Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Daisy wrote:I find the overly cryptic nature of Textusa turns me off. Can't be arsed deciphering tbh. Heathen that I am.

I know what you are saying but ...........i like the fact that it must take CR ages to dissemate the stated facts etc

pulling the chain of the hired dogs just added few quid to the Mc Bill  

Some interesting coincidences are highlighted again by Textusa....

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

Tilly-flop wrote:Some interesting coincidences are highlighted again by Textusa....

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

Yes I did a little investigation after reading this and found that K W and G M played in a golf event at the Rothley Golf Club in Summer 2011 to raise funds for Finding Madeleine. If they didn't know each other back then in 2007, they certainly do now.  The golf club newsletter for 2011 showed a photo of Gerry in the tournament looking like some minor celeb.  So the golf club are helping him raise more funds. I also found that KW appears to be a Mason, though cant be sure its the same KW - but seems likely.

An interesting piece by textusa today on GM and the hire car.

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

Merged with this thread cockerspaniel.

candyfloss wrote:Merged with this thread cockerspaniel.

Thank you candyfloss, I somehow missed this thread altogether! my bad. 

THANKS TO Textusa.

Friday, 21 February 2014

Chasing Cars & Doctors

1. Chasing Cars...

When the PJ checked previous renters of the Renault Scenic 59-DA-27, they were asked a number of questions, including whether they knew the McCann family. The driver but one before the McCanns was Kenneth Walkden, who was interviewed on April 29th 2008. He hired the car between March 25th and April 1st 2007 for a golfing holiday with some friends. The distance travelled in the car was 945km.

He doesn’t say which golf course they were playing on, but the Boavista or Parque da Floresta may have been amongst the possible destinations. The trip was organised by his friend P S and Mr Walkden said that they all went on holiday together every year.  Maybe to the same venue? The Scenic was also used by a number of golfers other than the Walkden party.

Mr Walkden  told the PJ:

“I am not familiar with any member of the McCann family. Neither do I know any of them.”

I’m sure by this time he knew exactly who the McCann family were and where they lived. Hardly a soul in the UK or Portugal didn’t know who they were by 2008. But he didn’t know them personally it seems.

Mr Walkden happened to be a member of the exclusive and prestigious Rothley Park Golf Club, as did at least four members of his party. The same golf club where Gerry McCann played golf every Monday, according to an article by Anna Pukas in The Mail on January 5th 2008.

Kate’s book is very helpful, as she confirms Gerry joined the Rothley Park Golf Club before she started her IVF treatment, which means Gerry had been a member for at least 5 years when Mr Walkden made his statement.  She also states that Gerry had been to play golf in Portugal a couple of times, dates unspecified, in her book.  Gerry, in contrast, claims to have played golf in Albufeira only once in 1994, according to his PJ statement. Why golf-mad Gerry didn’t even mention the word when describing their holiday activities is a continuing puzzle.

Returning to Mr Walkden, would a more accurate answer  have been along the lines of ..?

“I don’t know Mr McCann personally, but I now know he’s a member of my golf club.”

Not necessarily something the club wanted to advertise perhaps, but true.

Or maybe the first time they met was the Summer Event in July 2011, as part of the club’s Centenary celebrations. Gerry was there and so was Mr Walkden. Another one of those “fancy that” moments when they discovered they had both used the same hire car in 2007?

2. Chasing Doctors...

The “flurry of phone calls” that we are now hearing so much about, in relation to the night of May 3rd caused us to revisit the topic of the phones obtained for the T9. In Dianne Webster’s rogatory interview in April 2008, she is asked if she knew a Dave Middleton, the answer being “No.” The question is about phones and who they were obtained from, but Dianne’s answer suggests it is not Dave M who supplied the phone. She mentions her son-in-law, Simon Aldridge (sic) who is, in fact. Oldridge. She says her middle daughter Louise is married to Simon, whose company, Sandtoft Tiling is based in Doncaster. It’s probable that Dave M is also an employee of the company, but as he doesn’t figure in this saga. We won’t include any further details about him.

Police officer 4078 asks Dianne an interesting question. We say interesting, as it seems clear from the interview in total, that the police seemed to know many of the answers before they asked the questions.

4078 “You’ve got two doctor daughters have you?”

Reply “Yeah, well the one in New Zealand’s a doctor as well, but she’s a PhD doctor, she’s a scientist. Yeah that’s er Louisa Nates, yeah, my middle daughter.”

We were curious why her daughter was called Nates, if married to Simon Oldridge, who we could see from records, had lived with a Louise K Webster/Oldridge in a northern town and later, in the West Country. Was it possible to have two daughters, Louise and Louisa, living in different places? Had the rogatory interview been mistranscribed or mistranslated? The question about two doctor daughters intrigued us.

There was no Louise K Oldridge registered as a medical doctor, but as doctors often practise under maiden names, we checked, only to find there was a Louise K Webster registered, but no longer practising, as an anaesthetist. Qualified in Leicester.  And a Dr Louise K  Oldridge who had a business with Simon Oldridge.

Assuming that Dianne’s daughter Louise, married to Simon Oldridge, once practised as a medical doctor, why would Dianne say Louise was a doctorate doctor? Maybe she also had a science doctorate and was staying in New Zealand at this time. Then why not clarify?

Perhaps Dianne just wanted to keep her daughter at arm’s length from everything, but she could have had no idea that her rogatory statement would be released into the public domain, so why prevaricate? A full and frank statement to a police officer from a witness was more important than protecting her daughter, for whatever reason.

If officer 4078 knew the answer to this particular question before she asked, was this discrepancy noted by Leicester Police and was the information ever conveyed to the PJ?

Note: Details of addresses not already in the public domain are known to us, but will not be published here. It is possible to use publicly available sources for those who want to make their own check.

Posted by Textusa at 09:00

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 09:59:00

That is quite a coincidence about the car-hire. So 2 members of the same exclusive Golf Club hired the very same car within approximately 2 months of each other.I wonder if there any other exclusive links between them. I also wonder if there were any other exclusive events held at OC. For instance, were swinging events held there on a regular basis during low season? I am a member of my town's golf club and most people know each other, especially the male members. Also, how exclusive is Rothley Park Golf Club? The more exclusive it is, the more important and likely it is that individual members will know each other. My uncle lives in Rothley. I will try and investigate.

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:07:00

Just looking at the Golf Club, it doesn't appear to be exclusive in terms of Membership. Just a pretty normal golf club, with the usual social events - including mixed golf and ladies golf. No problems joining it, if you wish. Still, from my experience of golf clubs, I actually do not believe that GM and KW did not know each other if they belonged to the same club. A\t the very least, they will have known of each other. So yes, very much a fancy that occaision.

