Re: BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added**

#61 · by **Jill Havern** 05.05.17 14:36

jeanmonroe wrote:@ Get'emGonçalo

"I shall go over to the support forum and see if they're aware of this issue and if there's a fix!"
-------------------------------------

Forget the 'support forum'!,.............. "Go to OG. Move directly to OG, Do not pass Belgravia. Do not collect evidence."

THEY are outstandingly professional, in 'fixing' erm, y'know, um,...'thingy's'

#62 · by polyenne 05.05.17 15:09

I think the point is being missed...........IMO the HUGE issue which lies behind all of this (the reason high ranking officials got involved so quickly and deeply, the alleged involvement of the spooks, the reason Madeleine's body can NEVER be found, the "pact of silence" by the Tapas 9 etc etc) is still as valid today as it always was.

Whether paedophilia, medical or whatever, the "reason" will continue to be protected by whatever means are available. You're talking about major players on the circuit with big money at stake......nothing and no-one stands in their way.

All my personal viewpoints of course................

#63 · by MRNOODLES 05.05.17 18:22

polyenne wrote:I think the point is being missed...........IMO the HUGE issue which lies behind all of this (the reason high ranking officials got involved so quickly and deeply, the alleged involvement of the spooks, the reason Madeleine's body can NEVER be found, the "pact of silence" by the Tapas 9 etc etc) is still as valid today as it always was.

Whether paedophilia, medical or whatever, the "reason" will continue to be protected by whatever means are available. You're talking about major players on the circuit with big money at stake......nothing and no-one stands in their way.

All my personal viewpoints of course................

Yes this is why they have to keep a lid on it. I totally believe (my opinion) Clarrie is the gatekeeper.

So what are the chances of this happening?

OG suddenly gets wound up around June 8th or slightly later even.. Clarrie gets paradropped into a very winnable Tory seat in the GE as a reward? Ah but he stood in Brighton before. Yes, it was smoke and mirrors he had no chance of winning then.

#64 · by willowthewisp 05.05.17 18:57

Hi Mr Noodles,The UK Government From Gordon Brown through to Theresa May,CEOP have had full access to Madeleine McCann's disappearance,reported as 3 May 2007.
When "Restricted Pamphlets"were found in an Apartment,that they should not have had access to and at the Time they where Found coincided with the claimed Abduction of their Eldest missing daughter Madeleine McCann?
It is quite obvious that a Cover Up was began in Portugal to either divert attention away from certain parties?
Which has been influenced by benefactors from Private sources and Public resources being utilised over the past Ten Years?
Scotland Yard and the Metropolitan Police Service have knowingly allowed a"Gold Group"Remit to be drafted in to the Operational procedure of firstly a review of a case,then it was processed as an"Investigation" of the same case,That was unfit for the purpose of its requirement in the disappearance/Homocide Investigation of a Three Year old child,of whom they owed a Duty of care to being a Resident of the UK.
The Assistant Commander has stated that as part of the Original Review,that a certain known group of people who had known Madeleine McCann,were Not suspected of any involvement in her disappearance,that since Operation Grange in October 2011 have not had an Interview Under caution?
Yet Seemingly Metropolitan Police Service Officers openly show E-fits to Portugal residents,of the likeness to the E-fits and then Interview them as suspects for over Three years?
They have reported to the press of having Investigated over 600 suspects of involvement to Madeleine McCann's disappearance and are now reportedly looking for a female suspect after nearly six years of Investigations,IPCC anyone?

#65 · by Mirage 05.05.17 19:45

willowthewisp wrote:
Yet Seemingly Metropolitan Police Service Officers openly show E-fits to Portugal residents,of the likeness to the E-fits and then Interview them as suspects for over Three years?

In other words, the Met were riding roughshod over the Portuguese investigation like a colonial throwback, demanding to interview this one or that one with their vexatious Letters of Request.

And then, the umpteen million pound Crimewatch extravaganza hatched by DCI Redwood and the BBC leaving the Paynes out of that travesty of a reconstruction while denying broadcasting rights to ... wait for it ... Portugal where the crime took place.

#66 · by Phoebe 05.05.17 20:16

Did the dear old Met ever bother to ask questions of Cat Baker or any of the other relevant nannies who were whisked away out of reach of the P.J. with unholy haste despite their contradictory statements and record keeping? It appears not. This farce also failed to re-question the parents or the Tapas 7, basically anyone who should have been able to throw light on the mystery. It's a bit like a program exploring a play or film without mentioning the main characters - Hamlet, without the prince.

#67 · by Guest 05.05.17 23:54

If you take the time to analyze and weigh-up the pros and cons of this weeks BBC Panorama production and the Sky Documentary, one thing is apparent - at least to me.

