Friday, 28 September 2012

Jane W(B)ond

Before going on holiday, the blog underwent a meticulous process of debunking the three main independent witnesses who appeared in that priceless testimony which we all call Mockumentary: JW, TS and Derek Flack.

The McCanns sponsored and participated in it, meaning they’ve subscribed to it in full.

These three witnesses are the backbone of the “abductor thesis” defended by the couple. They’re the only ones who say they saw a suspicious individual looking suspiciously and obsessively at Apartment 5A in April/May 2007.

There’s one exception to this, as you know, and that is JW’s first sighting. She says she sees a man staring at something that, at least in the near foreseeable future, we’ll never know, but know it wasn't Apartment 5A.

Why is that? Because nowhere has it been shown where did JW thought Pimpleman was staring at, at that particular moment. In fact we don’t know what JW has said in statement besides the following sentences, shown in the Mockumentary, where it's referenced what she said somewhere else:

“She sees a suspect male, ambling along (...)”
“Not mentioned if she sees him from her ap(...) apartment 1) or from road?”
“Not possible it was from her apartment (...) tennis court or pool?”
“Which daughter is she with – the 3 year old or (...)”

In our post debunking the inexistent PJ Unpublished Files, we at a certain point, based on Pamalam’s commendable work, said that “You also have a set of statements, for which you have a roster that the people were heard by the PJ and which statements don’t appear in the PJ Files:

Euan Crosby OC Beach Manager;
Nathan Daniel Francis Scarll [or Scarf] Waterfront Manager;
Robert Cook Driver/Maintenance;
Stephen Steve] Edward Carruthers Dual Qualified Instructor;
Claire Louise Bennet Dual Qualified Instructor;
Sebastian Bollen Godsmark Dual Qualified Instructor;
Clare Hicks Dual Qualified Instructor;
Lauren Hilder-Darling Dual Qualified Instructor;
Steven Jackson Dual Qualified Instructor;
Elizabeth Miles Ocean Club nanny;
Fraser Calum Nixon [or Nickson] Dual Qualified Instructor;
Mark Shult Ocean Club nanny;
Sarah Jane Tily Ocean Club nanny;
Benjamin Wilkins Dinghy Instructor;
Alice_Louise_Stanley Assistant Instructor;
Chris Unsworth Windsurf Instructor;
Robert Ragone OC Kids Chef;
Jackie McConnel OC nanny.”

Besides the last name, Jackie McConnel, no other person has a first name starting with “J”, and none in the above list have the initials “JW”.

In the same post we also said “Then you have the statements, or "original statements" from a set of VERY interesting people, that are mentioned in the PJ Files but don’t appear in them:

Stephen Carpenter, original statement taken on 17th May 2007 by a UK Police Officer:

Rajinder Balu, rogatory statement refers to “original statements”

Neil Berry, rogatory statement refers to “original statements”

Carolyn Carpenter, rogatory interview not included in DVD.

Carole Tranmer, original interview and identikit not included in DVD (in the interview of Carole Tranmer on 22nd April 2008, as recorded on DVD, reference is made more than once to a statement given by her to Leics police on 8 May 2007, and to an identikit that was created with the assistance of a police officer from Reading)”

Again no “JW”.

Interestingly enough, there’s also no Jenny Weinberger in either of the lists. Quite a coincidence as Mrs Weinberger seems to be a recurrent character in all of this as per our Baloney post.

Yet, the Mockumentary gives us a precious indication. JW hasn’t provided ONE statement, but at least TWO:

It’s very clear: “(Source JW Statement 2)”. It even provides a date, “pril 2007”, which we assume to be April 2007, and must be referring to the date of the events witnessed (as is shown in the Mockumentary) and not to the date of the statement itself, otherwise it would have happened before Maddie disappeared.

A statement is a written testimony either to the media or during the course of an investigation. The first is a public registry and easily accessible to all those interested in it; the latter is obvious reasons not releasable to public scrutiny before a decision has been taken about the case it belongs to.

