Re: Bernt Stellander interview

by AnneCGuedes 24.08.24 18:52

Jill Havern wrote:Have you read Bernt's book?

Yes.

by **Jill Havern** 24.08.24 18:56

Did you listen to his podcast with James English?

by AnneCGuedes 24.08.24 19:57

by **Jill Havern** 24.08.24 20:00

Could you understand him?

by AnneCGuedes 24.08.24 21:12

James English ? It took me a while to get used to his Glasgowian accent.

by **Jill Havern** 24.08.24 21:17

No.

Were you able to understand Bernt? (It's him we're talking about on this thread)

If you were able to understand him for 3 hours, and you've read his book, what is your problem with him?

Would you like to write a review of his book for us on this thread?
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17580-brick-reviews

by AnneCGuedes 24.08.24 23:28

If I were writing a review, I probably wouldn't say everything I think, because freedom of expression doesn't exist on forums in general and I've been banned from at least 3 just for telling what I thought ! But I wouldn't say anything I don't think.

BS certainly says what he thinks, I've sometimes wondered if he meant what he said and thought through the implications of what he said. Not because he resorts to sophistry, he wants to say at the same time everything he has gathered here and there, very often what he says is jumbled up and hampers what he wants to say.

The difficulty, sometimes, is not to grasp what he's saying, but to work out what he's aiming at. I never wondered what he was referring to when I listened to him in the interview because I know this case very well, but anyone who only knows what the media have said about it might be lost and I'm not sure that the interview encourages people to read his book.

Here's an example:

"I remembered Kate's turning point to dream, the alleged dream, that she called to Paiva the liaison (officer) when Gerry was in Washington DC about Maddie being hidden on a hillside overlooking a beach in PdL and I thought "eh, what is this ? Are you trying to have the police find her" and then Gerry's response when he came back uh he was in court in Lisbon then he was alone on camera (I was there, K was not in the camera's field of vision but very close by, she could hear but said nothing) and he said "it's not true that Kate had a dream that M was buried somewhere" (G was right, RP didn't talk about a child being buried, but lying on a cliff), he used that word, and then I thought "wow he's uh kind of confirming that Hillside might be very interesting" and uh I went up that Hillside and I had this revelation about their jogging.. I thought this is brilliant if they hid her there in the future they could always go back and nobody would suspect anything why they were there."

KMC (in ‘Madeleine’) reports that she called Ricardo Paiva for help translating letters on 23 July 2007. BS, who does not mention the reason (according to K) for the call, omits to say that K feels Ricardo is ‘distant’ and wonders whether he is not influenced by the conclusions of Danie Krügel (who came at the insistence of MC, supposed to be rational as doctors). BS doesn't mention RP's slightly different version of the same scene in the Lisbon Court of justice : K tells him, crying, about a dream in which ‘Madeleine is on a cliff, we must go and find her’. RP's version is all the more reliable given that K, in her diary, reports that, that very morning, as she was running up the cliff, she had been surrounded by a dozen dogs and had prayed ‘Oh God, don't let Madeleine be buried here’.

It didn't escape RP's notice that, if K had only wanted to share her dream, she could phone her family or friends or even her husband. He ‘heard’ that K admitted the possibility of M's death. This was in line with her request to send for Krügel, whose hair machine had just detected a static signal.

BS didn't see it that way and went on to describe GMC's reaction during the trial against GA et al, in January 2010, as if the two scenes were consecutive in time, even though they were separated by two and a half years!

You might think that these are just details, but I agree with Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's ‘God is in the details’: it's by paying attention to the small intricacies and focusing on the minutiae, that we have a chance of understanding.

by **PeterMac** 25.08.24 6:51

I have a strange and some may say illogical feeling that discussion of Bernt Stellander's BOOK
should be restricted to people who have actually READ it.

And perhaps that people who want to comment on the INTERVIEW should perhaps have listened to it.
They might also wish to take into account that he was not well, though that is his problem not theirs.

