Mumsnet have closed the thread.

by worriedmum 28.10.13 18:36

1001 postings on this topic, the frankest I have ever seen!

by alfie02 28.10.13 18:39

worriedmum wrote:1001 postings on this topic, the frankest I have ever seen!

Yes and they already had in place the pictures of Madeleinne to be circulated within that hour out of nowhere clapping

by Mirage 28.10.13 18:46

Miraflores wrote:
Mirage wrote:
Miraflores wrote:And now the 48 questions have appeared on Mumsnet! It's certainly waking people up. Mind you, I expect that post will get whooshed soon.
Sounds the sort of place where they can quickly go back to sleep again, from what I've heard. Rip Van Winkle eat your heart out.
Maybe, but it has caused a few people to question, and not a few to be annoyed: those who contributed to the Fund especially.

I agree.

by irishdub 28.10.13 18:47

New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.

by KellyLennon 28.10.13 18:52

Daily Mail only showing one e-fit in their " report" today....

and its not the one that looks like Gerry

by Miraflores 28.10.13 18:55

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

Perhaps because they have got egg on their faces big time? 'New' information trailed before Crimewatch, 'new' efits issued. Firstly we all said, hey the Smith sighting isn't new, and now the ST have said, and nor are the efits. Doesn't look good, does it?

by marxman 28.10.13 18:56

Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.

by thetruthbeknown 28.10.13 18:57

irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.

And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?

by Mirage 28.10.13 18:59

marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.

As I opined earlier, a little spark of life and then back into coma.

by Miraflores 28.10.13 18:59

marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.

No, the thread filled up and a part 2 has started. Mind you, it's in their Chat section, so it will disappear before too long.

by plebgate 28.10.13 18:59

@Sally J. From memory of your last post re. the police believing that there would have been no point in getting them back for reconstruction.

If the PI file had been passed to them (and we know there is more info. in there other than the efit pics), such as Maddie's sleeping patterns the case could have been re-opened. The sleeping pattern info could well have contributed towards new evidence as Mrs. claimed right from the beginning that she knew Maddie could not have woken and wandered and pushed the abduction theory straight away.

The re-opening of the case did not depend on whether they agreed to do a reconstruction or not imo. That may be part of the new investigation but not all. There are definitely other things in the PI file.

The point is that although it was not an issue to SY apparently it was imo to the Portugese police who had only shelved the case not closed it, so if the parents had written that letter especially with the file enclosed the case could have been re-opened.

Nothing more to add. Thanks for replies. smilie

by KellyLennon 28.10.13 19:03

marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.

Last post ....."Wow - almost 1000 posts and not deleted yet. Is this a record?"

1000 posts....and more people seeing through TM clapping

by Praiaaa 28.10.13 19:08

KellyLennon wrote:
marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.
Last post ....."Wow - almost 1000 posts and not deleted yet. Is this a record?"

1000 posts....and more people seeing through TM

another thread has been opened as 1000 is max for a thread.
This is historic - previously they have been derailed and whooshed -this time the consensus is ignore the disruptors, report vexatious posts.

by worriedmum 28.10.13 19:11

thetruthbeknown wrote:
irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.
And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?

''I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter...too much conspiratorial looniness..''

Do please clarify for me, are you saying that the Sunday Times have got something wrong? Or that the decision to suppress what has been and is now regarded as vital evidence by Scotland Yard is a conspiracy?

But anyway, putting aside all these inconvenient inconsistencies, just so glad you are enjoying the thread. Thanks for your er, 'tuppence-worth' thinking

-now where have I heard that before...........

by irishdub 28.10.13 19:16

thetruthbeknown wrote:
irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.
And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?

