Re: MADDIE COPS PRIME SUSPECT BLUNDER- tomorrows MIRROR 28/12/13

by Okeydokey 31.12.13 2:52

jeanmonroe wrote:Perhaps Andy will 'give her a bell'!

A fellow professional who has worked on many serious cases.

Can't do any harm, can it?

Andy and his elite dedicated team of 37 haven't come up with anything in 2 years 7 months, and £7 million of taxpayers money, of 'intense investigation' have they?

Give Pat a ring, i say!

Yep, give Pat a call, and then Tony Bennett and then Mr Amaral. :)

by jeanmonroe 31.12.13 3:01

Okeydokey wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:Perhaps Andy will 'give her a bell'!

A fellow professional who has worked on many serious cases.

Can't do any harm, can it?

Andy and his elite dedicated team of 37 haven't come up with anything in 2 years 7 months, and £7 million of taxpayers money, of 'intense investigation' have they?

Give Pat a ring, i say!

Yep, give Pat a call, and then Tony Bennett and then Mr Amaral. :)

If, IF, i were investigating this case i would defo have called TB and GA even if it was only to ask them WHY it is they don't believe the 'abduction' story as told only by the parents of the 'missing' child.

But there again, i'm not the highly paid DCI charged with solving the 'case of the century'.

by Okeydokey 31.12.13 3:03

jeanmonroe wrote:
Okeydokey wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:Perhaps Andy will 'give her a bell'!

A fellow professional who has worked on many serious cases.

Can't do any harm, can it?

Andy and his elite dedicated team of 37 haven't come up with anything in 2 years 7 months, and £7 million of taxpayers money, of 'intense investigation' have they?

Give Pat a ring, i say!

Yep, give Pat a call, and then Tony Bennett and then Mr Amaral. :)

If, IF, i were investigating this case i would defo have called TB and GA even if it was only to ask them WHY it is they don't believe the 'abduction' story as told only by the parents of the 'missing' child.

On that we are certainly agreed then! :)

by SixMillionQuid 31.12.13 14:43

Who said wishes don't come true?

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

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

by loopzdaloop 31.12.13 14:55

SixMillionQuid wrote:Who said wishes don't come true?

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

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

This precise quote is why I didn't believe Tanner.
At that point in time, why was she so defensive and 'frustrated' at not being believed.

It looks a perfect time for a journo to have an interview with her now that the best thing that could happen to her has occurred.

by suzyjohnson 31.12.13 15:08

loopzdaloop wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:Who said wishes don't come true?

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

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

This precise quote is why I didn't believe Tanner.
At that point in time, why was she so defensive and 'frustrated' at not being believed.

It looks a perfect time for a journo to have an interview with her now that the best thing that could happen to her has occurred.

Yes, a very good way for the Tapas group to increase awareness of the 10 pm Smith sighting

by canada12 31.12.13 19:40

suzyjohnson wrote:
loopzdaloop wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:Who said wishes don't come true?

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

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

This precise quote is why I didn't believe Tanner.
At that point in time, why was she so defensive and 'frustrated' at not being believed.

It looks a perfect time for a journo to have an interview with her now that the best thing that could happen to her has occurred.
Yes, a very good way for the Tapas group to increase awareness of the 10 pm Smith sighting

Perhaps Redwood and Co. came across this rather enlightening quote from Jane and decided they would grant her wish. And now the ball is in her court.

by GRACEFUL1 01.01.14 10:01

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

Madeleine McCann: Police investigate new mobile phone information
By [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Dec 31, 2013

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

Detectives are examining new mobile phone information as they continue their search for [url=http://www.parentdish.co.uk/tag/Madeleine McCann/]Madeleine McCann[/url].

According to the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], Portuguese authorities are thought to have provided Scotland Yard with a list of calls made in and around the Ocean Club in Praia de Luz between 9pm and 10pm on May 3 2007 – the night the three-year-old vanished.

The dossier is believed to contain phone numbers that have yet to be identified, and officers hope they could provide vital new leads.

Detectives hope to track down the registered owner of each phone, and check whether any are known sex offenders.

The information was sent to the Met in response to an 'international letter of request' asking for assistance from foreign police forces in 31 countries.

The newspaper believes the requests relate to unidentified mobile phone numbers and it is the first time they have been analysed in detail.

by sallypelt 01.01.14 10:42

If one can believe a word the gutter press prints these days, it's scary to think that the alleged £5 million spent so far on the case could double. Nice work if you can get it.

by plebgate 01.01.14 10:45

sallypelt wrote:If one can believe a word the gutter press prints these days, it's scary to think that the alleged £5 million spent so far on the case could double. Nice work if you can get it.

The rate it is going it wouldn't surprise me if the amount had tripled by the time the taxpayer stops paying for it all.

IMO the parents should definitely have contributed to this investigation.

by russiandoll 01.01.14 10:47

quote Gezza : "that's why the e-fits & sketches are so important to us as it's the best chance of finding Madeleine "

On CW I believe, no wonder Redwood was in a separate section of the studio, anticipating having to listen to this level of barefaced cheek.

by Seek truth 02.01.14 4:10

loopzdaloop wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:Who said wishes don't come true?

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

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

This precise quote is why I didn't believe Tanner.
At that point in time, why was she so defensive and 'frustrated' at not being believed.

It looks a perfect time for a journo to have an interview with her now that the best thing that could happen to her has occurred.

There has always been a perfect time for a journo to have and interview with both of them, even on TV interviews, but it's never happened, wonder why.

Jane's wish came true and it's helped for the search to go on and on and on..

