. Firstly they have no jurisdiction to investigate the case and secondly they had a specific remit to follow the line of abduction, no abduction no crime - full stop!

The ONLY way that should be allowed is if MBM had been carried away in full sight of multiple, independent witnesses or on CCTV i.e. abduction was a FACT and not merely one possibile scenario amongst several. Jane Tanner's sighting doesn't do the job in anyone's eyes never mind those of experienced, investigative officers. It is a farce and nothing more!

Unfortunately Jane Tanner's mythical being did fool the populace, was propagated extensively by the media and Operation Grange to reinforce the McCann's abduction theory. A farce true but only the PJ realised that from the very beginning.

by Guest 28.04.16 0:50

MayMuse wrote:This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.

Do you think the Metropolitan Police are money laundering? What an extraordinary notion - The Home Office grants money from the public purse to the Metropolitan Police to undertake an inquiry/investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, who then launder the money granted from the public purse?

Now there's a novelty - interesting to say the least.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 1:34

Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.
Do you think the Metropolitan Police are money laundering? What an extraordinary notion - The Home Office grants money from the public purse to the Metropolitan Police to undertake an inquiry/investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, who then launder the money granted from the public purse?

Now there's a novelty - interesting to say the least.

Indeed they do, but what proof do we have it is fully spent on finding Madeleine? ( perhaps Mr Bennetts petition may shine a light) God forbid that anything untoward is happening in this 'strange case'? Do you think the Find Madeleine Fund is all it seems? liar

by Bishop Brennan 28.04.16 2:25

This thread started as "Parents still under investigation in Portugal". It's now wandered off into the bushes but to bring it back to the topic for moment. According to the recent transcript of the Amaral interview, it seems as though he is confirming that no such investigation exists. Indeed he confirms that the PJ re-open was simply to assist the MET. See below:

"Anchor - Gonçalo, do you believe things at this moment are being routed for the process to be archived here in Portugal?

Gonçalo Amaral - I have no doubts whatsoever, what was done by Scotland Yard is practically at an end. What they wanted to do was basically to, and I had said this before, was to in a certain way to give credence to the couple and remove all suspicions that existed concerning the couple. They did a reconstitution here in Portugal, not with the couple but with actors; constituted a series of arguidos that have nothing to do with the case, just for the sake of constituting arguidos; they followed a number of false leads. Now they have reached an end, after having spent a lot of money, maybe there isn't any more money to spend, perhaps the British public fund may not support such expenditure. And it will be archived, I can't see the Judiciary Police resuming the investigation when Scotland Yard ends theirs. In the end, the process was re-opened almost only and by the Scotland Yard, and when they leave the process will be archived just like before."

Amaral, like many here, has always been a firm believer in the "whitewash" theory. And whilst it's been a botched job - with Amaral emerging victorious and his reputation intact in the courts, it does appear as though his original theory will never be followed through.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 3:59

Bishop Brennan wrote:This thread started as "Parents still under investigation in Portugal". It's now wandered off into the bushes but to bring it back to the topic for moment. According to the recent transcript of the Amaral interview, it seems as though he is confirming that no such investigation exists. Indeed he confirms that the PJ re-open was simply to assist the MET. See below:

"Anchor - Gonçalo, do you believe things at this moment are being routed for the process to be archived here in Portugal?

Gonçalo Amaral - I have no doubts whatsoever, what was done by Scotland Yard is practically at an end. What they wanted to do was basically to, and I had said this before, was to in a certain way to give credence to the couple and remove all suspicions that existed concerning the couple. They did a reconstitution here in Portugal, not with the couple but with actors; constituted a series of arguidos that have nothing to do with the case, just for the sake of constituting arguidos; they followed a number of false leads. Now they have reached an end, after having spent a lot of money, maybe there isn't any more money to spend, perhaps the British public fund may not support such expenditure. And it will be archived, I can't see the Judiciary Police resuming the investigation when Scotland Yard ends theirs. In the end, the process was re-opened almost only and by the Scotland Yard, and when they leave the process will be archived just like before."

