Re: TAPAS 7 to be interviewed by SY Review Team - Sunday Express. Is something happening at last?

by Liz Eagles 09.02.12 7:34

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:
juliet wrote:I can't really see how this story benefits the McCanns. Surely it would just remind people that there was always something fishy about the Tapas 7, and underline the feeling that "Aha, Scotland Yard are on to them, that weird children-neglecting gang of medics".

I don't see how it would divert attention from Pat Brown as hardly anyone in the UK knows about Pat Brown or her trip to Portugal.
juliet, I totally agree. 100%.

Ditto.

The newspapers don't like making payouts, they don't like being called into enquiries or be testified against after they have settled with a complainant, they will be waiting for the first opportunity for payback IMO. Likewise, the Mc's took a huge ~~payment[strike]~~ settlement for Kates diaries, then went on to use some rather strong terms to describe their feelings afterwards, it seemed as though Pinky had brokered a deal with the journos, at least from the LI video, then hot-footed it off stage left when rumbled.

The media have been used when convenient then given a hard slap when they didn't follow orders/script. It doesn't work that way, even a fool knows that.

IF, and it's a pretty big if, anything 100% concrete emerges about certain persons involvement in the disappearance, the media will IMO conduct a, metaphorically speaking, comprehensive slaughter of all those that jerked them around. And I would tentatively speculate that the draft copy for that day has been squirrelled away already.
You betcha, Smokeandmirrors! In the same way that TV stations have at-the-ready obituaries for the Royals etc, I'd put my last penny on the fact the papers have an 'Arrest Special - How the Drama Unfolded' and another may be 'The Vilest Lie Ever'.
They will be wanting serious payback... You have to remember, I'd say all the journo's who were there at the time have very strong ideas about what happened - even sick-making Lazzeri (who wrote some pretty 'vile' stuff about TMcC herself). The stories only stopped and changed focus when the payouts began. Its been intimated more than once that the papers, in the present climate, just won't risk printing anything anti-McCann for fear of the ensuing libel payouts.
The journo's are not stupid, they know which side their bread is buttered. They need their job so print what they are told. I'll bet even Ms Lazzeri doesn't believe the McCanns as strongly as she appears to. That evidence, once seen, doesn't disappear. They are (fairly) intelligent people and most will have drawn the exact same conclusions as us (great big stinking rat).
They will be watching, waiting... Ready for the day they can exact their brutal revenge - and they will love EVERY minute of it (and the massive increase in sales!)

Rainbow-fairy on that day I will subscribe to every single paper that prints it. They shall have my money for exposing the truth.

by Cheshire Cat 09.02.12 7:46

Pat Brown tweeted this on 29 Jan: A 37 man Scotland Yard cold case team & not one in 9 months thinks to re-interview the parents & their friends? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Then on 5 February the Express printed the headline that the Tapas 7 would be reinterviewed by Scotland Yard. Not so much a distraction but planting a seed so that if anyone hears criticism that the Yard are not conducting a thorough review then they will dismiss such criticism.

Pats view is that this is fishy and that the story is pure McCann spin. I agree with her although I can see why others disagree. I actually believed that the Jim Gamble Maddie appeal was a serious attempt to get one of the Tapas crew to speak out. Obviously when Jim invited Gerry to be his star turn at a conference on abducted children I realised my error.

Why not print an exciting headline about Pat Brown's plans. i.e. "Leading American Profiler in Maddie Hunt". Could make a very eye catching and informative story with zero criticism of the McCanns!

by **tigger** 09.02.12 8:32

Yes, Cheshire Cat, but the headline is quite subtle imo and the papers could have gone for a more pro line such as:

Tapas 7 keen to help SY - Maddie can still be found say T 7 - we'll do anything we can to help say T7
At last! We've waited five years to take part in investigation, say T7. and so on.

The way that headline looks to me is that they will be summoned to HQ. Whether they like it or not.

by rainbow-fairy 09.02.12 8:54

tigger wrote:Yes, Cheshire Cat, but the headline is quite subtle imo and the papers could have gone for a more pro line such as:

Tapas 7 keen to help SY - Maddie can still be found say T 7 - we'll do anything we can to help say T7
At last! We've waited five years to take part in investigation, say T7. and so on.

