Friday, 22 May 2015

3 Penguins in the desert


1. Introduction

If the reader sees 3 penguins walking side-by-side leisurely in the scorching sands of the Sahara then we at least expect a surprised reaction and respond naturally with a “that’s nonsense, that has to be a mirage!”

But if we proved that the 3 Penguins were indeed penguins and the desert was indeed the Sahara, what would the reader then say?

There are no penguins in a desert, that's a fact.

If 3 Penguins are in the Sahara then they shouldn’t be there.

As there are no deserts in Madagascar, they didn’t arrive there on a ship they would have hijacked themselves in an animated movie about animals from the NY Central Zoo.

3 Penguins in the desert can only mean someone wrongly put them there where they should not be.

Today we’re 19 days into the 9th year of this saga.

Much has been investigated about the case based on the PJ Files and we’re certainly not alone in this.

We have played our part in this issue where the internet has played a decisive role.

We have shown the presence of that anonymous mass of people who the powerful have taken for granted up to now that we're an easily controlled numb herd when it comes to information and knowledge.

But the information era is upon them and us simultaneously and has made this paradigm to change.

They will, as expected, refuse this change and will resist it with all their might but the Maddie case is showing them no matter what they throw at us we will come back fighting.

And the more they resist the more distance they are putting between themselves and those they wish to control.

There's a Portuguese saying that maybe they should take heed of: “if you can’t beat them, join them”.

Stubbornness joined at the hip with arrogance leads to prohibition and prohibition only spikes our imagination.

Under prohibition we will find solutions we wouldn’t have found if they were less stubborn, arrogant and power thirsty.

And once a solution to circumvent them is found they will be rendered practically useless.

The younger generations are no longer reading papers or watching TV for their information. They obtain their information from alternative sources.

Not because they have moved against the mainstream media but because this generation does something the powerful most fear and it is to search for the news for themselves.

They do not wait for the news, they seek it. They do not wait passively waiting for it. That's a direct effect of this new age, the Era of Information.

And that’s what we have been doing in the past 8 years with the Maddie case.

We have refused what has been fed to us and have gone and searched the information ourselves. And we have dealt with the information with responsibility. We have resisted all the taunting and provocation.

And have now come to our own conclusions.

Conclusions that no matter the external effort outside ourselves will not make us change it.

Note, we're not saying our opinions won't change. They will and should whenever required but it will be because our research makes us find the reasons to change them. Our research and not from others.


2. Crèche sheets

In these past 8 years there are 2 things that could have been more scrutinised more thoroughly than Murat’s house and life, if that is even possible.

These documents are the last photo and the crèche sheets.

We in the blog have minimised both, we confess.

Maddie's alleged last photo

The first, the last photo, because it seems evident to us that it was produced not to prove Maddie was alive that afternoon but to fill the void required of “visual proof” of a family time that really didn't exist in what was supposed to be a family holiday.

The second, the crèche sheets, once the purpose of the tampering of the booking sheets is understood, it seemed evident to us they had the exact same one which was NOT to show who had really been in Luz that week.

Our opinion is that many more children used the crèche during the day but like with the booking sheets and the Tapas reservation sheets, only “volunteers” remained named in them.

What they probably didn’t realise is that they didn’t “volunteer” (if not then then tacitly later) for that moment but for history.

If with the first we thought that the analysis went a little over what was required to prove what the naked eye can immediately see, with the crèche sheets we must say we were mesmerised.

Handwriting comparisons have led to theories whereby Gerry handed over somebody else’s child, the Naylor’s we believe, and from that the whole construct of Maddie’s death early in the week.

The reader says but the handwriting of the signatures is similar for different people and we answer, yes, probably they are. Something to be expected in a doctored document.

And how do we know the documents were doctored? Exactly because of the handwriting.


3. Penguins and other sea creatures

The 3 Penguins in the desert are 3 characters that are inexplicably in the crèche sheets and, like the penguins in the desert, it stands out they shouldn’t be there.

2 of the characters were spotted by our good friend Sheharazade. We spotted the third.

Here they are.

On the sheet for the afternoon of April 30, 2007, it can be clearly seen that the capital “S” and the “e” in “Sean” are printed and not handwritten:


And that in the column “Time in”, also in Sean’s line, between the “15” and the “5” there’s a typed “a”. We supposed it’s was supposed to be a “2” as in “15.25” (as appears for Amelie) and certainly not “15.a5” as is on the sheet:


What are these 3 typed “penguins” doing in a handwritten “desert”?

The reader knows our opinion.

Please note how in the template, which supposedly is a copy for every single day, the column “Parents Location” is written up as “Parents Lscation”:


We didn’t even consider this as a “Penguin”  as it's not surrounded by handwritten characters like the other 3. This is a misspelling where there shouldn't have been one.

OCR doesn’t explain it so probably now the justification will be that the nannies sat every single day and made up these tables on Word and Excel and got that particular word wrong on that particular afternoon.

But the reason we haven't named this misplaced character “s” was because we’re waiting for a decision on what to call it.

The names we want to use, Starfish or Jellyfish, have been used by Toddlers 2 club and we’re waiting for someone to tell us what that club was REALLY called.

Once we know THAT, we will name that odd “s” is “Lscation”.

Our hesitation derives from the fact that this particular club has 2 names: Starfish and Jellyfish (pictures are ours):


Sunday, April 29, AM: we don’t know;

Sunday, April 29, PM: it’s Jellyfish;

Monday, April 30, AM: it’s Starfish;

Monday, April 30, AM: it’s Starfish;

Tuesday, May 1, AM: it’s Jellyfish;

Tuesday, May 1, PM: it’s Jellyfish;

Wednesday, May 2, AM: it’s Jellyfish;

Wednesday, May 2, PM: it’s Jellyfish;

Thursday, May 3, AM: we don’t know;

Thursday, May 3, PM: it’s Jellyfish;

Friday, May 4, AM: we don’t know;

Friday, May 4, PM: it’s Jellyfish;

Damned April 29, some will say, if it wasn’t for you one could say the club changed its name with the month (although Maddie’s Lobsters does remain the same).

So which is it? Is it Starfish or Jellyfish?

If Toddlers 2 club was Starfish, then we will call our odd “s” of “Lscation” as Jellyfish.

If it was Jellyfish, then the “s” will be a Starfish.

The final title of this story is pending on that decision: “3 Penguins and a Starfish in the desert” or “3 Penguins and a Jellyfish in the desert”.

Why no one has seen these details (that we know of) in such scrutinised documents is another story and NOT a children’s one.