Who knows where the investigation is going but I don't think this new development is getting much traction in the media. Infact if the DailyStar is correct today in reporting that the police are not treating this development as an issue, I cannot see how it will get anymore traction in the media. In saying that if a paper has access to the Oakley report, that might spring up some new developments of interest.

by StraightThinking 28.10.13 19:17

irishdub wrote:Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I explained this yesterday, irishdub, the BBC don't repeat sensitive stories from other media sources unless they have been checked out and confirmed. There's no conspiracy

by Guest 28.10.13 19:19

irishdub wrote:
thetruthbeknown wrote:
irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.
And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?
Who knows where the investigation is going but I don't think this new development is getting much traction in the media. Infact if the DailyStar is correct today in reporting that the police are not treating this development as an issue, I cannot see how it will get anymore traction in the media. In saying that if a paper has access to the Oakley report, that might spring up new development of Iinterest.

I'm sure if they have the report they have a lot more to tell us, we will see. winkwink

by plebgate 28.10.13 19:21

jeanmonroe wrote:tasprin wrote:

Looks like it's a quick appeal for money

BBC Radio 4
Missing People
Duration: 2 minutes

Sunday 03 November 2013 @ 07:55
Kate McCann presents the Radio 4 Appeal on behalf of the charity Missing People.

Reg Charity:1020419
To Give:
- Freephone 0800 404 8144
- Freepost BBC Radio 4 Appeal, mark the back of the envelope Missing People.
.......................................................................................................
I wrote:

And send it to Kate and Gerry, Rothley, it will get there!

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

And send it to Kate and Gerry, Rothley, it will get there!

by KellyLennon 28.10.13 19:25

Praiaaa wrote:
KellyLennon wrote:
marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.
Last post ....."Wow - almost 1000 posts and not deleted yet. Is this a record?"

1000 posts....and more people seeing through TM
another thread has been opened as 1000 is max for a thread.
This is historic - previously they have been derailed and whooshed -this time the consensus is ignore the disruptors, report vexatious posts.

Ahh i see, just new on here having been ttly taken in with almost everything the mccanns and their chums said,purely on the basis that i couldnt for the life of me comprehend the alternative.
It was CW that changed it for me tbh, not only the easy dismisall of Tannerman as a british father (when JT had clearly stated he wasnt dressed like the rest of the british tourist ie shorts t shirt) but when KY asked Kate and Gerry regards the Madeline shaped hole in their lifes,there was just nothing.....nothing atall,no sincerity no emotion, just Gerry looking like he was thinking on the spot...yeh uh its special family occasions when u realise your not complete...i was watching with my mouth hanging open like WTF, I would be saying,every minute of every single day, they just made it sound like someone had forgotten to buy the stuffing for christmas day dinner.

by plebgate 28.10.13 19:26

Mirage wrote:
tasprin wrote:
Beanie wrote:
kinell wrote:
ChillyHeat wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Better rush to order your tat quickly in case this terrible news is true!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I was wondering if its possible that nothing has changed on this site, with Tannerman still being on there etc etc..... Could it be possible that it may be due to it being part of evidence, so maybe SY has got some sort of warrant or something to have it not to be altered ? Only thing I can think of why nothing has changed....
Isn't Kate McCann due to give a speech about Missing People soon? If that goes ahead and she's able to continue to spout her lies then I will assume nothing has changed in this case.
I wonder how the Missing People charity now feel about their dear ambassador Kate, being that she with held important information in the search for her own child. You couldn't make it up.
Looks like it's a quick appeal for money

BBC Radio 4
Missing People

Duration: 2 minutes

Sunday 03 November 2013 @ 07:55
Kate McCann presents the Radio 4 Appeal on behalf of the charity Missing People.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Reg Charity:1020419
To Give:
- Freephone 0800 404 8144
- Freepost BBC Radio 4 Appeal, mark the back of the envelope Missing People.
Give Online [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
What's this? Some sort of sick joke, BBC? You should be ashamed of yourselves. Do you never learn?

