Re: 'Faked Abduction' Book - The Sun 27.01.2010

by **Tony Bennett** 28.01.10 20:18

Autumn wrote:
aliberte2 wrote:it's a Disgrace that Stevo did Not Contact Amaral, has no Permission from Amaral, Didn't even Get it Really Translated from the Portuguese and is Hawking this As His Book. Period. It will Go Nowhere and Do nothing In the States or Any other English Speaking Country FOR these Reasons.

Im not convinced that this book actually exists, we'v heard it all before. The cover itself is bizarre and off-putting and don't think many would be tempted to pick it up off the shelf to leaf through it, let alone buy it. I'l wait until the injunction is lifted from Snr Amaral's book, which surely if there is any justice in the world it will be, and buy up enough to give as presents. I don not like the way that Stevo has gone about this and, from what Tony says, has been most unfair in his dealings with the Madeleine Foundation. I beleive, also, that Stevo has set up an online shop selling tacky items - as with the McCanns, I do not think that this is right and feel that the online Madeleine shops are distasteful.

I think the book exists, Stevo spoke of it being printed by Mexican printers - or should I say a printers in Mexico.

I agree with you about the strange cover.

Why not a 'pic' of Madeleine, if it's about her?

by Cath 29.01.10 1:15

Copyright issues perhaps.
But that doesn't seem to stop him copying someone else's work.

by vaguely1 29.01.10 1:19

Actually I think it's more the case that it has sweet FA to do with Madeleine and everything to do with the authors of these bloody books.

by aiyoyo 30.01.10 9:01

So when is this so talked about book going to hit the shelves?

by Cath 30.01.10 12:09

According to the site, Mid January.
According to Debbie (in a post a few days ago) in three weeks.

by Autumn 30.01.10 12:25

Is this a joint venture with Debbie?

by bellatrix 30.01.10 14:04

I dont believe so,I have never read about it being by the 2 of them just him.

by Autumn 30.01.10 14:38

Just wondering as lynx infers in his/her post that Debbie is better informed about the book than the rest of us.

by bellatrix 30.01.10 15:05

I think they were quite close at one time so perhaps they are still in touch.

by Cath 30.01.10 19:44

As far as I know there's only one author, Stevo.
Debbie posted that information over at MissingMadeleine.
Oh I forgot, Autumn, you're banned over there.
Don't ask me how she knows it and don't ask me if it's true, because I don't know.

by marigold 31.01.10 0:17

vaguely1 wrote:Even if you believe she did in an accident, they wouldn't be on cloud nine.

They certainly don't look to be on cloud nine in that photo.

Strange how they don't look on cloud nine now and yet looked so happy and relaxed a few days after their daughter 'disappeared'. Perhaps then they were confident that they would get away with it and now they're not so sure.

by Autumn 31.01.10 0:25

Inyx wrote:As far as I know there's only one author, Stevo.
Debbie posted that information over at MissingMadeleine.
Oh I forgot, Autumn, you're banned over there.
Don't ask me how she knows it and don't ask me if it's true, because I don't know.

Yeh and proud to be banned from that cesspit, I might add. Ambersuz only wants those she can manipulate and brainwash on her forum :ambersuz:

by Pascal 31.01.10 0:30

Marigold I did wonder why they were grinning like maniacs, days after their daughter went missing. But wasn't there something about them being advised not to blubber and show their true feelings incase the 'abductor' would get off on their grief?

by twinkle 31.01.10 0:41

Come on, any reference to how they appeared to look is just rubbish.
Which one of you has the "how to look handbook when you child disappears"
Nobody can predict what behaviour is acceptable or not when your child has gone missing.
Would you really like to be in that position to be able to give an informed opinion. no nobody would.

by marigold 31.01.10 1:33

Pascal wrote:Marigold I did wonder why they were grinning like maniacs, days after their daughter went missing. But wasn't there something about them being advised not to blubber and show their true feelings incase the 'abductor' would get off on their grief?

Yes what a load of tosh said to cover the fact they were cold and unemotional. There is now way any normal parent wouldn't have broken down. Once again they were lying.

by Pascal 31.01.10 1:35

How do you know they didn't break down?

by marigold 31.01.10 1:46

twinkle wrote:Come on, any reference to how they appeared to look is just rubbish.
Which one of you has the "how to look handbook when you child disappears"
Nobody can predict what behaviour is acceptable or not when your child has gone missing.
Would you really like to be in that position to be able to give an informed opinion. no nobody would.

You don't need a handbook to know, as a parent, how you would feel and react to such a hellish situation. I know with certainty that I would have to be knocked out cold as I just couldn't cope. I have had friends who have had stillborn children and they have been zombies for months. The Mccanns behaved and spoke in a way that was jaw dropping in its coldness. Utterly incomprehensible. How can you sleep a few days after your child has gone? A child you think is being molested by paedophiles. No normal, caring parent can ever come close to understanding the mentality of a couple who act as if they are having a fabulous time in such a situation. Unbelievable.

by marigold 31.01.10 1:54

Pascal wrote:How do you know they didn't break down?