After having realised that Ocean Club tampered with documents, the booking sheets, it handed over to the PJ pertaining an ongoing investigation, we now see Mark Warner has done the same with the crèche sheets.

So much more can be said about these sheets that hasn't been said before. And we will.



Post Scriptum (May 23 2015 12:15):

We wrote a short post on purpose. To see what our detractors on length (those saying “I wish she would use 5 words to say what she has to say instead of 500!”) would find as an excuse not to debate its content.

We were not surprised, we got the expected response: silence.

We can now conclude that either the tampering of the crèche sheets by Mark Warner is not a sufficiently important subject to debated or the absence of discussion about our postings has nothing to with length of posts.

We will leave up to readers (including those who pretend they don't read us but do) to decide on which is which.

Fortunately, we know our message gets out there. The participation of readers on current post has been outstanding.

On the post that on the sheet for the afternoon of April 30, 2007 (pg 112) we saw how in the template, which supposedly is a copy for every single day, the header “Parents Location” is written up as “Parents Lscation”:


Thanks to our readers, some more “template misspellings” have been detected.

Our reader, Anonymous 22 May 2015, 15:18:00, showed us how on April 30, 2007 (pg 106) for the Lobsters club, Maddie's group, the word “Date” is typed “bate”:


Our reader Nuala, on 22 May 2015, 21:47:00, showed us how on that same page, April 30, 2007 (pg 106) for the Lobsters club, Maddie's group, only word “Location” appeared where there should be “Parents Location”:


Nuala also showed us how on the morning of May 2, 2007 (pg 116), “Parente signature” appeared instead of “Parents signature”:


We, in turn showed how the big word “markwarner” on the top r-hand of every sheet varied in font (pgs 105 - 108):


As can be seen very distinctly by the character “a” two different fonts were used:


And we pointed out that on page 116,  morning of May 2, 2007, the “m” of “markwarner” was made up of a “r” and a “n”:


Note, for now we are only pointing anomalies in form not content.

115 comments:

  1. No doubt Insane will correct your home work,you will be put back on the naughty step, be warned sisters?

    ReplyDelete
  2. ''OCR doesn’t explain it''

    Why not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 09:49:00,

      Because these were copied documents and not OCR'd ones.

      The intention was to reproduce and not to convert text into digital format.

      If they had been OCR'd no handwriting would appear on them.

      Please see #PS.1. “OCR mythology” of our Post Scriptum to our "Balance: Unbalanced" post.

      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2015/05/balance-unbalanced.html

      Delete
    2. How do you know?

      There is OCR software that converts handwriting, and works best when the letters are not 'joined up'', just as in that example.

      You haven't shown the other forms in the same level of detail either, I note, and you appear to have missed a glaring difference.

      Delete
    3. http://www.cvisiontech.com/ocr/ocr-pdf/handwriting-ocr.html

      How about you do your own research?

      Now - what about the glaring difference between that sheet and the others?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 10:30:00,

      Thank you for the link.

      "Over the past few years" does it go back to 2007?

      So PJ used a sophisticated OCR software (certainly advanced for its time) to convert handwriting into handwriting with the evident risk of altering information (OCR apparently randomly transformed 3 handwritten letters into typed ones), when any common scanner at the time would simply copy whatever was on paper into *.jpg or *.pdf format without losing or altering any information on the sheets?

      About "the glaring difference between that sheet and the others" we're waiting for you to tell us.

      The only major difference we have seen up to now is "Location" having become "Lscation" but that we showed on the post. Maybe you can show us others.

      Delete
    5. If the PJ wanted to analyse signatures in creche sheets, why on earth would they use OCR that would convert into text? Also, why only 3 letters in over 10 sheets?

      Sheharazade

      Delete
    6. OCR software has been commercially available for many years, certainly since the mid 1990s. There are even free versions available, and free versions which will convert handwriting too. Why haven't you determined this? Plenty of people told you about it last time.

      There is a pre-printed long line in the top left of the form you show. This is missing on later copies. They appear to have come from different batches, hence the typo on one and not the others

      Delete
    7. So sheets are now OCR!
      Why would PJ take copies of sheets and subject them to anything?

      Delete
    8. ''If the PJ wanted to analyse signatures in creche sheets, why on earth would they use OCR that would convert into text? Also, why only 3 letters in over 10 sheets?

      Sheharazade''

      Who said anything about the PJ wanting to analyse signatures? They were interested in the times signed in and out, not pandering to the conspiracy market

      Delete
    9. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 11:00:00,

      OCR has been commercially available since early 90s. I bought my first scanner in 1991.

      Paid quite a lot for it as it was novelty but it really paid off because I did convert a lot of book texts into digital format. Even if it meant having to correct every second word.

      OCR that recognises handwriting is, we would say, very useful but very much doubt it's efficiency. Don't know about you but most people have such an handwriting which the best scanner of all, the human brain, cannot convert and so we ask the person next to us "what's it say here?"

      To convert handwriting into handwriting makes no sense whatsoever. It would raise some very serious issues about having such tool which would facilitate falsifications.

      About pre-printed line, it's called an edge.

      Like you have also on pages 110 and 116 on the left side.

      But let's say you're right. That it's a pre-printed line. Why would that page in particular be from a different batch?

      Delete
    10. Where do you get this idea that it converts handwriting into handwriting? And seeing as you didn't know the software was available, I doubt you can contribute much with respect to it's efficacy. You also seem to think this has something to do with your scanner. It hasn't.

      I think you need to go back to the beginning, decide what it is you are trying to say, do some proper research and then have another try.

      That page appears to be from a different batch as it contains a line absent in the others and contains a typo. I'm sorry if that was difficult for you to follow.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 11:36:00,

      We're assuming, for argument's sake, that it IS from a different batch.

      What we asked and you haven't answered, is why would that page be from a different batch?

      Delete
    12. Why would it not be? Do you assume a company prints out all the forms it will ever need for the rest of time in one go?

      Most unlikely. They may even have printed one, spoted the typo, corrected it and printed the others.

      A typo doesn't mean a conspiracy

      Delete
    13. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 11:46:00

      So they printed a form on the afternoon of the 29th with no mistakes. Then they printed a form on the morning of the 30th with no mistakes.

      Then they printed a form on the afternoon of the 30th with a mistake. Why incorrect what was correct?

      PS. We inform you that you have now reached the limit of your quota in the use of the word conspiracy when you know perfectly well that we're talking about a cover-up. From now on be aware that it will be censored.