If it wasn’t for the Mockumentary, we wouldn’t have known know about JW at all and what she had to say about Maddie so, in this context, her two statements are anything but public.

Obviously Dave Edgar had access to them but where did he get them?

To say that JW made her statements directly to him is ridiculous as the Mockumentary, as per its promoters at the time, was about new evidence found within the PJ Files.

Besides, if JW had spoken to Dave Edgar after the process was archived then it would have to have been deemed as “new evidence” so much so that the McCanns found it important enough to decide to include them in the Mockumentary..

Where are these TWO statements? If asked, will Dave tell?

Let me guess, they’re highly secretive. Their content surely will endanger national security.

From what we’ve seen portrayed in the Mockumentary together with the abovementioned parts of JW's sentences from her 2nd statement, there appears no reason to justify, even minimally, such a statement.

Could the big secret they hold be where exactly Pimpleman was staring during JW’s first sighting, that singular piece of information that has been kept hidden from us, but, apparently was enough for JW to find that particular individual to be suspicious?

Or could it be because that JW is a secret agent licensed to lie?

What is important to notice is the real significance of all this. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Dave Edgar, a private investigator hired by the parents of the missing child, had access to evidence that those responsible for the investigation didn't have and nor did all those who had to make decisions about the process.

A decision based on anything less than the full facts is unquestionably a flawed decision.


  1. The most ridiculous statement.That documentary was a shame.

    Textusa, have you gotten any idea how far the police are with the revision?

  2. Anon Sep 28, 2012 11:54:00 AM

    As we've said, it's very difficult to elect the most ridiculous statement. We've seen how absurd are those from Derek Flack and TS, just to name those that together with JW, let themselves get involved in the Mockumentary.

    But there are others just as ridiculous all over the PJ Files.

    To say JW's statements are the MOST ridiculous it just isn't paying justice to so many. Besides, one can't put JW's statements into the same pot as the others as we haven't read them, have we?

    About the state of the SY Review, I know nothing about. Since I'm a non-believer, until proven otherwise, I hardly do care as it's not my money that's being thrown out the window for nought.

    But if I was asked to provide an opinion, I would say that it's in the exact same tangle of unraveling knots that Cameron put SY in the first place, with or without the 195 new leads...

  3. The Weinbergers are one of the names that appear on the Tapas Sheets. They were one of the few that "witnessed" the Tapas dinners...

  4. PJ's investigation was doomed to fail. The Brit Police boycotted it on purpose. GA had no chance at all. Very courageous of the man to write that book!

  5. Ooooops.....
    One thing is to not anticipate the PJ Files would be released another is to make a public video with compromising data. Edgar is as intelligent as a...

  6. The British Police was running a parallel investigation! It was a game. For every step the PJ took forward the UK made sure it took another to block it. If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable. A couple of doctors were able to convince a Nation to cover for them?!? Get real! I know that reality is something your shamelessness couldn't care less when shoving the Brit Maddie version down our throats. If it wasn't for Tex and pals I really wonder if all these people would have been able to have gotten away with it. Textusa was your Lieutenant Columbo, Black Hats!

  7. Textusa, is it true that the dog Eddie has died?
    The Curse of the McCanns!

  8. I believe in the revision.
    The PJ would not accept spending such a lot of money in order to keep the process shelved. Neither would the Met do the same.
    We have to wait and see. I think they are already writing the report for the Home Office and for the PJ.
    On McCannfiles there is a photo (days ago)probably taken in dark, Gerry and a friend, and I wonder if the Met interrogated that friend too.He must know where Maddie's grave can be found.

  9. Michael Wright is a Kate's cousin.
    I just read his rogatory letter and I didn't find any word about his presence on the beach, at that night, together with Gerry.It seems that the PJ decided not to ask it about.Maybe testing how far he would go, hiding facts.
    Very strange. One of these days he will be made arguido.

