Investigator ensures that Maddie's body in the backyard of Murat

candyfloss wrote:Aiyoyo why wouldn't you be safe? People are entitled to opinions that is the idea of a forum Unfortunately in his earlier posts SB did the post and run thing, whereby he just posted his bit, and wouldn't answer any questions at all, even when asked on numerous occasions, and a specific thread was set up for him to answer questions. He just kept starting new threads and posting his bit and disappearing. He has just done it again making posts without much explanation, shouting at people READ IT, and on his 4th or 5th posts he called people of this forum idiots. There is no need for that at all. If he was so keen to get help from this forum perhaps a different attitude might go down better. He originally posted links to the Huff post etc., and then called people idiots, then followed on by asking for help, how can he expect help when he talks to members like that.

As I said, if he had a different attitude then there would have been no problem, but 4 posts which were abusive simply will not be tolerated here.

Hi candyfloss, I do not post a lot, I tend to lurk

and learn from the many splendid posters that

avail of this forum. Every poster contributes like

an artist's brush stroke on a canvass, expressing

themselves with emotion, vigour and wisdom.

On occasion some might brush a different stroke,

but unless their intent is subversive or has the

aim to cause material harm to others, then IMO,

their rants and raves should be welcome and

cherished within the framework of this forum.

Call me an idiot, call me a fool, but it takes a

wise man/woman to act it.

Hi marxman,

I know what you mean, and yes everyone has different writiing styles and different opinions. But think, what would this forum be like, if posters started name calling ie calling members idiots etc. some members get offended and post their views and are appalled by the posts and threaten to leave, and so on and so on, until it ends up being a free for all and the whole thread gets derailed. It's very difficult, but you have to draw the line somewhere, and all we want is a nice friendly forum with good discussion.

If this was the real Stephen Birch, he must know that his findings are not being taken seriously by many people. This was his opportunity to respond in an adult fashion to the questions put to him. I made sure that I was very polite to him but he took no notice and responded only to other people in a most childish way.

He seems no different to me than the usual run-of-the-mill trolls whose sole aim is to wreak havoc and bring discredit to the forum.

For what it is worth I agree with both sides of this dispute! A real fence-sitter in fact! And while nobody wants abusive posters - on balance I feel it is a pity to have lost Mr Birch because, as someone else said, we got first hand information on his position and it might have been interesting, if nothing else, to have kept that source......

I suspect that he will be back sooner or later!

Hi all

I have read here for quite a while but only registered when I read the reports about Stephen Birch and his claims.

I really thought he might have been on to something (and do still wonder).

I am constantly surprised by the posters on here, I thought I was pretty good at reading people and was somewhat disappointed by the way Mr Birch was received the first time he was apparently here, but, I must admit, his behaviour was pretty poor on this recent batch of posts and the members here pretty much sussed him straight away

Some of what he has said in reports and interviews made me think he was on to something, but as I asked on this thread, the DNA suggestions and genuine questions asked by others were ignored. These questions would have most likely if answered, have given us an insight into his thinking and may have gotten more on his side, but with the reactions he gave, only alienated him more from the very people who should have been important to his aims.

I did recently start to wonder if it was again all part of the "plan", with the libel case timing and the reviews etc, maybe it could have been the right time for a body to be found, pointing the finger in a certain direction and clearing others, therefore eliminating the need for the continuation of the Reviews and any awkward conclusions.

I guess time may tell if there is any basis to his theories but if he is genuine, his approach is maybe part of the reason why his claims are seemingly being dismissed in official quarters, I personally just had a feeling that there may have been some truth behind his claims, how he got to the conclusions though, I really dont know and would have loved to have found out from him.

T. Bennet has compiled a long analysis article about Murat interviews with PJ. Very good analysis and detailed, worth for a read especially for those who have not yet read it.

In the article he exposes many inconsistencies, lies and changes of story many times from Murat; Which makes him even more a suspect in involvement of Madeleine disappearance.
Add to that the coincidental of his phone and Gerry's being "Off and On" in the same period of time.
Also to see how the PJ were very suspicious about Murat, even using the Ground penetrating radar, and now SB is bringing that back...
For all of those things, there must be something seriously wrong either with Murat or his driveway or both.

You can find the T.B. article at the link below, under "Articles". Its in 6 parts.
Well done for T.B. to take his time compiling the whole analysis.

Title of the article: The Mystery of Robert Murat: From Arguido to Applause

www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk

Or Those lies and inconsistencies in Murat interviews statement with the PJ, could it be because he was in someway involved in dirty business which he didn't want the PJ to know anything about it?