She looks a heck of a lot better in that pic. than she did in the stills pic. from the crimewatch appeal photo.

by tiny 28.10.13 19:28

plebgate wrote:
Mirage wrote:
tasprin wrote:
Beanie wrote:
kinell wrote:
ChillyHeat wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Better rush to order your tat quickly in case this terrible news is true!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I was wondering if its possible that nothing has changed on this site, with Tannerman still being on there etc etc..... Could it be possible that it may be due to it being part of evidence, so maybe SY has got some sort of warrant or something to have it not to be altered ? Only thing I can think of why nothing has changed....
Isn't Kate McCann due to give a speech about Missing People soon? If that goes ahead and she's able to continue to spout her lies then I will assume nothing has changed in this case.
I wonder how the Missing People charity now feel about their dear ambassador Kate, being that she with held important information in the search for her own child. You couldn't make it up.
Looks like it's a quick appeal for money

BBC Radio 4
Missing People

Duration: 2 minutes

Sunday 03 November 2013 @ 07:55
Kate McCann presents the Radio 4 Appeal on behalf of the charity Missing People.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Reg Charity:1020419
To Give:
- Freephone 0800 404 8144
- Freepost BBC Radio 4 Appeal, mark the back of the envelope Missing People.
Give Online [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
What's this? Some sort of sick joke, BBC? You should be ashamed of yourselves. Do you never learn?
She looks a heck of a lot better in that pic. than she did in the stills pic. from the crimewatch appeal photo.

The many faces of kate,and all for a reason..

by irishdub 28.10.13 19:31

worriedmum wrote:
thetruthbeknown wrote:
irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.
And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?
''I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter...too much conspiratorial looniness..''

Do please clarify for me, are you saying that the Sunday Times have got something wrong? Or that the decision to suppress what has been and is now regarded as vital evidence by Scotland Yard is a conspiracy?

But anyway, putting aside all these inconvenient inconsistencies, just so glad you are enjoying the thread. Thanks for your er, 'tuppence-worth' -now where have I heard that before...........

I'm not saying the Sunday Times got something wrong. It appears from said article that certain efits were surpressed, ones that now appear in 2013 to be crucially important to the case. But regarding the comments from the police today and lack of media coverage (yes there was some) I think there may have been too much social media hysteria in the last 24hrs to this development. Again judging by the police and media response.

Regarding my use of the word conspiracy, it was used in general and not specifically on this point. Some posts and tweets sometimes do read as conspiratorial to me.

by worriedmum 28.10.13 19:42

irishdub wrote:
worriedmum wrote:
thetruthbeknown wrote:
irishdub wrote:New here.

I've read some posts on this thread on the lines of Murdoch changing his attitude or is this revenge for Leveson.
So tell me this then, why didn't this story make the Sky News website today or yesterday?
Why was this story not a headline on the Sky News channel today or yesterday, not even a minor story?
Why did this story not make the front or inside pages of the Sun in Britain today?

Also hasn't the Dailystar basically today reported that the Police in Britain are not treating this new development as important yet some posters claim Redwood played a blinder on Crimewatch?

Why hasn't the national broadcaster in Britain not even reported this, afterall wasn't it the British national broadcaster, the BBC that aired the recent McCann Crimewatch programme?

I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter.

I'm not sure where I stand on the whole affair, some things just don't seem plausible or convincing enough, sometimes I have doubts, other times more sure but at the same time some posts and tweets just have an air of too much conspiratorial looniness to them.

Anyway, that's my tuppence worth. I do enjoy this thread though.
And your view on PJ reopening their investigation..even though saying previously that it would be 'unlikely' to be considered?
''I think there has been a little too much hysteria in social media regarding this development, from what I can see alot of the same people tweeting the same things over and over again on twitter...too much conspiratorial looniness..''

Do please clarify for me, are you saying that the Sunday Times have got something wrong? Or that the decision to suppress what has been and is now regarded as vital evidence by Scotland Yard is a conspiracy?

