Blacksmith - Stating The McCann's Will Settle On Amaral's Terms ........PLUS NEW ***McCanns ask for extrajudicial settlement by Joana Morais**TRIAL NOW SUSPENDED**

candyfloss wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:Oh Ed, forgot, the Brit Police stated that there was nothing in the files which exonerated them, katey even quoted this in her bewk, perhaps carter ru ck should take note of that

Well candy floss, if you think my attacking carter ruck is out of order justdelete my account dear, carter R ucks as well you know are definitely that out of order, they re the ones that intimidtae people frpm speaking their mind which is exactly what u are doing to me now so u are no different

But if u want to support them its your problem now, which is diagusting at best, see ya

Bye all other postera onhere if u get to hear me before the culls that is lol pathetic sbooting oneself in ones own foot candy

Don't take it to heart, it is one thing speaking your mind, and having an opinion, but really it is not very nice to use bad language, particularly as there are so many guests looking in.......surely you can make your point without the need for it. It adds nothing to the post or the point you are trying to make does it?

I'm sorry you feel like that, but I cannot see how bad language enhances any post. What do other members say? Do you want posts full of bad language.

ETA Using a swear word is not attacking CR, and as for sticking up for CR, don't be silly, I am merely trying to keep this forum a pleasant place to read. Think about it.

Depends what you consider bad language, its not like an expletive is going to send you to hell is it?

Inspector Frost - don`t go getting upset just because you were asked not to use bad language. You seem to think Candy is supporting CR just because she edited a swear word. Take a chill pill or something and we`ll see you tomorrow.

I think its wise to keep the forum well mannered or else it`ll descend into the likes of the pro-forums, although I know, at times, one feels like having a rage.

Inspectorfrost wrote:Ok. So this is clear as mud. What is the rumour being referred to?

Marvin Hübner Could only be a rumour but: Are you going to settle out with Amaral? I've asked for the third time now. Is it too hard to answer with a simple yes or no? (FB comment and previous question have been removed)


Pamela Gurney Marvin it may not be our business in all due respect. I think you will see under another thread here webmaster has said it is a rumour only.***


Official Find Madeleine Campaign @ Marvin, we do not discuss legal or investigation issues on this page


*** Presumably this is the post on the other thread referred to

Official Find Madeleine Campaign Brian and Pam, it's a rumour and totally untrue. Let's not discuss that horrid man on this page. Ta. ~FM Webmaster

That's an OFFICIAL response to questions on their website? How professional.

Poor Maddie.

Woofer wrote:Inspector Frost - don`t go getting upset just because you were asked not to use bad language. You seem to think Candy is supporting CR just because she edited a swear word. Take a chill pill or something and we`ll see you tomorrow.

I think its wise to keep the forum well mannered or else it`ll descend into the likes of the pro-forums, although I know, at times, one feels like having a rage.

Inspecorfrost, take no pills as prescribed by Woofer, could be much worse for your health than using an expletive. I personally have enjoyed your input here, then all of a sudden we have members encouraging you to indulge in illegal drugs just because you have used an expletive. Personally If I were admin I would ban Woofer immediately.

ShuBob wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:Ok. So this is clear as mud. What is the rumour being referred to?

Marvin Hübner Could only be a rumour but: Are you going to settle out with Amaral? I've asked for the third time now. Is it too hard to answer with a simple yes or no? (FB comment and previous question have been removed)


Pamela Gurney Marvin it may not be our business in all due respect. I think you will see under another thread here webmaster has said it is a rumour only.***


Official Find Madeleine Campaign @ Marvin, we do not discuss legal or investigation issues on this page


*** Presumably this is the post on the other thread referred to

Official Find Madeleine Campaign Brian and Pam, it's a rumour and totally untrue. Let's not discuss that horrid man on this page. Ta. ~FM Webmaster

That's an OFFICIAL response to questions on their website? How professional.

Poor Maddie.

i know its some really pathetic person, probably karen mcalnum but ENDORSED by the ,ibellous witch in charge, yawn

Observer wrote:

Woofer wrote:Inspector Frost - don`t go getting upset just because you were asked not to use bad language. You seem to think Candy is supporting CR just because she edited a swear word. Take a chill pill or something and we`ll see you tomorrow.