It is my personal view that Stellender improved on Mies van de Rohe's statement, which itself was an attempt to improve on the previous "The Devil is in the detail" – just as it is easy to improve on his architecture by inserting at least one aesthetic curve into his bleak modernist right-angled designs – when he said

"the Truth is in the details ". p.918 Kindle edition. p.602 BRICK Edition

POSTSCRIPTUM:
I have a copy of Maddie - Fabrication d'un Mythe, by Anne A. Corrêa-Guedes, but would not DREAM of commenting on it or reviewing it,
It has been written in French, for reasons which are not immediately obvious, there is no English translation available (SFAIK), and although I speak français de la rue au quotidien my limited vocabulary and lack of a reasonable command of the structure of tenses – particularly the conditional and subjunctive moods which will, I am confident, be important
in the text discussion of what might or could have happened were something else to be true, makes it dangerous even to open it.

by **Jill Havern** 25.08.24 10:48

AnneCGuedes wrote:If I were writing a review, I probably wouldn't say everything I think, because freedom of expression doesn't exist on forums in general and I've been banned from at least 3 just for telling what I thought ! But I wouldn't say anything I don't think.
You seem to wear 'I've been banned from at least 3' as a badge of honour!

BS certainly says what he thinks, I've sometimes wondered if he meant what he said and thought through the implications of what he said. Not because he resorts to sophistry, he wants to say at the same time everything he has gathered here and there, very often what he says is jumbled up and hampers what he wants to say.

The difficulty, sometimes, is not to grasp what he's saying, but to work out what he's aiming at. I never wondered what he was referring to when I listened to him in the interview because I know this case very well, but anyone who only knows what the media have said about it might be lost and I'm not sure that the interview encourages people to read his book.

So you haven't read Bernt's book then?

If you have, and would like to post a review, then please do so on the thread I gave you where it will remain on view to our many guests all around the world unedited and uncensored.

by crusader 25.08.24 10:53

If I'd been banned from at least 3 forums, I would start to look at myself instead of blaming them.

by AnneCGuedes 25.08.24 19:46

crusader wrote:If I'd been banned from at least 3 forums, I would start to look at myself instead of blaming them.

Just to feed your sanctimonious comment, the last one was "Miscarriage of Justice" where I published my reports about MC v Ga et al (there was no transcript because recording is not allowed in a court of law in PT). Some posters insinuated that I made it up and one, a certain KMC, declared I was the first on the list that Carter-Ruck will accuse of defamation, without John reacting, except "if you're not happy, leave", which I did, as several of us.

by crusader 25.08.24 20:02

So you weren't banned then, you left of your own accord.
My comment wasn't meant to be sanctimonious, I govern myself by personal responsibility and that is what I personally would do if I was banned from more than one forum.

by **Jill Havern** 25.08.24 20:06

We've got quite a lot of threads on this forum about your translations, Anne

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/search?search_keywords=guedes

by Ladyinred 25.08.24 20:14

AnneCGuedes wrote:
crusader wrote:If I'd been banned from at least 3 forums, I would start to look at myself instead of blaming them.

Just to feed your sanctimonious comment, the last one was "Miscarriage of Justice" where I published my reports about MC v Ga et al (there was no transcript because recording is not allowed in a court of law in PT). Some posters insinuated that I made it up and one, a certain KMC, declared I was the first on the list that Carter-Ruck will accuse of defamation, without John reacting, except "if you're not happy, leave", which I did, as several of us.

I think you were brave to join that board - it's very pro-abduction, and dismissive of any alternative reasons for M's disappearance.

by AnneCGuedes 25.08.24 20:27

crusader wrote:So you weren't banned then, you left of your own accord.
My comment wasn't meant to be sanctimonious, I govern myself by personal responsibility and that is what I personally would do if I was banned from more than one forum.

Come on, Crusader, what a fallacy ! "if you're not happy (as I protested against an unacceptable situation where John reacted like a coward likely for fear of the MCs), then leave the forum", "submit or get out" is what, if not banishment ? There was no room for discussion : you will respect the boss, he is always right. And when you're right against him, that's not a good enough reason to make him wrong.