      Delete
    14. And Anonymous 22 May 2015, 11:46:00,

      Thank you for showing that we were absolutely spot on when we said the following in the post:

      "OCR doesn’t explain it so probably now the justification will be that the nannies sat every single day and made up these tables on Word and Excel and got that particular word wrong on that particular afternoon."

      Delete
    15. How do you know when they printed them? Are you now assuming they only printed one day at a time? You have no knowledge which entitles you to make these quantum leaps of logic-defying imagination.

      A cover up IS a conspiracy if it involves more than one person. I'm sorry if that's difficult for you to understand.

      Delete
    16. ''Our opinion is that many more children used the crèche during the day but like with the booking sheets and the Tapas reservation sheets, only “volunteers” remained named in them.''

      So what you are saying is that there were far more children there, and that the parents of the children who remained on the list allowed them to remain and thus participate in a cover-up?

      So what is your evidence for that?

      Delete
    17. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 12:04:00,

      In due time. For now we want people to see how these documents were, like the booking sheets, also manipulated.

      "There were far more children there, and that the parents of the children who remained on the list allowed them to remain and thus participate in a cover-up" are your words but it's our opinion that you're not incorrect although we think the word far is a little exaggerated.

      Delete
    18. OH yes! The PJ were so interested in times for the Twins group...

      Delete
    19. No, if that is what you are claiming, where is your evidence for that?

      You have produced no evidence that any records or documents were manipulated

      You used the word ''many''. So why are you objecting to the use of the word ''far''?

      Delete
    20. Dear Ins3n2 here you go, just OCR'd you!

      Delete
    21. With due respect Anon (22 May 2015, 11:57:00) Textusa is right. "Cover-up" is the right term. Not "conspiracy".

      There is a subtle difference between a "conspiracy" and a "cover-up" - naturally you need a subtle brain to avoid using both words indiscriminately independently of its context.

      Anyway, for the record, if I may, "a cover-up" (noun) is: "any action, stratagem, or other means of concealing or preventing investigation or exposure."

      A "conspiracy" (noun) is: "a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose. E.g. "He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government."

      I can sense why Anon gets so confused. Both words are from the Latin and I sense Mr or Ms. Bright Spark's mother language was not Latin.

      Because 80 percent of all entries in any English dictionary are borrowed, mainly from Latin, Latins are at an advantage when it comes to understand the subtleties of "English" words but, I digress.

      And so we have "cover" from the Latin "cooperīre" - meaning: "to cover completely" AND "conspiracy" from the Latin "conspirationem" (nominative conspiratio) - meaning: "agreement, union, unanimity."

      Capiscce?




      Delete
    22. I think the word you were struggling for is 'Capiche?' but I shall ignore your lack of coherence.

      You appear to have entirely missed the fact that your post confirms what I said. Textusa claims there was a cover up. She claims the cover up involved more than one person, working together. Therefore, those people would be defined as
      "a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose. E.g. "He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government." - ie, a conspiracy.

      In addition, I think you will find that few people can claim Latin as their ''mother tongue'' given that it's widespread use as a spoken language ended hundreds of years ago.

      What you also appear unable to grasp is that what Textusa describes IS a conspiracy. You just don't like the term because it is normally suffixed with the term 'loon'

      If you have a number of people working together to impose an unlawful cover-up then they are conspiring. This is not a difficult concept. For most.

      Capiche?

      Delete
    23. Anonymous 23 May 2015, 02:44:00 and Insane, let's tone down the discussion please.

      Delete
    24. Not Textusa, if you are going to correct someone's Mafia lingo do it right... Capisce ?

      There is the English word capiche but you being such a purist (conspiracy vs cover-up discussion) the Italian word is capisce.

      Sheharazade

      Delete
  3. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 10:11:00,

    Could you please provide a link to your "OCR software that converts handwriting, and works best when the letters are not 'joined up''"?

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  4. Robert Guest trying to argue the toss as usual.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Why no one has seen these details (that we know of) in such scrutinised documents is another story and NOT a children’s one"

    Are you identifying a lot more pretendy "WHs"


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 11:24:00,

      We don't out people. The names we have referred in the blog are either in the PJ Files or are of those who have identified themselves in the media.

      Delete
    2. Sorry Textusa thats not really what I was getting at. I mean I have read forumes where these creche have been scrutinished to death and as you say "Why no one has seen these details (that we know of) in such scrutinised documents is another story". I wonder were you suggesting that they were deliberately missed and as such there are pretendy "WHs" on forumes and blogs out there asking us to look over here not over there

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 12:10:00,

      We wouldn't say deliberately missed.

      However we would say that the analysis done on these so scrutinised documents were done in order to focus only on certain and specific details when there are many other interesting things there to see, as we have shown.

      Delete
    4. ''We don't out people. The names we have referred in the blog are either in the PJ Files or are of those who have identified themselves in the media.''

      And the people from the Rothley Golf club, whose personal details you listed on this blog? Where do they appear in the PJ files?

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 13:32:00,

      "the people from the Rothley Golf club, whose personal details you listed on this blog" is a person and his name is Kenneth Walkden.

      We referred to Mr Walkden in our post "Chasing Cars & Doctors":
      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2014/02/chasing-cars-doctors.html

      Here is Mr Walden's statement in the PJ Files, by rogatory request, on April 29 2008 (Cartas Rogatorias Vol IV Pages 23-24):
      http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm#23

      And we're speaking of Kenneth Walkden again today because you brought him up.

      Delete
    6. I specifically did not name the person concerned, but you have seen fit to do so again. While we are on the topic, that is also the post in which you discussed the daughter of a witness and snooping you had done into her and her husband, who you named. So much for your statement above.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 15:35:00,

      We note with pleasure that your initial "people" has now become only a "person".

      The daughter of a witness was brought up by that witness, Dianne Webster, as per PJ Files:

      " 4078 “And they rang you at quarter past eleven in the morning on the fourth of May, so the morning after Madeleine had gone.”

      Reply “Ah so that might have been Louise, my other daughter.”

      4078 “It quite possibly was because that would match with what we have.”

      Reply “Yeah.”

      4078 “You’ve got two Doctor daughters have you?”

      Reply “Yeah, well the one in New Zealand’s a Doctor as well but she’s a PHD Doctor, she’s a scientist. Yeah that’s, err Louisa NATES, yeah my middle daughter.” "

      http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

      In our post "Chasing Cars & Doctors" we are merely clarifying who is Louisa Nates

      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2014/02/chasing-cars-doctors.html

      Delete
    8. It was none of your business and nothing to do with the case, and you speculated about her husband. Neither of these people are anything to do with the case, and Dianne Webster made no reference to her daughter's husband, that was entirely initiated by you

      Delete
    9. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 19:17:00,

      We did not give any negative connotation to Dianne Webster's daughter and son-in-law.

