Re: Gerry McCann's brother-in-law, Tony Rickwood, removes his depraved images of women drowning from an internet site

by loopzdaloop 27.12.13 23:04

loopzdaloop wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:This is not a nasty attitude, Loopzdaloop, simply a direct response to your post. I notice you placed an identical post on another thread with links to this perverts blog and twitter. Why would anyone want to look at those?

Deleted this is pure speculation and could be libellous

Dear Mod, Please can you sign off any censorship as I disagree what I wrote is libellous and I shall tell you why.

The Mccann's have pushed this idea of a mystery predatory stranger pedophile that has 'taken' their daughter.
Kate also 'imagined' within her book (graphically) what the mystery stranger pedophille might have done to her daughter.
Yet Statistically, this is highly unlikely. The hard truth is that more often than not, Pedo's abuse children that are known to them. Children are also, more often than not, if murdered, done anyway with by someone known to them.

As often as the Mccann's have been able to over the past however many years we have suspect upon suspect released to the media.
All mystery men, although one mystery woman that looked like Victoria Beckham.

Yet, as members of this forum have pointed out, they have been keen to avoid the questions raised with regard to things that are known.

For example, we have the Gaspar Statements RE the conversation David Payne and Gerry were having that had sexual undertones RE: Maddie.
We also have the Statement of Yvonne Martin (social worker and child protection expert) RE: David Payne that she felt she had come across him in their line of work.

As this website often analyses links between The Mccann's and shady or depraved connections (hence the title of this thread) when you hear that there is a sex offender called Dr Nigel Oldfield who has been profiled by the Telegraph, it is not a stretch to question whether he is connected to Dr Matthew Oldfield in some way.

Furthermore, according to the office of national statistics there were 7439 people with the surname Oldfield listed in the entire UK in September 2002. That is not that many.

You also deleted my response to Suep and my thank you to canada12 for looking up dates of births and relationships on the mothers side.
However, the subject is not closed as the surname or family name mostly runs down paternal lines.

I would also like to add that this whole website is speculation!

Merry Christmas! :)

by loopzdaloop 27.12.13 23:22

bobbin wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Birds of a feather flock together. I wonder if he got on well with David Payne.
And we remember that Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight.
Then denied it
Then had to admit it during his rogatory, but said he couldn't remember why . . .

And as I have often observed, when we get onto a rather 'sensitive' area of discussion, we see veritably vehement reactions which stand out against the normal, well mannered, well considered arguments put forward by capable people, analysing the facts and fictions put in front of them, and who are doing this, for the justice for a little girl who just simply disappeared.
In contrast to the sociopaths and psychopaths embedded in the total of society there is a greater number of 'socially responsible people' who put too much value on the sanctity of human life to let it just go by unchallenged, that a defenseless little girl has been so abused.
Sensitive, explosive reactions advertise the fact that we need to look more closely and more thoroughly at this aspect of current research.
Happily, the Education Authorities, with thanks to members of this forum, will be doing just that.
And it is by contributing to this forum and others similar, throughout, that a great deal of information has been brought out into the open whereby the authorities have become informed and know that the 'socially responsible' portion of society will not let this matter rest and will leave no stone unturned.

I agree with your observation entirely.
I forgot that David Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY At Midnight.
That's interesting in itself!

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath S and M.

As with a lot of other things about the McCanns, their friends and extended families, one instance on its own would not be thought significant but, taken as a whole, it raises unpleasant suspicions as to the world in which Madeleine lived.

^ This encompasses my thoughts.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:
bobbin wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Birds of a feather flock together. I wonder if he got on well with David Payne.
And we remember that Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight.
Then denied it
Then had to admit it during his rogatory, but said he couldn't remember why . . .
He did indeed Peter, and that has to be significant imo.
He also in his Leicester Police statement mentioned that yes, there was something else, but this was probably not the right place or time to say it. At which point, the interviewing policeman just moved on.

Could it be that it was pursued but has been held back in the PJ files? Amaral still puts Payne in an important position in this 'mystery'. Then again I was sure I read somewhere that DP had been fully investigated by the UK police and was clear.

(Sorry for three posts/ quotes in a row)

I'm not sure that David Payne has been cleared.
It is highly significant that he wasn't spoken of or named on Crimewatch.
The only reason that I can comprehend for this is, is not to potentially prejudice any future trial.

