Re: PM reopens Maddie files

by Ringo 13.05.11 15:28

Stella wrote:
Ringo wrote:

Yes all that may well be true, but it still doesn't answer the question - why would the Mccanns if guilty continue to badger the Home Secretary (three different ones!) and two PMs to assist them in finding their daughter? Where is the advantage to them if they are guilty versus getting on with their lives supposedly secure in the knowledge that they have got away with "the crime of the century"?

Your question, my answer:
Because they have the most expensive lawyers in the country and the best extradition lawyer money can buy in Europe, to ensure that they will never end up behind bars. This is all smoke and mirrors. If everyone believed their little story, they would have all gone away years ago. It is precisely because people do not buy their crap, many of which are working very hard behind the scenes to uncover new evidence to assist the Portuguese Police, that they have to continue with their little charade.

OK, next !

I'm afraid that makes little or no sense. Who is paying for these lawyers? Who is protecting them in your view?

If they had gone away years ago, not written a book, not kept appearing on TV, not written letters, started petitions etc, most people would have forgotten about them and they would have sunk into obscurity. If they were guilty they got away with it when the Attorney General announced that there was no evidence that they had committed any crime and the PJ shelved the case. The PJ have done nothing since apart from mark information received from the McCanns' investigators as "not relevant".

As for the people you refer to working very hard to uncover new evidence to assist the Portuguese police I take it you mean people like Tony Bennett? How is that evidence gathering going? I see some of it on here, like the stuff on Ed Smethurst's garage and his local boozer and his friend of a friend Greg 'The Groomer'. Gosh, how the McCanns must be trembling in their boots!

The simple and obvious answer to why the McCanns have fought tirelessly for a complete, transparent and independent review of this case is that they want to find out what happened to their daughter, and hopefully to find her alive. It is the only reason.

Now I must leave it there for now.

by Guest 13.05.11 15:33

Gracias wrote:
tcat wrote:[quote="Ringo]Yes all that may well be true, but it still doesn't answer the question - why would the Mccanns if guilty continue to badger the Home Secretary (three different ones!) and two PMs to assist them in finding their daughter?
Maybe it would appear suspicious to their family or friends or legal teams and financial backers if they didn't?

And maybe they know Maddy will never be found.

I don't know, but it's possible they're still not certain there won't one day be a trial and public opinion is still extremely important to them? Especially if they ever face a trial in Portugal? Public opinion in the UK would be vital to them if that happens. That might be why they can't just hope everyone forgets about them? Especially if they're still not sure exactly what is held in files in Portugal that were never made public (as mentioned earlier in the thread)?

by Guest 13.05.11 15:38

Ringo wrote:
Stella wrote:
Ringo wrote:

Yes all that may well be true, but it still doesn't answer the question - why would the Mccanns if guilty continue to badger the Home Secretary (three different ones!) and two PMs to assist them in finding their daughter? Where is the advantage to them if they are guilty versus getting on with their lives supposedly secure in the knowledge that they have got away with "the crime of the century"?

Your question, my answer:
Because they have the most expensive lawyers in the country and the best extradition lawyer money can buy in Europe, to ensure that they will never end up behind bars. This is all smoke and mirrors. If everyone believed their little story, they would have all gone away years ago. It is precisely because people do not buy their crap, many of which are working very hard behind the scenes to uncover new evidence to assist the Portuguese Police, that they have to continue with their little charade.

OK, next !

I'm afraid that makes little or no sense. Who is paying for these lawyers? Who is protecting them in your view?

If they had gone away years ago, not written a book, not kept appearing on TV, not written letters, started petitions etc, most people would have forgotten about them and they would have sunk into obscurity. If they were guilty they got away with it when the Attorney General announced that there was no evidence that they had committed any crime and the PJ shelved the case. The PJ have done nothing since apart from mark information received from the McCanns' investigators as "not relevant".

As for the people you refer to working very hard to uncover new evidence to assist the Portuguese police I take it you mean people like Tony Bennett? How is that evidence gathering going? I see some of it on here, like the stuff on Ed Smethurst's garage and his local boozer and his friend of a friend Greg 'The Groomer'. Gosh, how the McCanns must be trembling in their boots!

The simple and obvious answer to why the McCanns have fought tirelessly for a complete, transparent and independent review of this case is that they want to find out what happened to their daughter, and hopefully to find her alive. It is the only reason.

Now I must leave it there for now.