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:25:00

Lorus Golf Day 2013
Sponsored by LCM Wealth Management
"21 teams participated in a shotgun start at the highly prestigious Rothley Park Golf Club."
I don't know who designates a club as prestigious, but that description is frequently applied to RPGC

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:28:00

It's Loros
Got spelling wrong

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:15:00

On the 4th July 2011, GM and KW played in the same golfing event at RPGC, in part to mark the clubs 100th birthday and to raise funds for Find Madeleine ! I have just seen a photo of GM in the club's 2011 newsletter. So lets now assume that KW and GM now definitely know each other.

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:25:00

Who in the world didn't know who Gerry McCann was in 2008?!?
If Brad Pitt or George Clooney were members of my golf club, they wouldn't know who I was and I would know who they were.
Plus having rented the exact same car where Maddie's DNA was said to be found I would be following the case very closely!

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 10:35:00

Kenneth Walden and his wife were both directors of a bouncy inflatables company- they are now in their 70's and both members of the club . It looks as if KW is a Mason but I cant be sure it is the same KW. GM's connections have created support for him.

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 11:24:00

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

Anonymous21 Feb 2014 11:59:00

This post has many implications IMO. I would like to point out 2.
One is that it is evident the effort made by people (KW and DW) to avoid being part of events. In 2008 everyone knew the Mcs guilty so the further away they were from them, the best.
Second is G and golf. I don’t believe for a single minute that G didn’t try to play golf that week with a golf course just outside town. He didn’t need to rent a car. I’m sure OC would arrange a taxi and he could hire a set of clubs on site. In Portugal, golf’s high season is the tourist low-season. Algarve is a very well a known golf destination especially in winter. To have membership at RPGC means to be a golf enthusiast. Golf enthusiast don't play just tennis. For example, didn't Matt go sailing, a sport he's known to practice?
----------------------------------------------------------

Another one of those “fancy that” moments when they discovered they had both used the same hire car in 2007?

So Ms Webster is referring to her "middle" daughter. Do we know who is the third one?

As extracted directly from the Textusa site today.....

SWINGING EVIDENCE





There is one thing that is absolutely consensual among all of us who are familiar with the Maddie case and that is there’s a cover-up.

And it’s also consensual that we all think this cover-up involves the “British hierarchy” up to its government. That it’s a very high-level cover-up (VHCU).

But what this VHCU has intended to cover is far from being consensual.

Nor who is involved in it, generally speaking, or why .

It’s been said that the VHCU was to protect pharmaceutical, scientific, estate or state secrets.

Besides the last, all is justified by very vague, diffuse and conspiracy-magnet “secrets” but none offer an explanation as to what these could be.

And the last, “state secrets”, is the best way to reinforce the vagueness of the word “secret”.

One theory that comes close to a tangible reason is the pre-planned murder: someone for some reason (again always unspecified) decided to kill Maddie and the holiday in Luz was planned with this intention.

We don’t know exactly who that “someone” may be and very honestly cannot see any reason to justify Maddie’s “elimination” to the point of such sophistication.

Most importantly, it doesn’t in any way explain why a planned murder of the daughter of 2 medical doctors on foreign soil would warrant a VHCU involving not only the highest British authorities as also, locally, guests, ex-Pats and the Ocean Club.

The theory that Maddie died due to a sedation overdose also doesn’t explain the why of a VHCU involving all those it did.

There’s the paedo theory. Paedophilia with victims of Maddie’s age is very, very secretive as the criminal is fully aware of how repulsive the act committed is.

It’s a known fact that “celebrity” paedos are protected by their non-paedo peers. But this protection is done assuring the protector is not involved with paedo activities of the protected.

Not seeing anyone or any institution risking their own reputation to protect the paedo-murderer of a little girl.

Although not the intention of this post, we will show you later that the paedo thesis was looked into by the PJ.

All scenarios mentioned have 2 things in common: that there’s a VHCU but that there's no concrete or plausible justification as to why. It was all because of this... “secret”.

None explain the inexplicable power held by a group of middle-class people, eventually upper/middle-class, to be able to bring 2 nations literally to their knees.

The swinging scenario is, apparently, consensually taken as the only one that would explain all.

Quoting Research_Reader, a detractor of the swinging thesis (comment #21 of our “Swinging FMS” post):

“If this was a regular thing that the Ocean Club was arranging, and if there were lots of highly-connected people there that May who were indulging in this, AND they knew of even higher-profile swingers back in the UK I can easily imagine the powers-that-be wanting to cover it up. And it also might account for the nursery nurse apparently knowing the group and flying over at the same time, and potentially Murat and Malinka could have been involved.

Whilst swinging isn't illegal, the embarrassment would have been huge and widespread, and in combination with the death of a todler would have left and extremely bad taste in people's mouths.”

The swinging theory explains all but is, according to its detractors, speculation. Pure speculation, they say. Not a shred of evidence.

There are, as far as we have been able to read, only, repeat only, 4 arguments against the swinging thesis:

1. It isn’t illegal so it wouldn’t warrant a cover-up;

2. They wouldn’t take their children with them;

3. They wouldn’t take their mothers with them;

4. There’s no evidence there was swinging, so it’s just speculation…

This is so much so that after even in our post “Swinging FMS” in which we refuted thoroughly the first 3 arguments, some people simply pretended not to have read it and continued to justify that the swinging theory wasn’t plausible because… swinging isn’t illegal, children wouldn’t be taken and mum wouldn’t come along.

They seem to be stuck in a rut. Only they’re not.

As the swinging scenario encompasses adequately all present (including children and mum) there simply aren’t any other reasons, besides these 4 arguments, to contradict it.

As there aren't any more, they will keep being repeated to exhaustion whenever the issue is inconveniently brought up by its inconvenient subscribers.

The same 4 arguments repeated over and over until lambs become lions.

Even after adequate justification, they will keep being repeated. By those, we must note, accuse the Black Hats of repeating over and over the abduction argument...

The “5th argument” is to be silent. To abide by Mark Twain’s words “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.”

Only it’s not foolishness. It’s avoiding being revealed.

We think we have answered fully in our “Swinging FMS” post as to why the first 3 arguments (importance, kids and mum) aren’t valid in invalidating the swinging thesis.

Because swinging does warrant a VHCU because being outed as swingers, in the UK, is despicable enough to completely ruin careers and reputations.

Because children are an integral part of a pretended to be family holidays. Also, not exactly easy to provide an excuse to leave children home while escaping a whole week to an unknown location as PdL.

Because mother could have come along, as a swinger or as a non-swinger. We even think DW didn’t sleep in the same apartment as the Paynes.

We also noted in that post that the “children & mum arguments” are used by people who say it couldn't be because they wouldn’t have done it but then go and accuse the McCanns of doing things that supposedly they wouldn’t do.

Also “children & mum arguments” are double-standard, applicable only to swinging when convenient.

We find that many of those who think it absolutely intolerable, despicable and obnoxious for the T9 to have brought their children along to a swinging holiday, find it perfectly acceptable and natural for them to have brought the kids to a bingeing holiday.

