Panorama:Madeleine:The Last Hope...Thur 3rd May

pennylane wrote:

Remind them of Jeffrey Archer and Siôn Jenkins

Lots of criminals push for the limelight - because they hope naive people, the likes of which you met on holiday, will take that as a sign of innocence. Anybody with a grain of street sense knows otherwise!

Aaaah but l believe Jenkins is innocent, l dont think there was enough time for him to kill Billie-Jo and remain as clean as he did, plus there's bin bag man - a local mentally ill person with an obsession of bin bags, a small piece of bin bag was pushed up Billie-Jo's nostril, a fact that is not well publicised (even in this case the police and media shulder some blame for that). Even the mentally ill mans parents went to the police with their concerns about him.

I do think SJ is a horrible man but not a murderer.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/sion-jenkins-a-father-betrayed-907223.html

pennylane wrote:

Panda wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Panda wrote:

The more you read the more you wonder why everyone pandered to their demands. Here was a little child reported missing by her parents who left
her alone every night and insisted she was abducted . After 2 weeks with everyone around the World on the look-out for her and proof that the
Tapas Group statementss did not tally , wouldn't you think the Police would have called for a recon there and then , not a year later.

The McCanns PR machine made it seem as if they knew everyone from Gordon Brown to Prince Charles, and were so well connected they even had Rome preparing itself for their visit with the Pope.

That's how they got over, and that's how they got out..... in the beginning (imo). But that all changed once people realised they were just a tacky pair of child neglecters.

Morning pennylane, to be fair, if it wasn't for the internet we wouldn't know half as much as we do , on holiday a couple of years ago a few of us sitting around the Pool and the conversation turned to the McCanns . They were amazed at what I had to say and thought it shameful the amount of
protection they received . One of the girls asked why they were still putting themselves in the limelight if they are guilty ....that's quite a hard question
to answer,.

Morning Panda,

Remind them of Jeffrey Archer and Siôn Jenkins

Lots of criminals push for the limelight - because they hope naive people, the likes of which you met on holiday, will take that as a sign of innocence. Anybody with a grain of street sense knows otherwise!

Them putting themselves in the limelight is always used as a reason for their innocence. But they have played a very clever game, imo.

What have they actually done ? They have written a book, made money. They travel worldwide to give interviews to make money. We are told it was they who instigated the SY review, we only have their word for that to date.

The have employed private investigators who would not find a shopping trolley in a supermarket. There is no chance any of them were going to find out what happened.

IF they were truly putting themselves in the limelight in order to clear their name they would be DEMANDING the Portugese re-open the investigation. Had the Portugese refused, they would have lobbied Cameron to get the Portugese to do so. They would be begging for SY to go to Portugal and work with the PJ on an investigation, as they clearly do not trust the PJ to do a good job.

As it stands they have actually done nothing to get the case re-opened. The file is shelved, nobody is actually trying to catch them out.

All they have done is keep theselves in the public eye like all celebrities like to do and made lots of noise but actually nothing of any importance.

mossman, what they have also done is over publicise everything so they can claim 'unfair trial' too....

margaret wrote:mossman, what they have also done is over publicise everything so they can claim 'unfair trial' too....

Yes, that is a very good point.

margaret wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Remind them of Jeffrey Archer and Siôn Jenkins

Lots of criminals push for the limelight - because they hope naive people, the likes of which you met on holiday, will take that as a sign of innocence. Anybody with a grain of street sense knows otherwise!

Aaaah but l believe Jenkins is innocent, l dont think there was enough time for him to kill Billie-Jo and remain as clean as he did, plus there's bin bag man - a local mentally ill person with an obsession of bin bags, a small piece of bin bag was pushed up Billie-Jo's nostril, a fact that is not well publicised (even in this case the police and media shulder some blame for that). Even the mentally ill mans parents went to the police with their concerns about him.

I do think SJ is a horrible man but not a murderer.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/sion-jenkins-a-father-betrayed-907223.html

Hi Margaret, I followed the BJJ story avidly too, and even though people always flag up someone they believe is suspicious, just like another case we know oh too well.... I'm afraid I still believe SJ killed Billie.

I would go into more detail, but the McCann situation just saturates my brain I'm afraid!

mossman wrote:
What have they actually done ? They have written a book, made money. They travel worldwide to give interviews to make money. We are told it was they who instigated the SY review, we only have their word for that to date.

