Clarrie is in over-drive this week

ShuBob wrote:It looks like the Mail have decided to name-a-suspect-a-day until they go through the twenty or so suspects they claim the MET are looking at. Towards the end of their exercise, they should be left with the McCanns and their friends. Let's see.

As the days and weeks go on ShuBob the number of suspects will increase, I guarantee that, as will the sightings the closer we come to the GA trial.

Châtelaine wrote: Maman, my own little Miss Marple, has predicted that it's only a matter of time that someone will step out off line and spill the marbles to get a peace of mind ...

Bless your Maman! I hope she is right.

aiyoyo wrote:

Châtelaine wrote: Maman, my own little Miss Marple, has predicted that it's only a matter of time that someone will step out off line and spill the marbles to get a peace of mind ...

Bless your Maman! I hope she is right.

I hope Maman is right too. I feel certain it won't be one of the tapasniks however. Far too much conning of the masses and worldwide police searches, and framing of innocents, not to mention The Fund and the fat payouts... all as a direct result of their sleazy actions! No it won't be one of the usual suspects (imho)

Just something I've been thinking about in cases of kidnap and murder, how worried are the MET about public opinion?

Imo the fund was all about media monitoring and control from the beginning.

Peneda Geres wrote:

ShuBob wrote:It looks like the Mail have decided to name-a-suspect-a-day until they go through the twenty or so suspects they claim the MET are looking at. Towards the end of their exercise, they should be left with the McCanns and their friends. Let's see.

As the days and weeks go on ShuBob the number of suspects will increase, I guarantee that, as will the sightings the closer we come to the GA trial.

I would like to think that the trial will happen, but as time goes by I am starting to think this is less likely. Amaral would most certainly call on the McCanns to be in court so that they can be questioned and I think this is where the constant stalling comes from. I may be way off the mark on this, but I can hardly see a full blown libel trial taking place without the McCanns being examined by Amaral or his defence team. On many of the matters it is his word against theirs, and they would be forced under oath to explain WHY Amarals claims and theories are libellous, and this I think, is something they are never going to do.

If Amarals representation of the case is deemed NOT to be libellous, and he produces evidence in a court that validates his theories then I feel this would lead to a reopening of the case and an investigation into the McCanns involvement. I believe that they would be reconstituted as Arguido if Amaral was victorious. I don't believe the Portugese are prepared to reopen the case unless they are free to add the McCanns to the investigative procedure, and I don't believe the PJ feel that they can force the McCanns and the Tapas 7 to go back and co-operate with requisitioning and that is where the stalemate lies, IMO.

They've had their confrontation February 2010. I don't think they will ever risk it again. D.V they will have to, though.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3491-dr-christian-ludke-criminal-psychologist-talks-about-kate-and-gerry-mccann

I'd forgotten about this guy. Just saw it on FB. He speaks a lot of sense, imo.

Joana M posted some months ago that Mr. A. had been approached by Mr. & Mrs. re. out of court settlement providing the right terms could be agreed.

I believe Joana M. She has been consistent these last six years so why would she risk her reputation if this were not true.

I believe also that any offer made might have been to to give them time to see how the SY review would pan out. We are getting a lot of re-hashed headlines at the moment and as pendre gen. said, these will probably increase the nearer the libel trial comes.

Problem is, any dead paedo is of no use to them, unless the dead paedo. left a letter of admission (one that can be shown to actually exist). No DNA found in the apartment so even if DNA is available from a dead paedo, it can't be shown that they were ever in apartment 5a?

Unless Mr. A. settles the trial will go ahead. If Mr. & Mrs. settle on Mr. A's terms people will make their own assumptions as to why imo, but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

Maybe this is why the Portugese Police are not re-opening the case at the mo. Wait and see. Wait and see possibly.

Very interesting times ahead me thinks.

plebgate wrote:. . . , but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

They will NEVER go into a witness box.
Not in Portugal
Not in England.
The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Let us always remember that the only person who has ever gone into a witness box on their behalf,
giving evidence on their behalf, and UNDER OATH on their behalf, had to concede under ruthless cross examination,
along the lines of "do you have any evidence . . . ?" on their behalf that she had no evidence of abduction.
It was at this point that their QC, on unbelievable oodles per day, called a halt to the whole charade and they settled for a massive reduction in their so-called "costs".

Or at least that is my recollection !