  10. Mavbe of interest?

  11. Anon Sep 29, 2012 1:24:00 AM
    Sorry, but I don't know.

  12. Anon Sep 29, 2012 8:30:00 AM

    Could you please back up your statement about the beach? Thank you

  13. Last 11 September, McCannfiles published a Martin Robert's article, "Why a tumult ?" and one can see the photo was taken in dark, on the beach and it was taken on May the 7th 2007,which proves the PJ never believed in an abduction.

    On May the 4th, Gerry made an appeal in front of the whole media, in the evening, by torchlight. Why in dark,with a torchlight, if he had had the whole Algarve sun during that day?
    Or why not wait till the next morning?
    I bet those moments were used to let somebody pick up Maddie's body from somewhere and to transport it to somewhere else, all in darkness.
    Possibly on the photo of May the7th, Gerry is showing his friend Maddie's new grave, photographing it, in order to help Wright finding it back when it had to be transported to a freezer, some later.

  14. McCanns deleted call and sms and.........José Bréton also

    A spanish in Spain;
    British , "special" british at Portugal....

  15. Anon Sep 29, 2012 10:00:00 AM

    I haven’t read the article a “Last 11 September, McCannfiles published a Martin Robert's article, "Why a tumult ?"” but from what you state in your comment it doesn’t seem to be exactly proof of anything you seem to be accusing Mr. Wright of.

    How do you know about Mr Wright’s role in this? Have you reported this if you know it as a FACT.? Why are you telling us? We can't forward unsubstantiated information to the police on your behalf. If you have any information, forward it to Portuguese police, who are the only people who can act on it.

    If it's only a rumour, we don't want to give it legs. It then gets repeated as fact elsewhere.

  16. I)

    The Liberty Hotel squats in the Leicestershire countryside on the edge of the A5, a convenient 10 minutes from the M1 and the M6. BMWs and Mondeos line up in the car park. It looks a comfortable stop for a sales rep.

    But at weekends Liberty becomes Liberation, a high-class club for swingers that is set to transform the seedy image of swinging and the staid hotel industry. What once seemed an outré lifestyle is fast becoming a common secret for an estimated 500,000 couples in middle England.

    Such has been the hotel's success since it opened on Valentine's Day that a 140-bedroom branch is proposed outside London. Other Liberation franchises are likely to be established near Leeds, Carlisle and across the UK.

    Lone perverts are out; jazz, spa baths and fluffy white bathrobes are in. As couples enter the bar, paying £25 on the door and a £30 annual membership fee, there is little to indicate anything other than an ordinary country club. Beyond a discreet glass cabinet displaying a "cordless micro-pleasurer" and a "vibrating finger vibe", lies the "playroom".

    Ms Walker, 37, a guide and "door supervisor", shows guests the voyeurs' room, and a series of other rooms in dark red decor, with double beds, mirrors, lava lamps, and various contraptions, including stocks and "the swings". In the corner are wet wipes, bowls of condoms and piles of clean towels.

    Friday night is "new swingers" night. Eight visibly nervous couples are greeted by Mr and Mrs Armstrong-Nash, who give them an introductory speech, champagne and dinner.

    "Swinging is a very positive step so long as you are in a stable, long-term relationship;...

    ...who live in the Midlands, say that swinging must remain "the biggest secret you have" because of the misconceptions...

    Source: Patrick Barkham
    The Guardian, Monday 18 October 2004

    Liberty Elite is an exclusive members only swingers and fetish club and is considered THE UPMARKET CLUB for those pursuing a liberated lifestyle.

    There are also 12 chalets in the grounds should you wish to stay over, all have TV, small fridge, double bed and shower....


    2.1 The dead hand of the state

    The market is not at fault for the shoddy conditions that British swingers - and swingers visiting from overseas - are forced to endure. Demand for swingers' establishments is high, rising and would expand much further in free market conditions. Swingers who seek to exercise their sexual freedom of choice - and entrepreneurs who seek to satisfy that demand - face obstruction from the state.