Some even find it acceptable, natural and logical having children drugged so they could get drunk.

Drug the kids to get drunk, plausible, let the kids be tended to by professionals while swinging, ludicrous.


Using the exact same reasoning of the detractors of the swinging theory, why didn’t the T9 leave the kids at home with relatives if they knew they were going to get plastered all week? Why bring them along?

To have brought sedation drugs with them, means the T9 would have known beforehand they were going to sedate and leave the kids on their own, so why bring them in the first place?

And also it seems that grandmother wouldn’t hear of swinging but apparently felt fine in having her grandchildren drugged so she and her daughter could drink until they dropped.

Not much coherence in these arguments against swinging is there?

Let’s now deal with the 4th argument: no evidence.

First one must ask exactly what kind of evidence of swinging is one expected to find?

A brochure saying “Welcome to PdL’s Swinging Week - April 28/May05”?

The Ocean Club publicly saying Maddie was abducted because they were distracted while organising sex between the guests?

A “confession” of swinging by some witness without being asked about it?

We would really like to know when people say “there's no evidence” what evidence they were expecting.

We don’t have the brochure , the Ocean Club hasn’t said such a thing and no one has confessed to swinging although a “confession” can be read in someone’s words as you’ll see later in the post.

But is there no evidence of swinging?

We think there are 5 things that indicate strongly that there was swinging in the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz: 

1. Adult Pool

Not the fact that it exists, but because it “doesn’t”. It is absent throughout all the Maddie case.

The Ocean Club has it for some reason. Not saying its sole purpose is for swinging. Just stating that when it comes to the Maddie case it seems that it doesn’t exist.

Ok, so they played tennis. And went and did some watersports. And some jogging. Where did they spend the rest of the time?

Apparently inside the resort as PdL offers very little at that time of the year. We haven’t been told with precision but we all seem to think that all gravitated around Tapas.

So, we have these guests who take the trouble to take their own children to crèche to enjoy a kid-free day but then head to Tapas pool area where they have to put up with other guests’ children.

Why didn’t they simply use a facility that would give them a kids-free time - the adult pool? Simply leave the Tapas area for all those idiots who opted for not depositing their kids in the crèche.

This shroud of silence around the adult pool is very strange.

Linking it to swinging is speculation, saying it has been left out of the Maddie case is a fact. 


2. DNA from Kid’s Room

The DNA found in this room was too little when compared with what was expected to be collected. A “crowd” had supposedly contaminated the scene. That’s what we were told.

A distraught Kate, a friendly Fiona and a “soothing couple”, plus GNR and PJ on that night alone

Then we had Maddie and the twins using that room for some days.

3 children slept in that apartment for days. They dressed and undressed there. 2 adults regularly went in and out of that room on those same days.

Contamination means ADDING forensic evidence, not subtracting it.

It would be expected that there would be huge amounts of DNA collected, much of which one would expect would have to be discarded as it was from “contamination”.

In terms of what was expected to be found versus what was collected one could say that room was “forensically aseptic”. The room was subject to an exaggerated cleaning.

The forensic evidence collected was way too scarce and that’s a fact.

This can only mean the room was cleaned up, like we showed in our post, “"Clean Party Floor" Phenomenon”.

 It’s evident that forensic evidence was in fact subtracted from the (alleged) scene of the crime for no apparent reason.

If it was to be determined that the origin of the collected DNA would have come from the most diverse but explainable sources, it would be the EXPECTED so no reason whatsoever to clean up that room.

So why was it cleaned? We think to eliminate the presence of those who were not supposed have ever been there during the time the kids were away at crèche, day or night.

People that probably used who room for adult fun. 


3. Semen Stain

A stain was found on the bedcover of the bed nearest to the window.

A semen stain. Who says so? John Lowe from the FSS in his final report:

“The voluntary samples were also compared with 'crime stain 1', a DNA profile obtained by Portuguese scientists using their DNA profile system. The profile was recovered from suspected semen on a blanket in the apartment 5.”

“Suspected semen”, interesting. But what is really interesting is what he says 2 paragraphs later:

“I conclude further that, the DNA profiles obtained from the 'crime stain 1' and 286A/2007/CRL9A & B coincide with C****** Gordon (bar code 51156964). I believe that C****** Gordon was born on 29 January 2005, and if this is the case, in my opinion, the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' is not the result of semen found on the blanket.”

We have alerted our readers as to the very specious style used by Lowe, and have explained why he has, in our opinion used it intentionally.

Let’s break down what he's said so we can understand it clearly:

1. 'crime stain 1' and stain #9 belong to C****** Gordon (bar code 51156964)

2. C****** Gordon was born on 29 January 2005, so he was 2 yrs and 3 months old.

3. If he was born on that date, then the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' is not the result of semen found on the blanket

Note the absolute speciousness of that last sentence. Remember he knows he’s writing a report about the highest profile case of the XXI century. Every word matters.

We won’t say that he never clearly states that 'crime stain 1' is not semen, which he doesn’t. We will just stick with what he has said.

He appears to say that if the individual in question is indeed 2 yrs old then the stain is not semen.

We say he appears to say because we think he does make a much more affirmative statement than that about it being semen but will refrain from saying so for now.

So, apparently the condition is not about the nature of the stain but of the age of the individual: if 2 yr old – not semen. So if, say, 18 yr old, semen?

If he wanted to say that 'crime stain 1' wasn’t semen, then he should have written “then the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' found on the blanket is not the result of semen.”

This simple and this clear. But Lowe decides, for some reason, to write like a non-native.

What he does say, very speciously, is that ‘crime stain 1’ is not from semen found but from somewhere else. He doesn’t explain from where ‘crime stain 1’ is from, but confirms that it is semen.

If you don't agree with us, you have to agree that he puts the conditional, as we said, on the age of individual and not on what the stain consists of.

So if you don't agree with us, you're basically saying that a British scientist didn’t find it necessary to confirm any further if the human matter present before him was semen or not. In the highest profile case that Britain has ever faced.

Knowing, as we have demonstrated (in our post, “Super-Kid”), that C****** Gordon (CG) could not possibly make stain #9 one can only assume that the DNA sample “labelled CG” is not from CG.

Whoever it is, has left a stain 1,50 m high in a wall in an inaccessible corner of the living room  and has left a semen stain on the bedcover (like we showed in our post, “The Mystery of Profile L”). 

Not a 2 yr old, certainly.

But it’s not only Lowe who states that semen was found on that bedcover.

Although there is no date on the following correspondence, signed by Paulo Rebelo, from pages 3578-3582 or to whom it was addressed at the INML, it clearly states the presence of semen:

“During that stage of the investigation, the apartment was searched by members of the Crime Scene Team from the Laboratorio de Policia Cientifica [Police Forensic Science Laboratory] of the Portuguese Criminal Police, and samples were collected. Those samples, namely hair and a sperm stain, were sent to the National Institute of Legal Medicine (INML) to be analysed taking into account the DNA profile of the missing child-that had been provided-, as well as one of her parents and the ones of friends who belonged to a common group, and who went to the above mentioned tourist resort following previous arrangements among them.”