Either A> David Payne has turned Queen's Evidence, or B> David Payne played a much larger part and the thumbscrews are on on hold, awaiting evaluation by jury.

by plebgate 27.12.13 23:53

dromodaire wrote:I just want to say that in my comment about people critisising Philomena's weight, I wasn't trying to have a go at Bobbin, or indeed Chilly Heat personally, both of whom I like and admire as excellent contributers, and both of whom I wish Merry Christmas.

I was just pointing out the sort of innate hypocrisy we're all guilty of, which is relevant for me, because a lot of people on here take the moral high ground.

A lot of people in the world (not on this forum) have made personal attacks on members of team Mccann, and personally I don't really care -- I think, through their actions, they're fair game, and they've certainly made a lot of people's blood boil.

Ergo, if someone were to create photos of 'peope who've made our blood boil' sinking into mud, I personally would understand where that sentiment comes from: it comes from the rage of being helpless and impudent to counteract the injustice we all see before us.

Quite a few supporters have made very rude and abusive comments about contributors to this and other sites. One of the very first insults hurled was about people who questioned- calling them nutters I believe.

by Olympicana_Reloaded 28.12.13 1:37

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:The name "deviant art" is a little unfortunate; it is a legitimate form of artwork.

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

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008: Section 63

The IWF's role regarding government legislation on the possession of extreme pornography

Background

The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) was formed in 1996 following agreement between the government, police, and internet industry that a partnership approach was needed to tackle the online distribution of indecent images of children and criminally obscene adult content in the UK. Since then interest in and support for our work has grown considerably and our members now include internet service providers, mobile phone operators, search providers, filtering and software companies, the financial sector, and others.

The IWF is an independent self-regulatory body. It is governed by a Board of ten Trustees consisting of an Independent Chair, six independent Trustees and three industry Trustees. The Board monitor, review and direct the IWF’s remit, strategy, policy and budget to enable the IWF to achieve its objectives.

We operate an internet ‘Hotline’ for the public and IT professionals to report their inadvertent exposure to potentially criminal child sexual abuse content hosted around the world and criminally obscene adult content hosted in the UK. We provide a national ‘notice and take-down’ service to any service provider hosting such content in the UK.

Our role is confined to interpreting relevant legislation to ensure potentially criminal online content within our remit is traced, reported, and removed wherever possible. We work in partnership with our members and stakeholders, the public, law enforcement agencies, government departments, and, as a result of this collaborative approach, UK-hosted unlawful content within our remit has been virtually eradicated.

Criminally Obscene Content and Extreme Pornography

In 2007 the Home Office asked the IWF to allow our public internet reporting mechanism to be used for the reporting of UK-hosted extreme pornography covered by Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. Following consultation with IWF’s industry members, our Board informed the government of our agreement to fulfil this role, from 26 January 2009, as part of our original remit.

The new legislation is based on the principle that it is an offence to possess extreme pornographic images. Although IWF has no role in the investigation of possession offences by members of the public it is conceivable that IT professionals managing networks, abuse teams, and others charged with moderating online services could be inadvertently exposed to this type of content. Therefore, our industry members may wish to refer to IWF as a point of expertise for advice on whether content of which they have become aware is potentially illegal and whether it should be considered for investigation by the police.

Assuming any such content is considered to be unlawful we will ensure the IT professional reporting the content and their company are paired with the relevant law enforcement unit so any potential offences could be investigated.

The new legislation is not intended to extend the law to cover the possession of material beyond that which is already illegal to publish under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 (OPA). Therefore, the IWF will continue to apply OPA legislation to such content in the course of providing our national ‘notice and take-down’ service. On those rare occasions where material believed to be unlawful is depicted on a website hosted in the UK the IWF works in partnership with internet service providers (ISPs), hosting companies, and the police to provide information to assist investigations into the distributers of the content and to help combat abuse of UK networks.

Blocking

Unlike indecent images of children on the internet, IWF does not have the remit to deal with criminally obscene adult content at a global level. Comprehensive data regarding such content will not be collated in order to facilitate its blocking.

The IWF URL list which is made available to companies in the online sector so they can implement blocking solutions only contains specific web pages depicting indecent images of children according to UK law (Protection of Children Act 1978).