The way that headline looks to me is that they will be summoned to HQ. Whether they like it or not.

tigger, I'm with you. I've noticed a definite shift. It's hard to put my finger on, but the last few articles that have been posted up here, whilst in no way openly critical of the McCanns, seem ambiguous at the least. A lot of 'read between the lines' wriggle-room that didn't used to happen. Maybe the worm is turning...

by TheHare 09.02.12 12:46

rainbow-fairy wrote:I'll bet even Ms Lazzeri doesn't believe the McCanns as strongly as she appears to...

I've exchanged a number of emails with this particular 'journalist'. I am in absolutely no doubt whatsoever that she believe the story 100%, and as such, she's prepared to do whatever it takes. Sadly, I dont think she's the only one either, there's quite an extensive list.

by juliet 09.02.12 13:20

But it is so incredible that anyone could believe the McCann story without thinking: "Does this really add up?"

From the start, there were suspicions about the truth. The fact that the "abduction" story was all over the news at a time when Madeleine could still have been found wandering. The "jemmied shutters" tale was quickly found to be untrue. "They've taken her" has never been satisfactorily explained. Another change in story after a day or so that: "Oh yes, we left the door unlocked in case of fire". The fact that Kate McCann looked shifty, not heartbroken, when she appealed for the return of Madeleine. The fact that a diplomat (the Ambassador to Portugal?) tried to suggest early on that the McCann story was not to be fully trusted. Odd that before long all the British diplomatic staff had either been transferred on taken early retirement....

I could go on and on and on, not least about the balcony film of Gerry laughing and chatting without a care in the world. Are these journalists, and grovelling men like Leveson, brain-dead or brainwashed??

by rainbow-fairy 09.02.12 14:13

TheHare wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:I'll bet even Ms Lazzeri doesn't believe the McCanns as strongly as she appears to...

I've exchanged a number of emails with this particular 'journalist'. I am in absolutely no doubt whatsoever that she believe the story 100%, and as such, she's prepared to do whatever it takes. Sadly, I dont think she's the only one either, there's quite an extensive list.

Really? So when she printed the anti-McCann stuff, that was not her belief? She was attacking a genuinely grieving couple just because she'd been told to, but now has the gall to slag us off for questioning the 'hypothesis'.

Can I ask, The Hare, was it you and your e-mails to Antonella that are reproduced here somewhere? Or do you know her personally?

The reason I ask is that if your e-mails were regarding her 'work' she wouldnt reveal personal opinion for risk of it being revealed?

If she truly believes that Maddie was abducted then it makes it all the more despicable what she wrote. The journo's don't bite the hands that feed.

I was told by a BBC journo/researcher that most of those [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] stories are printed only because the editors just will not risk printing anything critical. Investigative journalists are not stupid, they can reach sane conclusions from the evidence as we can. They just can't print it!

Not yet, anyway...

by Cheshire Cat 09.02.12 14:54

RT [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Scotland Yard Commissioner says Met Police review of Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] evidence may reach conclusion within 'few months'

Complete the whitewash just before the Amaral courtcase. McCann lawyers / witnesses / PR can then use to discredit Amaral in the "Jersey Way".

by IAmNotMerylStreep 09.02.12 15:04

Cheshire Cat wrote:
RT [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Scotland Yard Commissioner says Met Police review of Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] evidence may reach conclusion within 'few months'
Complete the whitewash just before the Amaral courtcase. McCann lawyers / witnesses / PR can then use to discredit Amaral in the "Jersey Way".

Good grief, I hope not. Let's not forget that Amaral knows a lot more than he's let on so far. I just can't see him allowing a whitewash to happen without shouting from the rooftops and trying his best to expose it.

by TheHare 09.02.12 15:10

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Can I ask, The Hare, was it you and your e-mails to Antonella that are reproduced here somewhere? Or do you know her personally?

I dont know her personally, and although I disagree with much of what she writes, I'd be extremely hesitant to publish the full contents of private emails, although I assume they contain nothing that she wouldnt openly say in public. I may have quoted the odd line from them somewhere, but I cant honestly remember.

Our exchanges by email have generally concerned discrepancies and contradiction in articles that where published by the Sun. I wasnt really aware of too many "anti McCann" stories by this journalist. There's a website somewhere that I cant recall off hand that tracks the output UK journalists, and provides a summary of the range of topics that particular journalists tend to specialise in. What is surprising is that the last time that I checked, Antonella's output was almost exclusively dedicated to the McCann's. Its possible that she joined the Sun at a time when the McCann's where regularly headline news, and these days her output is more balanced, but I did find that rather strange.

