Digging to start next week - UPDATE... starting today 2/6/14

Katie 

frost wrote:I wonder what the police and press would do if everyone in the uk made up posters saying '' Dig up the lies not luz ''  and placed them in their cars back window or their windows at home ? 

interesting times ahead

Katie Hopkins posted this on twitter yesterday will try and find

Lorraine  K. is now doing the news review..... stand by folks.

frost wrote:I wonder what the police and press would do if everyone in the uk made up posters saying '' Dig up the lies not luz ''  and placed them in their cars back window or their windows at home ? 

interesting times ahead

And, display the sign/placard next to Madeleine's photo .....

That should go down very well (not) in certain quarters.

If the Police have no guts are not ready yet to announce that Madeleine is dead, freedom of speech threat of C-R is a still a long way off......

	Katie Hopkins (@KTHopkins)
02/06/2014 18:35 Digging up Praia da Luz looking for Maddie? If they spent more time digging up lies and less time digging up Luz, Maddie could rest in peace

Download the official Twitter app here


Sent from my iPad

I think considering she has a column in the sun I can't see her tweeting this without their approval as she could lose her job potentially if they had any come back

For someone as clever as she thinks she is, it is not very original thinking to parrot the words of someone else though, is it?  She should have quoted Nana and then commented on her words  Not tweeted as though they were her own.

 The timing of that tweet makes me think KH had just seen Nana on the ITV news, where unlike other channels, ITV showed Nana's suggestion about the dig AND mentioned the area being searched is close to the Irish family sighting.

I don't think it matters tbh as long as someone higher profile than nana gets the message out

russiandoll wrote:For someone as clever as she thinks she is, it is not very original thinking to parrot the words of someone else though, is it?  She should have quoted Nana and then commented on her words  Not tweeted as though they were her own.

 The timing of that tweet makes me think KH had just seen Nana on the ITV news, where unlike other channels, ITV showed Nana's suggestion about the dig AND mentioned the area being searched is close to the Irish family sighting.

  I agree, that Katie Hopkins woman is all about controversy and keeping her name in the papers for a living, integrity won't come into it.

They may not be keeping the McCanns fully up to date with developments, but I wonder if they are doing so with Her Honour Mrs Justice Hogg !

She us a most disagreeable woman but this is more likely to reach MSM than nana unfortunately

jeanmonroe wrote:" />

"Where do you want me to plant these bones and replica pj's guv?

Post of   the day, as far as I'm concerned....

noddy100 wrote:She us a most disagreeable woman but this is more likely to reach MSM than nana unfortunately

True,she didn't believe the mccanns as I recall before she went to sun,so I say good on her .

SixMillionQuid wrote:

aquila wrote:'We Just Want to Know What Happened to Maddie'

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/we-just-want-to-know-what-happened-to.html

She makes a good point that if they're acting on specific information why target five sites?

As a result of these 'digs' I'm expecting them to find forensic evidence that links directly to Madeleine's disappearance.

Maybe they got a tip off such as, 'I saw X in this area with a spade'.... or even a confession such as 'I was in this area with X' (that one's optimistic I know)

     If someone knew another person was at this site but wasn't there themselves, or someone was at this site but it was dark when they were there and couldn't report an exact spot.....maybe then the GPR and arial reconnaisance indicates a couple of areas on the site that warrant excavation. If the police had a tip off of this sort and they have GPR that supports it they shoud act shouldn't they? Where is the '5 sites' from? Is it more speculation?


      Yet Again Pat Brown is making assumptions based on what has been put out in the media by the dreaded 'sources'. None of the three areas marked on maps in various articles since early May are being searched. None of the papers got the site right and we don't know whether there will be further sites. So saying the police are 'pretending' based on multiple dig sites is impossible at this time, there is only one site so far and Pat Brown doesn't know why they are searching it or what data they have, just as non of us here do.

noddy100 wrote:She us a most disagreeable woman but this is more likely to reach MSM than nana unfortunately

  How many people saw the ITV news as opposed to KH's less than 200,000 twitter followers?
 
  Still maintain that KH could have got NANA'a message out on twitter without presenting it as her own !

 She posted quite a few very forthright tweets about the case a while back, then went very quiet, had been told to button it in case she was not invited on This Morining again and because she was writing for a newspaper, probably.

 Vile woman who makes a living out of being or pretending to be obnoxious and controversial just for the sake of it...anyway enough about  her from me. I prefer to concentrate on another obnoxious blonde with the same name.

russiandoll wrote:

noddy100 wrote:She us a most disagreeable woman but this is more likely to reach MSM than nana unfortunately

  How many people saw the ITV news as opposed to KH's less than 200,000 twitter followers?
 
  Still maintain that KH could have got NANA'a message out on twitter without presenting it as her own !

 She posted quite a few very forthright tweets about the case a while back, then went very quiet, had been told to button it in case she was not invited on This Morining again and because she was writing for a newspaper, probably.

