The killing of the Madeleine McCann case? (plus Last Photo)

by **Jill Havern** 05.05.18 18:53

Textusa 5 May 2018, 10:13:00
Maria Santos
7 hrs ·

Textusa5 May 2018, 10:13:00

We notify our readers that this comment may well be the most important thing that we’ve ever written about the Maddie case.

If we were to continue to write posts, we would hesitate calling it “Grange’s legal conundrum” or “Entrapping Grange”.

This has evidently to do with the popular surge that we have witnessed since Colin Sutton’s rise to stardom during the 10 yr anniversary last year, about how Grange should have considered the McCanns suspects from the beginning in 2011, which they said they didn’t, or in the desire of many that they should have the McCanns taken to the nearest British police station and question them, which they haven’t.

This surge had the recent attempted feeding by Sonia Poulton’s video “The McCanns and the Police [Part One]”

We inform readers that what we intend to explain today is that if what is being requested is satisfied, the Maddie case will be killed. To be clear, precise and concise, if Operation Grange ever questions the McCanns, any of the remainder of the T9 or any person who may bear guilt in the case, the case will be killed. Finished.
Note, not seriously compromised but finished.
…..
Please read the rest in the blog:
https://textusa.blogspot.pt/…/the-help-and-tennis-comments-…

Interesting blog and comments.

Sonia, Colin and Ben Thompson get a mention re the film 'The McCanns and the Police' and why there is such insistence for Operation Grange to interview the parents or close down the investigation.

by willowthewisp 05.05.18 19:24

Hi Jill Havern, I posted a comment to Phoebe about the textusa point,so i do not know if that post can be merged onto this post.
So if you can't solve the case,collapse the case so No one can be found guilty in any Court trails,incredulous if that is the ultimate"Get out of Jail free card"!

by **Jill Havern** 05.05.18 19:30

Could you just copy it over please willow?

by willowthewisp 05.05.18 19:43

Jill Havern wrote:Could you just copy it over please willow?

Hi Jill I have tried to send the quoted document but it has just repeated on the same page,I'v tried to insert a link,but it didn't work,not really clued up on computer usage!

by **Jill Havern** 05.05.18 20:25

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Phoebe, I know Verdi isn't a fan of Textusa and the latest post although not in a direct post is very long,but what has been stated basically,is if the Operation Grange team proceed to question,Non suspects,without informing Portugal PJ,it will very likely jeopardise any future possible prosecution?

It(Article) states relevant points of similarity between spoken words of Mr Colin Sutton and former CEOP,Mr Jim Gamble relating points to the McCann family,Operation Grange,Gold standard Group 8th May 2007 as there chosen method to follow!
(textusa) are quite adamant that Sonia Poulton's recent video documentary is being directed for the Police to possibly"Overstep" the boundaries,pressurising by exposure of unsure facts,costs of the ongoing operation via the Internet Facebook or Twitter comments,in today's austerity Police cuts to the service etc!
(textusa) is asking for all person's who had an interest in Madeleine McCann's disappearance to be even more patient,so as to avoid unnecessary elements being manipulated unaware to asking why haven't they questioned certain person's,of whom the UK,Portugal Police have consistently stated are not suspects in Madeleine's disappearance!
If Operation Grange has been set up on a flawed remit it has been done for"Political Reasons",not the Police stopping the operation,treading water?

by **Tony Bennett** 05.05.18 22:39

Let these points sink in to all those who still remain fans of Sonia's film, after all that has come to light so far on this forum.

Textusa, if I have read him aright, is hinting, if not suggesting, that Sonia Poulton's film may have been prepared and published in order to deceive, and quite possibly with the help of the establishment team behind the McCanns.

He is making the suggestion that Colin Sutton has come to the Madeleine McCann case to nudge things forward to what would be a token questioning of the McCanns and a possible reconstruction involving them.

That, says Textusa, would lead to the closure of Operation Grange.

He then adds that this would 'kill off' any further chance of the truth about Madeleine coming out and the McCanns (if they are guilty of anything) from being brought to justice.

I agree basically with the first point, and I further agree with Textusa (a) over Colin Sutton being used by those behind him to float the idea that 'The McCanns and their friends must be questioned and (b) over the fact that Sonia Poulton has 'teamed up' as it were with Colin Sutton to float both the question of the McCanns and the Tapas 7 and the so-called reconstruction. Sonia finished her film on this point.