Just found the link, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It looks as if not much has changed.

by Cheshire Cat 09.02.12 15:15

IAmNotMerylStreep wrote:
Cheshire Cat wrote:
RT [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Scotland Yard Commissioner says Met Police review of Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] evidence may reach conclusion within 'few months'
Complete the whitewash just before the Amaral courtcase. McCann lawyers / witnesses / PR can then use to discredit Amaral in the "Jersey Way".

Good grief, I hope not. Let's not forget that Amaral knows a lot more than he's let on so far. I just can't see him allowing a whitewash to happen without shouting from the rooftops and trying his best to expose it.

I agree. I am firmly in the "SY will conduct a white-wash" camp although I want to be proved wrong!!

by aiyoyo 09.02.12 15:20

IAmNotMerylStreep wrote:
Cheshire Cat wrote:
RT [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Scotland Yard Commissioner says Met Police review of Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] evidence may reach conclusion within 'few months'
Complete the whitewash just before the Amaral courtcase. McCann lawyers / witnesses / PR can then use to discredit Amaral in the "Jersey Way".

Good grief, I hope not. Let's not forget that Amaral knows a lot more than he's let on so far. I just can't see him allowing a whitewash to happen without shouting from the rooftops and trying his best to expose it.

Just how the Yard is supposed to summarise their whitewash?
That the mccanns were not involved, and that Madeleine's disappearance remains a complete mystery?
Neither dead nor taken, so where is she? Vanished into thin air? After months of pricey review, is that the best they can come up with?

There is no way the Yard is going to conclude anything without been seen to have either followed leads or interviewed witnesses.
A silence, behind the scenes, paper pushing exercise that comes with a hugh price tag is not going to sit well with Public or certain Parliamentary figures, and who is going to get the brunt of disgruntled MPs? Cameron no doubt - can people see the Yard putting Cameron in that position just to get the mccanns off the hook so to speak?

No one wants to stir the honet's nest.....but it will have to be done.
The yard had to do something - be it leads or parents to justify costs of the review? But so far they hadn't done anything to justify the costs so something has to give soon. Unless they are laying groundwork with various country police force to track down leads then we would have been mislead by Desmond's title and the Mail. We shall see what pans out.

by rainbow-fairy 09.02.12 15:22

Cheshire Cat wrote:
IAmNotMerylStreep wrote:
Cheshire Cat wrote:
RT [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Scotland Yard Commissioner says Met Police review of Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] evidence may reach conclusion within 'few months'
Complete the whitewash just before the Amaral courtcase. McCann lawyers / witnesses / PR can then use to discredit Amaral in the "Jersey Way".

Good grief, I hope not. Let's not forget that Amaral knows a lot more than he's let on so far. I just can't see him allowing a whitewash to happen without shouting from the rooftops and trying his best to expose it.
I agree. I am firmly in the "SY will conduct a white-wash" camp although I want to be proved wrong!!

I can be very cynical, especially when it comes to the McCann 'cover-up'. I just feel that K+G may become expendable, if it looks like 'higher ups' cpuld be exposed.

Thats what I'm basing my positivity on[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **PeterMac** 09.02.12 15:46

aiyoyo wrote:Just how the Yard is supposed to summarise their whitewash?
That the mccanns were not involved, and that Madeleine's disappearance remains a complete mystery?
Neither dead nor taken, so where is she? Vanished into thin air? After months of pricey review, is that the best they can come up with?

They are not allowed to say that. It is libellous !

by pennylane 09.02.12 16:14

I believe the new Met Commissioner will take up right where Sir Paul Stephenson left off, and the McCann case will be a white wash. Hope I'm wrong.... but I don't believe the McCanns would have openly begged/embarrassed the Prime Minister into pushing for this Review, if they weren't absolutely certain of the end results.

I do hope Pat gleans some compelling information re Madeleine's fate during her trip. I still keep hoping that something out of left field will change things dramatically! flag

by rainbow-fairy 09.02.12 16:47

pennylane wrote:I believe the new Met Commissioner will take up right where Sir Paul Stephenson left off, and the McCann case will be a white wash. Hope I'm wrong.... but I don't believe the McCanns would have openly begged/embarrassed the Prime Minister into pushing for this Review, if they weren't absolutely certain of the end results.