Amaral, like many here, has always been a firm believer in the "whitewash" theory. And whilst it's been a botched job - with Amaral emerging victorious and his reputation intact in the courts, it does appear as though his original theory will never be followed through.

I hope it continues to be victorious for Amaral and he can regain some normality and enjoy life. He has stood strong, and has huge insight ... I think he had them 'pegged' from the off, and he would have nailed it if there had been no interference. His composure and dignity throughout speaks volumes, unlike some! It is very disheartening if indeed it is the 'whitewash' that most have predicted. It makes you wonder why 'investigate', why spend all that money on a review with a remit of 'abduction' that never was!? For what? No, not buying it!!!... I'd like to think that the last line of inquiry was the 'parents' however judging by the latest MSM reporting, it's back to the 'burglar'? If so, what happens next? Red-tape procedure & a cursory signature sprawled across a bundle of papers... Case closed? Poor, poor Madeleine, justice has not been served. As for the McCanns I envisage them riding off into the sunset, you know like those old 'cowboy' films, over the hills and far away!? Cue music...

by Estelle 28.04.16 4:26

Do the McCanns receive money from every article that is printed about them or Maddie? If so, the will never stop.

It's about time the British public held demonstrations about their government wasting so much money and not seeking justice for Madeleine in favour of something else.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 4:33

Estelle wrote:Do the McCanns receive money from every article that is printed about them or Maddie? If so, the will never stop.

It's about time the British public held demonstrations about their government wasting so much money and not seeking justice for Madeleine in favour of something else.

Im not sure if they do but it wouldn't surprise me, someone else here may know.

The Government aren't listening, SY aren't listening, MSM aren't listening.

And no one listened to or for Madeleine either!?

Honestly do not know what it will take for the truth to be set free; it's a complete shambles full of lies and deception! IMO

by skyrocket 28.04.16 8:49

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - actually I don't recall asking for a response from anyone but thanks for taking the time to give your opinion on the content of my previous post, it's always appreciated. Yes, the whole OG investigation was a farce with fabricated leads, etc but the point I was trying to get across (again not clearly enough) was that OG has declared to the world that they have exhausted every single possible line of inquiry (except the only one that wasn't on the table and possibly alien abduction). IMO, the minute the OG investigation closes down is the minute all eyes, finger pointing, etc, should swing around the room and end up in the same direction as everyones on here.
The argument for a stranger abduction almost evaporates completely with the closing of OG, irrespective of the actual truth of the investigation, because they have declared that the end is as a direct consequence of all leads having been discounted. Snr Amaral says he believes OG was set up to give the Mc's credence and to 'remove all suspicions that existed concerning the couple' - he has far greater insight and intellect than most (me included) - and I would agree with that but I don't believe that OG has actually done the Mc's any favours as the argument for abduction is now based on what? (I appreciate it wasn't based on anything before but now OG are backing that up with zero positive results from a 4/5 year full 'investigation' costing 12 million - imo, the abductor could only have been a criminal mastermind of the Bond variety i.e. fictional.)

To continue, there seems to be a lot of conflicting info and links being posted about whether the PJ had/has an independent (from OG) investigation in progress and whether the PJ investigation will cease when OG ends. Snr Amaral (@ Bishop Brennan) seems clear. I admit to being a tad confused. Snr Amaral speaks of archiving which would presumably result in a second file release. But then what?

by Claire25 28.04.16 9:04

On 1st March 2012, Gonçalo Amaral reveals, in an interview with Portuguese magazine 'O Crime', that Scotland Yard has been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto.

This is picked up just over a week later by Jornal de Notícias, who declare that the case is going to be reopened. However, this is swiftly denied by the National Deputy Director of the PJ, Pedro do Carmo, who guarantees that there is no new evidence regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann to prompt the reopening of the case. However, he does reveal that the PJ team of investigators from Oporto was established one year previously and has been working in collaboration with the British police.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Tony Bennett** 28.04.16 11:06

Doug D wrote:These are GA’s comments following on from the snippet relating to this bit of video, posted by Joana above:

Anchor - Gonçalo, do you believe things at this moment are being routed for the process to be archived here in Portugal?