      What we questioned and question is what Dianne Webster had said about her daughter. Both her daughter and son-in-law are blameless for it and we have not accused them of any wrongdoing.

      If Dianne Webster had been clear in her statement, the post would have never existed.

      Delete
    10. Textusa,

      You haven't outed anyone. DW speaks of Simon Aldridge and says he's married to her middle daughter:

      "4078 “Do you know anybody in Doncaster?”

      Reply “Err no, but Louise, my middle daughter, she’s married to err Simon ALDRIDGE who, his company err Doncaster, I’m sure it’s around Doncaster where his business is.”

      http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

      Someone should read the files before criticising others...

      Delete
    11. My oh my textusa this post is really ruffling feathers

      Delete
  6. Very good, Textusa. Interesting about the reason for the pool photo. Makes sense. Gerry doesn't look particularly happy sitting in the sunshine with his daughters. But then, the pool was an Adult pool. Not many pics.
    No, penguins definitely should not be in a desert. Team McCann however would try to prove that these penguins are special. Why? Because they said so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you think they created the photo in advance, in case they were accused of spending too little time with their children?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 13:34:00,

      How far in advance did we say we "think they created the photo in advance"?

      Delete
    3. Emily Kelly,

      Thank you for your compliment.

      The "last" photo is not in the Adult pool (we haven't to date seen any picture from that pool) but is at the Tapas complex.

      The scrutiny that it has been subject to proves that beyond any possible reasonable doubt.

      Delete
    4. You're more than welcome. Praise where praise is due.

      Delete
  7. Unpublished Anonymous at 22 May 2015, 12:40:00,

    What is submitted under "DO NOT PUBLISH" (or similar wording) will not be published.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In the time in/time out section, it's hard to read when Sean and Amelie were signed out. As if someone 'got' at the time and distorted it with Tipex... Also, is the 'parent's location' (spelt wrongly) mobile telephone numbers? Because it seems blurred at its edges. Probably by the PJ before publishing the files?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 14:15:00,

      No typex changes an "o" into a "s".

      There is a lot of unexplained typexing in the various documents handed over to the PJ but we don't think PJ did any of the typexing.

      Delete
    2. I agree. My comments were about the amount of smudging, altering, changing. Lots and lots of it.

      Delete
  9. My obs (tho I'm not sure its of any importance):

    1. see difference between word date on both forms below: -
    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01-pages-107-111%5B105-109%5D/processopdf01page108-CrecheRecords3.jpg

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01-pages-107-111%5B105-109%5D/processopdf01page109-CrecheRecordss.jpg

    2. see difference between these forms - which I thought were the same form!! 2nd one from mccannpjfiles - both for 30th April

    http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/3-penguins-in-desert.html#comment-form

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20%5B112-120%5D/processopdf01page113-CrecheRecordsS.jpg

    sorry if I have got confused... but they appear diofferent in parent's location column

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Having checked again I was looking at 30th April am rather than pm - apologies Textusa for wasting time (regarding part 2 of my observation)

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 15:18:00,

      As we said, there's a lot these sheets have to tell us and haven't been heard yet.

      You have spotted something in the Mini club crèche sheets. No question that a "b" is not a "D" (we will remember to credit you when we return to this!).

      For now we wanted to call the attention to the sheets that have practically had no attention to the crèche sheets where the twins are.

      Thank you very much for your input.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Textusa - my only other observation at moment is:
      note the big g in Registration on the form shown at link 1 compared with that on link 2 (see link 1 and 2 below) - think it is a different font size

      1. http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/3-penguins-in-desert.html#comment-form

      2. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20%5B112-120%5D/processopdf01page119-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 16:04:00,

      Understand the difference.

      We have witnessed on the booking sheets that one of the sets has a font with the size different from the others.

      We will look at this also when getting back to this issue. And once again, thank you for your contribution.

      Delete
    5. Oh my god - a different font size??

      Well, this could blow the case wide open

      Delete
    6. Insane,

      A penguin in the Antarctic makes perfect sense and indeed not worthy of notice. A penguin in the Sahara is to be noticed. Both are penguins, one is not important the other is VERY much so. Thus the title of current post.

      A template is "a pre-developed page layout in electronic or paper media used to make new pages with a similar design, pattern, or style"
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template

      Because fonts change, and for that reason only, it seems that the page layout used by Mark Warner child care was not a template.

      This means that nannies typed up this page layout every single time they needed it. For Toddlers 2, twice a day. For Lobsters, only once.

      Interesting to notice how even though the clubs were physically separated (Toddlers 2 at Tapas and Lobsters at 24H Reception) whoever made up these tables chose exactly the same fonts (varying only between 2). Quite a coincidence, we must say.

      But one has to ask why on earth go to the trouble of making up these tables every single day and not type in the date they referred to nor the appropriate AM/PM.

      Apparently, they wrote the table up, then printed it and then filled in this information in handwriting.

      Delete
  10. Do not publish Anonymous at 22 May 2015, 13:22:00 and at 22 May 2015, 14:31:00

    We feel it would be unfair to readers to discuss here what you have submitted in confidence.

    However we can say hat we don't believe in the "crying episode" as we showed in our post "All paths lead to Rome":
    http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/11/all-paths-lead-to-rome.html

    ReplyDelete


  11. My friends, I who have walked with you seemingly forever.
    What first drew me to this case was after a month of writing letters of support to Kate and Gerry - even suggesting that she work for a missing child charity. I thought of nothing but finding this child and what a joy it would be to see her back with her parents.

    It was a turning point in my life because for the first time I became obsessed.
    And then one day I saw the radiance on her face and I just knew that there was no way this was a grieving mother. No way on earth. And then as you suggested I typed directly into the search bar - "what is dodgy about the madeleine mccann case" and I fell into a world where for the first time ever, we could discuss and bring forth facts ( well some of you).

    I think what I am personally witnessing is this a challenge. The judiciary systems of both countries have pledged allegiance to something other than Truth. This is a new way of going to trial. You are directly asking questions and Insane is answering them or not answering them.
    And reading this all is not a single judge or jury but hundreds of thousands who are interested in this case.
    I see such brilliance of spirit and intellect unfolding right now in the search of Truth and Justice for Madeleine and all others whose lives have been damaged with this enabled farce to continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Su,

      Thank you so for your support

      :)

      Delete
  12. Poor Insane
    Went round and round and on his what started to be an OCR error he ends up saying it was a typo after all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He’s not swearing to make sure he gets published but he can’t resist being rude!