I do not agree with Textusa's second point which is an over-dramatsiation of what would happen if Operation Grange closed. I don't think it would make any difference because most of on here know by now that Grange is amonstrous and expensive charade. I would remind Textusa that this will ALWAYS remain a Portuguese case and if compelling evidence were ever to come to light that the McCanns had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance then I believe they WOULD act.

I was glad to see Textusa basically responding to our thread here on CMOMM and would pay tribute to that part of his analysis, even though it means admitting I left an important point out of my own analysis.

Textusa did the same when, four years ago, I pointed out in a long post why I was absolutely sure that Nuno Lourenco had completely fabricated the story about Wojchiech Krokowski attempting to kidnap his daughter at Sagres. Textusa went there himself and produced an excellent post on the fake Nuno Lourenco 'sighting', having found several additional points in addition to mine. (I then went on of course to develop the hypothesis that Mr Wojchiech was deliberately used a 'template' description of a phantom abductor by Jane Tanner, Lourenco himself and Martin Smith. I also strongly suggested that in my opinion this suggested pre-planning.

Now going back to Sonia's film, Textusa has made two other very important observations, both of which I agree with.

First, he is sure that Sonia Poulton filming at 5 The Crescent, Rothley (the McCanns' house), together with cameraman Dave Eden, was a complete set-up, authorised by the McCanns and those behind them. I completely agree, in which case I would be being entirely reasonable to suggest that Sonia's whole film was authorised by the establishment. It never mentions the cadaver dogs, backs up the 'neglect narrative', puts the boot in repeatedly to the PJ, and promotes Colin Sutton's solution.

Second, he thinks that the 'secret' report Sonia was seen reading (which made the very unlikely claim that the McCanns distrusted Leicestershire Police) could have been the Jim Gamble 'scoping' report. If that is true, it would be hugely significant. I have asked in a Freedom of Information for that to be published but that request was refused. on the grounds that it was 'protected' because it formed part of an ongoing investigation. If indeed it is that report Sonia was shown (and I don't think she actually admits that on the 'phone), then that would be virtually 100% proof that Sonia Poulton is working with the establishment on this film.

I would add that it is very interesting that Isabella McFadden speaks on Twitter of having spoken to Colin Sutton and of what a 'warm, helpful man' he is etc. etc. McFadden has also been furiously backing Sonia's crowd-funding Patreon, just as she also backed that blatant scam by the joker and business friend of Robert Murat, Sergey Malinka. It is also a fact that two other voices on Twitter loudly supported the Malinka scam and now sing the merits of Sonia's film: Benjamin Thompson ('TheBunnyReturns' and 'AndyFish19') and Ben Salmon, both former members here for brief periods. All four (Sonia Isabella and the two Bens) waste no time in criticising CMOMM, its leading members and its hypotheses.

Three things I very strongly disagree with Textusa about:

1 He has ALWAYS from the get-go said that Madeleine died after 6pm Thursday

2 He still thinks that 'Smithman' = Gerry McCann despite all the evidence to the contrary, and

3 He maintains that the 'Last Photo' is not genuine but was concocted and photoshopped on Friday 18 May 2007 (11 days after Madeleine was reported missing), by Gerry McCann taking Amelie, Sean and Kate down to the Ocean Club for a re-shoot of the Last Photo. This I maintain, does prove now ridiculous some of Textusa's theories can get.

But, hey, Textusa, good observations o nSonia's subtle propaganda - well done.

Final word: I agree with almost every word of Phil Beddoe's excellent analysis of Sonia's film and I would commend it to all members and guests here.

by **Jill Havern** 05.05.18 22:57

Never once does Textusa explain that England has a conspiracy to defraud, whereas
Portugal has concealment of a body and failing to notify a death

Textusa never specifies what crime he or the two jurisdictions are looking at.

by Phoebe 06.05.18 0:04

Why is it an "All or nothing scenario" with Textusa. What would stop Op. Grange saying to the P.J. " Given that we have exhausted all other avenues, we want to interview the Tapas 9 but don't wish to in anyway prejudice or damage the Portuguese investigation. Can you send over some officers to oversee a rogatory interview with The McCanns and their friends". Or better still, allow the P.J. to interview them in the U.K. This has happened in Ireland in the ongoing saga of the 1996 murder of French woman Sophie Toscan Du Plantier in Ireland. Although the main suspect (a British ex-pat) was arrested twice in Ireland, it was decided that there was insufficient evidence to bring charges. The French disagreed, sent their own officers here to investigate (including the judge who pressed ahead with charges in France) and interview witnesses here. The Irish authorities refused to extradite the suspect, citing their belief that the evidence is insufficient. Now, a trial is about to get underway in France, with the suspect "in absentia". If the French can take this extraordinary step I fail to see why some arrangement cannot be reached by Grange which allows the McCanns to be interviewed with the P.J's assistance. I suspect this is not being done because unlike Textusa, I believe Grange has never been anything but a complete farce, designed to convey to Portugal that the McCanns are to remain untouchable.