Talking of petitions, theirs has got over 50,000 signatures, or so I believe, Why did the Sun start one, and only got 20,000 and managed to persuade the PM. Why haven't they bothered handing theirs in. Didn't Clarence say, it would be when people stopped adding names, . How long is a piece of string, it seems they weren't in a rush with that! I

by Guest 13.05.11 16:10

Ringo wrote:

I'm afraid that makes little or no sense. Who is paying for these lawyers?
It is widely known that the McCann's fund is paying for all of their legal fees.

Who is protecting them in your view?
The McCann's are not being protected, if they were, forensics would not have found Madeleines DNA in their car. It is the people behind booking their little holiday are the ones being protected in my view.

If they had gone away years ago, not written a book, not kept appearing on TV, not written letters, started petitions etc, most people would have forgotten about them and they would have sunk into obscurity. If they were guilty they got away with it when the Attorney General announced that there was no evidence that they had committed any crime and the PJ shelved the case. The PJ have done nothing since apart from mark information received from the McCanns' investigators as "not relevant".

"Not relevant", because they are not buying their crap either. Goncalo Amaral has said many times that he has seen text messages confirming their involvement. But unfortunately, they were not allowed to use this evidence. There was "no political will to solve this case".

As for the people you refer to working very hard to uncover new evidence to assist the Portuguese police I take it you mean people like Tony Bennett? How is that evidence gathering going? I see some of it on here, like the stuff on Ed Smethurst's garage and his local boozer and his friend of a friend Greg 'The Groomer'. Gosh, how the McCanns must be trembling in their boots!

No, not that line of enquiry as such. But one that relates specifically to evidence already in the files that must have been overlooked.

The simple and obvious answer to why the McCanns have fought tirelessly for a complete, transparent and independent review of this case is that they want to find out what happened to their daughter, and hopefully to find her alive. It is the only reason.

It is not the only reason sadly and if you truly belive that you are being very naive. Look up the term "smoke and mirrors".

Now I must leave it there for now.

Yes, I guess your shift is over for today. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by tiny 13.05.11 16:24

If the met are going to do the job as it should be done and not a white wash, does any one think the tapas pals are getting a little bit nervous now.

by lj 13.05.11 16:29

Transparent, so trans parent how that word keeps popping up to cover the real murky waters.

by beejay 13.05.11 17:41

To answer my own question from earlier - why would the McCanns try to re-open the case if they are in fact guilty - the only logical reason I can think of is money.

If by their own admission the fund is running low prompting Kate to write a book then a massive front page splash in the Sun can only help sales of the book and an investigation should keep the money coming in for a while longer as the case stays in the public domain.

Still sounds risky but maybe they think that by now they are bullet proof or they have had assurances from on high that the review of the case will not result in another "embarrassing" investigation of them personally. They seem to have everything under control, even to the extent of setting the agenda for the investigation.

Or maybe they are innocent, I dunno.

by Capricorn 13.05.11 18:29

beejay wrote:To answer my own question from earlier - why would the McCanns try to re-open the case if they are in fact guilty - the only logical reason I can think of is money.

If by their own admission the fund is running low prompting Kate to write a book then a massive front page splash in the Sun can only help sales of the book and an investigation should keep the money coming in for a while longer as the case stays in the public domain.

Still sounds risky but maybe they think that by now they are bullet proof or they have had assurances from on high that the review of the case will not result in another "embarrassing" investigation of them personally. They seem to have everything under control, even to the extent of setting the agenda for the investigation.

Or maybe they are innocent, I dunno.

Stella wrote:There was "no political will to solve this case".

I think that if the parents were innocent they would not have let the case be shelved over their dead bodies. They let it be shelved so that their aguido status would be lifted so they could make money from their dead daughter. I don't think people would have thrown money at them if they were still arguido's.

As Stella says there was no political will to solve the case and this decison by the goverment to involve the Met police will be the cover up and closure the McCanns want. This whole case has been very disturbing in that right in front of our eyes we have seen criminals get away with a heinous crime and get patted on the back and become rich. Madeleine's memory has been picked apart like a vulture by her own parents, her own vulgar 'mommy dearest' in particular.

by lj 13.05.11 18:50

Vulgar, that's the word I have been trying to find for them for ages now.
Oh if English were just my first language.

But that's the right word for them.

ETA: thank you capricorn.

by Guest 13.05.11 19:18

Jenny Jones of the Metropolitan Police Authority isn't happy with the Commissioner's decision - she was just on Sky News saying they will be asking him questions when they meet next week. "I suppose you can't say no to the person who signs you pay cheque, but to say you weren't instructed to open the inquiry is ridiculous", she said (or words to that effect) She thinks it's a waste of resources and/or preferential treatment for the McCanns.

by Guest 13.05.11 19:23

tcat wrote:Jenny Jones of the Metropolitan Police Authority isn't happy with the Commissioner's decision - she was just on Sky News saying they will be asking him questions when they meet next week. "I suppose you can't say no to the person who signs you pay cheque, but to say you weren't instructed to open the inquiry is ridiculous", she said (or words to that effect) She thinks it's a waste of resources and/or preferential treatment for the McCanns.