      Delete
  13. I am a qualified in childcare and part of the work I do is working abroad as a holiday maternity nurse or nanny.
    I have found that when taking babies or young children to crèche or nursery that the following has applied to several hotels
    When booking a child into crèche no ID is asked for. Eg passport
    When booking the child in my ID has never been asked for.
    When collecting a child sometimes there has been a change of staff, so they would be unaware of exactly who is collecting the child.
    One day I signed a child in stayed with that child in the crèche and later left without signing out.
    Staff have been unaware of children's names and who they are.
    As you can imagine that there are many children staying in a hotel at one time and staff won't always remember who these children are.
    I have observed in one facility a child of about three standing on a chair inside whilst other staff were outside
    Not all staff at these crèche in some countries are qualified
    They are also expected to work very long hours for little pay.
    I am referring to 5 star hotels abroad

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 22 May 2015, 19:31:00,

      Thank you for your comment!

      It would be interesting if readers would share their experiences with childcare facilities abroad, just to see what their views are as well.

      Delete
    2. I don't believe holiday companies in UK have such a cavalier attitude to childcare. You wouldn't use a facility if it didn't check you as a parent. I have no experience as I never used holiday childcare - a holiday was with my child!
      But when I picked kids up from nursery, they were handed over by the teacher. Signing in or out is a health and safety requirement for fire safety to know who is in a building.
      You don't just sign in and help yourself to a child.
      Older children make their own way to their carer but toddlers are handed over.

      Delete
    3. http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g659630-d622573-r165870340-Lakitira_Resort_Village-Kardamena_Kos_Dodecanese.html
      It may be tighter now than 2007 but security is important

      Delete
    4. All the Mark Warner staff had childcare qualifications. Therefore to compare them with hotels that haven't is pretty pointless

      Delete
  14. Childcare facilities in these types of resorts, in my experience, are usually held under one roof. They aren't normally scattered around the complex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So have you been there and checked?

      I think the PJ would have noticed, don't you?

      Delete
  15. Some people seem very OCD about OCR software. This happened in 2007 in a not-that-top-of-the market holiday complex. In this situation the PJ would want original documents or photocopies. Photocopying would have been the best way of supplying the information they asked for (whether that info. was being created/doctored/undoctored).

    ReplyDelete
  16. Goodness, this has stirred up a debate :)

    The creche records have always intrigued me, there are so many anomalies in them, plus all those nannies for so few children booked in. Very strange indeed.

    Apologies if these have already been pointed out and I've missed them, but here's some I noticed.

    This one has Parente Signature, rather than Parents:

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20[112-120]/processopdf01page118-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg

    This one, the word Parents is missing altogether from above Location:

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01-pages-107-111[105-109]/processopdf01page108-CrecheRecords3.jpg

    This one, where you've pointed out the Lscation word etc has the twins being signed in at 15.25 and signed out at 12.20 with a different Kate McCann signature:

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20[112-120]/processopdf01page114-CrecheRecordsS.jpg

    That takes some doing, time travel in PdL was possible it seems. I look forward to reading future posts on this Textusa :)

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nuala,

      And on your first example did you not notice the glaring "rnarkwarner"? The "r" + "n" to make up an "m"?

      http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/Processo-pdf01pages108-118%20[112-120]/processopdf01page118-CrecheRecordsJ.jpg

      If you check that "markwarner" word in the various sheets, it changes font.

      What a participation from readers!

      Delete
    2. No I didn't Textusa, I wasn't even looking at the "markwarner" word.

      Now you've pointed it out, the "rn" is very obvious (though I missed it because I wasn't looking). The font change is more subtle, and I doubt I would have noticed that at all if you hadn't said. The "a" is the most obvious letter showing the difference.

      Yes, lots of participation, anything to do with changed lists, sheets etc results in a lot of "interest" ;-)

      Nuala x

      Delete
  17. Why no mention of the wristband system used by MW? Was this creche even a real MW creche or a private arrangement for the swingers group?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I would really like to see Insane explain why the club changed name from Jellyfish to Starfish

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who gives a monkey's?

      There were two toddler groups - maybe they gave them different names. But do feel free to weave an elaborate cover up around it

      Delete
    2. Insane,

      Allegedly there were 2 clubs - Toddlers 1 and Toddlers 2.

      We say allegedly because from the nannies' statements this is not totally transparent as we'll show in a post.

      Starfish/Jellyfish are 2 names given to the same club: Toddlers 2.

      We don't know what Toddlers 1 club was called.

      The only other club we know the name of is the Mini club - Lobsters.

      Delete
  19. We inform readers that we have added a Post Scriptum to this post to show further anomalies that have been found, by our readers and by us, on the crèche sheets.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Textusa,
    I agree that these are copied documents and scanned (no OCR) into pdf or image format but I have to say no one writes "rnarkwarner" or "mar)<warner". These are clearly OCR mistakes. No human being does them!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 23 May 2015, 16:35:00,

      We have never said that OCR was not involved in the process.

      What we have said is OCR was not used in the copying done by PJ of the documents when it converted them into the digital *.jpeg format in which the files were distributed.

      What we see, including the mistakes you mention, are what the files look like originally. The reproduction did not alter any of it's information.

      However, we agree with you. The mistakes you refer are only understandable with OCR software having been used.

      But the question that has to be answered is why these OCR mistakes made their way into the documents in the first place. It wasn't because of the PJ reproduction, so from where do they appear?

      They are obviously not documents OCR'd by Ocean Club (booking sheets) or Mark Warner (crèche sheets) because they present too few of the garbled OCR mistakes that any OCR'd document presents.

      But they could be OCR'd documents revised before being handed over to the PJ.

      In our opinion, the "digital" information (or typed characters) has come from an OCR'd listing (original lists printed on paper, then OCR'd and then revised - information corrected, deleted or added).

      The mistakes we now see are those that escaped the revision.

      If the mistakes you mention are clearly OCR, there are others that are a clearly "copy & paste" ones and not due to OCR:

      - Andrew Pag C. Fee E30 Taverner
      - Allan T078642P-A1 Lynch

      So we would say that although some of the errors are typical mistakes OCR makes we would say that all fit in the category of "copy & paste of OCR'd and other information with a slightly faulty revision".

      Why was the revision faulty? Too many documents to produce in such little time. Mistakes were bound to happen and they, as we can see, happened.

      Delete
    2. You are wasting your time, Anon.

      She hasn't a clue what you are talking about, but will deny it until the cows come home.

