What is done cannot be undone.

From an article in the daily mail.


Amy Elizabeth Fleming (pictured), 60, has been charged with the murder of her young son, Francillon Pierre
A 60-year-old Florida woman has been
Amy Elizabeth Fleming was arrested last month for allegedly killing her son, Francillon Pierre, when he was just three years old in 1986.  
According to The Charley Project, Francillon was last seen at the Broad Acres Swap Meet in North Las Vegas, Nevada, on August 2, 1986. 
At the time of his disappearance, the child had been living with his mother, who was known as Amy Luster, and his stepfather, Lee Luster. 
His biological father's name is Jean Pierre, Amy's former boyfriend.
The year before Francillon disappeared, Amy and Lee Luster were charged with child abuse.
They had allegedly beat Francillon so bad that they caused 30 to 40 welts to form on his body. 
The Lusters were awaiting trial when the little boy went missing, according to the Project. 
At the time, the couple told police they believed the boy's father, Jean Pierre, took the child back to Haiti. 

+3



+3


Francillon (left) was last seen at the Broad Acres Swap Meet in North Las Vegas, Nevada, on August 2, 1986. Francillon's age-progression photo is seen above 
They had also claimed that they had taken Francillon to the swap meet and lost him there. 
Authorities later searched Pierre's home in Haiti, but found no trace of Francillon. 
Pierre was then asked to fly to the US to take a lie detector test, which he passed. He was eventually ruled out as a suspect.

They had also claimed that they had taken Francillon to the swap meet and lost him there. 
Authorities later searched Pierre's home in Haiti, but found no trace of Francillon. 
Pierre was then asked to fly to the US to take a lie detector test, which he passed. He was eventually ruled out as a suspect.

Almost a year after Francillon's disappearance, Amy and Lee Luster moved to Florida, telling police that they still believed Pierre had taken the child and wanted to be closer to Haiti. 
The Nevada Department of Probation and Parole gave them a 30-day travel pass to find work and a home in Orlando or else return to Nevada. 
Amy and Lee were considered suspects in the case but they were never charged, until December 2018. 

+3


It's unclear how investigators were able to break the case. But the North Las Vegas police will be releasing more details about what led to Amy Fleming's arrest during a news conference on Monday. Police said detectives have spent more than a year working Francillon's case 

A warrant for Amy's arrest was issued on December 13. A month later, she was booked into the Palm Beach County Jail for allegedly murdering her son, according to The Columbus Dispatch. 
Her second court appearance is scheduled for Monday.     
It's unclear how investigators were able to break the case.  
But the North Las Vegas police will be releasing more details about what led to Amy Fleming's arrest during an afternoon news conference on Monday. 
Police said detectives have spent more than a year working the case.  
Read more:

• Francillon Pierre – The Charley Project
  
• www.dispatch.com...
  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6688263/Mother-60-charged-murdering-three-year-old-son-three-decades-ago.html

There we have it, or rather, should i say, you kate and gerry have it.
30 years down the line and she has been charged with murder.

30 years kate and gerry.

Read it again, THIRTY YEARS.

You have struggled from the get go to come up with a plausible explanation as to what happened to Maddie.
An abduction by a paedophile abductor to explain why she was missing.
A jolly good wheeze you thought, plausible and you thought it would be believed.
You came up with the plan that you were leaving the children home alone at night and doing half hourly checks on them, everyone was taking turns, well those that were allegedly present each night, checking their own children and occasionally your
whilst you being the selfish folk that you are, claimed you were checking your children every half hour and NOT CHECKING ANYONE ELSE'S CHILDREN.
I suppose this epitomizes your narcissistic selfishness.
You had to admit to child neglect, leaving the children home alone in order to allow time and opportunity for an abduction to take place.
As i repeatedly say:

NO NEGLECT = NO ABDUCTION
NO ABDUCTION = DAMNING QUESTIONS AS TO WHAT YOU, KATE AND GERRY, DID TO MADDIE.

We all know that the children were never left home alone as claimed.