Now they need an innocent father for the Smith sighting, imagine that!

by ScallyScouser 03.01.14 4:29

Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Follow us: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] | [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by suep 03.01.14 6:34

ScallyScouser wrote:
Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Follow us: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] | [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

JT is still a 'fantasist' in my opinion, Scallyscouser, because whatever she saw she was incapable of making up her mind about it. First of all she didn't see any facial features, then it was Murat, then someone completely different etc etc. The thing that's always puzzled me is the direction she said the man was walking in which was apparently towards the creche not away from it . Has the man who came forward confirmed this and explained it?

by SixMillionQuid 03.01.14 7:33

suep wrote:
ScallyScouser wrote:
Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Follow us: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] | [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

JT is still a 'fantasist' in my opinion, Scallyscouser, because whatever she saw she was incapable of making up her mind about it. First of all she didn't see any facial features, then it was Murat, then someone completely different etc etc. The thing that's always puzzled me is the direction she said the man was walking in which was apparently towards the creche not away from it . Has the man who came forward confirmed this and explained it?

No and not surprisingly Redwood hasn't addressed this issue and no one in the media has answered the question. I mean Jane Tanner is off the hook as far as Operation Grange is concerned so she can carry on with her life without any further intrusion from the media - like that ever happened.

This nameless, faceless man who turned up after six years may as well be a figment of someones imagination, just like Tanners sighting. And the media dont seem to be interested in finding out who this guy was or what apartment he was staying at - because he was never where Jane said she saw Bundleman.

by canada12 03.01.14 7:34

Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

by ScallyScouser 03.01.14 7:52

canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

Thing is if he was walking in direction of block 5 then JT would be expected to give running commentary on were he went what floor why she never asked him why av u got ur kid out on a cold night in pj's......... were if he walking in other direction her statement is simply

by SixMillionQuid 03.01.14 8:02

canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

by Guest 03.01.14 8:23

SixMillionQuid wrote:
If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

Maybe he will give it another five years and admit to being Smithman too?

by tiny 03.01.14 8:33

SixMillionQuid wrote:
canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

This is my belief too,jane tanner was not on the street either,she is a liar,so I don't know what game sy are playing at other than trying to bring about a white wash.

by bobbin 03.01.14 9:40

tiny wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:
canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.
This is my belief too,jane tanner was not on the street either,she is a liar,so I don't know what game sy are playing at other than trying to bring about a white wash.

or successfully blowing Gerry McCanns only alibi apart and leaving the focus on him being seen by Smiths, at 10 p.m. when Gerry has no alibi. spin

Effectively, NO ABDUCTION, therefore, with Matthew Oldfield being the last to look in on the children, and Maddie's blood and cadavour odour being found, attempted concealed, it focusses in on the Tapas 9 again.
I would not want to be Matthew Oldfield at this time, nor his wife and family, with his testimony, even on the mockumentary being so clear that he was there, AFTER Gerry had seen Maddie alive and proudly noting his happy father's moment, and BEFORE Kate went back and discovered that Maddie had disappeared. Calling Matthew Oldfield, your times up....time to come forward and tell it how it really was..... spin

by Hongkong Phooey 03.01.14 10:51

ScallyScouser wrote:
Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Follow us: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] | [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Amaral stated that the PJ considered her sighting to be a fantasy, she herself put doubts on it by describing the way the child was being carried and stated in hindsight it would have made more sense for the child to have been carried at the shoulder a la smithman. There are elements of her story which are clearly made up, SY are in my opinion 'at it' their motive remains to be seen.

by suep 03.01.14 15:26

Hongkong Phooey wrote:
ScallyScouser wrote:
Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Follow us: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] | [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Amaral stated that the PJ considered her sighting to be a fantasy, she herself put doubts on it by describing the way the child was being carried and stated in hindsight it would have made more sense for the child to have been carried at the shoulder a la smithman. There are elements of her story which are clearly made up, SY are in my opinion 'at it' their motive remains to be seen.

From a Statement Analysis point of view her rogatory interview reeks of deception. And we mustn't forget that the tannerman e-fit is still prominently displayed on the McC's website. What message does that send to SY? Why would they want to do that? It makes no sense to me.Do they still have an 'active' private investigation going?

by Guest 03.01.14 16:02

Do they still have an 'active' private investigation going?

Yes, I've been wondering that too. What are they using the Fund for, apart from legal fees.

by suep 03.01.14 20:06

Yes. Phenomenal legal fees all made necessary because of their need to maintain the story of an abduction and aggressively divert understandable speculation about alternative explanations for the disappearance of their child.
Yes the search for Madeleine continues. Its what we're all doing. The difference is they want us to believe she will someday return alive whereas the evidence tells us we're looking for a dead almost four year old. I take no pleasure whatsoever from pointing that out but as a realist I can't see any other alternative. This is my opinion,of course.

by **PeterMac** 05.01.14 10:25

I love the bit about misunderstanding what the vocation of being a Burglar entails . . . ! Brilliant put-down.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by suep 05.01.14 10:51

Nice find, Peter Mac!!

by tiny 05.01.14 11:05

that's more of the truth,wonder who wrote it

by plebgate 05.01.14 12:14

Who wrote it?

Don't know, but a fool he/she is not.

by aiyoyo 05.01.14 16:59

That's a Mccracker.

Meanwhile the representative of Mr Gerry Psychkato, the pink spokescreature, has swallowed a whole turkey hence unfortunately unable to comment until further notice.

Keep your eyes peeled for more Mcbits of Croak coming up soon..............