I think its wise to keep the forum well mannered or else it`ll descend into the likes of the pro-forums, although I know, at times, one feels like having a rage.

Inspecorfrost, take no pills as prescribed by Woofer, could be much worse for your health than using an expletive. I personally have enjoyed your input here, then all of a sudden we have members encouraging you to indulge in illegal drugs just because you have used an expletive. Personally If I were admin I would ban Woofer immediately.

oh dont worry i just had a wobbly lol lol x

candyfloss wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:Oh Ed, forgot, the Brit Police stated that there was nothing in the files which exonerated them, katey even quoted this in her bewk, perhaps carter ru ck should take note of that

Well candy floss, if you think my attacking carter ruck is out of order justdelete my account dear, carter R ucks as well you know are definitely that out of order, they re the ones that intimidtae people frpm speaking their mind which is exactly what u are doing to me now so u are no different

But if u want to support them its your problem now, which is diagusting at best, see ya

Bye all other postera onhere if u get to hear me before the culls that is lol pathetic sbooting oneself in ones own foot candy

Don't take it to heart, it is one thing speaking your mind, and having an opinion, but really it is not very nice to use bad language, particularly as there are so many guests looking in.......surely you can make your point without the need for it. It adds nothing to the post or the point you are trying to make does it?

I'm sorry you feel like that, but I cannot see how bad language enhances any post. What do other members say? Do you want posts full of bad language.

ETA Using a swear word is not attacking CR, and as for sticking up for CR, don't be silly, I am merely trying to keep this forum a pleasant place to read. Think about it.

No worries cf see you tomorrow i will have to strengthen my attack tactics on liars without using names theres a challenge to be worked on thanks

Observer - funny you automatically assume that a chill pill is something illegal?

Inspectorfrost wrote:

Observer wrote:

Woofer wrote:Inspector Frost - don`t go getting upset just because you were asked not to use bad language. You seem to think Candy is supporting CR just because she edited a swear word. Take a chill pill or something and we`ll see you tomorrow.

I think its wise to keep the forum well mannered or else it`ll descend into the likes of the pro-forums, although I know, at times, one feels like having a rage.

Inspecorfrost, take no pills as prescribed by Woofer, could be much worse for your health than using an expletive. I personally have enjoyed your input here, then all of a sudden we have members encouraging you to indulge in illegal drugs just because you have used an expletive. Personally If I were admin I would ban Woofer immediately.

oh dont worry i just had a wobbly lol lol x

No problem mate, just shows the idiocy of some people though, preferring drugs in favour of straight talking.

Woofer wrote:Observer - funny you automatically assume that a chill pill is something illegal?

Perhaps you could have recommended chamomile tea.

Inspectorfrost wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:Ok. So this is clear as mud. What is the rumour being referred to?

Marvin Hübner Could only be a rumour but: Are you going to settle out with Amaral? I've asked for the third time now. Is it too hard to answer with a simple yes or no? (FB comment and previous question have been removed)


Pamela Gurney Marvin it may not be our business in all due respect. I think you will see under another thread here webmaster has said it is a rumour only.***


Official Find Madeleine Campaign @ Marvin, we do not discuss legal or investigation issues on this page


*** Presumably this is the post on the other thread referred to

Official Find Madeleine Campaign Brian and Pam, it's a rumour and totally untrue. Let's not discuss that horrid man on this page. Ta. ~FM Webmaster

That's an OFFICIAL response to questions on their website? How professional.

Poor Maddie.

i know its some really pathetic person, probably karen mcalnum but ENDORSED by the ,ibellous witch in charge, yawn

The webmaster may be in denial but how does calling Amaral a horrid man square with seeking an out-of-court settlement with him? Why use such language? They make it so obvious it's not about Maddie.

Shame on the lot of them.

Observer wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:

Observer wrote:

Woofer wrote:Inspector Frost - don`t go getting upset just because you were asked not to use bad language. You seem to think Candy is supporting CR just because she edited a swear word. Take a chill pill or something and we`ll see you tomorrow.

I think its wise to keep the forum well mannered or else it`ll descend into the likes of the pro-forums, although I know, at times, one feels like having a rage.