    British swingers are persecuted by laws at national and local level; they are persecuted by a press that does not recognise sexual acts as private, even in the home; and though they have no-one to speak on their behalf they are the victims of a campaign run by a well-funded NGO that jeopardises its professional and scientific reputation in its zeal to condemn them.

    The British government is responsible to a greater or lesser degree for every leg of the triad of persecution of swingers (law, press and bigotry); as well as the non-enforcement of the European Convention of Human Rights, despite its importation into British law by this very government; and the cruel inconsistency that allows gay men sexual carte blanche but criminalises the same activities when middle-class women are involved.

    Unfortunately while it is true that gay group sex is indeed legalised, it is equally true that heterosexual orgies are not.145 The new law merely repeals the old one that made gay sex legal in private only.146 It does not, as the BBC suggests, positively create a level playing field between gays and heterosexuals. The position of heterosexuals is untouched and the existing impediments crystallised in the case law decisions Winter v Woolfe 1931 and Kelly v Purvis 1983 remain. (In Winter v Woolfe a woman was convicted of keeping a brothel for allowing Cambridge University students to frolic with local girls - who were not prostitutes - on her premises, without charging. Kelly v Purvis concerned masseurs masturbating clients).

    Labour has set its face against any liberalisation of the law regarding swinging.

  18. Hi, anon. @Sep 29, 2012 1:24:00 AM,

    I'm afraid it might be possible that dear old Eddie has crossed the "Rainbow Bridge"...
    As far as I know, Eddie was retired after many years of excellent service. According to an article in McCannFiles he was 7 years old in 2006, so he would have been about 13 by now, a bit of an "oldie", poor dear! I suppose his partner Keela is still active, because she was only 16 months old in 2007.

    "Keela's Nose Makes Her Top Dog" Sky News

    "Top sniffer dog to join Maddy search" Belfast Telegraph

  19. The News of the World, a racy Sunday tabloid, has for over half a century made a name for itself as Britain's foremost violator of sexual privacy. Other tabloids do it but even when they do, the public thinks of it as News of the World-type journalism. Thus, colloquially, it is called the 'News of the Screws'.

    Here is just one example of its coverage of swingers.

    In June 2002 the News of the World exposed a man who had held a sex party in his house.149 He had advertised for partygoers on the internet and that, 'investigative reporter' Mazher Mahmood crowed, "was his one crucial flaw". Why it was illegitimate or illegal to do this is not explained, although it is clear that this is how he drew Mahmood's malevolent attention.

    I doubt that Mahmood and his newspaper have an anti-swinging agenda, despite the Lady Bracknell imitations they ham up whenever they report it. After all, why would they want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg?

  20. Maybe of interest?

  21. In summary:

    An accident happened and a child dies in the middle of a huge swinging event. What should they do?

    Hide the body and make sure no one will find it anymore; with so many people involved and so many resources cremation is a possibility;

    Stage an abduction and the rest of special guests with good connections will make sure the couple is above any suspicious; the extra T9 will pay a PR to make sure the world knows "there is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or not have found"!!!

    Swinging activity must be out of public domain at any cost!!! Any cost!

    What people on Maddie's affair didn't know was that control K & G behavior was more unpredictable than "abduction" itself.

    Sin and consequences constitute themselves their own history. All of them.


    Margaret Hodge nee Oppenheimer tried to spin child abuse allegations in Islington.

    A Tia do P. Ed.? Que voou mais rápido para a Suíça?

  23. The Pj files are not anymore available at Internet? I tried and got the information that the server could not be found. Is that part of the review, trying to wash information away to avoid the public to read and compare details with the result of the review?