Claiming you didn't want to use the evening creche or babysitters because you didn't want strangers looking after your children whilst also leaving said children in the care of strangers each day in the creche.
The very same creche whose staff would have been providing the evening creche and also allowing the creche staff to be hired out for €10 a night.
Anyone who works in medicines doctors, nurses being the most obvious are all too aware of what can happen in a fraction of a second to a child even with the parent next to them.
This knowledge alone makes medical parents hypervilgilant when it comes to their children.
They simply would not have left their children home alone, ever.
More so, given we know they had sick children and sick adults due to some tummy bug (allegedly)
We know that each night one of the group was missing from the table for dinner either because they were sick or because a child was sick.
We know this missing adult was in fact babysitting all the children in one apartment.
How do we know?
Because you, kate and gerry told us when you spoke using the process of free editing and leaked this when you spoke of what happened the night before, the Wednesday when Maddie allegedly  asked why they hadn't come when she/ the twins/combination of depending on which interview were crying.
Your response when speaking about the alleged crying incident was and i quote from an interview broadcast: 01 May 2008:

 Gerry McCann: Anybody with young children will understand that children cry; they wake up at night.
During that week there was one night, errr… and we can't give too much detail because it's part of the investigation file but there was one night where Madeleine came through and one of the other, errr… twins were crying, so, you know, and when she did mention to it… it to us and we asked her about it and she just dropped… she was completely fine and we thought,
'Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired.
Of course, with hindsight, in the… in the context of what had happened; of Madeleine being abducted, it's put in a very different light and it's put in a very different light to us and, of course, we emphasized that to the police."

Firstly note  he speaks about getting them ready for bed and he says this:

"Was it when they were bathing, getting them, you know, first putting them down in that period when they're really tired."
This is a man who claims he and kate left the children home alone in apartment 5a and then he and kate left the apartment  went to dinner in the tapas bar and did half hourly checks.
The problem here is, if he and kate were doing the bedtime routine, the bathing and putting to bed, then the question would never have arisen because kate and gerry were there, they would have heard the crying and presumably, although with their parenting, possibly not, responded to soothe the children.
Had he or kate been putting them to bed the question would never have arisen as they would have been present when the children were crying, for whatever reason.
So, as we hear from gerry, they did not hear any crying nor did they respond, the questions then become:

A) Who was bathing the children if it wasn't kate and gerry?
B) Why was someone else bathing the children when kate and gerry were allegedly present in the apartment, perhaps getting ready for dinner, remember kate's 2 baths/showers?
c) Since kate and gerry did not hear the crying, nor respond to said crying, where were the children being bathed?
D) If the children were being bathed and put to bed and kate and gerry weren't present, in whose apartment were the children?
E) If the children were, as claimed, in apartment 5a being bathed and put to bed, where were kate and gerry?
F) We know all the children were being babysat by the missing (allegedly sick) adult, it is highly unlikely they would all be in their own apartments so, in whose apartment were all the children sleeping until their parents collected them late at night?
I would think they would all be in the biggest apartment which would be paynes, it would also fit in with the statements from the Drs Gaspar regarding payne and gerry having an inappropriate discussion , with gestures, about what Maddie would do.

Next we have confirmation that all the children were sleeping in the same apartment/room.
Gerry leaks this:

Madeleine came through and one of the other, errr… twins were crying"

Did you spot it?
Gerry was about to say one of the other children, thus telling us all the children were in one apartment, before self censoring, stopping himself and saying other twins.
Too late gerry, you said one word too many.
There were no OTHER TWINS gerry only yours, Sean and Amelie.
Oops

This means the tapas 7 are complicit in whatever happened, although diane webster may have been kept in the dark since she was the mother to fiona payne and granny to her kids and perhaps not as trusted or reliable as the rest of the group, not a part of whatever shenanigans the group were up to.
The tapas are complicit since they covered up the fact the children were babysat by the missing adult.

We know Maddie died before the Thursday night when she was allegedly abducted because the dining routines changed.
Instead of all eating at the Millennium  for breakfast as it was included, the mccanns had breakfast Sunday morning and then ate breakfast in their own apartment.
We also know that instead of everyone eating lunch in one of the apartments, the mccanns ate lunch in their own apartment only meeting up with everyone in the tapas bar for dinner.

WHY?

Anyone would think they were trying to hide something, to avoid awkward questions, probably from diane webster as to where was Maddie?
We also have the almost forensically cleaned apartment that did not look as if children were present.
Children are sticky, drooly, messy creatures and their sticky fingerprints, saliva, urine possibly even faeces and the place should have been covered with the DNA especially bedding yet little to none was found.
Police look for what is there that shouldn't be and also WHAT SHOULD BE THAT ISN'T.
In effect, Maddie had been erased from the apartment, her bed which she had allegedly slept in was made up whereas the bed under the window where she wasn't sleeping looked slept in
What was also missing then and has been for the last almost 12 years is forensic evidence of an abductor, finger prints, shoe or foot prints, hairs, fibers, sweat, perhaps even semen or other bodily fluids.
Instead, the forensic evidence which has been found which should not have been present is blood and bodily fluids in the apartment and hire car and the scent of cadaverine as indicated by the dogs Eddie and Keela.
Evidence which was explained away eventually as Maddie may have had a nose bleed, rotting meat and fish, dirty diapers and sweaty sandals, with gerry even citing the case of eugene zapata when his wife went missing and cadaver dogs were brought in and indicated to some locations. the judge declaring them as unreliable as no body was found.
This backfired on him spectacularly when zapata later confessed to murder and the dogs had been right.
We also had explanations as to why body fluids and cadaverine had been found as kate dealing with multiple corpses before the trip (from her family) and to it being planted in order to frame her.