“On the other hand, it was possible to define the autosomic STR profile of the sperm stain detected on the bedspread of one of the beds in the bedroom from where the child went missing taking into account the DNA profile of the missing child-that had been provided-, as well as one of her parents and the ones of friends who belonged to a common group, and who went to the above mentioned tourist resort following previous arrangements among them.”

“We further request the DNA profile comparison concerning the English citizens that stayed in the apartment throughout 2007, where the above-referred sperm stain was found.

-FAWKES, SIMON ANDREW

-DAMBROSIO, CARLO

-GORDON, PAUL ANTHONY”

Rebelo doesn’t come up with the terminology from the top of his head. He’s referring to evidence collected by “members of the Crime Scene Team from the Laboratorio de Policia Cientifica [Police Forensic Science Laboratory]”.

Professional forensic experts.

“A sperm stain”, “sperm stain detected” and “sperm stain was found” couldn’t be clearer.

If this sperm was not from Gerry, then who is it from and what was it doing there?

To ask, as was asked, if there is any relationship between a male stain and a female child (Maddie) is to evidently confirm or rule out a possible paedo occurrence involving that semen. 


4. The Blond Man.

Mrs Fenn’s niece, Carol Tranmer-Fenn, on April 22nd, 2008, in her rogatory statement says that she sees a blond man exiting, via the back gate, the Oldfield’s apartment on the afternoon of May 3.

This visit isn’t mentioned by any of the T9, including the Oldfields. No burglary was reported.

Matt Oldfield was supposedly sailing, wasn’t he? Saving Rob’s life, if we’re recollecting correctly.

If this visit was innocent, it would have been spoken about.

Carol first stated that she saw this man on May 8th 2007 to Leicester Police. She even did an e-fit of the man, .

Both that first statement and the e-fit are not part of the PJ Files and still have to see the light of day as we showed in our Nov 25th 2010 post, “My Thanksgiving Turkey to ALL of You”.

This is a visit of an adult male in the middle of the afternoon to an apartment that was not his. Very much like the visit of David Payne to Kate McCann. 


5. The Visit

We’re referring to David Payne’s visit to Kate McCann on May 3. All points towards “over-friendliness” between the 2.



Put these 5 things together with the 24 factors we listed in our post “Swinging FMS” in response to comment #11.

As Payne’s visit is repeated, it makes 28 things for now that, as we say in that post, makes us conclude that swinging is the “only unifying factor that could bind all together and the only thing that could plausibly explain the motivation and involvement of so many present in PdL”

Acceptance of swinging is increasing.

Readers realise that it’s the only scenario that makes all pieces of the puzzle snap together. All pieces. Including importance, kids, mum and evidence.

They are also starting to understand the discomfort it causes to discuss it.

It makes us feel we are doing our job well.

We’re also pleased to see that the discussions are finally detaching from the T9 and towards what really matters being analysed.

What? The “confession”?

Oh, as we said, it’s not exactly a confession, but knowing what we now know, reading Bridget O’Donnell’s (Jez Wilkins’s partner) words’ to The Guardian on December 14 2007, take a whole new meaning:

“Throughout all this, I have always believed that Gerry and Kate McCann are innocent. When they were made suspects, when they were booed at, when one woman told me she was "glad" they had "done it" because it meant that her child was safe, I began to write this article - because I was there, and I believe that woman is wrong. There were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday; instead, there was a bunch of ordinary parents wearing Berghaus and worrying about sleep patterns.”

Don’t the words “there were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday” sound just like those of a toddler saying “I didn’t steal the cookies in the jar with blue butterflies behind the box of cereals on the top left cabinet”?

bumping this as imo it is off the scale for coincidence re K W.

 I also think that the thread re Murat and why he was hiding his activities on 2nd and 3rd is a very important one.

I think the swinging theory is plausible as a reason for the cover up. After all, KM did say in an interview that they were all "you know...into each other" something which has always struck me as a strange thing to say. But then why would GM not be there to enjoy himself? (if shuttle bus footage was, indeed from that holiday). If he was a swinger, I'd imagine that he'd be going to PdL to enjoy himself very much.

.....and some very valid and pertinent replies have been received in response to this latest article.....




[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Anonymous28 Feb 2014 11:03:00
   
2. I really enjoyed reading this post, because whilst I already subscribed to the theory that swinging was behind the cover up (as it made all the other jigsaw pieces fit) it has reassured me that there are valid reasons for me believing in the theory. It has even verbalised my thoughts and feelings about the absurd 'Bridget' article. I seemed to get the impression that she wrote to appease herself. 'I feel dirty, people think swinging is dirty business but hey, I'm not ... it's not doing any harm . we're not drugged up to the eyeballs - just simply having good old fashioned romping fun'.
   When you consider the people who were taking part - they were all fairly glamorous high achievers whether in the business world / professional / film. They need to get their kicks and I imagine its fairly addictive in the same way as gambling. Its not illegal but we in the UK have not properly got our heads around it yet. In my small rural town, as I was growing up there were a group of adults who were thought to be swingers - all middle class high achievers in business etc. Even now, they are all in their 70s even 80's - they are still pointed out as the 'swingers'...
   
3. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous28 Feb 2014 11:10:00
   What I find strange is the missing word - golf. In an area surrounded by golf courses. All those wealthy company directors, bankers, doctors, business people with children in the crèche. Yet no parent gives their location on the crèche sheets as golf.
   There must have been something even more appealing to do? The pool seems a popular venue.
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
5. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous28 Feb 2014 12:58:00
   Why did Bridget refer to parents worrying about sleep patterns? Did she discuss this with the McCanns?
   I suppose Jez may have talked about this, given he was wandering around for a long time, getting his child to sleep before he met Gerry. But he didn't notice any lurkers.
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   

[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   
2. AndyB28 Feb 2014 13:00:00
   
3. "Because swinging does warrant a VHLCU because being outed as swingers, in the UK, is despicable enough to completely ruin careers and reputations"
   
   Nonsense! Provide one example of a career ruined by swinging
   
   Even if it were true that swinging ruins careers, it doesn't give the establishment a reason to close ranks to protect a couple of low-level doctors.
   
4. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   

[*][url=javascript:;]Replies[/url]





[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous28 Feb 2014 17:12:00
   Max Clifford thought The Krankies' careers could be promoted by their admissions of being swingers. But I can't imagine the career of a British Prime Minister would last five minutes if such an allegation was made. Not suggesting any PM has indulged, just using it as an example.
   And it's not just careers, but what family members might think that would matter most.
   Delete
   
   
   
2. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa28 Feb 2014 17:56:00
   AndyB,
   
   It wasn't to protect a couple of low-level doctors. In fact, we do question why "a couple of low-level doctors" earned such protection. It doesn't make sense and you seem to agree with us.
   