by tnb 06.05.18 0:31

I would remind Textusa that this will ALWAYS remain a Portuguese case and if compelling evidence were ever to come to light that the McCanns had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance then I believe they WOULD act.

May I remind you Mr Bennett, there is compelling evedence, two dogs worth and then some.

by Guest 06.05.18 1:28

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Phoebe, I know Verdi isn't a fan of Textusa and the latest post although not in a direct post is very long,but what has been stated basically,is if the Operation Grange team proceed to question,Non suspects,without informing Portugal PJ,it will very likely jeopardise any future possible prosecution?

I might, that's just might, embrace Textusa and the sisterhood full on if a) I could understand even a fraction of what they're on about and b) they cut to the chase.

This particular blog is no different from the rest, a riddle a conundrum a code. roughly deciphered - a figment of an over zealous imagination, expressed in 10,000 superfluous words rather than a precis of fact and informed comment that could be stated in a few paragraphs. Frankly, I can't be bothered to wade through yet another epic volume only to end even more confused than I was before it started.

Remember, this is the sisterhood famed for big black hats, big round tables and big swingers agogo, amidst other delights of the vivid imagination.

10/10 for creative thinking - 0/10 for evidenced theorizing.

As an aside, you can read anything you like into the words of the likes of Colin Sutton or you can just accept them for what they are - one off comments when asked a specific question. Colin Sutton is not, I repeat not, an authority on the case of missing Madeleine McCann, he is therefore not in a good position to comment on the case with any accuracy. He is no different to Mark Williams-Thomas, sits before the camera making ill-informed off the cuff comments about the case, with scant knowledge, that waver from one interview to another.

It's oh so easy and oh so convenient to latch onto the words of this person or that person only because it agrees with ones own mindset - doesn't mean it's right !!!

by Guest 06.05.18 2:50

tnb wrote:

May I remind you Mr Bennett, there is compelling evedence, two dogs worth and then some.

Quite so but alas, the dog alerts were never corroborated by forensic analysis. Carefully crafted, the samples were sent to the British Forensic Science Service (still remains a mystery to me as to why) who, out of all the samples harvested and sent for analysis managed to produce not one single positive.

Funny that innit?

Folk still believe Operation Grange are on the case? Yep, they do!

This case is an establishment cover-up of the highest order, no ifs nor buts - always was always will be. No one is going to crack, Kate McCann is not going to crumble under the pressure, the ol' man is not going to chuck her under the bus. The case is all but done and dusted - hence Operation Grange are now operating from the broom cupboard.

Operation Grange was/is a charade from May (that month again) 2011 until present day. The British establishment are not planning some contrived end game with Portugal, that's just idle minds making a hell of a lot out of nothing. The British establishment facilitated the McCanns escape from Portuguese territory/jurisdiction early September 2007, coincidentally the period of time that Martin Smith decided it was Gerry McCann he and his family saw roaming the streets of Praia da Luz on the night of 3rd May 2007. The Portuguese police were manipulated by the British establishment from 3rd/4th May 2007 and still are to this very day.

Why else do you think the McCanns were allowed to leave Portugal when the cloud of suspicion was hanging over them like a dank smog - a pea souper? This whole conspiracy lies in the hands of the British establishment, granted they might have used political influence within Portugal but still the blame is here in good old Blighty. Always was always will be.

A vestige of hope that the recent letter sent to Portugal by the MMRG might generate a renewed investigation by the Portuguese, WITHOUT UK influence. It is the ONLY (sorry for shouting) hope left for Madeleine McCann, all else who should care and should be able to make a difference have failed her miserably.

Hail CMoMM and associates!!!

grouphug

by **Jill Havern** 06.05.18 10:21

Textusa's disclaimer. "None of us are legal experts or have any educational background in law. So, we may be wrong in the assessment we make and if there is one occasion we want to be wrong, this will be it. If anyone is able to prove us wrong, we will be the first to jump for joy and gladly, very gladly, correct our hand and take back all we are going to say next."