Gonçalo Amaral- I have no doubts whatsoever, what was done by Scotland Yard is practically at an end. What they wanted to do was basically to, and I had said this before, was to in a certain way to give credence to the couple and remove all suspicions that existed concerning the couple. They did a reconstitution here in Portugal, not with the couple but with actors; constituted a series of arguidos that have nothing to do with the case, just for the sake of constituting arguidos; they followed a number of false leads. Now they have reached an end, after having spent a lot of money, maybe there isn't any more money to spend, maybe the British public fund does not does not support such expenditure. And it will be archived, I can't see the Judiciary Police resuming the investigation when Scotland Yard ends theirs. In the end, the process was re-opened almost only and by the Scotland Yard, and when they leave the process will be archived just like before.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So Goncalo Amaral has confirmed exactly what I've always believed - and which Joana Morais confirmed yesterday - there has been a technically re-opened PJ investigation but in name only, with no real investigative work being done at all

by Guest 28.04.16 12:01

MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.
Do you think the Metropolitan Police are money laundering? What an extraordinary notion - The Home Office grants money from the public purse to the Metropolitan Police to undertake an inquiry/investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, who then launder the money granted from the public purse?

Now there's a novelty - interesting to say the least.
Indeed they do, but what proof do we have it is fully spent on finding Madeleine? ( perhaps Mr Bennetts petition may shine a light) God forbid that anything untoward is happening in this 'strange case'? Do you think the Find Madeleine Fund is all it seems?

Indeed who does what? You're not seriously suggesting that Operation Grange has laundered funds allocated to them by the Home Office to review/investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are you? How preposterous!

If you are unable to respond maybe you little helper/s might come to your aid - it would be extremely helpful if you/he/she/they could be more explicit rather than coming out with wild off the cuff comments without explanation.

BTW: The Find Madeleine Fund (Co. Ltd) has absolutely nothing to do with Operation Grange. Try to keep the two areas separate, it could be very misleading to a reader who is not familiar with the detail of this case.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 12:28

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ...not at all, "indeed they do" was in agreement to the Home Office grants money! However, the outrageous amount of tax payers money is I feel questionable. I apologise if that part isn't clear, but I do think that 'money laundering' has perhaps played a part... Rogue investigators/ detectives etc.

Not sure why you would think that I wouldn't respond or what you are meaning by 'little helpers' OR your need to shut my comments down!?

by Bishop Brennan 28.04.16 13:17

skyrocket wrote:...

IMO, the minute the OG investigation closes down is the minute all eyes, finger pointing, etc, should swing around the room and end up in the same direction as everyones on here. The argument for a stranger abduction almost evaporates completely with the closing of OG, irrespective of the actual truth of the investigation, because they have declared that the end is as a direct consequence of all leads having been discounted.

...

In theory I would agree. HOWEVER - remember that SY have become something of a laughing stock as a result of this farce. Who can forget the photos beamed around the world of eye-rolling PJ officers watching the sweaty MET cops scrabbling around in the bushes and finding... a SOCK ! They've been at this for over 4 years, spent £12m and achieved absolutely nothing.

They have to save face. They have to try and restore some of their battered reputation. And I think the only way they can do that is to come down hard on one of the abduction theories (serial sex-attacker that targets British girls OR the 3 burglars). Both have been tried out in the press - neither to great effect. But that's all they have. So, I think we will see quite a lot of detail from SY as they close it down. The detail will be of "times of phone calls / txts / suspicious behaviour / odd reports / previous bad deeds". The inference will be of an abductor(s) but with not quite enough evidence to charge anyone.

They cannot save face by saying "There wasn't an abduction". And so they won't. Remember the remit from the start: "Anyone but the McCanns". And IMO that is how it will finish.

by Realist 28.04.16 14:56

petunia wrote: A reminder to Kate and Gerry never go near a court room again always try settle out of court rather than in a court.

I thought that they did attempt to negotiate an 'out of court' settlement, Petunia, hence, one of the reasons for the delay in proceedings.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 15:34

Realist wrote:
petunia wrote: A reminder to Kate and Gerry never go near a court room again always try settle out of court rather than in a court.
I thought that they did attempt to negotiate an 'out of court' settlement, Petunia, hence, one of the reasons for the delay in proceedings.