  24. Love your blog Tex - read it everyday - justice for Madeleine.

  25. Tomorrow will be October the 1st, the last 3 months of the year will start. Within some few days it will be 17 months that the Yard started with the review.They said they would come up with a report "late in the year" but how long do we still have to wait? What is late in the year for them?
    Will they oblige Tapas 9 to take part in a reconstruction? I know that if Portugal requests a reconstruction, all of the Tapas will be obliged to take part on it.
    Two days ago we had a full moon, like it was on May the 3rd 2007, and I expect the reconstrucion to be made under the same circonstances, maybe now, maybe in November, time enough for the McCanns to escape.The tourist season will be closed, also in Praia da Luz, I suppose.
    In principle, the recontruction will have the goal to innocent Tapas 9 and the police will be capable to continue investigating other items.None of the Tapas will have the right to refuse to go back to Algarve.

    Which one of you has any idea why we don't hear anything from the McCanns? Mitchell?

  26. Tomorrow is Amaral's birthday.
    Shall we celebrate it by arresting Tapas 9?
    It would be a wonderful present for him.


  27. É só o meu PC ou aconteceu qualquer coisa as files da Pj e já não estão facilmente acessiveis a quem deseja consultá-las na net?
    Elas de facto parecem revelar alguns meandros que após uma analise detalhada e conjugada, mostram um certo caminho para a investigação e explicam porque aparecem os nomes de alguns hospedes em determinadas listas enquanto outros não, e porque a Pj decidiu tornar publicas essas listas e alguns depoimentos desses hospedes. O que disseram a Pj, quando e a forma como o disseram, e o facto da Pj os ter colocado no mesmo molho dos Tapas 9, indicia algo muito mau para essas testemunhas- sobre elas paira a desconfiança de saberem mais do que dizem e de terem encoberto a verdade. Não me surpreende se as files comecarem a ficar indisponiveis para o publico, tal como tambem não me surpreendem os ataques que alguns blogs sofrem sempre que discutem pontos proximos da verdade.
    Espero que o problema das files, se existe, seja temporário. Se for longo, que haja alguém a disponibiliza-las novamente na net para todos podermos analisar a informação das entrelinhas que me parece bastante importante.( Cont)

  28. Cont:
    Assim da minha analise livre e leiga, mas atenta, atrevo-me a considerar que Balu, Berry, Carpenters, etc, tal como Derek F e a mãe de TS, sabem a verdade mas deliberadamente mentiram a Policia. E a Pj sabe que mentiram, por isso os deixou neste papel comprometedor nas suas files. Senão vejamos:
    1-A Pj dá mais relevancia aos clientes de Mark Warner que aos de T Cook( Estes Passam quase despercebidos nas files).
    2-As listas dos jantares no Tapas parecem cópias da lista dos clientes de MW. Interessante que a Pj usou a frase " listas usadas para o jantar no Tapas". Que quererá dizer a palavra "usadas"? Copiadas a posteriori ou tidas como base para os bookings? não vejo porque um restaurante que aceita clientes de fora, tenha de usar a lista dos checkins como base para a marcação de clientes. A não ser que o jantar estivesse incluido no pacote de férias, e se assim fosse, porque haveria necessidade dos bookings e da fila para os fazer? Silly Pj que sabe que nem nos hoteis de 5 estrelas se usa as listas do checkin, e que este jantar está ferido de morte por quem o inventou. É a entrada do restaurante ou na altura de pagar que o cliente tem de dar o nr/ nome do apartamento se quiser alocar a refeição ao preço do apartamento e pagar so quando fizer o checkout.
    3-A organização das listas de checkin no OC para MW, é muito interessante. Penso que estarão de acordo com a ordem de chegada dos clientes( lógica). A Pj inclui na 'guest list1- pg 334' O'Brien, Oldfield,Tanner, os Berry, os Mckenzy e os Handy. na 'guest list 2- pg 335' estão os McCann, Webster e Payne em conjunto com os Mann e os Balu. Quererá dizer que os da lista 1 viajaram juntos e fizeram o checkin na mesma altura e o mesmo se terá passado com os da lista 2? Se sim, então estes grupinhos já se conheciam quando Maddie desapareceu. Vieram para a PDL a procura do mesmo tipo de férias e partilharam os mesmos serviços, embora não estejam interessados em assumir isso agora( Deus saberá porquê). Não admira que quem fez as listas da creche e dos jantares no Tapas, tenha incluido os nomes destes clientes e que estes o tenham consentido. Repartiram muitas coisas, por isso a veracidade dos seus depoimentos tem de ser questionada. (cont)