But to my opinion, that have a very low probability to be the case.

Looking at all this from a personal point of view - and I understand most will disagree - it strikes me that it was Stephen Birch here in both of his 'incarnations'. He was evasive and on several occasions rude, I know, but if people could perhaps take a moment to think about it all from his point of view. He came here with very controversial theories, many of which theories he left without explanations, but when pressed said that he had to be very careful what he said to avoid libel charges being brought against him. I think he said things like - work it out - it's pretty clear what I mean - but I cannot say it here - email me for answers to your questions.

I am not convinced that he is pointing at Murat. I think he thinks the McCanns buried Madeleine in Murat's garden - however audacious and impossible posters think such a theory might be. It is a free world and anyone is able to dismiss him as a complete 'nutter' with ludicrous theories. Others are equally at liberty to want to give the man a chance - if he could only control his outbursts and stop abusing people who don't agree with him. He strikes me as a man who does not find it easy to put into words what he is trying to say and a man who also has limited typing and spelling skills - all of which probably add to his frustration.

Speaking as the devil's advocate and trying to explain what I think his position now is - he has spent a huge amount of his own money pursuing his theory - he has risked being charged with trespass or more by the Murats - he has had very little or no support both from the Portuguese and British police/officials and the press. Now he has very little support from the very bunch of people he would have hoped and assumed were on his side - and with the 'posting messages on FB possibly' had a right to hope for that support.

The first time he was booted off for rudeness and nobody believing he was actually who he said he was. In his second incarnation he was received even less well. Now, speaking for myself only, if I had been Mr Birch I would have been hurt by the initial reactions (some of which were quite nasty in themselves). He is pedalling theories which, without further clarification, are meeting with hostility to his person and his theories - and he has reacted in a hurt and over-sensitive way to those criticisms - by becoming abusive himself. Personally I think his abject frustration at what has happened to him - following on from the two years of work and huge costs, culminating in his investigations whilst trespassing, have left him very vulnerable (obviously) and he has now 'retired, hurt' as it were - well, from his point of view he has - although we know he was shown the door.

I don't think he is a WUM. I don't think he is working on behalf of the McCanns. I don't think he has any agenda besides that of having the site dug up to prove him right - or wrong. In my view, given that he is certainly on the same 'side' as those of us here, it might have been better to try to welcome him as best we could.

If we get a third chance to do so he must be warned that rudeness to others is totally unacceptable - but that works both ways - and those here who also resorted to rudeness or sarcasm towards him are equally culpable. However many reasons there may be to doubt the whole thing, and consider it a charade, it is still a development which might be good to help him with - and then watch the outcome with interest - whichever way that outcome panned out.

I hope I can find a tin hat emoticon or else I am in for some abuse myself methinks! (No tin hat so don't shoot me down in flames)!

I don't think you'll need your tin hat winjoy.

The reason I was asking about the path construction is if you had a body buried in your garden, you'd hardly risk bringing in contractors to lay tarmac. SB has mentioned both tarmac and gravel, it's not libellous to answer the question.

May 3rd bothers me, as he seems to have accepted this as the date of death. How then did the dogs detect odour in the car?Had he suggested a burial after the garden and car were searched it would make more sense.

He says Murat is innocent, but then went on to hint that it was as a result of a meeting. So who buried the body and why did he lay the path?

Mr Birch has a problem in that he's made a statement without any evidence to back it up.

The one thing I agree with the Mccanns on, wouldnt give this guy the time of day personally. Has this guy actually come up with a theory on what happened to back up his body in the driveway claim?. If we starting this kind of thing seriously, we are in danger of all sorts of nutters claiming they know the location of a body! PDL will look like its got a serious mole problem!.

Winjoy - you won`t need a tin hat for my post.

I know there are many queries regarding SB`s theory but, after listening to him being interviewed on the radio and seeing his videos, I feel he is genuine (of course I could just be a gullible twit). Of course he has to be careful what he says so obviously cannot answer questions put to him. He could be on the right track but there are many inconsistencies. Just because some of his ideas seem way out, it doesn`t mean he`s not genuine.

One of his suggestions about the body being buried on the evening of May 3rd seems implausible to me as Jenny Murat was at home (with Robert supposedly) - wouldn`t she have heard the sound of spades digging away - it`s not something that can be done silently surely. Unless she`s hard of hearing and Robert turned the tele up loud. Supposedly they were sitting in the kitchen talking - is this true - and does the kitchen back onto said area?