 Vile woman who makes a living out of being or pretending to be obnoxious and controversial just for the sake of it...anyway enough about  her from me. I prefer to concentrate on another obnoxious blonde with the same name.

totally agree

Read this on the BBC site and for some reason it struck me as a little odd...

"In the church that overlooks the bustling beach, a sanctuary away from the heat and noise outside its doors, a middle-aged woman lights a candle inside.

It joins four other flames burning, each a silent act of remembrance.

It is here that Kate McCann says she still seeks solace on her visits back to the resort, drawn to the area she last saw her daughter.

This next stage of the investigation is focused on trying to provide the answers she still needs."

Not they need

Is that because Gerry doesn't need any answer providing, as he already knows them?

BOLD MINE, SORRY FOR THE REPEAT OF PART OF AN EARLIER POST, BUT IMO IT IS IMPORTANT :

 The McCanns’ Portuguese lawyer, Isabel Duarte, said the distraught couple “just want to know exactly what happened to their daughter”.

She added: “It is my belief that police have some very good information to be carrying out ground searches.

“I believe there is data in the criminal file which has led to this operation because, if not, police would not be performing this very drastic task.

“Kate and Gerry have not been given any information that Madeleine is dead, and until this happens they have to believe she is still alive.


“But they think police will come up with some significant news. It is such a stressful time for them and my heart goes out to them.

"It has been so long, and the investigating officers now have new information and there may finally be some answers.”

Ms Duarte added: “I don’t need to ask them how they are feeling. It is very clear.

"But it is not for me to say if they fear the worse.”


 THE ABOVE STRONGLY SUGGESTS THAT THE MCCANNS HAVE NOT BEEN KEPT IN THE LOOP AT ALL ABOUT THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Why is Isabelle commenting on their behalf and no word from Clarence.  

Both Clarence and Martin Brunt are missing at this crucial time. 

sami wrote:Why is Isabelle commenting on their behalf and no word from Clarence.  

Both Clarence and Martin Brunt are missing at this crucial time. 

maybe brunty is awaiting news so he can be outside rothley towers or sy head quarters

cocked up quote sorry , maybe brunty is awaiting the news and a call to be outside rothley towers or sy head quarters

I sorted it for you - Admin

There's a proper old troll on the Guardian comments called "ID735113" - describes themselves as an amused observer, but who appears to be phenomenally interested in this forum!

russiandoll wrote:BOLD MINE, SORRY FOR THE REPEAT OF PART OF AN EARLIER POST, BUT IMO IT IS IMPORTANT :

 The McCanns’ Portuguese lawyer, Isabel Duarte, said the distraught couple “just want to know exactly what happened to their daughter”.

She added: “It is my belief that police have some very good information to be carrying out ground searches.

“I believe there is data in the criminal file which has led to this operation because, if not, police would not be performing this very drastic task.

“Kate and Gerry have not been given any information that Madeleine is dead, and until this happens they have to believe she is still alive.


“But they think police will come up with some significant news. It is such a stressful time for them and my heart goes out to them.

"It has been so long, and the investigating officers now have new information and there may finally be some answers.”

Ms Duarte added: “I don’t need to ask them how they are feeling. It is very clear.

"But it is not for me to say if they fear the worse.”


 THE ABOVE STRONGLY SUGGESTS THAT THE MCCANNS HAVE NOT BEEN KEPT IN THE LOOP AT ALL ABOUT THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

I'm afraid I don't read it that way at all RD. ID is simply reiterating the libel trial argument that there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and the original investigation was flawed i.e. SY is acting on information that was there all along. Why they should think that the police will come up with "significant news" is not explained but clearly that is meant to infer news that will support an abduction explanation. As for not being given information that Madeleine is dead - again this is strictly true. There is no absolute proof, although there is a lot of evidence that points to it, and as far as I'm aware neither SY or PJ have ever formally said that they are digging for a body. On the issue of being/ not being in the loop I read it as entirely neutral.

gbwales wrote:There's a proper old troll on the Guardian comments called "ID735113" - describes themselves as an amused observer, but who appears to be phenomenally interested in this forum!