      Delete
    3. @Textusa "We have never said that OCR was not involved in the process."

      I know..... because I told you
      :)

      Delete
    4. Sorry KC, before you the booking sheets did.

      And it was Insane and Johanna who pointed out to them as we have explained.

      Credit is due where it's due.

      Delete
    5. By the way KC, when was it supposed you telling us?

      Delete
    6. was in "Irrefutable Proof ":

      "Anonymous17 Apr 2015, 22:18:00

      Insane has a point about the generation time of the prints....

      Further....reading about the 'typo's' and strange characters in the doc's......the first thing that came in my mind was: "these doc's were scanned and read with OCR (Optical character recognition ) software"... and we know that this software can produce 'funny' errors....

      just some thoughts.... don't know if true or not"

      KC

      Delete
    7. KC,

      Thank you for letting us know that Anon comment was from you.

      Delete
  21. There's an interesting article written in the Travel section of The Telegraph newspaper, dated 21 April 2007. Entitled: Happy in a nanny state (sic), it touches on many of the issues which are now being fully deconstructed in this blog. Even if readers have read it before, it's still worth another gander in light of what's unravelling currently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/portugal/740884/Happy-in-a-nanny-state.html

      Happy in a nanny state

      Melinda Libby and her children throw themselves into the activities offered by a Mark Warner holiday in a real village in the Western Algarve.

      12:01AM BST 21 Apr 2007

      Many years ago when I was a twenty-something, I set off from Britain in a fast car driven by a boyfriend. We were heading for a villa in Portugal owned by the parents of a friend and we left Tooting without tickets, itinerary or the address of the villa; we knew what town it was in but nothing more.

      These days, as a forty-something single parent of an 11-year-old girl and a nine-year-old boy, I like to be a bit more organised. But not too organised.

      We had tried the everything-on-tap style holiday at Mark Warner's San Agostino resort in Greece, where we were hermetically sealed into an all-inclusive resort in a beautiful coastal location. It offered us comfortable accommodation, agreeable food, a choice of swimming pools, a wide range of activities (particularly tennis and watersports) and excellent childcare.

      But, like Mark Warner's other resorts, it was remote and there was little opportunity to get out and explore the surrounding area. One day at San Agostino, I found myself getting exceptionally excited by the tiny chapel on the perimeter of the village and realised that I hankered after a bit of real life, and - more to the point - Greek real life.

      So when we heard that Mark Warner, in a departure from its usual format, had taken over some apartments within the Ocean Club in Praia de Luz, a real Portuguese village in the Western Algarve, we were one of the first families to sign up.

      The Ocean Club has groups of villas and apartments integrated within the village. This would give us more freedom than in a traditional club-style resort and more chance to absorb the local culture - but there would still be the children's groups and activities that make these holidays so popular with families.

      In traditional Mark Warner style, we were helped at Gatwick and greeted by cheerful staff when we reached Faro.

      But when, on a dark night, the bus dropped us with our luggage at the door of our beachside apartment, we felt very alone without the usual support structure.

      We had a map to show us where to go for breakfast and the location of the welcome meeting - yes, they still offered that - but I had a restless night worrying whether we would find all the facilities that the Ocean Club had to offer.

      And with good reason. Map-reading has never been my strong point, but I became anxious when, the following morning, we asked various people the way to the Millennium Restaurant, where breakfast and dinner is served for Mark Warner guests - and no one seemed to know.

      We eventually found our way thanks to a chance encounter with a couple from London. Thanks to their sense of direction, we managed to get some breakfast and formed a rewarding friendship for the duration of the holiday. While the trip was mostly agreeable from our point of view, many other Mark Warner regulars begged to differ.

      The distances between accommodation, watering holes and activities became a real bugbear for some, particularly those with small children.

      Some guests resorted, in desperation, to hiring a car before their holiday was over. For us, the 12-minute uphill walk to dinner each evening was irksome, but the walk back down to the beach after the meal and entertainment was extremely pleasant. It was on one of these walks that Bertie, my nine-year-old, confided that he much preferred being in a real village to a club-style resort.

      The other constant moan was the food: old Mark Warner hands became wistful as they talked about chefs at the other resorts who would boil an egg to their specification in front of their eyes. Quite a contrast to the unappetising fried eggs with hard yolks - not to mention dry croissants and tinned fruit - which were provided for breakfast at the Millennium Restaurant.

      (cont.)

      Delete
    2. (cont.)

      At other meals, people missed the wide range of fresh salads that they had enjoyed on previous Mark Warner holidays. And although there were some themed nights, and the Portuguese evening included some excellent squid and a cuttlefish stew, International Night was cruelly renamed "leftovers night".

      Guests were, though, generally happy with their accommodation - because, although the holidays are sold on a half-board basis, the apartments had facilities for self-catering and were larger than a traditional Mark Warner hotel room.

      And the children's activities really made the holiday come into its own. Before we arrived in Portugal, I had laid down the rules with the offspring. "Each day you'll be off to the children's clubs for all the activities," I told them. "Oh no we won't," they trilled.

      I was willing to negotiate: as long as they attended for a morning or afternoon session each day, I would be content. As it turned out, they barely missed a session and sometimes they were so exhausted that I had to persuade them not to go.
      Bertie was particularly delighted that he had no time at all to read any of the books that I had carefully selected for the holiday. They both enjoyed the watersports and were soon educating me in the names of the different sorts of boats or telling me they had seen dolphins or caught a fish. They swam, played games on the beach and, at the end of each week, performed a show which they had written themselves.

      But what really made the clubs such a success for them, and what must be the secret of Mark Warner's popularity, was the dedication of the indefatigable nannies and the sunkissed young men (with names such as Will and Olly) who run the waterfront and tennis activities.

      In a world of depressingly bad service, their energy, enthusiasm and cheerfulness made everything seem possible. The set-up in Praia de Luz was particularly appealing to teenage guests, who could spread their wings and dip in and out of the various activities and hostelries in the village.

      While the children were at their clubs, I spent time on the beach or exploring the village: I found the butcher, the baker and a few clothes and gift shops. Later, with a group of Mark Warner guests, I went on a coastal walk to the pretty fishing village of Burgau, with cliff-top views of the craggy Western Algarve coastline and the wide expanse of yellow, sandy beaches.

      Some Mark Warner regulars will never be happy in a situation where the environment isn't controlled, even if all the usual facilities - three swimming pools, tennis courts, two restaurants and four bars - are available. They don't want to share a pool with non-Mark Warner guests, nor do they want someone in a green, furry alien costume to appear at dinner, allegedly to entertain children (an experience described as "shocking" by a seasoned traveller with Mark Warner).