I do hope Pat gleans some compelling information re Madeleine's fate during her trip. I still keep hoping that something out of left field will change things dramatically! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I'm not actually convinced the McCanns did beg the PM for a review - I honestly think it all happened too quickly... I think its more likely that a review was ordered and the 'letter to Dave' was pre-emptive spin to make it look like the McCanns run the show. And I just can't believe they do. I think in their minds they hold all the cards but I think the reality is quite different and time could be running out for them... though I could well be wrong!

by pennylane 09.02.12 20:53

rainbow-fairy wrote:
pennylane wrote:I believe the new Met Commissioner will take up right where Sir Paul Stephenson left off, and the McCann case will be a white wash. Hope I'm wrong.... but I don't believe the McCanns would have openly begged/embarrassed the Prime Minister into pushing for this Review, if they weren't absolutely certain of the end results.

I do hope Pat gleans some compelling information re Madeleine's fate during her trip. I still keep hoping that something out of left field will change things dramatically! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
I'm not actually convinced the McCanns did beg the PM for a review - I honestly think it all happened too quickly... I think its more likely that a review was ordered and the 'letter to Dave' was pre-emptive spin to make it look like the McCanns run the show. And I just can't believe they do. I think in their minds they hold all the cards but I think the reality is quite different and time could be running out for them... though I could well be wrong!

Hi rainbow fairy,

Certainly the rapid response from DC was mind-boggling. If it were pre-emptive pink spin, then DC was well out of the loop with his sycophantic 'Dear Kate and Gerry, your wish is my command' reply. I recall the McCanns previously pressured Theresa May for a review too, which had Clarence Mitchell spinning his usual 'Rome is preparing itself' piffle, which didn't impress Theresa May and I got the distinct impression she was annoyed at the time, and didn't offer the pair zilch - not even a cheesy headline for poor old Clarence to spin with. Anyway, they slunk back to Rothley in much the same way as they slunk back from the Amber Alert fiasco in Brussels, and their squirmy, ear scratching embarrassing stint on The Oprah Winfrey Show. nails

I am suspicious that the Mc's, or someone they know, has clout within the Met though. If so, Sir Paul Stephenson's untimely exit would have been a shock. Anyway let's hope the new Commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe has morals and integrity, and doesn't owe anyone any favours..... I won't hold my breath though! sad

by Miraflores 09.02.12 21:10

I expect a whitewash on the lines of - there was no evidence to implicate the McCanns, and therefore Madeleine must have been abducted. But where do the McCanns go from there?

by **Nina** 09.02.12 21:22

Miraflores wrote:I expect a whitewash on the lines of - there was no evidence to implicate the McCanns, and therefore Madeleine must have been abducted. But where do the McCanns go from there?

Where do they go [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] ye gods they will think it is all there birthdays and christmases come at once and they will be able, with the blessing of the word ABDUCTION to really pull out all the stops in getting the money machine cranked up. And they will be back in the headlines as the poor parents and they will just glow in the glory. And Kate won't look like she does in the photo at the top of the page here, she will glow and wear ribbons in her hair again.

All imo of course.

by Smokeandmirrors 09.02.12 21:23

Miraflores wrote:I expect a whitewash on the lines of - there was no evidence to implicate the McCanns, and therefore Madeleine must have been abducted. But where do the McCanns go from there?

Onto yet another merry-go-round of interviews, tv appearances, "fresh appeals" for information and ..... aaagh

by Maive 09.02.12 21:28

You are probably already aware of that but I follow someone on Facebook, and here is his (or her) last post:

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

My thanks to Joana Morais (currently hosting Pat Brown in Lisbon) for alerting me to the following Twitter link suggesting that the New Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case may be completed within a few months. It's disappointing however to see so many negative comments on there about the honesty of the review. As a former long-serving police officer in England, I have absolute faith in the integrity of the senior SY team charged with this task. The expectation amongst many anti-abductionists that they won't get the outcome they desire is no excuse for questioning the determination of these public servants to carry out as complete a review as they can...

It gave me hope this morning!

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

by sofa 09.02.12 21:34

Has anyone seen the info on mc cann file, apparently SY is now investigating the Smith Sighting, a white wash this review oh yes it is, no mention of Mr Smith mentioning that the man who was carrying the child could be Gerry himself. I have to say lately I thought, it won't be long. Unfortunatly, we have to accept that there got away with murder (far from a perfect one).

by Ollie 09.02.12 21:46

Maybe NSY won't be able to find evidence that the McCanns were involved in Madeleine's disappearance, but in order to say that she was abducted they will need to produce the evidence. I still have faith that there are many police officers with morals and integrity. It is unfortunate that the bad few tarnish the many.

by ShuBob 09.02.12 21:50

Maive wrote:You are probably already aware of that but I follow someone on Facebook, and here is his (or her) last post:

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

My thanks to Joana Morais (currently hosting Pat Brown in Lisbon) for alerting me to the following Twitter link suggesting that the New Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case may be completed within a few months. It's disappointing however to see so many negative comments on there about the honesty of the review. As a former long-serving police officer in England, I have absolute faith in the integrity of the senior SY team charged with this task. The expectation amongst many anti-abductionists that they won't get the outcome they desire is no excuse for questioning the determination of these public servants to carry out as complete a review as they can...