However, and paradoxically, John didn't erase my allegedly "invented" reports and furthermore, when another trial occurred, he tried to get me back to his forum !

by AnneCGuedes 25.08.24 20:32

Ladyinred wrote:
AnneCGuedes wrote:
crusader wrote:If I'd been banned from at least 3 forums, I would start to look at myself instead of blaming them.

Just to feed your sanctimonious comment, the last one was "Miscarriage of Justice" where I published my reports about MC v Ga et al (there was no transcript because recording is not allowed in a court of law in PT). Some posters insinuated that I made it up and one, a certain KMC, declared I was the first on the list that Carter-Ruck will accuse of defamation, without John reacting, except "if you're not happy, leave", which I did, as several of us.

I think you were brave to join that board - it's very pro-abduction, and dismissive of any alternative reasons for M's disappearance.

I joined precisely for that reason. It's always useful to question one's own convictions.

by Bluebagthepirate 25.08.24 20:35

crusader wrote:If I'd been banned from at least 3 forums, I would start to look at myself instead of blaming them.

Nah... sometimes it's a badge of honour.

I've been banned by the BBC, suspended by YouTube only recently.

Countless others over the years.

Some forums don't like free speech.

by crusader 25.08.24 20:49

I don't see it that Anne was banned, she stood by her principal and left, good for her I would have done the same.
My badge of honour is personal responsibility and I wear it with pride, if forum owners that she's been a member of banned her, they had their reasons that's their loss.

by Angel 25.08.24 21:40

I can vouch for the unfairness in that forum . AnneCGuedes did excellent work translating the files .
I left because of the two women Mods . They picked on and or ridiculed in an unpleasant manner anyone who disagreed with them and not in a nice way .

by AnneCGuedes 25.08.24 21:54

Jill Havern wrote:We've got quite a lot of threads on this forum about your translations, Anne

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/search?search_keywords=guedes

I did translate quite a few judgments that Pamalam published. Someone else could have done that, even better because English isn't my mother tongue. But the tough work (and if I hadn't done it, nobody would know what happened in the court of law) was the trial reports. Here I explained how it worked and why it can't be 100% accurate.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/introduction.htm

Someone suggested that I write a book in which I would record everything I had seen and thought, but didn't say in the reports. I usually sat just behind the MCs who had an interpreter to their left. They had no special places, they sat on the same benches as the public and journalists. Once, at a break, I sat in the middle of the front row, exactly where they always sat, just to see how they would react. G made an annoyed gesture but went towards this bench which was long enough for them to also sit. But K pushed him imperiously to go and sit on the bench behind, which was empty. I once found myself alone in a lift with G. He said, as he was looking for the right button to press, ‘this word I know, sair (exit)’. I said ‘there's lawyer and there's lawyer’, he looked at me suspiciously and I didn't say what I was thinking ‘find yourself another lawyer’. I smiled and said I was thinking out loud about trials in general.

by Flossy 26.08.24 10:48

I would love to read Brent’s book but struggle to read on screens/kindle. I am UK based and the only copy I can find is the kindle version. Does anyone know where I could buy the printed version? Thank you

by **Jill Havern** 26.08.24 10:51

https://www.foreigndetective.com/home

by **Jill Havern** 26.08.24 12:21

Flossy wrote:I would love to read Brent’s book but struggle to read on screens/kindle. I am UK based and the only copy I can find is the kindle version. Does anyone know where I could buy the printed version? Thank you

Bernt just sent me this for you:

Three options on foreigndetective.com
Softcover in English and Portuguese

We got both Softcover and ebook.
Foreigndetective.com
Some additional info that may help.
https://www.wook.pt/livro/the-sudden-impulse-bernt-stellander/29980369
Ensure you have entered UK (reino unido) if you are in the UK obviously
When it asks for NIE (Fiscal number) Put your first name.
Email: apoioaocliente@wook.pt