   We say it was protect the reputation of others present as well as the resort's for promoting such an alternate lifestyle activities.
   
   Before we go back to the relevance of one’s reputation and career in being outed as a swinger the question one must never forget is the timings and pressure of when the decision to go for an abduction scenario.
   
   There are 2 things that no one in those critical couple of hours could possibly anticipate: the dimensions to which things would snowball into and the effective power that would really be mustered.
   
   In our opinion, decision was taken and then favours called in and not the other way around.
   
   Even if swinging was taken as a minor transgression the choice was one being risked being outed swinger or let those idiots who killed the girl to find a way out of the problem in which they got themselves into without one being involved.
   
   At that moment no one thought that the engagement required by the cover-up would be humongous, mainly due to the stupidity, arrogance of the T9 and the unstable condition Kate was in, which was the cause for the premature alarm.
   
   If the alarm had been set at the rightful time after the apartment been “effectively” broken into and all calmly rehearsed beforehand plus the help of Martin Smith coming forward as planned saying seeing a man with a child half a mile from the apartment, then the abduction choice would have been the correct one.
   
   No one today, except all those present in PdL then, would know what really had happened.
   
   Even with all the evidence pointing towards death, we’re still, 7 years later fighting for the truth, imagine where we would be today if things were done just half better than they were then.
   
   (continues)
   
   Delete
   
   
   
3. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa28 Feb 2014 17:58:00
   (continuing)
   
   About swinging v reputation, just one phrase... are you kidding?
   
   Answering your question, a case, we will give you an example: Tommy Sheridan, a Scottish Labour politician.
   
   He was very upset to be accused of being a swinger.
   
   (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Sheridan)
   
   On Wikipedia, under “Defamation action” one can read:
   
   “The jury heard allegations that Sheridan had visited a swingers clubs in Manchester and engaged in adulterous affairs with two women. Sheridan, who claims to be a teetotaller, reportedly drank champagne and consumed cocaine during an extramarital liaison. Sheridan denies drinking the champagne and the claim of substance abuse. Eleven members of the SSP's executive committee testified that he admitted in an Executive committee meeting to attending a swingers club with women, but another four members of the SSP who were present at that Executive meeting backed Sheridan's claim that he made no such admission at that meeting.”
   
   Why defamation if swinging is accepted as you imply?
   
   Also “Perjury conviction”, it can be read:
   
   “In May 2007, it was reported that staff at Cupid's Swingers Club in Manchester had told police they had been offered bribes not to co-operate with the inquiry”
   
   Why accept bribes to lie about such an accepted thing as you imply?
   
   Swinging is a theme throughout his Wikipedia page. Quite a stigma, we would say.
   
   But it’s not only swinging that is very frowned upon and scandal-exploited.
   
   Immediately the Profumo case comes to mind… and when was that? In 1961.
   
   (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profumo_affair)
   
   Currently, one just has to see how “sex-laundry” is being washed in a court-room between Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson.
   
   As far as we know, being unfaithful isn’t illegal.
   
   But we will return the question to you: name one high-profile name who has survived unscathed a sex scandal of which they were a part of.
   Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 05:01:00
   Agree Textusa. The situation was so hot and difficult to handle that a business man, who claimed to have been in the Tapas dinner, left PDL before the sunrise of May 4, to Switzerland. Suddenly and without any valid explanation, he ended his holidays.
   How, we know that? Because Mr. TB bothered the man and he replied with an email defending himself and claiming that he had a picture of his 2 sons taken on May 3 2007, where Madeleine appears at the background. That picture never raised the day light, but the investigation of Mr TB was so dangerous to all involved that they start to persecute him via the Mccann's and their lawyers.
   If there was no swing involving most of the guests and people of high social classes, and what happenned was just an accident involving a child from a restrict group, why that guy runaway from PDL, before journalists and PJ arrived to scene and start questionning inexplicable presences? Having that guy holidaying in such place is very odd. His economical condition suites more a 5 star hotel, then a cheaper resort in a fish village. He must be in Vilajoia or in any other 5 star hotels with wonderful packs involving golf, pool and what Portugal is largely known - WONDERFUL FOOD. instead, he choose a poor resort with bad food, no pool and no Golf. Then, what else was left to attract that guy? I think, It's clear the answer.
   Delete
   
   
   Reply
   

[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Textusa28 Feb 2014 18:02:00
   
2. Insane has submitted a comment in his usual uncalled-for rude style at 28 Feb 2014 14:18:00. We won’t obviously publish it.
   
   However, in it, he does make, supposedly at least, a valid point that deserves attention and so we will publish that part of his comment:
   
   “John Lowe clearly states that the stain from the blanket was not semen and in the same report, which you have omitted to mention, gives the result of a test on the same sample, specific for saliva, which gave a positive result.”
   
   We invite Insane to please quote John Lowe, in the same report (or wherever), saying that ‘crime stain 1’ (or whatever other possible designation) is positively saliva.
   
   We’re sure that Insane refers to 2 Expert Reports by INML (not FSS) on 09Jul07 and 31Mar08.
   
   On the 09Jul07 one it’s said:
   
   “2-Nature of the sample
   
   Acid Phosphatase Test to detect SEMEN on the small spot on the cloth fragment in envelope no. 5 recovered from the bedspread of the bed next to the window of the children's bedroom: Weakly positive.”
   
   This sample, was not tested for saliva at this instance.
   
   On the 31Mar08 one it’s said:
   
   “2- Nature of the sample
   
   Phadebas Forensic test, for detection of SALIVA on the fragment of cloth corresponding to trace n'. 5 collected from the bedspread of the bed next to the window of the children's bedroom: Positive.”
   
   This sample was not tested for semen at this instance.
   
   Sample either contains semen and saliva or the suggestion made in the post Profile L, where the test carried out was compromised by the testing method used.
   
   (http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2011/11/mystery-of-profile-l.html)
   
   In case sample contained both semen and saliva, any adult can easily understand how these 2 body fluids can appear together in the same sample.
   
   Not that we believe in what John Lowe says about the Maddie case, but we're really curious about where in the report did he say that ‘crime stain 1’ was positively saliva as Insane so adamantly says he does.
   
3. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous28 Feb 2014 18:50:00
   Rebelo asks: "At last, we request a reply as regards the previous queries concerning the collected mouth swabs from NEIL BERRY and RAJINDER RAJ SING BALU, as well as their DNA profiles comparisons with the results obtained in that laboratory, and also the comparison with the mitochondrial DNA profiles already submitted."
   
   Why single out Berry and Balu?
   
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   

[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   
2. Marty28 Feb 2014 19:31:00
   
3. Hi Textusa
   
   Longish-time reader, first-time commenter - thanks for yet another great article.
   