Inspecorfrost, take no pills as prescribed by Woofer, could be much worse for your health than using an expletive. I personally have enjoyed your input here, then all of a sudden we have members encouraging you to indulge in illegal drugs just because you have used an expletive. Personally If I were admin I would ban Woofer immediately.

oh dont worry i just had a wobbly lol lol x

No problem mate, just shows the idiocy of some people though, preferring drugs in favour of straight talking.

Oh whatever mate LOL, thank you but i dont care, i have had enough of many telling me to shut it, this is nothing to do with me or you, or what others say to us, the mccann lies WILL be shown up, there is every reason they will be and none that they wont, in other words they are NOT going to get away with it, at the very least they will pay for trying to strangle peoples voices, next they will pay mr amaal for ruining his life and then they will pay the public for tricking them and decieving them and stealing their money, its all good
Apologised to cf for sounding off, night all check out my piece on mr amarals theme tune he he

Quite shubob, quite
The webmaster is an idiot and a hypocrite at best lol saddo that they are

Observer wrote:

Woofer wrote:Observer - funny you automatically assume that a chill pill is something illegal?

Perhaps you could have recommended chamomile tea.

well, yes, that`s what I had in mind, or valerian maybe.

Inspectorfrost wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:* Presumably this is the post on the other thread referred to

Official Find Madeleine Campaign Brian and Pam, it's a rumour and totally untrue. Let's not discuss that horrid man on this page. Ta. ~FM Webmaster

That's an OFFICIAL response to questions on their website? How professional.

Poor Maddie.

i know its some really pathetic person, probably karen mcalnum but ENDORSED by the ,ibellous witch in charge, yawn

As a matter of interest who's Karen M? That's not a name I've come across before of any of the McCanns' devoted followers.

How very infantile to describe someone with whom they disagree as "horrid" though it's certainly an improvement on the disgusting language normally used by pros.

Jean wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

Inspectorfrost wrote:* Presumably this is the post on the other thread referred to

Official Find Madeleine Campaign Brian and Pam, it's a rumour and totally untrue. Let's not discuss that horrid man on this page. Ta. ~FM Webmaster

That's an OFFICIAL response to questions on their website? How professional.

Poor Maddie.

i know its some really pathetic person, probably karen mcalnum but ENDORSED by the ,ibellous witch in charge, yawn

As a matter of interest who's Karen M? That's not a name I've come across before of any of the McCanns' devoted followers.

How very infantile to describe someone with whom they disagree as "horrid" though it's certainly an improvement on the disgusting language normally used by pros.

I think it's quite mild. Have you seen the recent tweets by Morais where she describes the McCanns as *unts....... insert the third letter of the alphabet

Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

ed1976 wrote:I think it's quite mild. Have you seen the recent tweets by Morais where she describes the McCanns as *unts....... insert the third letter of the alphabet

Why would you describe the police co-ordinator who has simply re-affirmed what the offical police files report as "horrid"?

What is horrid about stating the police gathered evidence and repeating the police's conclusions?

candyfloss wrote:Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

I see after the post accusing Joana ed1976 has logged off. Typical hit and run spreading false information we are so used to.

candyfloss wrote:Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

I would suggest that is the sole purpose of Mr Ed’s presence here. His/her constant barrage of unsubstantiated one liners coupled with patent misdirection, misinformation or a complete failure to answer valid questions has done little but that, and served to bury any real discussion of the Blacksmith info at the begining of this 44 page thread. Of course it should be apparent that Ed isnt interested in expressing his opinion to us, he isn't interested in converting us, the guests are his target audience. Job done eh? It is for that purpose alone I will not enter into debate with him/her because quite simply, there isn’t any. And doesn’t Ed just know it.

As mods are aware I am not one to agree with banning people, not for having a different opinion. However, this Ed1976 should surely of been banned by now?!. His posts are out right lies and grossly defamatory ?.

monkey mind wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

I would suggest that is the sole purpose of Mr Ed’s presence here. His/her constant barrage of unsubstantiated one liners coupled with patent misdirection, misinformation or a complete failure to answer valid questions has done little but that, and served to bury any real discussion of the Blacksmith info at the begining of this 44 page thread. Of course it should be apparent that Ed isnt interested in expressing his opinion to us, he isn't interested in converting us, the guests are his target audience. Job done eh? It is for that purpose alone I will not enter into debate with him/her because quite simply, there isn’t any. And doesn’t Ed just know it.