Spaniel wrote:I don't think you'll need your tin hat winjoy.

The reason I was asking about the path construction is if you had a body buried in your garden, you'd hardly risk bringing in contractors to lay tarmac. SB has mentioned both tarmac and gravel, it's not libellous to answer the question.

Don`t see why not - surely its an excellent way to secure the burial site.

Even around property one is familiar with, digging a hole big enough and deep enough to bury a small animal for a mere 15 minutes in broad daylight will be difficult but in the dark of night with trees for company in an area unfamiliar to you, how will this be possible without the use of heavy equipment? What about the excess earth after filling the hole? Did the digger carry that with him/her? This is before one starts asking questions about the cadaver dog.

Makes no sense to me!

Woofer wrote:

Spaniel wrote:I don't think you'll need your tin hat winjoy.

The reason I was asking about the path construction is if you had a body buried in your garden, you'd hardly risk bringing in contractors to lay tarmac. SB has mentioned both tarmac and gravel, it's not libellous to answer the question.

Don`t see why not - surely its an excellent way to secure the burial site.

And what if the contractors happen upon the body? Is that really a risk worth taking?

ShuBob,
never mind heavy equipment, where would they find a spade in the dark in an area that they were not familiar with?
I did ask the question on the thread he started but there was no reply.
Its not like anyone would be in the frame of mind to wander round looking for a spade or pick after having found a dead child is it?

fabpete wrote:ShuBob,
never mind heavy equipment, where would they find a spade in the dark in an area that they were not familiar with?
I did ask the question on the thread he started but there was no reply.
Its not like anyone would be in the frame of mind to wander round looking for a spade or pick after having found a dead child is it?

Mr. Birch's theory is like the whole McCann story. The more you look at it the less it holds together. It's full of holes.

ShuBob wrote:

Woofer wrote:

Spaniel wrote:I don't think you'll need your tin hat winjoy.

The reason I was asking about the path construction is if you had a body buried in your garden, you'd hardly risk bringing in contractors to lay tarmac. SB has mentioned both tarmac and gravel, it's not libellous to answer the question.

Don`t see why not - surely its an excellent way to secure the burial site.

And what if the contractors happen upon the body? Is that really a risk worth taking?

Tarmac contractors don`t dig the ground up before they tarmac it, so they wouldn`t be aware of what was under the ground. The topsoil could have been spread elsewhere. But agree that they cadaver dog should have sniffed it out as the tarmac had not been laid at that point. However, SB says the `area` was covered with pipes and rubble at the time of the cadaver dog search and might not have been guided to search there if it looked like an area that hadn`t been disturbed for a long time.

Woofer wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

Woofer wrote:

Spaniel wrote:I don't think you'll need your tin hat winjoy.

The reason I was asking about the path construction is if you had a body buried in your garden, you'd hardly risk bringing in contractors to lay tarmac. SB has mentioned both tarmac and gravel, it's not libellous to answer the question.

Don`t see why not - surely its an excellent way to secure the burial site.

And what if the contractors happen upon the body? Is that really a risk worth taking?

Tarmac contractors don`t dig the ground up before they tarmac it, so they wouldn`t be aware of what was under the ground. The topsoil could have been spread elsewhere. But agree that they cadaver dog should have sniffed it out as the tarmac had not been laid at that point. However, SB says the `area` was covered with pipes and rubble at the time of the cadaver dog search and might not have been guided to search there if it looked like an area that hadn`t been disturbed for a long time.

They may not have to dig but gases from the body may have disturbed the soil making it necessary to dig a bit or at least, attempt to spread the soil. Bear in mind the hole was meant to have been dug in a mere 15 minutes. How deep could it have been? Did the digger return to dig a deeper hole? It's a stupid risk IMO. With regards to the cadaver dog, if you've seen footage of Eddie in action (or even search and rescue dogs), you would see that junk like pipes and rubble would not have prevented the detection of the so-called scent of death. For a police search, I think such an area with a lot of rubble would have been of much interest to them.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, Stephen Birch's theory makes no sense whatsoever to me.

The way this forum works as I understand it is that years of work by hundreds of people in terms of minute analysis of the evidence and careful questioning of the facts has built up a solid base that allows various conclusions to be drawn or further questions to be asked. Sure we don't know exactly what happened but most of us have a pretty good general idea. The problem with SB is that he is coming at the mystery from the opposite end. He starts with the 'solution' but offers no build up in terms of how his solution might be true. He doesn't really belong here unless he has something else to offer. He is just playing 'pin the tail on the donkey' in terms of guessing where she might be.