Reply from PeterMac (retired Police Superintendent with 30 years experience plus a Law degree):

PeterMac wrote:We need to distil out the flabby thinking at the beginning.
He never spells out what he thinks they should be prosecuted for

Consider these bits .

The crime happened in Portugal. What crime ?

For it [What crime ?] to be prosecuted outside Portugal, where the crime happened, [What crime ?]
and there be no consequences there is only one way for that to happen: Portugal agreeing fully to that.

So, to the question will Portugal accept that the McCanns are prosecuted by the British in Britain? The answer seems to be a clear no. For what crime ?

Sovereignty determines that the McCanns have to be prosecuted in Portugal. For what crime ?

Only if the UK wants to insult Portugal and face the consequences on the international stage for doing so, will the McCanns ever be prosecuted in Britain for what happened in Luz. What DID happen in Luz ?

He then throws in a whole page about prosecution in England for crimes committed elsewhere
Ss. 9 and 10 OAPA 1861 refers ONLY to homicide
The Geneva Conventions Act 1957 (“GCA”) is talking about War crimes and torture

Unless we believe Madeleine was killed by her parents neither has any relevance to the case.

Portugal has a case of (the Portuguese equivalent of) failing to report a death, failing to produce a body for burial, and possibly another couple of minor administrative things -
but without conclusive proof cannot go further
England has a possible case of a Fraud, and a conspiracy to defraud, but without proof that Madeleine is dead and that the parents knew, or reasonably suspected this cannot go further

Now look at this nonsense

In a country’s jurisdiction laws from other countries are not accepted even if the issue in question is the same.

This is simply wrong. The whole point of the EAW is that countries DO accept the laws of others if they have an equivalent crime on their own statute books.
The recent case of not extraditing Puigdemont from Germany is a classic. German law specifies that there has to be an element of violence in the crime of sedition or whatever. Spanish law doesn't. The Spanish want him back, but the Germans can find no evidence of violence and so will not extradite him. Which is why the Spanish have changed tack and started to look at Financial crimes. (think Al Capone)

And then he starts on about "arguido" status and says it does not exist in England.
It is exactly the same as being interviewed under Caution with a lawyer present, and everything recorded on tape or video

But in any event it is a red herring (remember that ?) because BritPol would not interview about Portuguese crime, only about English crime

As someone has posted, if the 6,500 words were cut down to bullet points on one side of A4 it would be easier to see the flaws

REFS:
https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/legal-update-universal-jurisdiction-which-foreign-crimes-can-be-tried-in-the-uk

Forgot to add this one.
The crime is rebellion . or High Treason

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/03/german-prosecutors-ask-court-to-permit-carles-puigdemont-extradition-to-spain

German prosecutors ask court to extradite Carles ...
www.theguardian.com
Carles Puigdemont with Catalan politicians from his Together for Catalonia party in Brussels in January. Photograph: Virginia Mayo/AP German prosecutors have asked a court to permit the extradition of the former Catalan separatist leader Carles Puigdemont to Spain. Prosecutors in the northern town ...

And Textusa's reply:

The killing of the Madeleine McCann case? (plus Last Photo) Textus10

https://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/the-help-and-tennis-comments-continue-ii.html?showComment=1525630074466#c6812648200207471641

by Liz Eagles 06.05.18 11:27

Exactly!

Over the years I have wasted countless hours reading the complete nonsense that is Textusa. From black hats and white hats this strangled route of saying something (saying nothing) in a thousand cryptic words always underpinned with a swinging theory is clever. Getting people to willingly wade through treacle flavoured with a pinch of paranoia is clever.

by willowthewisp 06.05.18 13:42

The present Prime Minister Theresa May and her Government are still presiding over the Unsolved murder and Cover Up of Daniel Morgan from 10 th March 1987,thought to have involved employees of Rupert Murdoch being allowed to facilitate monies to Police officers for stories?
Cost to the tax payer over One billion Pounds in collapsed Court Trails!

Recent Times News Paper articles allude to Rebekah Brooks being involved in dubious,nefarious practices of obtaining "Medical Notes from NHS Hospitals" funding these malicious activities by proffering payments of Thousands of pounds in exchange for the Personal information,would these practices come under the Data Protection Acts,where people can be prosecuted for these activities,but not if your Name is Rebekah Brooks it seems!
Now if you need to know any practices of how to "Kill a story" contact Rupert Murdoch's Team aka Martin Brunt and special cohorts,remember Mrs Brenda Leyland and your sticky little fingers of involvement,Jim,Gerry,secret Dossier to Sir Bernard Hogan Howe,master manipulator?