PeterMac wrote:

plebgate wrote:. . . , but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

They will NEVER go into a witness box.
Not in Portugal
Not in England.
The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Let us always remember that the only person who has ever gone into a witness box on their behalf,
giving evidence on their behalf, and UNDER OATH on their behalf, had to concede under ruthless cross examination,
along the lines of "do you have any evidence . . . ?" on their behalf that she had no evidence of abduction.
It was at this point that their QC, on unbelievable oodles per day, called a halt to the whole charade and they settled for a massive reduction in their so-called "costs".

Or at least that is my recollection !

Yep earning oodles and under ruthless cross examination had to admit no evidence of abduction.

I agree, they will never get in the witness box, so settlement on Mr. A's terms?

PeterMac

I agree with you - the McCanns will never go into a witness box but I think my reason for holding this opinion differs from yours.

My opinion is that HM Government will not allow it.

Which makes me wonder what will happen as regards GA in Portugal. Will HM Government step in and force this case to be settled.

PeterMac wrote:The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Really? So after all these years and millions of pounds spent they are likely to get away with it*?

And no one will ask why they have got away with it?

Police will turn a blind eye to the death of a 3 year old child, the government will turn a blind eye and so will the media?

I find that shocking. Absolutely sickening.

*whatever 'it' is, of course.

IAmNotMerylStreep wrote:

PeterMac wrote:The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Really? So after all these years and millions of pounds spent they are likely to get away with it*?

And no one will ask why they have got away with it?

Police will turn a blind eye to the death of a 3 year old child, the government will turn a blind eye and so will the media?

I find that shocking. Absolutely sickening.

*whatever 'it' is, of course.

If nothing happens this year with either the review or GA's case IMO they are home and dry unless something totally unexpected blindsides them in the future.

Angelique wrote:PeterMac

I agree with you - the McCanns will never go into a witness box but I think my reason for holding this opinion differs from yours.

My opinion is that HM Government will not allow it.

Which makes me wonder what will happen as regards GA in Portugal. Will HM Government step in and force this case to be settled.

A last minute intervention like the Paul Burrell case?

I value PeterMac's opinions seeing as he's a former high ranking police officer. In one post, however, he said the net was closing in and then another he said it's unlikely they'll get in the dock.

That's confusing to me.

I took it that he meant they would never be in a WITNESS box. That is different than being a suspect in the DOCK (isn't it) ?

PeterMac wrote:

plebgate wrote:. . . , but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

They will NEVER go into a witness box.
Not in Portugal
Not in England.
The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Let us always remember that the only person who has ever gone into a witness box on their behalf,
giving evidence on their behalf, and UNDER OATH on their behalf, had to concede under ruthless cross examination,
along the lines of "do you have any evidence . . . ?" on their behalf that she had no evidence of abduction.
It was at this point that their QC, on unbelievable oodles per day, called a halt to the whole charade and they settled for a massive reduction in their so-called "costs".

Or at least that is my recollection !

I'm confused, what court case are you speaking of PeterMac?

If there`s no hope of justice, we might as well all give up then. I`ve often thought I could stomach them getting away with it if only they`d stop peddling their lies continually in the media and making out they`re innocent. They`d end up in the Ramsey, Anthony category of people that got away with it.

I think PM`s referring to Martorell (or whatever her name is) in TB`s case.

I guess that, as far as the pathetic parents are concerned, the statute of limitations will soon make it impossible to prosecute the McCanns, unless proof murder will come to light. I don't know if Portugal has a statute of limitations for murder.

So it seems likely that they indeed will join the ranks of Simpson, Antony and Ramsey.

I do think though that some justice will be done: can you imagine the twins asking "but mammy, why didn't you come when we were crying?

aquila wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

plebgate wrote:. . . , but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

They will NEVER go into a witness box.
Not in Portugal
Not in England.
The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Let us always remember that the only person who has ever gone into a witness box on their behalf,
giving evidence on their behalf, and UNDER OATH on their behalf, had to concede under ruthless cross examination,
along the lines of "do you have any evidence . . . ?" on their behalf that she had no evidence of abduction.
It was at this point that their QC, on unbelievable oodles per day, called a halt to the whole charade and they settled for a massive reduction in their so-called "costs".

Or at least that is my recollection !

I'm confused, what court case are you speaking of PeterMac?