The have employed private investigators who would not find a shopping trolley in a supermarket. There is no chance any of them were going to find out what happened.

IF they were truly putting themselves in the limelight in order to clear their name they would be DEMANDING the Portugese re-open the investigation. Had the Portugese refused, they would have lobbied Cameron to get the Portugese to do so. They would be begging for SY to go to Portugal and work with the PJ on an investigation, as they clearly do not trust the PJ to do a good job.

As it stands they have actually done nothing to get the case re-opened. The file is shelved, nobody is actually trying to catch them out.

All they have done is keep theselves in the public eye like all celebrities like to do and made lots of noise (MONEY) but actually nothing of any importance.

The private investigators they employed had zero experience in finding missing children and were specialised in company fraud!

marxman wrote:

mossman wrote:I have a memory of Gerry saying they saw no point in a reconstruction unless it was a "Crimewatch" type production where it would go out to millions. When the PJ said no, it would be just a localised un-televised reconstruction GMcC said it would be of no use. This was in relation to the first proposed reconstruction.

Am I dreaming this or does anyone else remember ???

No mossman you are not dreaming it,
Gerry did indeed request a 'crimewatch'
type format.
And the tapas crew asked if 'actors' could
be used instead of them.
The mind boggles.

and I suspect it was to this, that the PJ responded by saying, 'it's not usual in Portugal'.

mossman wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Panda wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Panda wrote:

The more you read the more you wonder why everyone pandered to their demands. Here was a little child reported missing by her parents who left
her alone every night and insisted she was abducted . After 2 weeks with everyone around the World on the look-out for her and proof that the
Tapas Group statementss did not tally , wouldn't you think the Police would have called for a recon there and then , not a year later.

The McCanns PR machine made it seem as if they knew everyone from Gordon Brown to Prince Charles, and were so well connected they even had Rome preparing itself for their visit with the Pope.

That's how they got over, and that's how they got out..... in the beginning (imo). But that all changed once people realised they were just a tacky pair of child neglecters.

Morning pennylane, to be fair, if it wasn't for the internet we wouldn't know half as much as we do , on holiday a couple of years ago a few of us sitting around the Pool and the conversation turned to the McCanns . They were amazed at what I had to say and thought it shameful the amount of
protection they received . One of the girls asked why they were still putting themselves in the limelight if they are guilty ....that's quite a hard question
to answer,.

Morning Panda,

Remind them of Jeffrey Archer and Siôn Jenkins

Lots of criminals push for the limelight - because they hope naive people, the likes of which you met on holiday, will take that as a sign of innocence. Anybody with a grain of street sense knows otherwise!

Them putting themselves in the limelight is always used as a reason for their innocence. But they have played a very clever game, imo.

What have they actually done ? They have written a book, made money. They travel worldwide to give interviews to make money. We are told it was they who instigated the SY review, we only have their word for that to date.

The have employed private investigators who would not find a shopping trolley in a supermarket. There is no chance any of them were going to find out what happened.

IF they were truly putting themselves in the limelight in order to clear their name they would be DEMANDING the Portugese re-open the investigation. Had the Portugese refused, they would have lobbied Cameron to get the Portugese to do so. They would be begging for SY to go to Portugal and work with the PJ on an investigation, as they clearly do not trust the PJ to do a good job.

As it stands they have actually done nothing to get the case re-opened. The file is shelved, nobody is actually trying to catch them out.

All they have done is keep theselves in the public eye like all celebrities like to do and made lots of noise but actually nothing of any importance.

Hi mossman, Yes they do make a lot of noise without substance, but I guess they don't have much choice under the circumstances.

Someone has played a clever game, but I don't think it's the McCanns. They very quickly came into focus as the main culprits by a slew of professionals and onlookers. I tend to believe their success (thus far) is down to them having top advice and assistance from a few of the sleaziest and most devious members of the establishment. I also believe the initial Birmingham FSS results should have hung them out to dry, but a decision was made at that juncture to stop things from going further, and they were sabotaged. The Home Office gave them a hell of a lot of help by not cooperating with the PJ's requests. Why would the HO not cooperate with the basic requests if they felt the McCanns had nothing to hide?

I see the pair as slippery and cunning, but not particularly smart.

Hi Pennylane, I agree with you. When I say "they" are clever, it is those who hide in the background I refer to.

Kate and Gerry are like two puppets, and they have been consistently advised on what to do.