      But, as far as we were concerned, the venture was a success. After two weeks, I was thoroughly rested and fit. And the children were distraught at leaving Praia de Luz and the nannies they had grown so fond of. Several weeks later, their conversations were still peppered with happy reminiscences of their days spent in the care of Natalie, Becky, Lucy, Chloe and Laura.
      ------------------------------
      Praia basics

      A week with Mark Warner (0870 898 8942, www.markwarner.co.uk ) at the Ocean Club, Praia de Luz costs from £545 per adult, two weeks from £699; child prices vary according to age, but start at £273/£350 for children aged two to 12; those under two are charged £100 a week. This includes flights, transfers, accommodation with breakfast and dinner, childcare for children aged two and over and use of tennis courts and activities such as sailing and windsurfing tuition, canoeing, aerobics and fitness classes
      Diving courses, tennis coaching and tuition for RYA sailing qualifications cost extra, as does the crèche for children under two (from £230 a week).

      Delete
    3. Natalie, Becky, Lucy, Chloe and Laura????

      These were the Mark Warner childcare staff listed who were PdL in 2007:
      http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/CRECHE/01_VOLUME_Ia_prosesso_page104.jpg

      Lyndsay Johnson (15/03/2007)
      Stacey Portz (18/03/2007)
      Amy Tierney (18/03/2007)
      Catriona Baker (21/03/2007)
      Lynne Rhyannon (21/03/2007)
      Kirsty Maryan (21/03/2007)
      Susan Owen (21/03/2007)
      Emma Wilding (21/03/2007)
      Jacqueline Williams (21/03/2007)
      Shinead Vine (21/03/2007)
      Leanne Wagstaff (23/03/2007)
      Emma Knights (25/03/2007)
      Pauline McCann (27/03/2007)
      Charlotte Pennington (28/04/2007)
      Sarah Williamson (28/04/2007)

      Those that Mark Warner says they had arrived that year and left before Maddie disappeared:

      Rhiannon Groves (21/03/2007)
      Elizabeth Mills (21/03/2007)
      Mark Shutt (21/03/2007)
      Sarah-Jayne Tily (21/03/2007)

      NO Natalie, Becky, Lucy, Chloe or Laura!!!

      Where are Natalie, Becky, Lucy, Chloe and Laura who took care of her Melinda Libby's children?

      Was Melinda wrong in FIVE names??

      Delete
    4. Her son's name is Bertie, so they must be middle class, I would think! BTY, am I living in Narnia?

      Delete
    5. Swimming pools being busy and sunkissed young men suggests that this review was for a holiday that took place in the warm weather of 2006. Also, a similar revue by Melinda Libby from 2005 places Bertie as being 8, and in this article he is 9.

      Delete
    6. May agree with you about sunkissed young men but we cannot agree on the fact swimming pools being busy suggests a holiday in 2006.

      At date of article:
      - Laundry was 100% manned
      - Cleaning was 100% manned
      - Reception was 100% manned
      - Restaurant & Bars were 85% manned
      - Mark Warner was 95% manned

      http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2015/04/tourism-diet.html

      This amount of manning could not have been for empty swimming pools. And as swimming pools are linked to the sun, then most likely the young men were sunkissed too.

      Delete
    7. No. The article refers to non MW guests using the pool being a problem. Locals wont go swimming in weeks/months before April as the water will be too cold.

      It seems to be that Natalie, Becky, Lucy, Chloe and Laura may have been in MW employment in 2006 and were not employed in 2007. Could this be confirmed ?

      Delete
    8. Where was Charlotte Pennington in 2006?

      Delete
    9. It's perfectly clear that the article must be referring to a holiday taken in 2006 or earlier, as it was published in mid April 2007. The author of the article talks of her children playing on the beach and swimming in the pool and herself lying on the beach. Unless they were wearing coats, the sensible conclusion is that she is referring to 2006 or earlier.

      Delete
    10. Yes, you must be right because 2005/2006 is such a mystery, almost as if it didn't exist. So we won't bother with prior or future research. Cheers!

      Delete
    11. Insane at 25 May 2015, 00:42:00,

      "The author of the article talks of her children playing on the beach and swimming in the pool and herself lying on the beach. Unless they were wearing coats, the sensible conclusion is that she is referring to 2006 or earlier"

      So the sensible conclusion is for you to agree with us that on April 15, 2007 the resort was over-manned for no reason:

      Ocean Club.

      Laundry 100 % - 3 out 3, 2 new workers
      Cleaning 100 % - 22 out 22, 8 new workers
      Reception 100% - 10 out of 10, 3 new workers
      Restaurant 84% - 42 out of 50, 36 new workers

      Mark Warner 91% - 30 out of 33, 30 new workers.

      However, if we consider the 4 Mark Warner employees who arrived on March 21 and we're not sure when they left (2, Groves and Mills, seem to have left in March - so we won't count them - and the other 2, Shutt and Tily in April) it means:

      Mark Warner 97% - 32 out of 33, 32 new workers.

      As tourists had no beach or pools to enjoy and Luz, as far as we know, has no other significant offers, we think you agree with us that many was a employee who found him or herself with nothing to do all day.

      Delete
    12. Is it a wonder, given such emphasis on 'family holidays' - their major - if not THE major source of their income, Mark Warner /Ocean Club and their franchises would want to suppress ANY sense that the resort was being used for 'swinging' or other such activities? Although some readers think 'swinging' is passe, if news got out would the same readers still book with MW/OC or - mmm - try somewhere 'new' instead, and in the future?

      Delete
    13. Valid point....a lot of people are quite flippant about the effects on careers and reputations of being labeled Ss. MSM have had field days with celebrities and powerful people who have embarked on extramarital affairs. Even the American president almost lost all when his was exposed. Burley footballers with a “so what” mentality ended up weeping and wailing after the MSM had finished with them after similar exposures. Why would people now think that being exposed as Ss (especially at a location where a baby died) would be “no big deal” when they are aware of the treatment people of what I would think was the lesser offence of extramarital affairs. It not illegal either. As the poster rightly said if MW was linked with this their reputation as a “family holiday” provider would be in tatters overnight.

      Delete
  22. Nova Gente, paper edition, Nº2019 (25 to 31/05/2015) pg 92

    Top of page:
    Gonçalo Amaral receives apologies from Manuela Ferreira Leite

    Title:
    "THEY TRIED TO DESTROY ME"

    Subtitle:
    In 2009, the ex-inpector of the "Maddie case" was chosen by PSD to be candidate to the Olhão Municipality
    He was removed from the race by the McCann couple.