To allow for time to dispose of Maddie after her death and to allow time for the clean up and also figuring out a story, Maddie could not have died Thursday evening.
There simply would not have been time for the cleanup and working out timelines and also for everyone to be at the table that night unlike the rest of the week.

They did the checks as it would have meant leaving the children home alone.

We also know Maddie did not die from an accidental death as gerry himself told us:

"And if she died when we were in the apartment, or fell, why would we cover that up?"


https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/madeleine-mccanns-parents-deny-killing-or-being-negligent-of-their-daughter-on-sunday-night-20170423-gvqv5x.html

Oops

Since they did cover it up, by their language and behavior it was not an accident.

Kate went even further, confirming Maddie's death was non accidental when she said:

 09/09/2007
Daily Mirror Interview.
Quote:

 "They want me to lie - I'm being framed.
"Police don't want a MURDER in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming US"

Why say murder when the story is abduction and that Maddie is still alive?
Oops.

Then we have the Portuguese court pronouncing the mccanns had not been cleared of involvement when the mccanns sued Dr Amaral over his book, winning the initial court case and then losing every appeal.

Unsolved cases do not get closed, they become cold cases and over the years they will be reopened and looked at by fresh eyes and where applicable using new advances in forensic technology.
What could not be seen or examined 10 years ago is now  seen clearly.
A murder does not advance, forensic science does.
Then you, kate and gerry, also have the problem of wondering if you can trust your friends, your accomplices to stay quiet.
Are the pangs of guilt eating away at them they way they are at you kate?
Is whatever hold gerry has over the tapas 7 still strong enough to keep them silent?
What about the twins?
Can you trust them to stay silent regarding what they have seen, heard or remembered since that vacation?
A secret is not a secret if more than one person knows?

Could tomorrow be the day the walls come crashing down?
Could you last 30 years concealing the death of Maddie?
Do you think the tapas 7, your  now very distant friends if friends at all could last 30 years?
What happens if divorce rears its head and a custody battle ensues,  guilty knowledge can be a mighty fearsome weapon to use?

30 years kate and gerry and justice for that little boy.
Thirty years kate and gerry.
Imagine spending your dotage in jail.
Your physical body in a physical jail in Portugal then there is the problem of the fund and for that you will be prosecuted in the UK
Should you be released from Portuguese prisons to then end up in a UK prison.
Then there is the mental prison you are already in.
Almost 12 years of hell wondering if today is the day the police come knocking at your door, wondering the your probably now ex chums have had a word with the Police or even if the twins, who will have read everything about the case and their missing sister
and your non searching and non cooperation decide to have a word with the Police to say what they remember, saw or heard over the last 12 years.
Until you confess the truth, you are in an inescapable prison of your own making.

TICK TOCK

Hi Hobs,thanks for your post,"What is Done,cannot be undone" and the points made as reference as to what might have happened in Portugal 28 April-3 May 2007 Fantastic Work, congratulations.

There is No doubt that a Cover Up has been orchestrated and with the high level of Government to Boot Gordon Brown,Clarence Mitchell etc?

Then you have the Metropolitan Police Service,Gold Group,Leicestershire Police"Failing to Assist Portugal PJ" Why!
The Metropolitan Police force/Interpol both claimed they could find"No Paedophile Gang" associated to Madeleine McCann's disappearance 2007/08?
Then you have the mysteries of reams of "Evidence" confiscated by nefarious Police Officers,MI5 in regard to MP's,Tim Fortescue video from 1970's,"Brownie Points"!
Elm Guest House,Dolphin Sqaure,Haute De La Gurrane,Jersey,Saville,but No connections according to Metropolitan Police Service,South Yorkshire Police,1400 Girls"Groomin gangs" they didn't know about!
Dunblane,Mr Thomas Hamilton,Royals?