The ID735113 is probably there old prison number . We get a few on here too .

admin please remove if not the appropriate place for these comments allowed on the Guardian site after the report on police activity yesterday



Welshwitch
03 June 2014 7:02am
Recommended
19
There is no existing evidence of the presence of any abductor - it there was one, he broke Locard's Principle for the only known time in criminal history.
Would a putative abductor travel, presumably on foot since the ground is rough, through an area in a resort where people were up and about outside, while carrying a child, dead or alive, then calmly proceed to dig a hole (What with? Had he brought a spade with him?) and bury a body not far from where the child had been? It beggars belief, though I suppose someone in a panic might be afraid to go far before dumping of a body for whose death he/she was (partly) responsible for bringing about, though I'd have thought that the putative abductor, if he'd accidentally killed the child, would have got out ASAP and left the body where it was.
The location chosen for this dig and equipment brought by the British police make no sense. There are huge amounts of open ground, much of it pock-marked with cracks and even old man-made holes.- why choose this particular area, which is far too big to be the subject of any specific information? Ground-penetrating radar? Finds solid objects - concrete, stone, bricks, metal - after seven years any remains of a three-year-old's body would be very slight. Cadaver dogs? They're trained to detect the smell of decaying human flesh - how much flesh would be left on the bones of a three-year-old's body after the desiccating effects of summer heat.

Has any psychological profiling been done on the parents? If not, why not? The standard investigatory process in the case of lost or dead children is to look first at the parents; these two have never given answers to questions quite properly asked by the Portuguee police.


CloudCastle
02 June 2014 9:17pm
Recommend
89
It seems the Met have faith in the abilities of cadaver dogs, despite Gerry McCann describing them as 'incredibly unreliable'.
(The dogs, not the Met...)


          
thekimster Britannie
03 June 2014 9:22am
Recommend
1
The 2 forces worked well together in 2007 but their efforts were sabotaged by UK Govt interference.
You can find 11,000+ pages of publicly released files from the original investigation at mccannpjfiles.co.uk
The case was shelved on the back on continued non-cooperation of the McCanns, who had only to send a letter to Portugal to get it re-opened.

• Report
  
• Share this comment on Twitter
  
• [url=https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/36484795&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false&name=Comment by thekimster on the Guardian]Share this comment on Facebook[/url]
  

[*]9 people, 21 comments

whatorly
02 June 2014 9:45pm
Recommend
86
I think there are many people myself included who would like to see resolution of this case. perhaps the parents and their friends will now agree to return to Portugal to do a formal reconstruction and answer all the questions they refused to answer in 2007. This I think would help the police forces involved.

• Report
  
• Share this comment on Twitter
  
• [url=https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/36468379&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false&name=Comment by whatorly on the Guardian]Share this comment on Facebook[/url]
  

• 
  
  dook whatorly
  02 June 2014 9:55pm
  Recommend
  66
  such a bizzare case. Have the Mccanns answered any questions whatsoever from Scotland Yard or the British police? How can you have an investigation if you haven't answered questions that I would have though standard in a case where a child has vanished?
  
  
  
  • Report
    
  • Share this comment on Twitter
    
  • [url=https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/36468699&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false&name=Comment by dook on the Guardian]Share this comment on Facebook[/url]
    
  
  
  

               
TonightsTheNight dook
02 June 2014 10:27pm
Recommend
42
What are you on about?
Come on guardian - switch off the comments on this article. Ridiculous accusations being made about these parents who have lost their child.

• Report
  

PKinOz
02 June 2014 10:09pm
Recommend
146
I fail to understand why the McCann's have not been pilloried in the press and prosecuted for neglect. Who goes out to dinner leaving their young children unattended? It would be bad enough at their home, let alone an unfamiliar holiday apartment. Especially given the peculiarly English paranoia of a paedophile lurking on every corner.

• Report
  
• Share this comment on Twitter
  
• [url=https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/36469212&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false&name=Comment by PKinOz on the Guardian]Share this comment on Facebook[/url]
  

• 
  
  Wordtaster PKinOz
  02 June 2014 10:51pm
  Recommend
  79
  Because the press are sacred shitless of this well informed, professional and highly defensive couple?
  I mean, who questions their doctor, let alone two of them - even of you do think they are irresponsible parents.
  

              
Aguia SimpleOldSailor
02 June 2014 10:59pm
Recommend
22
Also, the ground is hard as concrete. I wonder how far they will get with hand shovels? And it is not like your average burglar or kidnapper runs around streets with a shovel on his shoulder so that he could bury his victims in the nearest lot.

• Report
  
• Share this comment on Twitter
  
• [url=https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=180444840287&link=http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/36471205&display=popup&redirect_uri=http://static-serve.appspot.com/static/facebook-share/callback.html&show_error=false&name=Comment by Aguia on the Guardian]Share this comment on Facebook[/url]
  

          
MerkinOnParis
03 June 2014 12:40am
Recommend
55
The Portuguese police knew from a very early stage what had happened - hence the form of their questioning.
However, the McCanns kept silent on the advice of their PR team who were also contacted at a very early stage (a very early stage, it seems).
Now the Portuguese police have been given a point in the right direction and it looks as though someone has broken cover.
Truth will out.

Matthew Wright, the Wright Stuff, has just said 'this is the area (dig) where the dead 'suspect' (EM?) used to go."

So there you have it.

Dead 'suspect' did it!

Dosen't 'matter' if they 'find' anything.

(But replica Maddie pj's would come in handy)

Case closed.