I think you are correct, unusually as a Plaintiff ?

by Guest 28.04.16 15:35

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote: Not sure why you would think that I wouldn't respond or what you are meaning by 'little helpers' OR your need to shut my comments down!?

Since very recently joining this forum, you have been very vocal on just about every topic under discussion - flitting about like a frantic fly at the butt end of a swatter. No problem there except for the fact that you don't appear to have a individual opinion about anything. As I see it, your posts are but a collection of words, sentences, phrases, opinions expressed by other members and packed out with uneccesary platititudes. You also appear to be promptly up-front in support of some of the baseless theories being propagated from time to time. In return for this you have attracted a small circle of anonymous supporters for yourself, hence my comment about your little helper/s.

Quite understandable that you lack positive direction, as a relative newcomer you are probably not aware of much detail about the case in order to form an opinion about different aspects, hence my recent suggestion that you read at least some of the PJ files and research subjects of interest to you on this forum. You may then be able to form an individual perspective of the case and contribute to discussion accordingly.

Behind the scenes, the forum admin. and mods have built-up a strong, informative venue for old hands and newcomers alike to acquaint themselves with current, recent and historic information concerning the case of Madeleine McCann. You may or may not be aware of just how much criticism is levelled at the forum - whatever their reasons. Only my opinion but I don't think it aids the reputation of the forum by posting groundless theories, from wherever they originate. I'm not sure some people realise the true purpose of this forum - it's not (or at least shouldn't be) a club sub-divided into small cultish groups - a sort of them and us situation.

Just my opinion. Might well be wrong - I often am. winkwink

Back to business - onwards and upwards..

by MayMuse 28.04.16 16:18

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. You are as far off the mark as you can get!
Who have I attracted? Point me in their direction? Is it perhaps a few who already know me? I am Not new to this case & have followed it since the very beginning. Questions are now baseless theories? Oh for goodness sake: I have read the files ( admittedly not all) but my own opinion was formed prior to such! In fact on the very day of the first KM 'appeal'. And that was that Madeleine's parents were culpable in her disappearence. Over the years I have watched how people have been subjected to being 'singled out' harassed & insulted in the most despicable ways! I am not like that and kept away. Intrigue and justice for Madeleine and then the horrific media display resulting in Brenda Leylands death made me research more. I recently felt compelled to join here in support even though I have been aware of this forum for the past couple of years; and have read umpteen posts from those who have been brave enough to share information. Are you not aware that people "read" without becoming a member and possibly do so
due to 'fear' or something of precisely this & more! Admin can ask me direct if they was to verify who I am, I have no problem with that. In fact there is a FB group where I am well known so many know of my intentions! Your insinuations are offensive and if my opinions are not valid or you are unhappy with how I express them or the questions which are asked ( as you deem ) then what is the point of anyone being here? Move along, read another comment which suits you better, fall outs or insults to those who have tried to stay strong in opposition really isn't the way to continue! Not all of us have a law degree, are multi-lingual or have the waywithall to produce documentaries/videos/forums etc of which without those Madeleine would have no voice! I am just a believer in the truth, and actually sick to the back teeth of all this pro/anti troll rubbish! By the way donations to Amarals GoFundMe were of numerous times, I expect that will put me on the media 'hit list' also... Admin please contact me for 'approval' to be here! Thank you

by skyrocket 28.04.16 16:46

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - what genuinely intrigues me is why, when you appear to have only been a member here yourself since last year, do you so regularly take it upon yourself to declare yourself as the guardian of what is and what isn't damaging to this forum's image? As far as I can judge, all members here seem intelligent enough and sensible enough to self-police and I am sure that the odd one who sneaks through the net will be weeded out quickly by the mods. I for one, find certain patronising comments you make, despite the added smiley emoticons, (as to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] above and of course on several occasions to myself in the past) completely unnecessary.