Well, I'm all for getting this case solved, but it is rather setting a dangerous precedent. How can they now refuse any other person with a missing child, or any adult's family, come to that, the same sort of help. Mr Cameron seems to have boxed himself into a corner now, no going back.

by Guest 13.05.11 19:41

candyfloss wrote:Well, I'm all for getting this case solved, but it is rather setting a dangerous precedent. How can they now refuse any other person with a missing child, or any adult's family, come to that, the same sort of help. Mr Cameron seems to have boxed himself into a corner now, no going back.

Sophie Ridge of Sky News says a political row is brewing! It's crying out for a politician with integrity (if any still exist) to speak out and say enough is enough isn't it. Let's hope [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by moroneylm03 13.05.11 19:57

lets just hope this does the trick.. the case is investigated fully, and a once and for all conclusion agreed on - based on all the evidence together, not just the bits that Team McCann and the media want us to believe.... and hopefully Madeleine will be found alive and well.

For those (including the McCanns) that are daft enough to think she should go back to live with them....although that would possibly be great for all 3 kids... its surely not a wise decision for the courts to make... given this little piece on child abuse/neglect...

What is child abuse?

All parents upset their children sometimes. Saying `no' and managing difficult behaviour is an essential part of parenting. Tired or stressed parents can lose control and can do or say something they regret, and may even hurt the child. If this happens often enough, it can seriously harm the child. That is why abuse is defined in law. The Children Act 1989 states that abuse should be considered to have happened when someone's actions have caused a child to suffer significant harm to their health or development.

Significant harm means that someone is:

punishing a child too much

hitting or shaking a child

constantly criticising, threatening or rejecting a child

sexually interfering with or assaulting a child

not looking after a child - not giving them enough to eat, ignoring them, not playing or talking with them or not making sure that they are safe.

taken from The Royal College Of Pyschiatrists website - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

that last point seems to trigger a few pointers... palming their kids off everyday on holiday to a kids club (rather than playing with the kids themselves)... ignoring them (didnt bother to find out what Madeleine was talking about when she asked why no one had come to her and Sean crying the night before)... and not making sure they were safe.... well we all know the outcome of that....

surely if the Childrens Act 1989 states that it is law that the above 'significant harm' pointers are all under the term of abuse, then whether Madeleine is found or not, alive or dead, her parents (those at the time responsible for her welfare), should be charged with child abuse?

probably not the best topic to put this under.. but not sure where else to post it!

by Guest 13.05.11 20:00

Is any of thisw going to happen though, it seems the PJ don't know about it!! Just started a thread on it

candyfloss wrote:Just seen this on MM, who in turn saw it on MCF,

FRIDAY, 13/05/2011, YEAR 12, No. 4122

abola.pt

Maddie Case: PJ denies involvement in research UK

The Judicial Police on Friday denied the existence of a collaboration with the British police in the research work of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the British girl who was last seen in Praia da Luz, Algarve. The information is advanced by the Renaissance.

Recall that, on Thursday evening, the international media gave account of the British Government's decision to order further efforts in the investigation of the case Maddie. However, it was not advanced any information about an involvement of the Portuguese authorities in this case, only being revealed the involvement of Scotland Yard.

17:53 - 13/05/2011

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

I have hunted high and low for something about this in the Portuguese press, and they usually print everything to do with this case and nothing. Perhaps this is why. What's going on?

by ufercoffy 13.05.11 20:00

moroneylm03 wrote:probably not the best topic to put this under.. but not sure where else to post it!

The forum owner wont mind you starting a new thread as it's a new topic thumbsup

by C.Edwards 13.05.11 21:23

Hello all. I have been a long time lurker and recently registered. Have been active on Amazon discussion mainly.

Why are the McCanns badgering for a review? Simple. They're narcissists. They love the limelight (and say they don't, how modest). They love the attention, the money, the reflected importance and pseudo-fame (notoriety?) and they simply don't think they'll get caught. Sociopathic behaviour.

Why, indeed, do so many criminals return to the scene of the crime? It's a known trait...

By the way, I suspect Stella knows, but you do realise who "ringo" is, don't you? I won't say it yet unless it's not allowed on here, but happy to name him and wonder why he's trying an assumed identity... ;-)

by niknaks08 13.05.11 21:33

c edwards , totally agree with u ,couldnt of put it better myself [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by niknaks08 13.05.11 21:38

Profile of the Sociopath

This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths.