  29. Cont:
    Não sei se terão feito depoimentos a Pj ainda na PDL. Presumo que sim porque os que há disponiveis de Berry e Balu indiciam que houve um anterior. Também presumo que a terem acontecido foram feitos em contra-relogio no meio da confusão dos dias imediatos a noite de 3 de Maio e que estas testemunhas trataram de se por fora de Portugal o mais rápido possivel para se safarem de interrogatórios mais estruturados. Interessante, não deixa de ser o comportamento que tiveram depois: julgo que os depoimentos destas testemunhas, libertados pela PJ, foram feitos a policia inglesa, não por convocatória mas de livre vontade. Significa, que a semelhança de TS e DF, estas testemunhas deslocaram-se a policia para relatar uma certa versão dos acontecimentos. Com que objectivos? Primeiro, com o objectivo de apresentarem alibis para eles próprios para a noite de 3 de Maio e depois para reforçarem a idéia de existência do jantar no Tapas já que sabem que ainda que tonta, esta é a unica versão que pode dar pernas ao rapto. Estes senhores, tal como J Edmonds e alguns outros, vivem no limiar do medo porque sabem que tambem cometeram um crime ao encobrirem a verdade. Não estão interessados na reabertura do processo nem em ver estes assuntos discutidos na net. Tudo fazem para desacreditar quem deles fala. Tem muito a esclarecer em tribunal e sabem que hoje a Pj sabe isso e sabe muito mais, graças também ao trabalho de milhares de cidadãos que voluntariamente estudaram as files e se preocupam com o destino que teve Madeleine. O jantar, é mais que evidente que foi uma fabricação e testemunhas como J Edmonds teriam passado despercebidas se não tivessem caido nas armadilhas de alguns internautas. Este respondeu a Tony B, assumindo que abandonou o OC cedo a 4 de Maio. Já se desconfiava. Mas acrescentou que tirou fotos aos filhos a 3 de Maio, onde Maddie está em background. Quando, a que horas e node? Então estava nas fotos ou na creche? E que a lista da creche poe-a lá das 9-12h embora quem tenha assinado a sua saida tenha tido a premonição de saber que Kate H seria dias mais tarde rebaptizada de Kate McCann pelos jornalistas. Se há fotos "cadê elas?". Que belas primeiras páginas dariam no "The Sun" e nos outros jornais da caserna para safarem as vendas.

  30. Anon Oct 1, 2012 10:06:00 AM

    Não podia estar mais de acordo consigo. Os McCann definiram GA como o seu inimigo nº1 mas o tempo - esse - é que tem sido o seu maior inimigo.

    A esta distância de Maio 2007 - embora já sem corpo para ser encontrado por razões biológicas entre outras - TODA a gente SABE - além da polícia - e percebeu o que se passou na PdL. Até os maiores apoiantes dos McCann em terreno Luso gostariam que este caso fosse desligado, esquecido e que todas as evidências desaparecessem por magia.

    Nunca acontecerá e há - garanto - cópias (várias) de todas as evidências, depoimentos, entrevistas, testes, perícias, correspondência, fotografias; you name it.... guardadas a espera de melhor prova. Nem sempre as pessoas estão preparadas para verdade. É preciso dar tempo ao tempo.

    O tempo essa fatal inimigo dos McCann!!! O tempo que tudo compara, que tudo analisa, que tudo põe a descoberto. O tempo é implacável!!!

    O caso Madeleine Mccann ficará para a história como a maior fraude capaz de afundar a ilha britânica.