Notes:

If you believe you have stumbled across extreme pornography on a website hosted in the UK then it can be reported through the Internet Watch Foundation’s online reporting form ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Where potentially illegal extreme pornographic material is found in hard copy or on a computer it should be reported to the police in the same way as any other criminal offence.

If individuals have concerns about the legality of content they possess they should seek their own legal advice.

This legislation contains defences to cover those who may have contact with the material in the course of their legitimate work.

Further information

For the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (Section 63), visit [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010: Section 42: Extreme Pornography

Section 42 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 provides for a new offence criminalising the possession of extreme pornographic material. It came into force on 28 March 2011. An information note on the new offence, including Frequently Asked Questions is available.

The new offence is similar to that at section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, which applies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Scottish offence goes further than that offence, however, in that it covers all images of rape or other non-consensual penetrative sexual activity.

The new legislation is based on the principle that it is an offence to possess extreme pornographic images. Although the IWF has no role in the investigation of possession offences by members of the public it is conceivable that IT professionals managing networks, abuse teams, and others charged with moderating online services could be inadvertently exposed to this type of content. Therefore, our industry members may wish to refer to the IWF as a point of expertise for advice on whether content of which they have become aware is potentially criminal and whether it should be considered for investigation by the police.

Assuming any such content is considered to be unlawful we will ensure the IT professional reporting the content and their company are paired with the relevant law enforcement unit so any potential offences could be investigated.

Under section 51 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, it is already illegal to publish, sell or distribute or to possess with a view to selling or distributing, obscene material, including the obscene pornographic material which is covered by this new offence. The Bill contains provisions to increase the maximum penalty under section 51 of the 1982 Act in respect of extreme pornographic material from three to five years.

The IWF will continue to apply existing legislation to such content in the course of providing our national ‘notice and take-down’ service. On those rare occasions where material believed to be unlawful is depicted on a website hosted in the UK the IWF works in partnership with internet service providers (ISPs), hosting companies, and the police to provide information to assist investigations into the distributers of the content and to help combat abuse of UK networks.

To report criminally obscene adult content hosted in the UK, including extreme pornography click here.

For more information visit: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by scotclogs 28.12.13 4:44

Ladyinred wrote:This is not a nasty attitude, Loopzdaloop, simply a direct response to your post. I notice you placed an identical post on another thread with links to this perverts blog and twitter. Why would anyone want to look at those?

by Loving Mom 18.07.14 20:06

Cristobell wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Birds of a feather flock together. I wonder if he got on well with David Payne.
And we remember that Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight.
Then denied it
Then had to admit it during his rogatory, but said he couldn't remember why . . .
He did indeed Peter, and that has to be significant imo.

IMO, Payne ringing the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight, denying it, and then saying he could not remember why are huge red flags. He knows a lot about the lies told and more important, the truth of what happened to Madeleine during the hellish friends vacation.
Maybe, in addition to communicating online about it here someone would like to ask him about it online?
Can't hurt to try to jog his memory... Sometimes it is what it takes to get the facts out.
Okay, I am waiting to see if any response(s) are what I expect. Hmmm
The truth will come out, I am surprised and very disappointed it has taken this long. shark

by Five Ice Creams 18.07.14 21:07

Loving Mom wrote:MO, Payne ringing the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight, denying it, and then saying he could not remember why are huge red flags. He knows a lot about the lies told and more important, the truth of what happened to Madeleine during the hellish friends vacation.
Maybe, in addition to communicating online about it here someone would like to ask him about it online?
Can't hurt to try to jog his memory... Sometimes it is what it takes to get the facts out.
Okay, I am waiting to see if any response(s) are what I expect. Hmmm
The truth will come out, I am surprised and very disappointed it has taken this long.