But anyway, putting aside all these inconvenient inconsistencies, just so glad you are enjoying the thread. Thanks for your er, 'tuppence-worth' -now where have I heard that before...........
I'm not saying the Sunday Times got something wrong. It appears from said article that certain efits were surpressed, ones that now appear in 2013 to be crucially important to the case. But regarding the comments from the police today and lack of media coverage (yes there was some) I think there may have been too much social media hysteria in the last 24hrs to this development. Again judging by the police and media response.

Regarding my use of the word conspiracy, it was used in general and not specifically on this point. Some posts and tweets sometimes do read as conspiratorial to me.

so what do YOU think , irishdub,about the suppression of the file with the e-fits, and the threat of legal action against the investigator if the contents were ever made known?

by Seek truth 28.10.13 19:47

marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.

As usual. Not much they CAN talk about on there.

Milk bottles and dummies and all things nice.
Dull.

by chillyheat 28.10.13 19:48

plebgate wrote:
Mirage wrote:
tasprin wrote:
Beanie wrote:
kinell wrote:
ChillyHeat wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Better rush to order your tat quickly in case this terrible news is true!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I was wondering if its possible that nothing has changed on this site, with Tannerman still being on there etc etc..... Could it be possible that it may be due to it being part of evidence, so maybe SY has got some sort of warrant or something to have it not to be altered ? Only thing I can think of why nothing has changed....
Isn't Kate McCann due to give a speech about Missing People soon? If that goes ahead and she's able to continue to spout her lies then I will assume nothing has changed in this case.
I wonder how the Missing People charity now feel about their dear ambassador Kate, being that she with held important information in the search for her own child. You couldn't make it up.
Looks like it's a quick appeal for money

BBC Radio 4
Missing People

Duration: 2 minutes

Sunday 03 November 2013 @ 07:55
Kate McCann presents the Radio 4 Appeal on behalf of the charity Missing People.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Reg Charity:1020419
To Give:
- Freephone 0800 404 8144
- Freepost BBC Radio 4 Appeal, mark the back of the envelope Missing People.
Give Online [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
What's this? Some sort of sick joke, BBC? You should be ashamed of yourselves. Do you never learn?
She looks a heck of a lot better in that pic. than she did in the stills pic. from the crimewatch appeal photo.

I always look at her and think its a He....Is that Adam under her chin big grin

by plebgate 28.10.13 19:53

@ ChillyHeat - naughty by imo right. titter

by pulch 28.10.13 19:57

They are saying on that other forum, that the McCann's only threatened to sue the m15 investigators so they wouldn't sell the info to the papers? Isn't that plausible? I need facts to think otherwise!

by Hongkong Phooey 28.10.13 20:02

pulch wrote:They are saying on that other forum, that the McCann's only threatened to sue the m15 investigators so they wouldn't sell the info to the papers? Isn't that plausible? I need facts to think otherwise!

It may be plausible however they didn't hand this information over to either the UK or Portuguese police and SY had to apply for it otherwise they weren't getting it!

by marxman 28.10.13 20:03

Seek truth wrote:
marxman wrote:Mumsnet has pulled the plug on discussion.
As usual. Not much they CAN talk about on there.

Milk bottles and dummies and all things nice.
Dull.

Indeed, but as I was just visiting for my first time, I found it
interesting how so many uninformed were slowly becoming
better informed by a few posters providing nuggets of truth.
Apparently, Mumsnet do not allow discussion usually, so it
was quite something for a thread to pass 1000 posts without
being pulled.

by Guest 28.10.13 20:03

pulch wrote:They are saying on that other forum, that the McCann's only threatened to sue the m15 investigators so they wouldn't sell the info to the papers? Isn't that plausible? I need facts to think otherwise!

Hmm now I wonder which forum that would be. The point is, the e-fit was supressed according to the ST and also Channel 4 and I think (not 100%) that even Sky mentioned it on their half hour programme. It wasn't put on the McCanns website, and not in her book....why?

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

Mumsnet have closed the thread.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Your 'tuppenceworth'

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Latest topics