Little wonder there was No Leveson mark Two,now we know why,about to expose all those dirty little mischievous practices of collusion by the" Establishment,the state"?

by **Ladyinred** 06.05.18 13:48

@TB post #6 above. Where can Phil Beddoe's analysis be found?

Is PB member Philo Beddoe?

by Guest 06.05.18 14:15

Reply from PeterMac (retired Police Superintendent with 30 years experience plus a Law degree):

Thank goodness - a voice of reason in this wilderness of invention.

I have tried in the past to convey a similar message, only I ain't got the where with all to explain - mine is more where without.

Thanks to PeterMac for making sense of it all and hopefully halting any further misinterpretation of the law.

The Textusa sisterhood has (for it is he) perfected the art of deception by creating a sort of indecipherable 'Murder in the Rue Morgue' monologue to excite the lust for Agatha Christie style murder mysteries. It is fiction in it's purest form - he should write for a tabloid.

by **Jill Havern** 06.05.18 15:48

Ladyinred wrote:@TB post #6 above. Where can Phil Beddoe's analysis be found?

Is PB member Philo Beddoe?

I'm afraid it can't, Tony made a mistake - it's in one of our restricted research forums.

PB is not Pat Brown, if that's what you were asking.

Pat Brown is Pat Brown, and Philo Beddoe is not Philo Beddoe because otherwise he'd be Clint Eastwood...if you get me drift big grin

by **Ladyinred** 06.05.18 16:09

I was asking if Phil Beddoe (PB) is member Philo Beddoe.

Sorry, don't get your drift about Clint Eastwood!

by **Jill Havern** 06.05.18 16:14

Ladyinred wrote:I was asking if Phil Beddoe (PB) is member Philo Beddoe.

Sorry, don't get your drift about Clint Eastwood!

Ah sorry, I didn't notice TB's spolling mistake.

Clint Eastwood played Philo Beddoe with an orangutan in Every which way but loose.

by **Ladyinred** 06.05.18 16:21

Thanks. Was about to google. I've not seen that film.

by Guest 06.05.18 18:34

Was Madeleine killed?

I see no evidence that she was killed.

There is some evidence she died in 5A.

But killed?

Maybe... who knows...?

Lots of questions that were never answered that should have been.

"Killed"... I think there may be a fine legal distinction there that indicates an action by someone or something that needs to be avoided until there is evidence of such action.

The evidence suggests she died, the cause is a mystery.

"Killing" is even stronger than "killed" and is deliberately provocative imo.

by **Ladyinred** 06.05.18 19:40

The word "killing" is in reference to the case, as I understand it, as in ending/terminating.

Not the best word to use.

by willowthewisp 06.05.18 20:49

Ladyinred wrote:The word "killing" is in reference to the case, as I understand it, as in ending/terminating.

Not the best word to use.

hi Ladyinred,perhaps the use of the word killing maybe wrong.
Bbut what is very drastically wrong is for a former Police Officer,in his words(Colin Sutton), to clear or exonerate certain parties once and for all time to have had any involvement in Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Especially,when he turned down the opportunity to Lead Operation Grange on the proposed flawed remit,that he knew about,seven years into the operation costing over £12 Million funded by the Tax payer?
So if Mr Colin Sutton knew the Operation Grange was a flawed,farce,why did he wait so long to join Sonia Poulton's documentary,no mention of Mrs Brenda Leyland,which was supposed to have been the reason for the"Untold story"?

by Liz Eagles 08.05.18 13:32

I have said many times on the forum that I cannot understand anyone who advocates the closure of Operation Grange. I want OG to continue until it becomes inevitable the cover up is no longer sustainable.

The life and demise of a three year old girl has yet to reveal the dreadful deceit around her. I have questioned many times the staffing arrangements of the 40+ team originally dedicated to this case.

How many senior people have retired across the years is but a trifle as to the turnover of operational officers seconded for a short period of time and moved on.

by Guest 08.05.18 16:48

Although senior officers from the Metropolitan Police and their Operation Grange team, decline to run a commentary on their 'investigation' (as it of course should be), when you consider the apparent lack of progress towards a solution, you have to wonder if Operation Grange exists in name only.