I disagree. The way to handle people such as Ed is to engage and debate with them, because to do so then exposes the paucity of his argument, his lack of thinking and highlights his attempts to veer away from stark truths he doesnt want to accept, because of his own pre conceived beliefs, through his misdirection and misinformation.

monkey mind wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

I would suggest that is the sole purpose of Mr Ed’s presence here. His/her constant barrage of unsubstantiated one liners coupled with patent misdirection, misinformation or a complete failure to answer valid questions has done little but that, and served to bury any real discussion of the Blacksmith info at the begining of this 44 page thread. Of course it should be apparent that Ed isnt interested in expressing his opinion to us, he isn't interested in converting us, the guests are his target audience. Job done eh? It is for that purpose alone I will not enter into debate with him/her because quite simply, there isn’t any. And doesn’t Ed just know it.

Yes monkey mind we know why ed is here. One gets eventually banned and another one pops up.

Ed just like any other person who joins has been given the right to post his or her opinion, we cannot be accused here, as some try to accuse, that we do not allow free speech. However, ed1976 has had ample time to make their point, and as far as I can see, the posts mainly consist of just rubbishing Blacksmiths posts obfuscating, and posting misinformation. To that end I will say my patience is starting to run out finally..........

I agree that the word "horrid" is mild, dear old Ed, it's just such a childish term for an adult (supposedly) to use about a person presenting factual evidence which shows that another "account of the truth" to coin a phrase is less than honest.

I can remember calling my mother horrid when, as a child, I had been refused permission to do something.

If Joana M really did use the C word to describe the McCanns, I will be the first to criticise her.

Me wrote:

monkey mind wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Err I don't think so ed, I have just looked at her timeline, I can't see it. There is one tweet but she was being wound up by pros and she is describing them. If you have the tweet in question post it otherwise don't spread misinformation!

I would suggest that is the sole purpose of Mr Ed’s presence here. His/her constant barrage of unsubstantiated one liners coupled with patent misdirection, misinformation or a complete failure to answer valid questions has done little but that, and served to bury any real discussion of the Blacksmith info at the begining of this 44 page thread. Of course it should be apparent that Ed isnt interested in expressing his opinion to us, he isn't interested in converting us, the guests are his target audience. Job done eh? It is for that purpose alone I will not enter into debate with him/her because quite simply, there isn’t any. And doesn’t Ed just know it.

I disagree. The way to handle people such as Ed is to engage and debate with them, because to do so then exposes the paucity of his argument, his lack of thinking and highlights his attempts to veer away from stark truths he doesnt want to accept, because of his own pre conceived beliefs, through his misdirection and misinformation.

Sorry, I'm not sure what it is I said that you disagree with? Was it the reasons I gave for his presence? If so I'm happy to be corrected and I'd like to know why you think he is really here? If it was the fact that I do not wish to enter into debate with him because there isn't any, well that was a personal choice. Everyone else is free to enter into a one sided debate if they so wish.

[quote="Me"]

ed1976 wrote:Why would you describe the police co-ordinator who has simply re-affirmed what the offical police files report as "horrid"?

What is horrid about stating the police gathered evidence and repeating the police's conclusions?

Amaral was a Detective charged with finding a missing child.

This is no ordinary crime, there is something about a child abduction that will bring out the very best in all police officers. It will bring forward the greatest resolve and determination. In short, they will work until they drop. Finding the child takes priority aboveall else. That is the only motive and it is a great one.

He did what any Detective in his position would do, he followed what to him was the most plausible evidence.

To attempt to paint him as disreputable or without honour serves no purpose for even the most dishonourable of men would find honour in such circumstances, charged with finding, saving the life of a 4 year old girl whose parents allege with no more evidence than the fact that she is missing that she was abducted by paedophiles. Yet, despite no independent evidence he would nothave walked awayfrom that assertion readily. In fact it took four months.

And if the most plausible evidence points him to the child being dead which to him it clearly did, not just him but the team as some of the detectives have testified in Pt court, takes him not to a paedophile but to the parents themselves, then his resolve will be even stronger, for it is no longer about saving the child but true justice for what appears to him to be a most heinous end to a very short life. This is all just my opinion of course but as an ex Detective myself I feel I can speak with certainty on his resolve.