   One thing jumps to mind though - wouldn't a few previous swingers have come clean about their holidays there in PdL ? They could have sold their stories to the tabloids, at least in the earlier days, or just blogged about their experiences anonymously. Has there been any mention anywhere about swinging activities from previous visitors ?
   
   People in the 'scene' - whatever that may be - who may have never visited PdL but may have been aware that it was a 'friendly' destination for that sort of thing - surely someone would have spoken up ?
   
   Even if the whole thing was effectively shut down after Maddie disappeared, surely there would be some mention somewhere that the Ocean Club was a good off-season, family-friendly swingers destination ? I guess there must be discussion boards and members-only forums for this sort of thing, even if everyone there does use a pseudonym and veiled lingo.
   
   Just back from a quick google - these 2 are the best I can do, but not entirely relevant (and apologies for the Daily Mail link) -
   
   (1) Several Portuguese lawyers and journalists, along with a uniformed police officer from the National Republican Guard I spoke to outside the Ocean Club apartment, told me solemnly not only that the McCanns and their friends were "swingers" who had taken their holiday together to indulge in group sex (an assertion made repeatedly by the Portuguese Press), but that "everyone knows" that its tolerance of orgies is the Mark Warner Ocean Club resort's main selling point.
   One afternoon I decided to test this proposition, approaching two holiday reps there, dressed in their red Mark Warner sweatshirts. "Er, is this a good place for swingers, then?" I asked.
   They looked at me in total bafflement. "Swingers?" one replied.
   "Look around you, sir. Most of our guests are retired, or families with children."
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
   
   (2) Jane Tanner, brought by fate into the bleak surroundings of the Leicester Police interview room, watched by both a video camera and, behind a two way mirror, the Portuguese police, had had her fill of “theories.”
   “There’s a lot been said but, you know, we’re not a bunch of swingers that went out there for a swinging holiday,” she protested, adding the fascinating aside that, “I can’t think of anything worse, to be honest.” Her questioner, possibly intrigued by this insight into her personal tastes, let her proceed. “We didn’t go out there on a swingers’ holiday to dump our kids in the kids club while we got pissed and shagged each other, you know. That’s not what we did. One week a year,” she added bitterly, “there’s, there’s one week a year, the other fifty one weeks of the year with the kids all the time! In terms of our family, you know every spare moment’s with the kids: Russell doesn’t go off playing golf or go to the football ...it’s spent with the kids. I just think the Portuguese police have obviously got this idea of us and it’s completely, completely wrong in terms of the way we are and what, you know, our motives for being on holiday there were.” She added, as Jane Tanner often did, “I’m telling the truth.”
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
   
   Thanks.
   
4. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   

[*][url=javascript:;]Replies[/url]





[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 09:57:00
   Marty,
   
   Thank you for your comment.
   
   Swingers, as far as we've been able to tell, aren't boasters. They are normal people simply expressing in a different way from norm their desires.
   
   They are also fully aware that their optional lifestyle is socially reprehensible, reason why we find perfectly natural for them to have had a defensive and self-protective reaction to Maddie's death, to which, we will repeat time and time again, had nothing to do with.
   
   Being a swinger and having participated in swinging in PdL it would be of one's best interest that the issue would never surface so why be the one to bring it up even anonymously?
   Delete
   
   
   
2. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 13:32:00
   Put together DEVOUT catholicism, publicly and ostensively self-proclaimed devout catholicism and sleeping around with partners other than your husband/wife...I suppose that this is ADULTERY in the eyes of the catholic faith...and I suppose it is the same for anglicans too...
   Delete
   
   
   
3. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 14:22:00
   13:32, I'm a catholic and I don't care about other people's adultery. I care if I am or not. True religion is about oneself and not about others. We should forgive others for their trespasses and it's not up to us to condemn.
   I have known many atheists bigots.
   Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 15:44:00
   14:22:00,
   I'm afraid the Vatican does not share you liberality... I was referring to the dogmas of the catholic faith imposed/fabricated by the Church (Vatican), not the individual interpretations of you or me. For the Vatican, catholic faith is not a equivalent to a self-service restaurant where you pick and choose what pleases you and discard what does not...you either take it as a whole or you're not a "true" catholic!
   I might say I am a catholic, because I was baptized in the faith as a baby (no choice there....something that repulses me, the fear instigated on parents that their infants will not go to heaven if they die without the sacrament of baptism), but in truth I cannot say I am a catholic, I prefer to think I'm a christian, because I cannot agree and accept many things in the catholic faith, like the forced celibacy of priests, the discrimination on women and on divorced people, and a lot more!
   I think it is an hypocrisy to proclaim oneself "catholic" while living one's life breaking a number of paramount rules of the faith!
   Delete
   
   
   
5. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 16:06:00
   Anonymous 1 Mar 2014 14:22:00 and Anonymous 1 Mar 2014 15:44:00,
   
   Thank you both for your observations, but we try to keep religious stances on the blog to a minimum. 
   
   We are not theologians and don't offer opinions on religious views.
   
   Thank you for understanding.
   Delete
   
   
   Reply
   

[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Anonymous28 Feb 2014 23:35:00
   
2. I think that before asking if a grandmother would have her daughter swinging next to her or her kids, someone should ask if a grandmother would have her daughter cover-up her grandaughter's death? It seems grandparents, uncles and aunts and cousins have done just that, haven't they?
   Wasn't one of Kate's cousin that got all agitated in court defending the McCanns position Maddie was still alive? Wasn't he under oath?
   
3. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   

[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   
2. Anonymous1 Mar 2014 07:25:00
   
3. AndyB28 Feb 2014 13:00:00
   
   "Because swinging does warrant a VHLCU because being outed as swingers, in the UK, is despicable enough to completely ruin careers and reputations"
   
   Nonsense! Provide one example of a career ruined by swinging
   
   Even if it were true that swinging ruins careers, it doesn't give the establishment a reason to close ranks to protect a couple of low-level doctors.
   
   I agree. Rampant pedophiles get away with it - swinging is no big deal. Not going to bring anyone down at all.
   
4. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   

[*][url=javascript:;]Replies[/url]





[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 09:01:00
   Anonymous, 1 Mar 2014 07:25:00
   
   There is no comparison between the two. Paedophilia is illegal and vile.
   
   As to whether swinging ruins careers and reputations we see you disagree totally with Tommy Sheridan as to why he fought so fiercely to save both.
   
   According to you he shouldn't have. According to you he just went through a harsh legal battle for no reason whatsoever.
   
   In that case, a pretty stupid thing to do.
   Delete
   
   
   
2. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 16:13:00
   That reminded me of another "situation" that although not illegal still is hidden as a shameful thing: homosexuality. Lots of people in high places (politicians) go to great lenghts to hide they're gay, to the point oh having façade marriages, a family, the perfect front of an irreprehensible "normal" life...
   It's not illegal, but for some reason they're embarassed by it and feel they will loose much if it is out in the open...(and it seems it is so, because whenever such cases have been exposed in the media it never ended well...), otherwise why cover it up...?
   