If you have issues send email direct først to the one above.
If that doesn't work send to Modocromia.editora@gmail.com

by **Jill Havern** 26.08.24 12:29

by Flossy 26.08.24 16:33

Jill Havern wrote:
Flossy wrote:I would love to read Brent’s book but struggle to read on screens/kindle. I am UK based and the only copy I can find is the kindle version. Does anyone know where I could buy the printed version? Thank you
Bernt just sent me this for you:

Three options on foreigndetective.com
Softcover in English and Portuguese

We got both Softcover and ebook.
Foreigndetective.com
Some additional info that may help.
https://www.wook.pt/livro/the-sudden-impulse-bernt-stellander/29980369
Ensure you have entered UK (reino unido) if you are in the UK obviously
When it asks for NIE (Fiscal number) Put your first name.
Email: apoioaocliente@wook.pt

If you have issues send email direct først to the one above.
If that doesn't work send to Modocromia.editora@gmail.com

Thank you so much, this is useful

by Honesty 26.08.24 17:18

Please excuse my ignorance, but who is Clifford Ward?

by Amy Dean 27.08.24 3:00

by Verity 27.08.24 8:17

Lizzy Hideho Taylor

SOME QUESTIONS FOR BERNT STELLANDER FROM HIS INTERVIEW WITH JAMES ENGLISH

I was pleased to see The Sudden Impulse by Bernt Stellander was getting the info, about the McCann’s involvement, out to the public.

He spent 7 years, some of that time collating the research (whether from the Police Files or from our social media groups and videos) along with his own effort of monitoring with video research on Rocha Negra. (which we haven’t seen).

Bernt is kindly sending me the book, but until now I have only been able to make any judgements based on his interview with James English and his promotional video.

After having spent four years detailing the statements and compiling them into a hundred or more TIMETABLES AND TIMELINES I knew it would be relatively easy to spot any errors in what he claims, and that became true.

There are ALWAYS going to be errors, but I was saddened to see many of those errors were stated as FACT and often without proof, which is troubling to me to feel our member would believe and the incorrect or unproven ‘facts’ would escalate and be believed by many exponentially.

I felt I needed to correct or question a few that I have discovered so far…

1) Maddie was taken to the cemetery - NOT FACT

"they rented the car to uh move move her from the cemetery up to the final place 1:13:45 they had prepared on the hill"

"point is Gerry's too intelligent to walk down with the dead daughter right to the restaurants and bars to go to the beach 2:15:13 for what hoping the tide would take her away no she was already of course a day before in the cemetery"

OF COURSE? in the cemetery NOT FACT

2) Transported to Rocha Negra for burial – If she was only taken from the cemetery to Rocha Negra HOW WOULD THERE BE BODY FLUIDS FROM THE FROZEN BODY LEAKING ONTO THE WHEEL AFTER DEFROSTING in less than a mile in early May?

*********

3) Maddie's blood was not found under the tile.

"and also Keela the the 1:11:27 blood sniffing dog human blood sniffing dog and they found blood underneath the tile"

IT BELONGED TO PJ OFFICER LINO HENRIQUES

286/2007-CRL (17) Cement-glue [grouting] between the floor tiles identified as number 2
A DNA profile that appeared to be from at least two sources was obtained through LCN from cellular material recovered in that area. In my opinion, the major part of the profile matched that of Lino Henriques [PJ Officer]

*************

4) Martin Grime was intercepted at Faro Airport to change the alert locations? Have I understood this correctly? Where is the proof of this happening?