I agree regarding DPs responses around the call to SY being huge red flags. IMO these red flags are accompanied by a fair few others:

his role as the last non-family-member alleged to have seen MBM alive and ...
his 30sec/30min visit to the fragrant KM when ...
she may/may not have been wearing a towel or clothes and when ...
he may, or may not, have entered the apartment and ...
his, IMO, disturbing descriptions, in police interviews, of MBM and ....
the Gaspar statements.

by jack dexter 18.07.14 23:56

I have felt for a while that dp has saved himself. He was wooshed from crime watch and it is believed he took the bus video that was released. I was corrected on this point as it was gm who said he released the video. You do have to ask why he would want to release that video.Did dp tell him he was putting it on the net so gm had to pretend that he did it?

by **PeterMac** 19.07.14 0:49

The thread has drifted.

see TB's excellent dissection and destruction of the alleged KM and DP timelines

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

by j.rob 29.07.14 18:08

PeterMac wrote:The strange, and perhaps worrying thing is that the teacher who was dismissed for making the indecent images was in the department whose Head is Philomena McCann.
She MUST have had a hand in his appointment and then his professional mentoring, annual staff appraisals and so on.
And the other one who has come to notice is husband of Philomena McCann, who cannot help having noticed stuff on his or their computer.
She is the common factor in this.

These things are often NOT just coincidences. What happens is that you get a certain 'culture' within an organisation. Schools are not immune to this phenomenon, unfortunately.

by j.rob 29.07.14 18:30

PeterMac wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Birds of a feather flock together. I wonder if he got on well with David Payne.
And we remember that Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight.
Then denied it
Then had to admit it during his rogatory, but said he couldn't remember why . . .

This is extraordinary. I would say there was a massive amount of panicking going on that week.

by j.rob 29.07.14 19:15

A bit like Russell being obliged to admit in one of his early police stations that a fellow-holiday maker approached him and Kate (and maybe others from the Tapas, not sure, I will have to dig out the statement) video-recording the holiday-makers three year old child playing mini-tennis. And the holiday-maker made it clear to them that their video-recording of his daughter was making him uncomfortable.

When asked by police about the video-recorder, Russell says he does not remember seeing one.

Kate deals with this rather embarrassing incident in her book by placing the video-recorder in the fellow holiday-makers own hands and claiming he told her and Russell that filming his daughter in this way made him feel 'like a dirty old man.'

This then, according to Kate in her book, leads on to some light-hearted banter between the three of them about paedophiles. You know - typical sort of stuff that parents talk about while hanging around the playground.

And Russell shares with the holiday-maker and Kate his view that effectively amounted to 'the world had become paranoid.'

And, according to Kate, the other dad chipped in with his views, as well as Kate who apparently believes that parents are not allowed to take photographs of their own kids in swimming pools any longer.

"We agreed it was a shame things had come to this."

Silly old 'other dad' finding Russell and Kate's behaviour was a cause for concern.

Anyone would think that he was paranoid that a paedophile was about to snatch his daughter from this family-friendly resort.

Honestly!

Thank Goodness that Kate and Russell could put his mind at rest that he was just being paranoid!

(page 64 - Madeleine).

I have posted up the Russell police statement where he gets in a twist about the video-recording incident in several threads. It is slightly confusing to read as I think certain aspects get 'lost in translation' - a factor that no doubt certain people were banking on.

by j.rob 29.07.14 19:25

Loving Mom wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
Birds of a feather flock together. I wonder if he got on well with David Payne.
And we remember that Payne rang the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight.
Then denied it
Then had to admit it during his rogatory, but said he couldn't remember why . . .
He did indeed Peter, and that has to be significant imo.
IMO, Payne ringing the Child Abuse Unit at SY before midnight, denying it, and then saying he could not remember why are huge red flags. He knows a lot about the lies told and more important, the truth of what happened to Madeleine during the hellish friends vacation.
Maybe, in addition to communicating online about it here someone would like to ask him about it online?
Can't hurt to try to jog his memory... Sometimes it is what it takes to get the facts out.
Okay, I am waiting to see if any response(s) are what I expect. Hmmm
The truth will come out, I am surprised and very disappointed it has taken this long.

Indeed. The red flags are billowing in a force 10 hurricane. I can't imagine why it took me, at least, so very long to see them. I suppose it is because this case is all such a mind twister.

by Milo 07.08.22 1:53

Verdi et al, Please do not shut down this topic as I have not yet had time to digest it all. Veritas, Please do not give up. After all, you have given us much to think about.

by Guest 07.08.22 2:11

In Verdi veritas - or should that be in Vino veritas.

Please feel free to elaborate about what is troubling you ....

Gerry McCann's brother-in-law, Tony Rickwood, removes his depraved images of women drowning from an internet site