    The story has more than six years, but remains well alive in the memory of Gonçalo Amaral, the ex-coordinator of the "Maddie case". After he retired, the PSD wanted to launch him in the political life, appointing him "as candidate to the presidency of the Municipality of Olhão", at the end of 2008. When all indicated him as the strongest candidate to victory, came the announcement of the contrary from Manuela Ferreira Leite. Gonçalo Amaral was received by the then orange [colour linked to PSD] leader who apologised to him about the decision.

    "The McCannns allege that they minimised the book and only the showing of the documentary took them to react. It's not true. The book came out and was minimised by the couple, but before the dicumentary, in January 2009, it came out in the papers that I had been chosen by the PSD as the candidate to the presidency for the Olhão Municipality", says the ex-inspector, underlining: "What happened was that the couple tried always to destroy me, destroy my credibility, and were frightened with the possibility of me to stop being an outsider, a retiree from the police, and being able to be president of Olhão Municipality. They were frightened, they would have thought that a mayor would be a more credible figure than that of a police officer", states Amaral, describing his version of the events at that time. "The couple's reaction was quick. In a flash trip, Gerald McCann came to Lisbon, met with his lawyer, Dr Rogério Alves, with a PSD leader, who is said to be Dr José Luís Arnaut, and the couple’s current lawyer, Dr Isabel Duarte. They spoke about me, a Portuguese citizen with the right to elect or be elected in any democratic elections, and they even delivered a report about me, done by their private detectives, hired to look for their daughter. After the meeting, Dr Manuela Ferreita Leite announced that I was no longer candidate, overriding the will of the Olhão militants and that of the Agarvians’ “

    In the sequence of this removal, Gonçalo Amaral asked to be received by Ferreira Leita. “She received me in the party headquarters, having only apologised, to me and my family”, revealed in an interview to Nova Gente, again defending that “the cupel didn’t suffer any kind of damages, only were frightened with the course of life was taking, because they wanted to discredit me”.


    Caption of photo 1:
    PSD LEADER REJECTED CANDIDACY
    Gonçalo Amaral believes that Manuela Ferreira Leite will have refuse his candidacy to the Olhão Municipality by influence of José Luís Arnaut, who, in turn, will have been meeting with Gerry McCann and his lawyers.

    Caption photo 2:
    DELIVERY OF APPEAL
    The ex-inspector of the PJ is going to appeal the sentence that condemned him to pay 500 thousand euros to the McCann couple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course Gerry McCann lied about his reasons for going to Portugal - stating it was to keep abreast of the 'search' for his little girl, when all along he was more concerned with shutting up the detective (or anyone else) who wasn't swallowing the official line. That he was allowed so much power (or the people behind him had so much power) is simply appalling. We support you Dr. Amaral 100%. C (in Ireland)

      Delete
    2. And this "episode" served to show those who had high hopes that if the political power changed hands in Portugal, That is, if José Socrates and his socialist party government would be defeated in the elections to come, both the investigation's and Mr Amaral's situation would change for the better, that the cover-up would end and the McCanns and friends would be accountable before the portuguese justice.
      Now we know (thanks to the work and investigation of many, like Textusa) that "the secret" about the case reaches deep into every corner of society, all political "colors" included, not this or that particular person/politician/party. As we have sadly and shamefully witnessed, nothing changed with the PSD rise to power...its government, like its predecessor, went along with the cover up, allowing itself to be crushed under the british "boots".

      Delete
  23. Ins3an3 you have lost your spark.

    Shaherazade

    ReplyDelete
  24. Textusa, thank you for your replies to Insane. It gives me an enormous pleasure to see that at least one of the team McCann is being put in his place.

    ReplyDelete
  25. http://www.expressandstar.com/entertainment/showbiz-news/2015/05/25/celebs-back-missing-children-appeal/
    Kate makes appeal in newspapers for Missing People
    Any news on Ricardo Firmino, 11
    Is he really missing since December 2014 in Portugal?
    If so, why hasn't this been plastered over the news?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://mobile.twitter.com/missingpeople/status/602854362344480768?p=v
      Only deal with UK?
      Ricardo Firmino was Portugal.
      So why does his photo and scant details appear on the website?

      Delete
    2. https://mobile.twitter.com/lime_harry/status/602799678049165312?p=v
      Zero info on Ricardo Firmino

      Delete
    3. mariaccnr – ‏@mariaccnr
      @adrian5x5 @lime_harry @urcrazytoo @MrsWaspie Forget the case. A divorced couple and son was to England to stay there only for Christmas.

      Isabelle Maria McF ‏@QUEENdePORTUGAL
      @lime_harry @urcrazytoo @MrsWaspie @adrian5x5 @mariaccnr I filed complain with judiciaria. No such child missing in PT

      It looks like to me that a spiteful parent filed this. All parent-abducted children are on PJ site and if he isn't then nothing illegal

      Delete
    4. When his name was put on the Missing People site, the details of his so-called disappearance would be known.
      No details of time and place of disappearance or what he was wearing.
      It's a deceit to put his appealing photo on a site which people raise funds for. And it raises the question of how many of their appeals are based on the same scenario.

      Delete
    5. Textusa yourself and blacksmiths analysis have shown that the MSM and the Mirror in particular no longer print pro McCann stories....at least not to the extent that it did. I know she has been an ambasador for missing people for quite a few years now but are they now being used to get the pro mcCann messages out now. I seen yesterday that the article in the Sun was wrote in a way to link their name to the likes of the Beckhams and other celebs. Is this organisation do you think linked with the BHs

      Delete
  26. DO NOT PUBLISH at 25 May 2015, 17:00:00,

    You cannot imagine how much you made us blush...
    :)

    Oh, and your assessment in the change of communication... we agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  27. https://www.facebook.com/ISPCCChildline/photos/a.129567053738292.19469.109912082370456/1066157646745890/?type=1&__mref=message_bubble

    Ben Needham and no Maddie. All other children though. Interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 19:04:00,

      I don't see a Ricardo Firmino there either.

      Delete
    2. Surely he should appear on the PJ's official website?

      Delete
  28. I know it is not related to this post,in a roundabout way but Thomas Cook do not appear to be having good publicity with regard to the Greece Children's deaths and one of their recent take over from Mark Warner, Ocean Club Apartments?
    The longer the Appeal process lasts cannot be wanted publicity for Thomas Cook and the residents of Prai De Luis.

    ReplyDelete

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.

Textusa