Maybe they did when the cheques weren't coming in fast enough.

by Autumn 31.01.10 2:37

marigold wrote:
Pascal wrote:How do you know they didn't break down?

Maybe they did when the cheques weren't coming in fast enough.

Brings to mind something Gerry said when asked to describe how he felt about his daughter's disappearance - he compared the feeling to going to the cash machine and discovering his balance had gone into the red.

No-one will ever convince me that they ever cared about Madeleine.

by Pascal 31.01.10 2:44

Nope. You have certainly made your mind up.

by aliberte2 31.01.10 4:09

Autumn wrote:
marigold wrote:
Pascal wrote:How do you know they didn't break down?

Maybe they did when the cheques weren't coming in fast enough.

Brings to mind something Gerry said when asked to describe how he felt about his daughter's disappearance - he compared the feeling to going to the cash machine and discovering his balance had gone into the red.

No-one will ever convince me that they ever cared about Madeleine.

Never said that. Prove it. You can't. It was Myth. But that's what you enjoy Trafficking in, No? Along with Gleefully Envisioning Madeleine's Abuse Because Her Parents' Aren't Looking For Her BEcause They Know She's Dead or Er, Something?

:megashock:

by vaguely1 31.01.10 8:55

He made the overdraft comment which interestingly is always used out of context. You never see it attached to the preceding question.

by vaguely1 31.01.10 8:59

IW: I think that everyone has just been incredibly impressed
with you as a couple and how you’ve dealt with this. There was a period
after a week or so where you looked as if you were almost broken and
who could not understand that? And then there seemed to be a sort of a
strength come from somewhere. Is that a fair point? Is that what
happened and what brought it about?

KMcC: I think that’s definitely true, isn’t it [looks at Gerry and sighs]

GMcC: Certainly,
you know, at the end of that first week there was so much emotion that
we had spent and we actually had a period where we discussed this
openly that we felt devoid, completely devoid of emotion. The analogy
that I like to use is a bit like when we were students and you’d got to
your overdraft limit and you’d gone beyond it and there was just
nothing left in the tank. Also, I think, physically and mentally were
shattered but, you know, as we gradually got more on an even keel and
we started to get back into the black and we’d also worked tirelessly
behind the scenes to put support mechanisms in place including our
legal team. The response with the fund which was really driven by
offers rather than us thinking we needed it. And once these were in
place then it helped us to focus on what we really needed to focus on.

by vaguely1 31.01.10 9:06

The 60 reasons booklet claimed that the question asked prior to this statement was how they felt on learning that Madeleine had gone missing.

That appears to have been accepted as fact.

As you can see above from the Sky news transcript.....it wasn't.

by **Tony Bennett** 31.01.10 9:57

twinkle wrote:Come on, any reference to how they appeared to look is just rubbish.
Which one of you has the "how to look handbook when you child disappears"
Nobody can predict what behaviour is acceptable or not when your child has gone missing.
Would you really like to be in that position to be able to give an informed opinion. no nobody would.

We all have abilities to read body language and facial expressions, to a greater or lesser degree. As a general rule, women are better equipped to 'read' body language and faces than men.

No-one, not one person on this earth, beams like Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann did on being greeted by cameras and a sympathetic congregation on your first daughter's 4th birthday (which no doubt they were planning to celebrate at home in Rothley, with invitations already having been sent out*), knowing their dear daughter was still missing nine days after they'd deliberately left her alone with the two two-year-old twins for a night of adult fun and eating out, their daughter having already informed them that she and her younger brother had been crying on their own the night before. (Though, mind you, this comment of Madeleine's was 'only a passing remark', according to anaesthetist Dr Kate McCann, and according to cardiologist Dr Gerald McCann 'we nearly didn't go, you know').

Why were they positively beaming on such an occasion?

[* Just a thought...did the McCanns ever mention their plans for a 4th birthday party at home in Rothley for Madeleine?]

by vaguely1 31.01.10 10:01

Except that rarely do we ever have such an insight in to the lives of people will missing children. Thankfully. With which to compare.

by **Jill Havern** 31.01.10 10:12

Tony Bennett wrote:Why were they positively beaming on such an occasion?

I thought they said it was only the first 48 hours that were incredibly difficult. Once they'd passed that landmark they were all smiles and smirks.

thinking

by **Tony Bennett** 31.01.10 10:16

jkh wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:Why were they positively beaming on such an occasion?

I thought they said it was only the first 48 hours that were incredibly difficult. Once they'd passed that landmark they were all smiles and smirks.

Yes, and I think they said they were 'sleeping normally' after just five days.

Probably the first couple in the history of the world to be doing so after their dearly beloved first child had gone missing and was probably in the hands of a predatory paedophile

by vaguely1 31.01.10 10:19

And how would they behave if she had died in an accident and they'd disposed of her body....

by **Tony Bennett** 31.01.10 10:22

vaguely1 wrote:And how would they behave if she had died in an accident and they'd disposed of her body....

You might like to compare their behaviour with that of other people known to have covered up their crimes with a believeable 'cover story' [P.S. to Carter Ruck - not saying that this is what Drs G & K McCann have done]