   One of many examples is american New Jersey governor, Jim McGreevey.
   And for all those who non-chalantly proclaim they don't care about other people's private lifes/lifestyles and that Textusa is wrong about the absolute need for a cover-up of swinging activities, check out this:
   
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
   
   Public opinion DOES care! Public opinion counts! Whether it is swinging, homosexuality, adultery, paedophilia, it is always the END, if it comes out!
   If it is not important and well accepted, then why is it that the best way to destroy people's reputations is to spread rumours/accusations of the above mentioned practices...?
   
   
   Delete
   
   
   
3. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   AndyB2 Mar 2014 08:50:00
   "As to whether swinging ruins careers and reputations we see you disagree totally with Tommy Sheridan as to why he fought so fiercely to save both.
   
   According to you he shouldn't have. According to you he just went through a harsh legal battle for no reason whatsoever.
   
   In that case, a pretty stupid thing to do."
   
   Tommy Sheridan raised a libel action against the News of the World which claimed that he had visited a swingers club where he drank champagne and took coke. The libel action was in respect of the claims of champagne drinking (he's doesn't drink) and cocaine taking. He admitted visiting the swingers club and therefore to swinging. He won his case and was awarded £200,000. That maybe stupid, we'll have to agree to disagree on that, but its certainly very lucrative.
   
   You still haven't explained why the full weight of the establishment would be brought to bear to prevent the fact that a couple of doctors were involved in swinging becoming public knowledge. It certainly didn't happen in Tommy Sheridan's case and he's one of their own; a politician.
   
   
   
   
   Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa2 Mar 2014 09:46:00
   We think this is very good example of "purple-blindness":
   (http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/06/reason-as-per-black-hats.html)
   
   We will let readers read Tommy Sheridan's Wikipedia entry and make up their minds.
   Delete
   
   
   Reply
   

[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Textusa1 Mar 2014 09:30:00
   
2. Unpublished Anonymous at 28 Feb 2014 23:54:00
   
   Your response to the comment about the missing word GOLF was very informative and helps to complete a jigsaw So thanks for that.
   
   We won't publish, because we can't be totally certain the doctor AF you refer to is the same person in the group you refer to. We also don't publish names unless the person has made a statement to the police or media.
   
   Hope you understand.
   
3. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   

[*][url=javascript:;]Replies[/url]





[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 10:45:00
   Fully understand you not publishing my previous comment.
   There are overlaps between the directors of Rothley Park Golf Course Company and Vigia Group/Parque da Floresta. Company details in public domain.
   Nancy Burridge, who handed in a bag of clothes to the PJ, unless there is more than one NB in the area, is married to a director of Vigia Group UK.
   Delete
   
   
   
2. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 17:55:00
   F S of Vigia also director of Trafalgar Scientific based in Leicester. Jane Tanner worked for Fisher Scientific, a similar company. In my opinion, the  holiday wasn't arranged because it was the only suitable venue. I bet these people already knew each other.
   Delete
   
   
   Reply
   

[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Textusa1 Mar 2014 11:30:00
   
2. We recommend the reading of the following posts:
   
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (05Feb11)
   
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (02Sept11)
   
3. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 11:54:00
   and obviously:
   
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (19Jan11)
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
5. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 13:53:00
   Textusa, about your suspicion that Dianne Webster did not sleep in the Paynes apartm., I believe you're right on the money! I've always found weird what she said in her rogatory interview about the sleeping arrangements in their apartment, that she slept in the living room, on the coach, because she did not want to sleep in the same bedroom with her grand-daughter:
   
   "We were the only ones on the first floor, we had the, we had a bigger apartment than the others, err which is what Dave, Dave had originally err asked for anyway because he wanted to have err a separate bedroom I think for the girls, although they were in cots, and err I, I just slept on the err there was a folding bed in the liv, the sort of living room area, and that’s where I slept, although there were two beds in one of the bedrooms, that’s also where Lily was sleeping in her cot so I didn’t err didn’t want to sleep in the same room as her.”
   
   Which grand-mother would choose to sleep in a folding bed, in the living area, very exposed and no-privacy, instead of sleeping in a proper bed in a room, with a lot more privacy? She wouldn't be sharing a bed with the child, there were two beds! From the way she speaks one would think the child had the plague, or something! It's her own grand-daughter she's speaking about! Which grand-mother wouldn't want to sleep close to her grand-child, watch over her?!
   Folding beds are known to be quite uncomfortable, and DW is no "spring chicken", folding beds and elderly people...not a good match...
   Did she not want to sleep there or she could not sleep there because the room was not "available"?
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   
6. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Anonymous1 Mar 2014 13:59:00
   Forgot to add in my comment on Dianne Webster and the sleeping arrangements, that what also makes me suspect that the second bedroom was reserved for "other uses" is when she said :
   "Dave had originally err asked for anyway because he wanted to have err a separate bedroom I think for the girls, although they were in cots,"
   
   She slipped and let it out that the girls were sleeping in cots! Cots, not beds! I bet the girls were sleeping in the parents' bedroom!
   Why would Payne ask for a BIGGER apartment if the girls were in cots? And why have a bigger apartment and have your mother-in-law sleeping in the living-room? To me that says "SMALL apartment", not " a bigger apartment"!
   [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   
   
   

[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   
2. Anonymous1 Mar 2014 18:18:00
   
3. Hi Textusa
   Ive been investigating... no need to print this but here quickly are my results.
   
   Nancy Burridge found bag of clothes.
   Andy Burridge works for consultancy company which advises Vigia Group which was originally a Leicester based company with 4 UK shareholders - now 6. Most of them now live in Algarve.
   
   See description of what Andy's firm does...particularly the last line -my findings are in the forum. This may help or not..
   
   OwnerShare Hotel
   
   The Fractional Ownership Consultancy has developed a model for fractionalising resort hotels.
   
   Consider the advantages over conventional funding:
   
   • The hotel room can be sold off-plan to investors or lifestyle purchasers.
   • Sales therefore fund the build and upfront capitalisation is kept to a minimum.
   • Hotel operating profits are maximised because the cost of funding is minimised.
   • Owners/investors utilise the property, creating livelier off-peak operations.
   
   
   
   
4. [url=javascript:;]Reply[/url]Delete
   

[*][url=javascript:;]Replies[/url]





[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
   HelenMeg,
   
   We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
   
   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
   
   
   Delete
   
   
   Reply
   

[*][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

1. Anonymous1 Mar 2014 18:21:00
   
2. Sorry the OC PDL is just a lovely holiday complex & resort,nothing to do with swinging,the cover up of Madeleine's undoubted death by the McCanns is for another yet unknown reason,swinging is embarrassing for those involved if found out,but being found out would hardly be a sufficient reason to cover up the death of one's own child.
   