Mastic asphalt has been used for centuries as a waterproof roofing membrane. It comprises bitumen (tar) and sand. So perhaps the tarmac layer below the gravel drive comprising bitumen (tar) and gravel was used to create an impermeable barrier to any vapours from below. The guys who laid this drive must have had some suspicions - maybe there are rumours locally (like the item some months ago about local landlords being aware of the risks to the children of tourists getting injured by banging their heads on solid floors). Just a thought - filling in the bits SB hasn't filled in.

ShuBob wrote:Anyway, to cut a long story short, Stephen Birch's theory makes no sense whatsoever to me.

No, it doesn`t to me either, but I still feel his motives are sincere; mainly from listening to the guy. When hearing him talk, he doesn`t sound like some wise guy on the make and doesn`t come across as the sort of person who would be involved in the type of game playing and manipulation that is TM`s MO. He just doesn`t seem that personality type.

Woofer wrote:

ShuBob wrote:Anyway, to cut a long story short, Stephen Birch's theory makes no sense whatsoever to me.

No, it doesn`t to me either, but I still feel his motives are sincere; mainly from listening to the guy. When hearing him talk, he doesn`t sound like some wise guy on the make and doesn`t come across as the sort of person who would be involved in the type of game playing and manipulation that is TM`s MO. He just doesn`t seem that personality type.

Well, I've reactivated his account and told him if he's coming here then he's to answer questions, interact with people if he wants to be taken seriously and to be civil or he'll be on his bike again. We exchanged a few emails last night so let's just see what happens if he comes back.

Spaniel wrote:Aiyoyo, I was the one who asked whether he wanted donations or diggers and it seems I was half right on the latter. It was more a josh with candyfloss than with him, as cf had replied to his remark on digging.

He obviously wasn't offended by it, as he replied 30 minutes later, that he wanted the word spread via Facebook, which I couldn't help with either, not being a member.

You will see his abuse started on page 61. On P62, I stated that I recognised his frustration and anger but to calm down and that I wished him to continue posting here. Obviously I could see where it was heading but didn't want that to happen.

Although I was sorry to see him go, I can fully understand candyfloss, as all posters should be treated the same. You can imagine the backlash if someone else was banned and he wasn't for the same breach of rules.

Some decisions to ban, on the surface I find bizarre, but then I don't know the behind the scenes story. Such as using a banned ip, or a post by them may have been hastily removed to avoid litigation.

Admin and candyfloss give their time freely, we posters get to interact FOC on a subject we care about. Therefore I'm willing to accept whatever they decide. Their forum, not mine. Thankyou both. I don't post much at present but I read everyday.

On this occasion Aiyoyo, I feel wrongly blamed.

Look back and see for yourself. As you had no input whatsoever from when SB entered p61 until he was exited on p66 when you jumped in complaining, I don't see what your gripe is. Why didn't you defend him as I did? Too late now he's gone, no point blaming someone else.

Hey Spaniel, maybe it's moot point now that SB's given a chance to interact again.

Nevertheless I feel it's only right to respond to your above post by saying I not in same time zone and by the time I looked 6 pages had gone past and all the hulabaloo history.

I was trying to make a point I'd expressed previously ie that everything has to be taken into the right context.
That regardless of what motivates SB, the point is, he's another person just like us who's on a quest for the truth because he didnt buy mccanns' story. Except he's proactive spending time, and money (importantly of his own, which is ten thousand times better than the mccanns ever did for their own daughter), as well as lobbying the authorities to take his work seriously, Those are facts we cant ignore irrespective of our view of his method and theory.

admin wrote:

Woofer wrote:

ShuBob wrote:Anyway, to cut a long story short, Stephen Birch's theory makes no sense whatsoever to me.

No, it doesn`t to me either, but I still feel his motives are sincere; mainly from listening to the guy. When hearing him talk, he doesn`t sound like some wise guy on the make and doesn`t come across as the sort of person who would be involved in the type of game playing and manipulation that is TM`s MO. He just doesn`t seem that personality type.

Well, I've reactivated his account and told him if he's coming here then he's to answer questions, interact with people if he wants to be taken seriously and to be civil or he'll be on his bike again. We exchanged a few emails last night so let's just see what happens if he comes back.

Keep in mind that he can`t answer all questions - he has to be careful what he says, that`s if he`s the real SB.