Think of the primary focus of McCann sceptics across cyberspace - the dog alerts; the remit and performance of Operation Grange; the McCanns behaviour; the infamous treatment of Goncalo Amaral; the Portuguese investigation v. the Metropolitan Police review/investigation.

Then think of the focal points of both the BBC and Sky productions - much the same? Yes, I think so!

The McCanns defence league have publicly admitted they monitor the internet, as the McCanns have openly admitted that this information is fed back to them. So, the 'trolls' main concerns have been monitored and documented and for this monumental 10th anniversary have formed the basis of these two televised documentaries. Was it not said a while ago that Scotland Yard would be collaborating with the media and coordinating a couple of television productions to mark the 10th anniversary of Madeleine McCann's disappearance?

Reverting to the content and purpose of the televised productions - the main points frequently raised and discussed by the McCann critic lobby were taken on board as a matter of serious concern as regards the case of Madeleine McCann and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

After this weekends customary blitz of media rubbish following the 10th anniversary celebrations, I'm hoping matters will return to some semblance of normality and CMoMM can continue it's pursuance of justice for little Madeleine McCann - the only person of any real importance in this pathetic circus of deception.

#68 · by Phoebe 06.05.17 0:38

Verdi wrote:If you take the time to analyze and weigh-up the pros and cons of this weeks BBC Panorama production and the Sky Documentary, one thing is apparent - at least to me.

Think of the primary focus of McCann sceptics across cyberspace - the dog alerts; the remit and performance of Operation Grange; the McCanns behaviour; the infamous treatment of Goncalo Amaral; the Portuguese investigation v. the Metropolitan Police review/investigation.

Then think of the focal points of both the BBC and Sky productions - much the same? Yes, I think so!

The McCanns defence league have publicly admitted they monitor the internet, as the McCanns have openly admitted that this information is fed back to them. So, the 'trolls' main concerns have been monitored and documented and for this monumental 10th anniversary have formed the basis of these two televised documentaries. Was it not said a while ago that Scotland Yard would be collaborating with the media and coordinating a couple of television productions to mark the 10th anniversary of Madeleine McCann's disappearance?

Reverting to the content and purpose of the televised productions - the main points frequently raised and discussed by the McCann critic lobby were taken on board as a matter of serious concern as regards the case of Madeleine McCann and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

After this weekends customary blitz of media rubbish following the 10th anniversary celebrations, I'm hoping matters will return to some semblance of normality and CMoMM can continue it's pursuance of justice for little Madeleine McCann - the only person of any real importance in this pathetic circus of deception.

Spot on. I think they have also firmly tried set the time from which the story, and therefore any behaviour deserving of investigation, begins. Everything focuses on after Gerry's check at 9.10/9.15 nicely airbrushing the events up to this from picture. The clear message is that nothing which happened before this has any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance, a hypothesis the "trolls" question.

#69 · by Guest 06.05.17 7:10

Verdi wrote: and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!

How did they diss the dogs?

(I've not watched either propaganda piece).

#70 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 8:18

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote: and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!
How did they diss the dogs?

(I've not watched either propaganda piece).

Bilton said the dogs alerts were only 'indications' - the footage may have looked damning but it didn't prove anything.

And then went on to show the FFS reports that said "the results didn't back up the barking dogs" the results were "weak and inconclusive".

Of the 66 samples none directly matched Madeleine McCann.

BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added** - Page 3 110

BBC1 tonight - what do members think? ** VIDEO added** - Page 3 210

No evidence
No evidence
No evidence

and so on.

Jim Gamble "Madeleine's parents were using that car. 50% of the DNA would have come from each parent, so to have some cross-over of DNA is not unusual".

And he questions the professionalism of anyone who drew conclusion of evidence. (or words to that effect but with emphasis on professionalism)

And that the PJ misinterpreted the results.

Bilton: The theory was falling apart and Amaral was removed from the case. Amaral blamed political interference (showing Gordon Brown and Socrates, the former Prime Minister who was shown sneering at Amaral)

You should watch it from 13.30 - although you should watch the whole thing.

#71 · by Mirage 06.05.17 8:36

Gamble also craftily addressed Gerry's cold demeanour, which he found off-putting at the outset.

He obviously got over it and warmed to the fellow. Bingo. Yet another "troll" concern over Gerry McCann's red flag behaviour ticked off the list.

Jta. Good try. It doesn't wash for normal people, Mr Gamble. The following is just one of hundreds of reasons why ...........

"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?" Gerry

#72 · by nglfi 06.05.17 8:56

The programme wilfully deceived with its description of the dogs. It deliberately confused the issue by implying that the dogs alerted positively to DNA. They did not. They alerted positively to BLOOD. Samples were then taken from the areas they alerted, and DNA containing 15/19 markers from Madeleine were found. This was not at all explained and was probably the worst part of the programme for me.