So, a cosmetic exercise, they fly Andy Redwood and a few officers out to Portugual, or to the offices of Metodo3 in Spain to sieze boxes of paperwork for effect but what else have they been up to for past six years? Chasing dead tractor drivers and women in purple?

Hardly a professional approach is it? I'll wager all it's ever been is a point of liaison, otherwise just a facade. The big jobs is being handled by the big bods - oh gawd, I'm beginning to sound like Texusa.

by **Jill Havern** 08.05.18 17:13

Hardly. You said what you needed to say in three paragraphs.

by **Jill Havern** 09.05.18 20:54

Jill Havern wrote:Textusa's disclaimer. "None of us are legal experts or have any educational background in law. So, we may be wrong in the assessment we make and if there is one occasion we want to be wrong, this will be it. If anyone is able to prove us wrong, we will be the first to jump for joy and gladly, very gladly, correct our hand and take back all we are going to say next."

Reply from PeterMac (retired Police Superintendent with 30 years experience plus a Law degree):

PeterMac wrote:We need to distil out the flabby thinking at the beginning.
He never spells out what he thinks they should be prosecuted for

Consider these bits .

The crime happened in Portugal. What crime ?

For it [What crime ?] to be prosecuted outside Portugal, where the crime happened, [What crime ?]
and there be no consequences there is only one way for that to happen: Portugal agreeing fully to that.

So, to the question will Portugal accept that the McCanns are prosecuted by the British in Britain? The answer seems to be a clear no. For what crime ?

Sovereignty determines that the McCanns have to be prosecuted in Portugal. For what crime ?

Only if the UK wants to insult Portugal and face the consequences on the international stage for doing so, will the McCanns ever be prosecuted in Britain for what happened in Luz. What DID happen in Luz ?

He then throws in a whole page about prosecution in England for crimes committed elsewhere
Ss. 9 and 10 OAPA 1861 refers ONLY to homicide
The Geneva Conventions Act 1957 (“GCA”) is talking about War crimes and torture

Unless we believe Madeleine was killed by her parents neither has any relevance to the case.

Portugal has a case of (the Portuguese equivalent of) failing to report a death, failing to produce a body for burial, and possibly another couple of minor administrative things -
but without conclusive proof cannot go further
England has a possible case of a Fraud, and a conspiracy to defraud, but without proof that Madeleine is dead and that the parents knew, or reasonably suspected this cannot go further

Now look at this nonsense

In a country’s jurisdiction laws from other countries are not accepted even if the issue in question is the same.

This is simply wrong. The whole point of the EAW is that countries DO accept the laws of others if they have an equivalent crime on their own statute books.
The recent case of not extraditing Puigdemont from Germany is a classic. German law specifies that there has to be an element of violence in the crime of sedition or whatever. Spanish law doesn't. The Spanish want him back, but the Germans can find no evidence of violence and so will not extradite him. Which is why the Spanish have changed tack and started to look at Financial crimes. (think Al Capone)

And then he starts on about "arguido" status and says it does not exist in England.
It is exactly the same as being interviewed under Caution with a lawyer present, and everything recorded on tape or video

But in any event it is a red herring (remember that ?) because BritPol would not interview about Portuguese crime, only about English crime

As someone has posted, if the 6,500 words were cut down to bullet points on one side of A4 it would be easier to see the flaws

REFS:
https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/legal-update-universal-jurisdiction-which-foreign-crimes-can-be-tried-in-the-uk

Forgot to add this one.
The crime is rebellion . or High Treason

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/03/german-prosecutors-ask-court-to-permit-carles-puigdemont-extradition-to-spain

German prosecutors ask court to extradite Carles ...
www.theguardian.com
Carles Puigdemont with Catalan politicians from his Together for Catalonia party in Brussels in January. Photograph: Virginia Mayo/AP German prosecutors have asked a court to permit the extradition of the former Catalan separatist leader Carles Puigdemont to Spain. Prosecutors in the northern town ...

And Textusa's reply:

https://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/the-help-and-tennis-comments-continue-ii.html?showComment=1525630074466#c6812648200207471641

Peter's reply to Textusa's comment as she went off topic on her own article to go on about the Last Photo:

One of the main reasons I used the 3/5/7 photo WITH the bits of blue sky is so that I / we can NEVER be accused to selecting only the evidence which supports any argument.
In fact that photo is taken facing out to sea and shows the expected pattern of breaks in the cloud at sea from which we can deduce cloud over land - but that is beyond the intellectual capacity of those who refuse to see.