Just my opinion of course and I also might well be wrong - I often am too! winkwink

by Guest 28.04.16 16:59

Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.
Do you think the Metropolitan Police are money laundering? What an extraordinary notion - The Home Office grants money from the public purse to the Metropolitan Police to undertake an inquiry/investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, who then launder the money granted from the public purse?

Now there's a novelty - interesting to say the least.
Indeed they do, but what proof do we have it is fully spent on finding Madeleine? ( perhaps Mr Bennetts petition may shine a light) God forbid that anything untoward is happening in this 'strange case'? Do you think the Find Madeleine Fund is all it seems?
Indeed who does what? You're not seriously suggesting that Operation Grange has laundered funds allocated to them by the Home Office to review/investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are you? How preposterous!

If you are unable to respond maybe you little helper/s might come to your aid - it would be extremely helpful if you/he/she/they could be more explicit rather than coming out with wild off the cuff comments without explanation.

BTW: The Find Madeleine Fund (Co. Ltd) has absolutely nothing to do with Operation Grange. Try to keep the two areas separate, it could be very misleading to a reader who is not familiar with the detail of this case.

The idea of the Met money laundering the OG funds is ridiculous.

There is zero, nil, none, nada, zilch evidence for that. Not a sausage. The notion is pure invention.

Put silly ideas up here without evidence and you will be robustly challenged.

Because silly ideas are ammunition to forum monitors.

by MayMuse 28.04.16 17:03

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:
Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:This may seem like an odd question ( or maybe not) but what proof do we have that the 12M Plus has been spent investigating the disappearance of Madeleine?
Long have my thoughts been of ' money-laundering' as an addition to whatever else 'suspicious' is going on!
Where does Madeleine fit in all of this now, if ever she truly did?!?
What do OG think they have actually done for her?

And what an utter waste of a life, and I'm speaking of Brenda Leyland...Rest her soul.
Do you think the Metropolitan Police are money laundering? What an extraordinary notion - The Home Office grants money from the public purse to the Metropolitan Police to undertake an inquiry/investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, who then launder the money granted from the public purse?

Now there's a novelty - interesting to say the least.
Indeed they do, but what proof do we have it is fully spent on finding Madeleine? ( perhaps Mr Bennetts petition may shine a light) God forbid that anything untoward is happening in this 'strange case'? Do you think the Find Madeleine Fund is all it seems?
Indeed who does what? You're not seriously suggesting that Operation Grange has laundered funds allocated to them by the Home Office to review/investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are you? How preposterous!

If you are unable to respond maybe you little helper/s might come to your aid - it would be extremely helpful if you/he/she/they could be more explicit rather than coming out with wild off the cuff comments without explanation.

BTW: The Find Madeleine Fund (Co. Ltd) has absolutely nothing to do with Operation Grange. Try to keep the two areas separate, it could be very misleading to a reader who is not familiar with the detail of this case.
The idea of the Met money laundering the OP funds is ridiculous.

There is zero, nil, none, nad, zilch evidence for that. Not a sausage. The notion is pure invention.

Put silly ideas up here without evidence and you will be robustly challenged.

Because silly ideas are ammunition to forum monitors.

Please add the full post which showed my reply.. I did nothing of the sort! This has all been taken out of context, and rather perturbing to say the least . My first post on joining was criticised by Aquilla, then everything I have posted is criticised by Verdi and now you! What on earth is going on and what or how does this instill confidence ?

by Realist 28.04.16 17:12

MayMuse wrote:

. My first post on joining was criticised by Aquilla,

If you hadn't been criticised by Aquilla, then you would indeed be an apparition big grin

by Guest 28.04.16 17:14

MayMuse wrote:

Please add the full post which showed my reply.. I did nothing of the sort!

Well you did.

Then you did a switch-a-roo.

Anyway.

Silly ideas with not a slither of proof are going to get challenged, just so you know.

Clarrie has his forum monitors always ready to say "Look nutters".

by Liz Eagles 28.04.16 17:17

Realist wrote:
MayMuse wrote:

. My first post on joining was criticised by Aquilla,
If you hadn't been criticised by Aquilla, then you are indeed an apparition

That's made me belly laugh.