Glibness and Superficial Charm
Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
Incapacity for Love
Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet "gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.
Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.
Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

Other Related Qualities:

Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
Authoritarian
Secretive
Paranoid
Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
Conventional appearance
Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
Incapable of real human attachment to another
Unable to feel remorse or guilt
Extreme narcissism and grandiose
May state readily that their goal is to rule the world

mmmm very much so id say !!

by ufercoffy 13.05.11 21:40

What are the chances of two sociopathic doctors marrying?

About the same as two expert sniffer dogs both being wrong in exactly the same places I suppose. $i don\'t know$

by moroneylm03 13.05.11 21:42

ufercoffy wrote:
moroneylm03 wrote:probably not the best topic to put this under.. but not sure where else to post it!

The forum owner wont mind you starting a new thread as it's a new topic [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

okey cokey.. will have a go now! thanks [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 13.05.11 21:47

C.Edwards wrote:Hello all. I have been a long time lurker and recently registered. Have been active on Amazon discussion mainly.

Why are the McCanns badgering for a review? Simple. They're narcissists. They love the limelight (and say they don't, how modest). They love the attention, the money, the reflected importance and pseudo-fame (notoriety?) and they simply don't think they'll get caught. Sociopathic behaviour.

Why, indeed, do so many criminals return to the scene of the crime? It's a known trait...

By the way, I suspect Stella knows, but you do realise who "ringo" is, don't you? I won't say it yet unless it's not allowed on here, but happy to name him and wonder why he's trying an assumed identity... ;-)

Hi C Edwards and welcome welcome

No, please don't reveal identities of people on the forum, but you can always PM admin.

by C.Edwards 13.05.11 21:52

candyfloss wrote:

Hi C Edwards and welcome [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

No, please don't reveal identities of people on the forum, but you can always PM admin.

Thanks candyfloss. I've responded to a few PMs about it, but I won't name the person concerned in the thread then. I'm 90% sure I know who it is... very distinctive posting style... ;-)

by niknaks08 13.05.11 22:30

i dont think km is a sociopath , but i certainly think gm displays sociopathic behaviour reguarly [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by ufercoffy 13.05.11 22:31

niknaks08 wrote:i dont think km is a sociopath , but i certainly think gm displays sociopathic behaviour reguarly [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kate McCann is a filthy cow talking about her daughter's genitals in a book that she wants her daughter and paedophile abductor to read.

by niknaks08 13.05.11 22:41

ufercoffy wrote:
niknaks08 wrote:i dont think km is a sociopath , but i certainly think gm displays sociopathic behaviour reguarly [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kate McCann is a filthy cow talking about her daughter's genitals in a book that she wants her daughter and paedophile abductor to read.

totally agree with you , not quiet sure which planet shes on [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by RBxHN 13.05.11 22:53

ufercoffy wrote:
niknaks08 wrote:i dont think km is a sociopath , but i certainly think gm displays sociopathic behaviour reguarly [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kate McCann is a filthy cow talking about her daughter's genitals in a book that she wants her daughter and paedophile abductor to read.

Sheesh you've got a weird way of looking at things. It is absolutely no wonder you have trouble understanding anything about this case without your prejudices kickin in.

Get some fresh air chap.

by lj 13.05.11 22:54

C.Edwards wrote:Hello all. I have been a long time lurker and recently registered. Have been active on Amazon discussion mainly.

Why are the McCanns badgering for a review? Simple. They're narcissists. They love the limelight (and say they don't, how modest). They love the attention, the money, the reflected importance and pseudo-fame (notoriety?) and they simply don't think they'll get caught. Sociopathic behaviour.

Why, indeed, do so many criminals return to the scene of the crime? It's a known trait...

By the way, I suspect Stella knows, but you do realise who "ringo" is, don't you? I won't say it yet unless it's not allowed on here, but happy to name him and wonder why he's trying an assumed identity... ;-)

Hi C. Edwards, I thought Ringo was a bit uh "transparent".

by lj 13.05.11 22:56

KM is the classic narcissistic sociopath, and this book makes it all more the clear.

by ufercoffy 13.05.11 22:59

RBxHN wrote:
ufercoffy wrote:
niknaks08 wrote:i dont think km is a sociopath , but i certainly think gm displays sociopathic behaviour reguarly [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kate McCann is a filthy cow talking about her daughter's genitals in a book that she wants her daughter and paedophile abductor to read.

Sheesh you've got a weird way of looking at things. It is absolutely no wonder you have trouble understanding anything about this case without your prejudices kickin in.

Get some fresh air chap.