It gave me hope this morning!

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

I know this case isn't straightforward by any stretch of one's imagination but I must say I'm disappointed with the number of naysayers in respect of the review. I still have faith and I won't beat myself up if it goes the other way. At least, my faith is keeping me going.

by pennylane 09.02.12 22:00

ShuBob wrote:
Maive wrote:You are probably already aware of that but I follow someone on Facebook, and here is his (or her) last post:

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

My thanks to Joana Morais (currently hosting Pat Brown in Lisbon) for alerting me to the following Twitter link suggesting that the New Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case may be completed within a few months. It's disappointing however to see so many negative comments on there about the honesty of the review. As a former long-serving police officer in England, I have absolute faith in the integrity of the senior SY team charged with this task. The expectation amongst many anti-abductionists that they won't get the outcome they desire is no excuse for questioning the determination of these public servants to carry out as complete a review as they can...

It gave me hope this morning!

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

I know this case isn't straightforward by any stretch of one's imagination but I must say I'm disappointed with the number of naysayers in respect of the review. I still have faith and I won't beat myself up if it goes the other way. At least, my faith is keeping me going.

Sorry ShuBob, I can't help it,

It is down to how broad or narrow the parameters are for the review, rather than down to the individuals performing it.

It was the Home Office that procrastinated and refused to turn over the most basic information to the Portuguese Judiciary on the very suspicious Drs McCann back in 2007; and it was the Birmingham FSS that endlessly delayed the results of the DNA testing, and then did a jaw dropping U turn re the results. Last but not least, it is the Home Office yet again, that is now funding the review, and hence setting the parameters thereof. Forgive me but I find it all very depressing. sad

by Maive 09.02.12 22:05

pennylane wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
Maive wrote:You are probably already aware of that but I follow someone on Facebook, and here is his (or her) last post:

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

My thanks to Joana Morais (currently hosting Pat Brown in Lisbon) for alerting me to the following Twitter link suggesting that the New Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case may be completed within a few months. It's disappointing however to see so many negative comments on there about the honesty of the review. As a former long-serving police officer in England, I have absolute faith in the integrity of the senior SY team charged with this task. The expectation amongst many anti-abductionists that they won't get the outcome they desire is no excuse for questioning the determination of these public servants to carry out as complete a review as they can...

It gave me hope this morning!

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

I know this case isn't straightforward by any stretch of one's imagination but I must say I'm disappointed with the number of naysayers in respect of the review. I still have faith and I won't beat myself up if it goes the other way. At least, my faith is keeping me going.

Sorry ShuBob, I can't help it,

It is down to how broad or narrow the parameters are for the review, rather than down to the individuals performing it.

It was the Home Office that procrastinated and refused to turn over the most basic information to the Portuguese Judiciary on the very suspicious Drs McCann back in 2007; and it was the Birmingham FSS that endlessly delayed the results of the DNA testing, and then did a jaw dropping U turn re the results. Last but not least, it is the Home Office yet again, that is now funding the review, and hence setting the parameters thereof. Forgive me but I find it all very depressing. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Yes. And it's for all these reasons that I am 90% sure it's a white-wash, and 10% I still have hope..

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

by ShuBob 09.02.12 22:09

In any case, the Met will have to produce a report explaining how their conclusions. The report won't remain secret forever.

by Gillyspot 09.02.12 22:37

They won't disclose the results without a FOI and even then I feel they will use the get out of jail clause that the investigation will still be ongoing as Madeleine hasn't been found yet.

by ShuBob 09.02.12 22:51

In that case, the McCanns cannot be exonerated and will not be able to rely on the report to sue all and sundry.

by Gillyspot 09.02.12 23:13

ShuBob wrote:In that case, the McCanns cannot be exonerated and will not be able to rely on the report to sue all and sundry.

They don't need to be cleared to sue anyone. Remember they were suing UK media (admittedly the press chickened out of fighting them - for pr reasons presumably) whilst they were still arguidos (suspects).

TAPAS 7 to be interviewed by SY Review Team - Sunday Express. Is something happening at last?