Re: WOW A MUST READ -Madeleine clues hidden for five years - Sunday Times Full article now on Page 1

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:36

This has to be near an end...It has to be.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:39

And this is clearly a claim that Redwood knowingly misled the British people!:

"One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said."

We know it was Redwood who claimed it was a "revelation moment". So that is a very serious charge.

by View-from-Ireland 27.10.13 1:40

After reading that all I can say is [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And to think that came from The Times. Are they running out of road? This is very damning.

by Sockpuppet 27.10.13 1:40

Oh my word.

by Guest 27.10.13 1:40

Quote:

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

by suzyjohnson 27.10.13 1:42

suzyjohnson wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Am I reading what I think I'm reading.............
I thought that too!!

About the Sunday Times I meant, not about sallypelt's post

by bristow 27.10.13 1:43

The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

by View-from-Ireland 27.10.13 1:44

Okeydokey wrote:And this is clearly a claim that Redwood knowingly misled the British people!:

"One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said."

We know it was Redwood who claimed it was a "revelation moment". So that is a very serious charge.

Perhaps this was a trap? Redwood wanted to provoke this reaction to show that this investigative work had been suppressed by....guess who.

Something is stirring.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:44

View-from-Ireland wrote:After reading that all I can say is [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And to think that came from The Times. Are they running out of road? This is very damning.

Very significant that a Murdoch paper is allowed to publish this. Maybe Murdoch is still seething about the Leveson evidence...payback time.

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:46

Sounds like to me that SY were tying up loose ends possibly in favour of the McCanns, but the Times said that's not going to happen....
Or they are reeling them in....

by worriedmum 27.10.13 1:48

'' He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.''

So they asked them to look for 'the missing piece of the jigsaw' ..and then they stuffed it down the back of the sofa

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:49

Sounds like Clarrie is struggling here -no more excuses left in the excuses bag:

"[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

What does "hypercritical of the people involved" mean? Which people? Jane Tanner? All the Tapas 9? What the F is going on?

The only functioning part of Team McCann seem to be the lawyers sending out threatening letters to all and sundry.

by sallypelt 27.10.13 1:50

worriedmum wrote:'' He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.''

So they asked them to look for 'the missing piece of the jigsaw' ..and then they stuffed it down the back of the sofa

They probably stuffed it down the sofa with all those photographs they asked people to send DIRECTLY to them. This stinks to high heaven!

by worriedmum 27.10.13 1:51

Does Lorraine Kelly work on Sundays? lol

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:52

Anything on Twitter about this ?
This is the dogs bollox

by sallypelt 27.10.13 1:53

ChillyHeat wrote:Anything on Twitter about this ?
This is the dogs bollox

@JillyCL JillyCL 2m
@xklamation @winnower1 I'll set aside my vow not to buy another UK paper until the #McCann scam is exposed & I'll buy Sunday Times tomorrow.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:56

View-from-Ireland wrote:
Okeydokey wrote:And this is clearly a claim that Redwood knowingly misled the British people!:

"One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said."

We know it was Redwood who claimed it was a "revelation moment". So that is a very serious charge.
Perhaps this was a trap? Redwood wanted to provoke this reaction to show that this investigative work had been suppressed by....guess who.

Something is stirring.

Who knows - it's possible. But it sounds a bit too subtle for Deadwood. Isn't it more likely he is trying to square the circle of what happened and what his political brief is and this was the best he could come up with?

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:57

ChillyHeat wrote:Anything on Twitter about this ?
This is the dogs bollox

It sure is!

by Woofer 27.10.13 1:58

I remember Henri Exton being very touchy about his name being mentioned some years ago. We know why now. He had been threatened by their lawyers.

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:59

worriedmum wrote:Does Lorraine Kelly work on Sundays?

She certainly doesn't work on the other days of the week...unless you count lolling around on a sofa and uttering inanities as work.

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:00

Can this be classed as perverting the course of justice ? Not sure how it works.

by Woofer 27.10.13 1:02

AND ........ this is from the Murdoch press !

by MaryB 27.10.13 1:02

Madeleine could easily have got out of bed and left the apartment. There is nothing to suggest she didn't. Or have I missed something.

by bristow 27.10.13 1:04

Would the Lawyers be CR? And would their actions actually be legal??

by suzyjohnson 27.10.13 1:05

Okeydokey wrote:And this is clearly a claim that Redwood knowingly misled the British people!:

"One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said."

We know it was Redwood who claimed it was a "revelation moment". So that is a very serious charge.

When Redwood read this report I expect it was a revelation moment

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:05

There simply cannot be spin put out on this revelation....McCanns, your effed. If not by law yet, but by all those around the world whom are seeing you as the definite McScams

Madeleine....It seems Justice is near friends

by worriedmum 27.10.13 1:07

How your information will be used:
Our investigation team greatly appreciate all the information being sent through to them by email & phone. It is vital in helping them to find Madeleine. All information will be used in any way and shared with such relevant third parties as may be required in order to find Madeleine, support her family and bring her abductors to justice. We take our data protection requirements seriously and will treat any personal data we receive in line with these obligations. If you require any limitations on the use if the information you provide or the people with whom we will share the information, please let us know at the time you provide us with the information or as soon as you want these limitations put in place.
Due to the large volume of information that our investigation team receive, they will only re-contact people if additional information is needed. Please be assured that all information is looked at, evaluated and prioritised. Thank you so much for your help.
Contact details when providing information:

Investigation Line:	+44 845 838 4699
Email:	[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Post:	Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited P.O. Box 9880 Leicester LE7 7UJ

( FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES)

by Okeydokey 27.10.13 1:07

Is this the biggest development since release of the PJ files? I would say it is. yes

Fortress McCann hasn't come crashing down but this will have blasted a very big hole through their credibility. And we know they don't have an answer.

by Woofer 27.10.13 1:08

You can understand Exton being angry particularly when Halligen didn't pay him.

by chillyheat 27.10.13 1:10

No wonder Tannerman is still on their website......Bitter till the end, the narcisstic evilites. Not an ounce of care for their daughter. Just a continued charade.

WOW A MUST READ -Madeleine clues hidden for five years - Sunday Times Full article now on Page 1