PeterMac was referring to McCann's v Bennett.

agree why are mccanns wanting to speak to suspects! With all the PR,family fund and hype it makes you think this is not about a real person at all anymore.It seems more like a farce.Parents seem to think they are celebrity victims and mother good role model to be suitable, as an ambassador for missing people, there is no shame it seems, is there a salary taken ? Now more nonsense tabloid tales its all to much and the money spent on operation grange is outrageous if cant find any proper suspects why don't they just say ! Portugese police tried their best. Cant journalist go get proper sourced stories anymore or are they scared of being sued or something. It seems they just do a madeline made up story or non story leaks daily. do they think were all daft ?

I'm fairly new to this case and stumbled on the files and forums a few months ago via another missing person case, although of course it would be impossible not to be aware of the 'official' version! For me, it's the media manipulation that's the crux of the whole thing - whenever I waver and start to think that there could be some truth in the McCann's story, I'm led back to the scale of the cover-up. And this recent spin is just beyond ridiculous. It does seem as if the so-called 'serious' press is not really covering the story much any more, and that's hardly surprising, because if they ran these recent 'new suspect' stories, they would be a laughing stock.

As for the tabloids (and I include the Mail and the Express there, because their news values are no better), they do seem to be becoming pretty lax about reporting, as if they've handed it over to a few students on work experience, just to re-hash stories from the archives. There's no real attempt at even a pretence of accuracy, and far less monitoring of comments. Where the 'whooshing' happens, it's a bit slow, so that some genuine criticisms are staying up for a while, beyond the usual denigration of the McCann's parenting practices. So that allows doubt to be circulated, and it's definitely increasing - I think some readers might have thought they were alone with their reservations, but they're clearly not.

The recent stories also don't have the ring of a press release, except for the Hamish Campbell story - I think Clarence did capitalise on that one. But the others are quite careless: a mish-mash of facts, speculation and errors. If they did come from Clarrie, I think he needs to brush up on his skills! I think they're coming from the newspapers themselves, scrabbling around for something to say to keep the story running, but with far more important news to cover.

I don't think the McCann's will go to court, ever, but I still don't think they'll 'get away with it' either, because their lives will be spent with the knowledge that many people despise them, for a whole range of reasons: the parenting, the lies, the pretend charity, or just the whole aura of fakeness that surrounds them. And then there's the fear of the twins coming across all the negative coverage - it's interesting that the Mirror has a handy re-cap of its old cover stories, but it's easy to find anyway. And what happens when they go out into the world? There will be plenty of people all too ready to remind them that their parents were under suspicion of killing their sister.

At the moment they can stay vigilant, sue any nay-sayers, control the twins' access to the media etc, but this is never going to go away. And the press is fickle anyway - once they're 'cleared', there's no story - except that the parents will then have a battle to stop coverage of their remaining children and their lives. It's easier to protect them now, but what about when they are adults? A whole lifetime of looking over your shoulder to see who's watching. I don't envy that. And no fund left for lawyers, because inevitably, interest is going to decline, and even if they have some cash backers now, most of those will be self-interested parties, as with Hugh Grant's donation for the marathon run.

So there's no happy ending for the McCann's. A flurry of interest over the next few months, with the Amaral case and maybe a favourable conclusion to the SY review, and a few more of Lorraine's sycophantic non-interviews. Then out of the limelight, probably the worst of punishments for the self-important.

Bit of a ramble there for a first post!

NoPasaran and

celtclogs wrote:NoPasaran and

Seconded! -and
NoPasaran (on ne passeray pas? - wild guess)
As for the tabloids (and I include the Mail and the Express there, because their news values are no better), they do seem to be becoming pretty lax about reporting, as if they've handed it over to a few students on work experience, just to re-hash stories from the archives. There's no real attempt at even a pretence of accuracy, and far less monitoring of comments. Where the 'whooshing' happens, it's a bit slow, so that some genuine criticisms are staying up for a while, beyond the usual denigration of the McCann's parenting practices. So that allows doubt to be circulated, and it's definitely increasing - I think some readers might have thought they were alone with their reservations, but they're clearly not.
unquote

PeterMac wrote:

plebgate wrote:. . . , but if they have to go to court, who knows what will happen when they are alone in the witness box?

They will NEVER go into a witness box.
Not in Portugal
Not in England.
The most we could ever hope for is a dock, but that is getting increasingly unlikely.

Sadly, it appears increasing that way.
If MET random announcements are anything to go by, then even dock looks like remote possibility, unless the body is found.
Not because the Police are turning a blind eye, but because they found no substantive evidence , not enough to go all the way anyway.