#73 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 8:58

#74 · by **Jill Havern** 06.05.17 9:08

John Lowe tells us the blood in the back of the car MATCHED Maddie... Either MADELEINE WAS IN THE CAR or it was a CHANCE MATCH. If it was a 'chance' match, how can it be explained? Two or more relatives leave 15 markers of the DNA they share with Maddie, in the same sequence, in EXACTLY the same tiny BLOOD spot?

Forensic results in the case have been discussed and scrutinised since the day they were revealed. Efforts to discredit the dogs and the findings run rampant.

Fact is, for the record, that if a BLOOD dog alerts, then they have found BLOOD (Keela alerts to nothing else) Forensics being retrieved from that area CONFIRMS the dog was successful.

We are told that 15 of Madeleine's 19 markers were found in the trunk of the car (among 37 markers altogether) and with 4 more of her markers would have been conclusive. Had any of the other markers in her sequence NOT been hers then it could NOT have been Maddie's DNA, but the results reveal, according to John Lowe, that it is a MATCH to Maddie.

The question he asks, was the match GENUINE or a CHANCE match.

Was Madeleine in the car or was the match deposited by family members?

We now KNOW that DNA that Matches Madeleine WAS IN THE CAR, we just need to find out HOW 15 of Madeleine's DNA markers could be deposited in a tiny blood spot in the back of the car? Her relatives share some of the same markers.

How many combinations of DNA from her relatives would need to have produced 15 of Madeleine's markers in the EXACT spot that Keela alerted to and in the same sequence?

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12172-john-lowe-tells-us-there-was-a-match-to-maddie-in-the-car-more-about-dna-forensics

#75 · by Guest 06.05.17 9:38

Can a complaint be made about the objectivity of the programme?

It sounds to me like willful misrepresentation of the evidence.

#76 · by pennylane 06.05.17 10:19

BlueBag wrote:Can a complaint be made about the objectivity of the programme?

It sounds to me like willful misrepresentation of the evidence.

Yes they're masters at perpetuating misinformation and wrapping it up as if factual! It must take a lot of work to achieve such a sick agenda, and they obviously know exactly what they are doing.

#77 · by Guest 06.05.17 13:01

BlueBag wrote:
Verdi wrote: and then, smashed into smithereens with a heavy duty sledge hammer courtesy of the McCann defence league, through the medium of the BBC and Sky !!!
How did they diss the dogs?

(I've not watched either propaganda piece).

Sky 1 Documentary - Searching for Madeleine [this is only a rough transcript but gives the gist]

Brunt: [@ 19:36] Portuguese police asked the UK to bring over two specialist dogs [on the recommendation of Mark Harrison], one who detects dead bodies [technically incorrect] and the other that detects traces of blood. The dogs reacted in the McCanns apartment and in the family's rental car which wasn't hired until three weeks after Madeleine disappeared. Forensic swabs were taken and sent to the UK for analysis, the leaked [?] results - or at least the Portuguese interpretation of them, caused a sensation.

In the car scientists have found a second full match and the police say that's the most damning evidence that's been returned by these test results.

[brief interview between Martin Brunt and Colin Sutton]..

Brunt: The dogs, the forensic tests that followed - that was the turning point wasn't it?

Sutton: It was the turning point for the arrests [what arrests Mr Sutton?] yes certainly but we need to remember the dogs are there to indicate where proper forensic tests, evidential tests should be made.. dogs, certainly in the UK are not used as evidential things - just an indication to focus the search for forensic material.

THE END

Henceforth the show returns to the usual claptrap - difficulty understanding the hostility shown towards the McCanns. social media trolls, no police action against trolls - even Summers and Swanne are allowed a brief appearance.

Conclusion of Sky 1 documentary:
Two police forces have found no evidence to suggest they [the Mccanns] played any part in their daughters disappearance. In our investigation [?], we discovered nothing to suggest otherwise - the mystery of what happened to Madeleine McCann is just that - a mystery.

howdy

#78 · by Philip Anders 06.05.17 18:34

Verdi wrote:
Conclusion of Sky 1 documentary:
Two police forces have found no evidence to suggest they [the Mccanns] played any part in their daughters disappearance. In our investigation [?], we discovered nothing to suggest otherwise - the mystery of what happened to Madeleine McCann is just that - a mystery.

I would have thought that leaving 2 babies & a toddler alone in an unlocked apartment can hardly be dismissed as playing no part in the disappearance but Brunt & Sky obviously think it can be.

#79 · by tunein 06.05.17 19:29

Hi,

Complaining to the BBC is like P-----G in the wind.