The vast majority of people believe in their innocence for two reasons:

1. They do not believe that parents could kill their child or hide her body in those circumstances
2. They do not believe they would be out in public if they were guilty

In my experience, the second reason is very important because even people who are accepting of the first part as being possible still question the second.


Most times I think when/if we get an explanation of what happened that night it will be so simple and they got away with it largely down to luck.

They themselves or their friends are not at all clever, so anything that happened prior to the string pullers arriving will be very simple indeed.

As always, we have to wait.....

jd16 wrote:

mossman wrote:
What have they actually done ? They have written a book, made money. They travel worldwide to give interviews to make money. We are told it was they who instigated the SY review, we only have their word for that to date.

The have employed private investigators who would not find a shopping trolley in a supermarket. There is no chance any of them were going to find out what happened.

IF they were truly putting themselves in the limelight in order to clear their name they would be DEMANDING the Portugese re-open the investigation. Had the Portugese refused, they would have lobbied Cameron to get the Portugese to do so. They would be begging for SY to go to Portugal and work with the PJ on an investigation, as they clearly do not trust the PJ to do a good job.

As it stands they have actually done nothing to get the case re-opened. The file is shelved, nobody is actually trying to catch them out.

All they have done is keep theselves in the public eye like all celebrities like to do and made lots of noise (MONEY) but actually nothing of any importance.

The private investigators they employed had zero experience in finding missing children and were specialised in company fraud!

That could be a stroke of luck, let them investigate the fund.

I hope the Panorama programme will go right back to basics for instance:

HOW DID MADELEINE LEAVE 5a?

Assuming the flat was unlocked
1. She walked out on her own
2. She walked out with someone she knew
3. She walked out with a stranger/intruder
4. She was carried out, sleeping, in the arms of someone she knew
5. She was carried out, sleeping, in the arms of a stranger/intruder
6. She was carried out, drugged, in the arms of someone she knew
7. She was carried out, drugged, in the arms of a stranger/intruder
8. She was carried out, dead, in the arms of someone she knew
9. She was carried out, dead, in the arms of a stranger/intruder
10. She was carried out, dead, in a bag by someone she knew
Assuming the flat was locked
11. She walked out with someone she knew with an official key
12. She walked out with a stranger/intruder with a duplicate key
13. She was carried out, sleeping, by someone she knew with a key
14. She was carried out, sleeping, by a stranger with a duplicate key
15. She was carried out, drugged, by someone she knew with key
16. She was carried out, drugged, by a stranger with a duplicate key
17. She was carried out, dead, by someone she knew with a key
18. She was carried out, dead, by a stranger with a duplicate key
19. She was carried out, dead, in a bag, by someone she knew.

There may be others. Some of these possibilities can be eliminated easily by the police working on the case. I doubt we shall be told which of them are still in the frame.

There was talk of a Repair Guy having a key and let's suppose he knew the McCanns routine and kidnapped Madeleine with an accomplice who had a Car and could hide Madeleine until their intended Ransom was met. However, what they didn't bargain for was the amount of instant publicity the
kidnap generated , knew they couldn't ask for a ransom without getting caught so disposed of Madeleine.

As for the McCanns , the amount of publicity and the Ambassador, Lawyers etc, public interest had them on a crest of a wave. Doug Skehan is a Fund Raiser and the McCanns started the Fund initially to search for Madeleine. As time went by they realised Madeliene wasn't going to be found but kept the Fund raising going, for their own benefit and that's how it's been ever since.

Pennylane wrote:

Hi mossman, Yes they do make a lot of noise without substance, but I guess they don't have much choice under the circumstances.

Someone has played a clever game, but I don't think it's the McCanns. They very quickly came into focus as the main culprits by a slew of professionals and onlookers. I tend to believe their success (thus far) is down to them having top advice and assistance from a few of the sleaziest and most devious members of the establishment. I also believe the initial Birmingham FSS results should have hung them out to dry, but a decision was made at that juncture to stop things from going further, and they were sabotaged. The Home Office gave them a hell of a lot of help by not cooperating with the PJ's requests. Why would the HO not cooperate with the basic requests if they felt the McCanns had nothing to hide?