In their case vs Amaral it is expected of them to attend Court in person, but NOT mandatory requirement under the PT law far as I know.
All the arguments and counter-arguments were presented on documents by both parties legal team, already filed in Court, and perused by the Judge before trial. Both sides lawyers are in possession of each other side arguments.
The writing must already be on the wall. That would explain how ID already knew the conclusion is a foregone one, hence her advice to her clients to ditch the trial and to settle out of court on Amaral terms. Predictably we learnt that no agreement was reached, that the case is now reverted back to Court to decide.

There won't be any cross examining of either plaintiff or defendant at the Witness box as people seemed to believe - that's not allowed under the PT complex judiciary systems.
Peripheral witnesses for either party would have to be pre-notified and approved by the Court.
At most elements within statements of Witnesses for Amaral, or leaks of Court documents might cause embarrassment and damage to the Mccanns; but they wont be embarrassed from Witness Box.
In view of the nasty surprise they got last time around, you can bet your bottom dollar they will prepare better to handle any more of those surprises this time around by having their pink spokes-creature on 24 hours standby duty to spin in the UK media.

IMO, this time round their damage control mechanism is already in gears ready to go even before they stepped onto the plane. It wont be an impromptu utterance from a furious Mr.

I am guessing they go for the trial (if only for easy conferment with ID) but wont appear in Court. They hide in ID's office or hotel room waiting for news. They attended the last one because they were mistakenly confident. If their cave in holds true, this time around, they wont show up in court for their crashing defeat.

Damaging evidence that may emerge from their libel trial vs Amaral is their biggest fear, but bear in mind they're not on trial for here.
If it comes to that , it would have to be a separate trial, and that is looking increasingly unlikely.








[/quote]

S&M
"and I don't believe the PJ feel that they can force the McCanns and the Tapas 7 to go back and co-operate with requisitioning and that is where the stalemate lies, IMO."

The PJ souldn't have to force anything!
The McCanns and the Tapas 7 should be falling over themselves to get to Portugal, and do ANYTHING, as they PROMISED (hope they never promise their own kids anything) to co-operate unreservedly in doing absolutely everything to help get Madeleine back!
They ALL did PROMISE, after all.
What would happen if a 'nasty, nutter' as the McCanns have said, has enough of this BS, and tries to take more direct action, to get some resolution?
Would the McCanns have this 'nutter' charged?
And would they have to appear in a court room as 'witnesses'?
Subjected to 'cross examination'?

I wonder if Clarrie is in overdrive because they have got wind that the case is going to be reopened and the McCanns want the UK to believe it is because of these supposed missed suspects, when it is in fact because of some entirely new evidence. Or maybe that stand alone evidence that G Amaral has mentioned.

Personally I don't even think it is pink going into overdrive.
Just the Press wanting diversity for news, a change from alternating between naming 'branded' paedo***** and royal baby on the way.

There isn't any need for pinky special talent anymore because the case will stay on the shelf if Blacksmith is to be believed, and generally speaking people hold his comment in high esteem.

When you think about it, considering he swears by the Mccanns for his success, it's surprising he hasn't come up with a bestseller to beat all bestsellers for the Story of the Century.

o/t
Last I read, Amanda Knox's "Waiting to be Heard" isnt flying off the shelves because of potential libelous charges from the Italian Prosecutor/s.

The only hope left is perhaps Amaral suing Mr & Mrs and their pink boots licker then maybe the Public will get to hear some hard facts Truth.

aiyoyo wrote:Personally I don't even think it is pink going into overdrive.
Just the Press wanting diversity for news, a change from alternating between naming 'branded' paedo***** and royal baby on the way.

There isn't any need for pinky special talent anymore because the case will stay on the shelf if Blacksmith is to be believed, and generally speaking people hold his comment in high esteem.

When you think about it, considering he swears by the Mccanns for his success, it's surprising he hasn't come up with a bestseller to beat all bestsellers for the Story of the Century.

o/t
Last I read, Amanda Knox's "Waiting to be Heard" isnt flying off the shelves because of potential libelous charges from the Italian Prosecutor/s.

The only hope left is perhaps Amaral suing Mr & Mrs and their pink boots licker then maybe the Public will get to hear some hard facts Truth.

Well for any deal to be done, that would of course been considered by their lawyers.

I really cannot see how they can come out of the libel trial proceedings having won, but we will wait and see.

I hope that come July a date will be given for the trial to proceed and that the judge orders no further postponements.

I thought Blacksmith was now blogging on a different site - was it the Cracked Mirror or have I misunderstood the post from last week?