Why the apparent venom toward him? Why the desire to destroy him? Why the desire for him to feel fear? Is that a slice of the fear Kate felt? Truth is the governing factor over fear, truth and where you stand in relation to it? Amaral will have felt stress, not fear.

Amaral will not be gagged. No way. Nor, no matter how unwell he felt would he pull out. There is something at stake here that those fighting him failed to take into account or understand, they would have been wise to do so for it is mightier than they could have reckoned. Has he not stated others will take over on his behalf. To dismiss such claims as folly would indeed be folly.

He hasn’t caved regardless of what may be spun. In this instance He will look forward to THIS day in court even if superior courts hadn’t already ruled in his favour.

Make no mistake, Amaral will have his day and not be gagged, after all wasn’t that the very purpose of the book in the first place.

Just my opinion, of course. Take it or leave it.....

Here is more confirmation from Joana blog.......

McCanns ask for extrajudicial settlement


24 January 2013 | Posted by Joana Morais




They were the ones who took him to court for defamation and asked to suspend the judgement in order to negotiate. On the eve of the trial of Gonçalo Amaral, against whom they filed a complaint, the McCanns asked to negotiate.

by Hernâni Carvalho

It's not often the one that accuses that asks to negotiate but in this case it was so. TVmais found that, on the eve of Gonçalo Amaral's trial, the McCann couple lawyers proposed a meeting in order to reach an extrajudicial settlement[out of court).

In court, Madeleine McCann's parents demanded from Gonçalo Amaral (see box*) a compensation of 1,2 million euro for alleged defamation. Now it's them who propose an extrajudicial settlement. TVmais also learned the lawyers for the defendants (sic) have accepted a meeting to take place within the following 20 days.

As all parties have agreed, the start of the trial, scheduled for 24th of this month at the 1st Civil Court of Lisbon, “has been suspended because the parties are trying to reach an agreement”, said a judiciary to Lusa News agency. All witnesses have already been notified of the suspension of the hearing.

Now follows a period of six months, after which, if there is no agreement, the hearing will be scheduled and the trial will start.

Read the full story in this week's edition of tvmais, on news-stands now!

in: TVmais, 24.01.2013

Note:* belongs to the paper version/not online (trying to get paper version)

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/01/mccanns-ask-for-extrajudicial-settlement.html

HiDeHo wrote:

He holds all the cards.

He also holds a fire in his heart that the McCanns lit, a fire they did not count on, a fire that will only be settled on his terms, not theirs.

If agreement cannot be reached, he will have his day in court.

And so will they......

candyfloss wrote:Here is more confirmation from Joana blog.......

McCanns ask for extrajudicial settlement


24 January 2013 | Posted by Joana Morais

They were the ones who took him to court for defamation and asked to suspend the judgement in order to negotiate. On the eve of the trial of Gonçalo Amaral, against whom they filed a complaint, the McCanns asked to negotiate.

by Hernâni Carvalho

It's not often the one that accuses that asks to negotiate but in this case it was so. TVmais found that, on the eve of Gonçalo Amaral's trial, the McCann couple lawyers proposed a meeting in order to reach an extrajudicial settlement[out of court).

In court, Madeleine McCann's parents demanded from Gonçalo Amaral (see box*) a compensation of 1,2 million euro for alleged defamation. Now it's them who propose an extrajudicial settlement. TVmais also learned the lawyers for the defendants (sic) have accepted a meeting to take place within the following 20 days.

As all parties have agreed, the start of the trial, scheduled for 24th of this month at the 1st Civil Court of Lisbon, “has been suspended because the parties are trying to reach an agreement”, said a judiciary to Lusa News agency. All witnesses have already been notified of the suspension of the hearing.

Now follows a period of six months, after which, if there is no agreement, the hearing will be scheduled and the trial will start.

Read the full story in this week's edition of tvmais, on news-stands now!

in: TVmais, 24.01.2013

Note:* belongs to the paper version/not online (trying to get paper version)

[url=http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/01/mccanns-ask-for-extrajudicial-settlement.html

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/01/mccanns-ask-for-extrajudicial-settlement.html[/quote[/url]]

It's not often the one that accuses that asks to negotiate but in this case it was so. TVmais found that, on the eve of Gonçalo Amaral's trial, the McCann couple lawyers proposed a meeting in order to reach an extrajudicial settlement[out of court).

Let's see ed1976 try to spin his way out of this one!!