Here in the UK it has now been highlighted about the level of "Child Abuse" from the 1970's onwards,PIE,Parliament,lowering age of consent to 10 yrs old,Lord Longford(Moors Murders)!
So it goes back even further to Post Second World War,when children where sent from UK Homes to Australia,New Zealand,Canada by our UK Government,Film Oranges and Limes!

Then you have the Belgium Child Abductions/Murders Michael Dutroui and corruption of European Union officials trying to have his Trail held behind "Very Closed Doors"!

The Church and its cohorts are heavily involved in the "Child Abuse" and it seems to be a World Wide problem associated to very "Powerful Elite Persons",Masonic influences,Skull & Crossbones,USA?

Keep your eye on the squirrel !

PeterMac wrote:Keep your eye on the squirrel !

Explain please ! 

SQUIRREL
“If you think that you can think about a thing, inextricably attached to something else, without thinking of the thing it is attached to, then you have a legal mind.” — Thomas Reed Powell
------------------
A lawyer advertised for a clerk. The next morning his office was crowded with applicants — all bright, many suitable. He bade them wait until all should arrive, and then ranged them in a row and said he would tell them a story, note their comments, and judge from that whom he would choose.
‘A certain farmer,’ began the lawyer, ‘was troubled with a red squirrel that got in through a hole in his barn and stole his seed corn. He resolved to kill the squirrel at the first opportunity. Seeing him go in at the hole one noon, he took his shot gun and fired away; the first shot set the barn on fire.’
‘Did the barn burn?’ said one of the boys.
The lawyer without answer continued: ‘And seeing the barn on fire, the farmer seized a pail of water and ran to put it out.’
‘Did he put it out?’ said another.
‘As he passed inside, the door shut to and the barn was soon in flames. When the hired girl rushed out with more water.’
‘Did they all burn up?’ said another boy.
The lawyer went on without answer:–
‘Then the old lady came out, and all was noise and confusion, and everybody was trying to put out the fire.’
‘Did any one burn up?’ said another.
The lawyer said: ‘There that will do; you have all shown great interest in the story.’ 


But observing one little bright-eyed fellow in deep silence, he said: ‘Now, my little man, what have you to say?’
The little fellow blushed, grew uneasy, and stammered out:–
‘I want to know what became of that squirrel; that’s what I want to know.’
‘You’ll do,’ said the lawyer; ‘you are my man; you have not been switched off by a confusion and a barn burning, and the hired girls and water pails. 
You have kept your eye on the squirrel.’

A

PeterMac wrote:SQUIRREL
“If you think that you can think about a thing, inextricably attached to something else, without thinking of the thing it is attached to, then you have a legal mind.” — Thomas Reed Powell
------------------
A lawyer advertised for a clerk. The next morning his office was crowded with applicants — all bright, many suitable. He bade them wait until all should arrive, and then ranged them in a row and said he would tell them a story, note their comments, and judge from that whom he would choose.
‘A certain farmer,’ began the lawyer, ‘was troubled with a red squirrel that got in through a hole in his barn and stole his seed corn. He resolved to kill the squirrel at the first opportunity. Seeing him go in at the hole one noon, he took his shot gun and fired away; the first shot set the barn on fire.’
‘Did the barn burn?’ said one of the boys.
The lawyer without answer continued: ‘And seeing the barn on fire, the farmer seized a pail of water and ran to put it out.’
‘Did he put it out?’ said another.
‘As he passed inside, the door shut to and the barn was soon in flames. When the hired girl rushed out with more water.’
‘Did they all burn up?’ said another boy.
The lawyer went on without answer:–
‘Then the old lady came out, and all was noise and confusion, and everybody was trying to put out the fire.’
‘Did any one burn up?’ said another.
The lawyer said: ‘There that will do; you have all shown great interest in the story.’ 


But observing one little bright-eyed fellow in deep silence, he said: ‘Now, my little man, what have you to say?’
The little fellow blushed, grew uneasy, and stammered out:–
‘I want to know what became of that squirrel; that’s what I want to know.’
‘You’ll do,’ said the lawyer; ‘you are my man; you have not been switched off by a confusion and a barn burning, and the hired girls and water pails. 
You have kept your eye on the squirrel.’

Excellent, very apt.

In memory of Madeleine Beth McCann.  RIP little one.

So, I'm gathering there is still a very sneaky rodent with a fair amount of buckshot about his backside, running about, or maybe driving at some point too and possibly leaving a little fur and body sauce behind, while all hell's breaking loose around him.

Now that Tufty's a real devious little sod. A proper smoke screen that one. It works to some extent.

Thanks Peter