    Da mesma maneira que para uns seria desejável que este assunto morresse da noite para o dia para outros seria uma estupidez desperdiçar um caso capaz de se tornar, um dia, num estudo sociológico, sobre comportamentos de grupo no fio da navalha confrontados com uma experiência-limite.

    Há alguns estudos que falam da dificuldade da sociedade britânica lidar com a questão do sexo extra-conjugal e especialmente em grupo, ou com grupos e em destinos vários. É um falso puritanismo (os americanos também são um pouco assim) mas é um facto, e, em Inglaterra as pessoas até podem ser condenadas por comportamentos considerados desviantes. Apenas os gays parecem gozar de uma tolerância generalizada. Se alguém deseja sexo extra-conjugal e ainda por cima em grupo, é porque se passa algo de errado - na cínica opinião inglesa - porque a seguir são imensos os aderentes...este caso é a prova provada disso mesmo. Não é preciso ir aos arquivos.

    De qualquer maneira, não estamos aqui para julgar comportamentos sexuais adultos, o que estamos aqui é a escancarar a porta da vergonha de um mentira hard core para esconder a morte de uma criança e de alguma maneira a falta de decoro para com a sua memória...

    Mas, sejamos realistas ninguém deseja a a reabertura deste caso: nem a polícia britânica, nem o ministério público, nem os residentes na PdL, nem os turistas que lá estavam à hora do crime, nem o presente governo português nem o britânico nem o anterior, nem o futuro, nem a PGR. Nem alguns membros da PJ. Padecem todos de uma doença de vergonha que é preciso curar a todo custo.

    Conhecendo a justiça portuguesa ou a sua inoperância, que deixou o país chegar a este buraco orçamental por falta de actuação, por corrupção entre outras razões, não haverá reabertura nenhuma, nem investigação nenhuma. Vai haver algum controle de danos porque o casal não percebendo o limite da decência, decidiu processar o polícia.

    Mas até o tribunal terá de ser equilibrado na resposta e devolver alguma justiça ao polícia porque este caso - embora moroso - poderá chegar a instâncias internacionais e, nessa altura, perder-se-á para sempre a possibilidade de conter algum do ruído. É um caso mais quente do que parece!!!

    E aqui chegamos à única coisa que me interessa e que me indigna e por isso tudo farei para ajudar; não aceito que depois de tudo o que os McCann fizeram no meu país a culpa seja do polícia que a única coisa que fez, foi o seu trabalho: procurar uma criança desaparecida e, levando a sério a sua missão, não deixando nenhuma pedra levantar DESCOBRIU a VERDADE!!!

    Às vezes pensamos "como é que depois disto tudo os criminosos escaparam impunes"? Seria preciso conseguir ver de todos os ângulos para se fazer uma afirmação assim. E pouco nos é dado a saber sobre o pequeno inferno doméstico dos criminosos. A resposta na maioria das vezes é "não escaparão".

    Sejamos pacientes e esperemos. Esperar é, de facto, uma virtude.


  31. A, Oct 1 2:31,
    Obrigada pelo seu Post em alusao ao meu.
    Concordo plenamente que o tempo e o maior inimigo para os Mccann e quem os ajudou. Ate porque o tempo se encarregara de trazer para a ribalta outros actores que eles fingem ignorar mas que terao um papel preponderante- os gemeos Mccann, as criancas dos Tapas 7 e outras que terao ficado ligadas ao 3 de Maio de 2007, embora anonimamente. Sao variaveis a mais para tentar controlar, sobretudo quando sabemos como e repentino e imprevisivel o comportamento dos adolescentes, sobretudo quando proliferam pelo mundo talk-shows tao apelativos que um bom cachet ou umas semanas de fama e gloria estao a distancia de um telefonema. Estou a lembrar-me do estripador de Lisboa que acabou armadilhado pelo proprio filho.
    As criancas da saga Maddie, ainda serao acometidas por uma outra paixao, que e a de tentarem/ procurarem saber a verdade sobre o que lhe aconteceu. Exactamente, a mesma angustia/fascinacao dos filhos adoptivos que procuram a vida toda os seus lacos biologicos por mais que amem aqueles a quem chamam pais. So descansam quando resolvem esse capitulo nas suas vidas.
    O inferno dos Tapas 9 comecara em breve, nao por aquilo que se escreve na net mas sim pelas perguntas bombardeadas diariamente, dentro das suas casas. Nao e facil lavar o cerebro de adolescentes para quem o grupo de amigos adquire uma importancia capital. Os amigos farao perguntas, comentarios que invariavelmente cairao na mesa dos que viveram a noite fatal. Sao muito ingenuos, estes Tapas 9, se julgam que podem formatar o cerebro dos seus filhos e incutir-lhes um rapto absurdo como verdade absoluta e inquestionavel.