Tunein

#80 · by Roidininki 06.05.17 20:47

I complained anyway .
About a couple of things .

#81 · by **Jill Havern** 07.05.17 14:35

#82 · by tunein 07.05.17 16:01

Hi,

Yes I complained to the BBC for what its worth.

Tunein

#83 · by GordonGarner 07.05.17 23:18

There were hints, small one's, but hints nonetheless in these programmes that there are a few chinks in the official line.
The constant refusal to go back further than the 'Madeleine was abducted on the Thursday evening' and everything was fine with the world before 9:30 pm and Gerrys last check is what i find most aggravating. Its as though anybody who hasnt read extensively on the case, has been blagged into accepting that as gospel.
If im sure of nothing else in this case, then im sure that the 'official tale' of the Thursday evening as told by the M's and the Tapas gang, needs pulling apart.
Any objective investigation of this case, could begin nowhere else. The fact that hasnt taken place , deflates any optimism i have for this case to be solved.

#84 · by Philip Anders 08.05.17 7:48

.

GordonGarner wrote:There were hints, small one's, but hints nonetheless in these programmes that there are a few chinks in the official line.
The constant refusal to go back further than the 'Madeleine was abducted on the Thursday evening' and everything was fine with the world before 9:30 pm and Gerrys last check is what i find most aggravating. Its as though anybody who hasnt read extensively on the case, has been blagged into accepting that as gospel.
If im sure of nothing else in this case, then im sure that the 'official tale' of the Thursday evening as told by the M's and the Tapas gang, needs pulling apart.
Any objective investigation of this case, could begin nowhere else. The fact that hasnt taken place , deflates any optimism i have for this case to be solved.

Any 1st month probationary police officer, let alone an experienced investigator / interviewer, could tie up the McCanns & their friends in a few seconds.

Q: How did you manage to take a photo in bright sunshine on a day when it was dull & cloudy?
A: Errrm, er well, err hmmm it's not our fault that some smartarse checked the weather, they shouldn't have checked it.

Q: Why did you state that the shutters had been forced open?
A: Errrm, er well, err hmmm it's not our fault that the stupid Portuguese police arranged for forensic testing, they shouldn't have tested them.

In fact we're not to blame for anything, it's the IVF clinic's fault that Madeleine was born in the first place so it's the clinic that should be under investigation & not us!

#85 · by GordonGarner 08.05.17 8:58

Er yes, LOL, I see where you are coming from.
The M's tale would struggle to withstand much scrutiny !!

#86 · by **Jill Havern** 08.05.17 9:16

GordonGarner wrote:Er yes, LOL, I see where you are coming from.
The M's tale would struggle to withstand much scrutiny !!

At least with all this confusion, and the country split on what they do and don't believe, they'll get a fair trial when the time comes.

#87 · by GordonGarner 08.05.17 11:47

Do you think that day will ever happen ?
I lost hope on that some time ago.
It would be great to see the whole event laid bare for the truth, whatever it may be, to emerge.

#88 · by **Jill Havern** 08.05.17 12:08

GordonGarner wrote:Do you think that day will ever happen ?
I lost hope on that some time ago.
It would be great to see the whole event laid bare for the truth, whatever it may be, to emerge.

I did say "when the time comes" and not "if the time comes" winkwink

We all need to stick with it - here on CMOMM; on twitter; on blogs and websites; on facebook.

We need to keep submitting FOI's, petitions, complaints etc.

But most importantly, we need Colin Sutton to make an official 'Misconduct in Public Office' complaint based on what he publicly said in the Daily Mail and the Sky1 documentary.

If he doesn't have the bottle to follow through, although he said he "wasn't a snowflake", then we will have to do it for him. He's certainly opened the door for us to do that, for which I'm grateful.

Colin said he would be back here to take part in debate after the Sky1 documentary had aired but there's no sign of him, even though he's busy on twitter.

If we lose hope and give up then there will never be Justice for Madeleine Beth McCann. We've spent ten years on this case and we can't give up now.

Plus, Gonçalo has got his voice back, since the Supreme Court ruling, and he's not done yet.

#89 · by **sandancer** 08.05.17 12:51

It's all gone quiet in the media now the 3rd has passed .

It will Never go quiet on the likes of CMOMM , not with people like Jill , HideHo , Peter Mac , Tony , Richard and the other great researchers here.

As said by Jill Goncalo has his voice back , his time is coming .

The little girl with no voice has many prepared to speak for her , not her parents or her family sadly . Those voices will Not be silenced or intimidated .

Colin , are you prepared to be one of her voices ? I sincerely hope so .

I cannot and will not give up hope , Madeleine and the twins deserve Truth and Justice .