I see the pair as slippery and cunning, but not particularly smart.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Unquote

Mossman or you said earlier that the PJ were hampered from the start. IMO the fact that John Buck the Ambassador, the consul and the vice consul were all present on the morning of the 4th shouts: 'Protection - damage limitation' for me.
I have worked for an Embassy. The Ambassador has nothing to do with non political matters. At most, in ordinary circumstances, the Consul-General would have made a personal appearance. But certainly not within hours of the child disappearing.
The only people who would be there are the local consul and possibly a side kick.
Now: how did the Ambassador get there so quickly? Because it is a good three hour drive from Lisbon. He would not have been woken up in the night on the strength of a phone call from a bunch of doctors on holiday - case for the local Consul and then we'll see how it develops.
IMO that was an instruction from the FO - nothing else would have made the Ambassador grab a croissant and head for the Algarve. So - how soon did the FO know this?
IMO it's one of the most glaring pointers to an earlier demise than the 3rd of May. IMO the protective cover was primed and ready to go.

Re: cunning - if you've ever read George MacDonald Fraser's 'The General danced at dawn' and 'McAuslin in the rough' you'll find that 'cunning' is much admired in the Glaswegian psyche. Being a trickster is to be cunning i.e. 'clever'. Now who does that remind me of?

Wintabells wrote:

marxman wrote:

mossman wrote:I have a memory of Gerry saying they saw no point in a reconstruction unless it was a "Crimewatch" type production where it would go out to millions. When the PJ said no, it would be just a localised un-televised reconstruction GMcC said it would be of no use. This was in relation to the first proposed reconstruction.

Am I dreaming this or does anyone else remember ???

No mossman you are not dreaming it,
Gerry did indeed request a 'crimewatch'
type format.
And the tapas crew asked if 'actors' could
be used instead of them.
The mind boggles.

and I suspect it was to this, that the PJ responded by saying, 'it's not usual in Portugal'.

Would the Gerry take advice from a police officer about cardiology...

This article from Cumbria Crack News has more info:-

http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2012/04/24/madeleine-mccann-the-last-hope/

Oldartform wrote:This article from Cumbria Crack News has more info:-

http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2012/04/24/madeleine-mccann-the-last-hope/

Thank you. Very interesting.

Poor Ms Durate :

“I feel alone because I don’t feel support, not in public opinion. I have friends that don’t want to talk to me about the case because everyone believes in Goncalo Amaral. Everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse.”

A rather odd statement for her to make.

mossman wrote:

Oldartform wrote:This article from Cumbria Crack News has more info:-

http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2012/04/24/madeleine-mccann-the-last-hope/

Thank you. Very interesting.

Poor Ms Durate :

“I feel alone because I don’t feel support, not in public opinion. I have friends that don’t want to talk to me about the case because everyone believes in Goncalo Amaral. Everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse.”

A rather odd statement for her to make.

She should've thought of that before she sold her soul to the devil.

The public believe in the truth Ms Duarte...Not the fabricated lies and cover ups you are protecting

mossman wrote:

Oldartform wrote:This article from Cumbria Crack News has more info:-

http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2012/04/24/madeleine-mccann-the-last-hope/

Thank you. Very interesting.

Poor Ms Durate :

“I feel alone because I don’t feel support, not in public opinion. I have friends that don’t want to talk to me about the case because everyone believes in Goncalo Amaral. Everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse.”

A rather odd statement for her to make.

Maybe trying to garner sympathy - at least she concedes that everyone believes in GA.

I could never follow a profession where I had to help clients escape justice.

Aw diddums, Duarte - I'm glad you feel alone, and if you end up crying you'll cry alone too.


From one of the people you called vultures and vampires.

Wow, didn't dr. Amaral come across well in the BBC news just now. And I liked the "attitudes have hardened against the McCanns" comment. Never thought I'd hear the Beeb every comment on anything like that about the blessed couple.

Everyone thinks that Ms Duarte?

Everyone?

That can't be right, can it Ms Duarte? After all, the parents themselves have told us it's only a few Internet nutters that think that way...

Iris wrote:

mossman wrote:

Oldartform wrote:This article from Cumbria Crack News has more info:-

http://www.cumbriacrack.com/2012/04/24/madeleine-mccann-the-last-hope/

Thank you. Very interesting.

Poor Ms Durate :

“I feel alone because I don’t feel support, not in public opinion. I have friends that don’t want to talk to me about the case because everyone believes in Goncalo Amaral. Everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse.”

A rather odd statement for her to make.

She should've thought of that before she sold her soul to the devil.

Shouldn't think TM will be too pleased with dizzy Izzy for blurting that out. Let's face it they aren't paying her the big bucks to tell home truths!

is she talking about us???