[*]

1. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
   Textusa1 Mar 2014 21:12:00
   Anonymous 1 Mar 2014 18:21:00
   
   We think we have responded to the "importance" argument quite adequately.
   
   About the Ocean Club being an innocent player in all this, we think we have provided enough proof that it wasn't.
   

There is another blog on the Textusa website for anyone interested .

HelenMeg wrote:There is another blog on the Textusa website for anyone interested .

Thanks Helenmeg,will take a look

tiny wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:There is another blog on the Textusa website for anyone interested .

Thanks Helenmeg,will take a look

Yes it is quite interesting as it relates to the PJ's analysis of the 9 laptops / computers used by Murat / Malinka.
It also highlights amongst other things a potential Barcelona link & that perhaps the Mc Canns flew from Coventry airport

But, as I suspected, a lot of new posts and posters come along to nicely deflect when anything veers too closely to the truth. Still.. not surprising

HelenMeg wrote:Have just read this blog entry in more depth. I'm in awe of Textusa.
Anyone know more about Textusa and the link to Independent.

You mention Walkden and a Textusa article on it. as Textusa does not permit cut and paste could you give me the title?
Did you post the connection of Walkden with Rothley Golf club?

In the car topic, quite some way back, you mention that you're going off topic and are moving your post to another topic.
However that topic isn't named. Could you help and find it?

Also, as most of the car topic is on golf now, where did the Walkden connection with Rothley Golf Club go? Iirc the discussion was quite detailed with mention of photographs.

Thanks.   

tigger wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:Have just read this blog entry in more depth. I'm in awe of Textusa.
Anyone know more about Textusa and the link to Independent.

You mention Walkden and a Textusa article on it. as Textusa does not permit cut and paste could you give me the title?
Did you post the connection of Walkden with Rothley Golf club?

In the car topic, quite some way back, you mention that you're going off topic and are moving your post to another topic.
However that topic isn't named. Could you help and find it?

Also, as most of the car topic is on golf now, where did the Walkden connection with Rothley Golf Club go? Iirc the discussion was quite detailed with mention of photographs.

Thanks.   

Hi Tigger
I have tried looking but cannot find it. I think we came to the conclusion that Ken Walkden hired the car in March and that he was also a member of Rothley Park Golf Club and probably knew of Gerry even though he denied knowing him.  We found a Golf Club newsletter showing that Walkden played in a golf tournament that Gerry arrange for Find Madeleine Org, sometime in 2011. I dont know that anything else came to light re Ken Walkden. There are definitely major links between Rothley Golf, Alfarve golf / Vigia / Nancy Burridge etc etc.  The trouble is we lose or forget a lot of interesting info ......

While it is possible that 'swinging' was going on, I do not believe this would be the motive behind such a big cover up. Why? It's not illegal, who really cares if they were all bed-hopping? It would be a one-day wonder story. No reason for such a huge hoax. And in any case, it appears that the McCanns, at least, adored  the media attention after their daughters 'disappearance'. They are so narcissistic, imo, that I can't imagine that they would be particularly phased by the suggestion of swinging. 

Apart from which, it is not a subject that Kate dwells on in her book. Which leads me, at least, to believe that it is not a topic that is particularly relevant to the case.

However, there are indications that there were darker forces at play. The Gasper statements; Social worker Yvonne Mitchell finding the McCanns and David Payne's behaviour and words suspicious and also recognizing David Payne in her professional capacity; the CATS references; the McCann and their friends suggestion that Madeleine was stolen by a paedophile. The many references in Kate's book to paedophilia. David Payne's very embellished account of when he last saw Madeleine and the twins. And so on.

And the timing of Madeleine's 'disappearance' was also at a politically very sensitive time. Blair had issued a D-notice on Operation Ore (which was, admittedly, highly flawed.) There were many secrets to be kept.

The level of deception involved is not consistent with covering up an activity which, if 'outed' would - at most - cause embarrassment and a raising of eye-brows and some sniggering, imo.

I agree j.rob about the darker forces ie pedophiles references way too much by Kate almost like she wants that subject brought up... Possibly a cover IF Madeleine's body was /is found. I believe with the Gasper statements and if they are true.. And I believe they are... That something happened that TM knew about but never thought accidentally she would die? That's one of a few theories that have been consistent in my mind. Just my opinion though. I believe it could have happened

Other than the sanction of being axed from their Christmas Card list, it's certainly noticeable that at no point has there been any attempt to deny, discredit or sue the Gaspars for making these statements. Have they ever appeared in the UK press or are they just too incendiary?

Certainly as part of this new review, they, along with the dogs' evidence and sedation remain the 'unmentionable' items of this case. I wonder if there are any others? All are likely to be significant.

HelenMeg wrote:

tigger wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:Have just read this blog entry in more depth. I'm in awe of Textusa.
Anyone know more about Textusa and the link to Independent.

You mention Walkden and a Textusa article on it. as Textusa does not permit cut and paste could you give me the title?
Did you post the connection of Walkden with Rothley Golf club?

In the car topic, quite some way back, you mention that you're going off topic and are moving your post to another topic.
However that topic isn't named. Could you help and find it?

Also, as most of the car topic is on golf now, where did the Walkden connection with Rothley Golf Club go? Iirc the discussion was quite detailed with mention of photographs.

Thanks.   

Hi Tigger
I have tried looking but cannot find it. I think we came to the conclusion that Ken Walkden hired the car in March and that he was also a member of Rothley Park Golf Club and probably knew of Gerry even though he denied knowing him.  We found a Golf Club newsletter showing that Walkden played in a golf tournament that Gerry arrange for Find Madeleine Org, sometime in 2011. I dont know that anything else came to light re Ken Walkden. There are definitely major links between Rothley Golf, Alfarve golf / Vigia / Nancy Burridge etc etc.  The trouble is we lose or forget a lot of interesting info ......

Most of us are guilty of going off topic, but the last 20 pages or so of the car hire are about golf and related matters.
If I have time or if someone else wants to do it, just. New topic, called Golf, or Golf connections, starting with the posts copied from the car topic would be a help.
It's always good to give the source of information, e.g. i take it that you have some of it from companies house and other websites.
It is very slow and tedious to do this with an iPad however.

I thought there must be another more suitable topic as you wrote you were moving your post in car hire to another, unnamed topic.

Great observation Bishop Brennan, it's strange that there is no lawsuit or injunction over the Gasper statements. I believe some things hit too close for comfort with TM's and the truth. I'm sure they would want that whooshed away not to be brought up.... But to sue would be to open that can of worms... Or beans... And leave them open to questions they wouldn't like to answer so best leave some things unspoken.my opinion only .

Tigger
 
For the record it went to:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
Page 14, but I don’t think it goes where you wanted it to.