"2:42:45 Kate's tops were positive by Eddie but he completely ignored them so Martin Grime the dog handler he was intercepted by probably some Mi Personnel at uh Faro airport this is from Amaral and um make made him switch because her Checker pattern pants and her top was on the list of positives "

***************

5) We do not have confirmation about who created the dossier but apears to be some Pro McCanns in the community

2:38:12

"from Gerry McCann himself he he was talking about a campaign of making an 2:38:17 example and they were creating a dosier and I think his uh sister Philomena was 2:38:22 helping him with this and this dossier"

***********

6) He is talking about Maddie

I find it disrespectful to refer to:

'Game of Chess' "Cat and mouse game" "joker" "trump card" "play my cards slow' "jackpot"

"and how many times did you see Kate and Jerry uh I don't want to go into details I write in the 1:42:32 book that I have them uh why not no it's nice that they don't 1:42:38 know everything you know because this is of course a game of chess"

***********************************

DIGGING: "the point is if that was true if they knew for example if they had hitd her elsewhere okay why wouldn't they now 1:43:07 promote getting that dug up because then my book will drown right it will drown 1:43:14 and uh and my timeline would disappear with the book right which is the jackpot

1:44:11

this has only been 17 years the thing is that the context of this this cat and mouse game

1:44:23

they know who they are when they read this book and uh that's probably a joker 1:44:30 you know in this card game

13:26 my trump card uh and I'm going to play my cards slow Slowly by slowly uh making U moves

*************

7) Claims it as FACT that Maddie died May 2nd between 11pm and midnight... THE WAITERS CLAIM they were in the bar until about 1am!!Claims it as FACT that Maddie died May 2nd between 11pm and midnight... THE WAITERS CLAIM they were in the bar until about 1am!!

"you can tell the story right but this book is because of the timeline 2:41:00 she died the night before that is what I hope people are curious about to find out how did he put this together how can he be so confident about May 2nd between 11:00 p.m. and midnight"

""it's the 1:44:54 timeline you know she died um the last hour before midnight uh I mean the last 1:44:59 hour of May 2nd and um yeah oh about moving the body"

NOT FACT

WITNESS TESTIMONY OF JERONIMO RODRIGUES SALCEDAS

'On the night in which they drank more than usual, [Wednesday May 2] they left a bit later, perhaps towards 00h30-01h00. I remember this detail because I was supposed to finish work at 00H00 and I wanted to go home.'

Bernt agreed to answer some questions in ‘What happened to Madeleine McCann’ (Private group) so I looked forward to asking him a question. He claimed that Mr Amaral had stated there was sedatives found in the body fluid from the car.

“the liquid in the rental car that was found uh was said by Amaral to contain 34:32 very high dosage of uh sedatives”

There were others that wanted to ask the same question as we believe there were no forensics on the body fluid released.

He claimed it was in one of Goncalo Amaral’s Documentaries. I had added the sub titled PORTUGUESE to ENGLISH translations to his documentaries and interview videos and had never seen that mentioned so I was eager to find out WHERE he had said it.

I asked my question, and was surprised that I could not see his answers to anyone! I WAS BLOCKED! (an FB glitch?)

Admin contacted him and sent my question to him but when he FINALLY answered it was nothing to do with my question (which was odd).

A few days later Bernt entered the group to post on the threads and SUDDENLY I was magically unblocked!

I tried to make sure I was respectful in my comments in the group but was surprised to see Bernt and another supporter member being, what I would consider, rude to me.

Bernt left the group abruptly and I felt that it would be respectful to the group for me to pull away for a while in case my ‘research’ threads made him uncomfortable.

Knowing I have a HUGE amount of research on the timelines I felt it was for the best.

I did not want to create any angst and lower the morale of other members who were extraordinarily supportive of him.

However, I feel its important to highlight some issues that I discovered while watching the James English interview for just a short period of time.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/posts/2952255224930947/

by Bluebagthepirate 27.08.24 8:50

Some more nit-picking in my opinion.

Madeleines blood was found on top of the tiles from swab 3A.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Bernt did an amazing job - yes I noticed some errors as well and the cemetery is not a given - yes he does state as fact things that may have a different interpretation - but overall he covered nearly everything and there is the 2nd part of the book still unfolding.

by **Jill Havern** 27.08.24 8:56

Maybe she should have read yet another one of Bernt's FREE books first that he's sending to her all the way from Portugal to Canada.

Latest topics