Breaking News on Sky News - SY back in PDL suspects to be interviewed

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

espeland wrote:

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

aquila wrote:

espeland wrote:

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

It's not entirely clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

As for 'the likely penalty if they don't succeed' that's just too far out man.

jeanmonroe wrote:

aquila wrote:

espeland wrote:

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

It's not entirely clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

As for 'the likely penalty if they don't succeed' that's just too far out man.

Actually i AGREE with 'espeland' on this.

IF SY/MET do NOT 'solve' this case, what is to stop a criminal 'enterprise' STAGING an exact same 'crime'?

We've already had a 'copycat' haven't we?

Shannon Matthews 'case'

In which Karen Matthews constantly referred, and compared, Shannon's 'disappearance' to Madeleine's 'disappearance'

and a 'lot' of her 'relatives' tried to claim 'rewards on offer' didn't they?

BIG 'rewards' on offer for their 'mates' to claim?

"I found the kid wandering about our village, where's me £2.5million 'reward'?"

IF SY/MET do NOT solve this 'disappearance' then it WILL open the door to replica 'stagings' of 'abductions' of pretty three years old 'children' abroad, imo.

Ad Infinitum for SY/Met.

Possibly 'abducted' Canadian 'Maddie', Australian 'Maddie', South African 'Maddie', Cambodia 'Maddie' etc.,

The MET would have to investigate ALL of the above possible 'claims' wouldn't they?

Otherwise they might stand to be 'accused' of total bias towards 'investigating' ONLY one preferred 'missing' child who only the parents have said 'she (Madeleine) was abducted'

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

This case has nothing to do with any other case imo. It's still not clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

The only precedent set is that a Prime Minister can be bullied by the media to instruct (without the authority to do so) the UK police to do his bidding.

Naz_Nomad wrote:I saw a story (probably The Mirror, maybe The Express, but I can't find a link at the mo) online a few days ago, saying that sniffer dogs are being brought in to sniff these arguido's cars.  But if they do get a whiff of corpse, what then?  How does the whiff of corpse in the McCann's car fit in there?  

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

jeanmonroe wrote wrote:To use UNLIMITED taxpayers money, whilst kiddies after school 'clubs' are closed, due to Government 'cuts',(we ain't got no money for THEM) to 'solve' the claimed 'abduction' of a SINGLE child in Portugal, 7 years ago.

AndyB wrote:

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

I don't know if you're wrong, I used to think the same thing, but others have almost persuaded me that RB bullying her close friend in that way doesn't quite ring true. Do you know the provenance of the story?

Of course if that wasn't the reason for Cameron's unprecedented actions (for which neither he nor the Home Secretary have authority - the police are supposed to be independent) it begs the question what was the reason that he ordered the review

AndyB wrote:

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

I don't know if you're wrong, I used to think the same thing, but others have almost persuaded me that RB bullying her close friend in that way doesn't quite ring true. Do you know the provenance of the story?

Of course if that wasn't the reason for Cameron's unprecedented actions (for which neither he nor the Home Secretary have authority - the police are supposed to be independent) it begs the question what was the reason that he ordered the review

AndyB wrote:

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

I don't know if you're wrong, I used to think the same thing, but others have almost persuaded me that RB bullying her close friend in that way doesn't quite ring true. Do you know the provenance of the story?

Of course if that wasn't the reason for Cameron's unprecedented actions (for which neither he nor the Home Secretary have authority - the police are supposed to be independent) it begs the question what was the reason that he ordered the review

stargazer59 wrote:

Bellisa wrote:Any update on wlbts banning ? very very sad to see such a reasoned poster banned and for the sake of the forum I hope there was a genuine mistake.

stargazer can you please send him my regards. completely undeserved.

Hi Bellisa i have just done so , and he said to send his regards back to you

Daryl Dixon wrote:I'm a new poster and not au fait with the internal wranglings of this forum but good posters appear to leave or be banned for no other reason than disagreeing with Tony. Rightly or wrongly, it is my impression that this forum belongs to Tony in all but name.

Bellisa wrote:I have read that lj. My opinion still stands on what I know of wlbts from his posts. But if I see proof that he was a genuine disruptor I will be happy to retract my best wishes.

Daryl Dixon wrote:I'm a new poster and not au fait with the internal wranglings of this forum but good posters appear to leave or be banned for no other reason than disagreeing with Tony. Rightly or wrongly, it is my impression that this forum belongs to Tony in all but name.

lj wrote:

sofieellis wrote:

Woofer wrote:Its surely not true that WLBTS has been banned - he`d done nothing wrong - what`s going on?

Have noticed that in the last few weeks there have been several lurkers who have now suddenly found very strong voices.

And once again, someone has a go at new/ish posters. I don't understand how this is acceptable? How long does someone have to be a member before they are allowed to post their opinions?

Talk about ostracising people!

ETA: I can't understand why WLBTS has been banned either - it seems bizarre to me.

Sadly the trolls, or disrupters, or whatever you want to call them come in as new posters, often in waves. So it is not more than natural that new posters are looked at with a healthy amount of skepticism, especially when there is a wave of new posters patting each other on the back and posting with styles we recognize.

aquila wrote:

AndyB wrote:

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

I don't know if you're wrong, I used to think the same thing, but others have almost persuaded me that RB bullying her close friend in that way doesn't quite ring true. Do you know the provenance of the story?

Of course if that wasn't the reason for Cameron's unprecedented actions (for which neither he nor the Home Secretary have authority - the police are supposed to be independent) it begs the question what was the reason that he ordered the review

See the Leveson Inquiry.

NickE wrote:Cash strapped Maddy suspects 'would have grassed'

THE gang accused of killing Madeleine McCann must be innocent because they would have snitched on each other to pocket the reward.


By [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]/Published 5th July 2014





INCONCEIVABLE: One of the financially strapped suspects would have talked says Portuguese police [PA]


At least one of the “skint” men would have broken ranks, Portuguese police believe.


One was a heroin addict, the second a 16-year-old beggar and the third a driver who police believe organised thefts from apartments in Praia da Luz where the McCanns stayed.


Police and UK newspapers offered rewards totalling more than £2.5million for information that cracked the case. Yet in the seven years since no-one has come forward to claim the cash.


A Portuguese police source said it was “inconceivable that humble people with limited financial resources could keep quiet” for so long.


UK detectives believe Madeleine was killed during a bungled break-in at the McCanns’ apartment in May 2007 by a gang of thieves who then buried her on wasteground near the scene.


The three suspects denied all knowledge of Madeleine’s fate when quizzed by British detectives this week.






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