  32. Outro material que merece uma analise detalhada e a lista dos bookings para as licoes de tenis. As marcacoes parecem ter sido contaminadas pelo mesmo bicho que atacou as listas dos jantares no Tapas ou as da creche. Lembro-me de ter visto nas files da PJ, a lista dos bookings para as licoes com bookings em que a primeira licao e as 7:45pm e o resto e uma confusao que nao se percebe exactamente qual era o esquema das horas e quem estava nas licoes. Mas as 7:45pm em Abril/Maio e quase noite e a essa hora os hospedes do OC que tiveram de estar em fila durante a manha para marcarem o jantar no Tapas, ja deveriam estar a caminho do jantar. Isto para nao falar nos clientes mais o instrutor que estando a jogar a essa hora, terao visto o egg man com a crianca ao colo e toda a azafama dos Tapas 9 no seu esquema de vigilancia. Ah, esqueci-me de um pormenor...nao estavam presentes quando o grupo escreveu o esquema das horas no livro de Maddie e por isso perderam um importante capitulo nesta historia. Ou sera que Gerry, se interrogado sobre as listas de tenis, dira que o OC tem a dimensao do Algarve e os courts de tenis nao estao propriamente no quintal do apartamento onde se encontrava o Tapas?

  33. I think they'll explain at a certain point in time to the kids what really happened. If you look at it Maddie's death wasn't a criminal act. They just had to hide from the world what they were doing there. How they will tell the story to the kids or how each one will react we don't know but it's normal to defend our own. Another issue is whether they can speak. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you dare speak out? Just look at TS. She's old enough now to realize what she's done. Can she speak? I don't think so. All those involved will live for the rest of their lives with "I know what you did about what happened Spring of 07" Syndrome. They may convince themselves that they're doing the right thing by protecting each other but in 20/30 years time when the truth is no longer as harmful for them as it is now and all will come down to a half a dozen of official apologies, they, those that are kids today but will be parents then, will have to explain to their kids why they kept silent all that time. What a life...

  34. "If you look at it Maddie's death wasn't a criminal act"

    Whatever has happened to little Madeleine on May 2007 raises a enormous suspicious about the circumstances of her death. Concealing, removing a corpse, staging an abduction, obstruction of justice, fake statements, threatening main witnesses, setting a fund based in fake purposes are, indeed, a lot of "demarches" to cover a death that YOU consider that wasn't a criminal act.

    When police reports a domestic accident or accidental death may be for precaution not because they just believe in involuntary acts.

  35. Oct 2, 2012 10:11:00 PM

    Did we say it wasn't a criminal act? Death may have occurred by accident (only those present know exactly what happened) which would not be crime and totally separate from what happened afterwards which were criminal. The 2 things are separate issues.

    Yes, we believe that Maddie’s death was an accidentm but we’ve never stated that on certain terns.

    Anything that followed the death of Madeleine then became a criminal act, as you say in your comment. Even if her death had been a complete accident, if the truth about her death was concealed and a fund was started, the criminal act is compounded


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.