Emma Loach Witness

Looking for something else on mccannfiles I came across this ,there is a photo of Emma, and she looks a bit like Kate.


Emma Loach hiding from the limelight

Smithman is probably on the left, holding the camera

Emma Loach didn't shout but instead took refuge in girlie upset at a bad school report, even though her teenage years are long behind her. She had reason to be troubled since she'd begun with a performance quite beyond satire, breezily telling the court that she was an "expert" on the case and quoting audience statistics that proved how influential Amaral had been in corrupting the public. Ah the public! Modestly she told us how lucky she was to be able to understand complicated things so much better than they, a public that she consistently referred to in terms that an average eventer would use about her horse. Within ten minutes one was almost feeling sorry for her, so plentiful were the hostages she gave to fortune. Amid this rubbish, psychology once more raised its head: just like her fellow Guardianista, Bridget O'Donnell, Emma Loach seemed simply star-truck by the pair.

But that didn't help her when the questioning began and Emma dissolved slowly into her chair like a messily melting ice-cream. Her "expertise" was based on a few case files that the McCanns had thoughtfully chosen for her. The Archiving Summary or PJ report? No, she'd never read either. The source of her audience statistics? Ah, now that she was asked well, hmm, she thought that she'd read them somewhere but, oh dear, no, perhaps she hadn't. Amaral's book, which she had read – no wait a minute, no she hadn't actually but she'd read, well, something on the Internet somewhere – anyway it was so influential because, you know, it was "so easy to read" that even the public (given an apple and a nosebag to go with it?) could understand it, unlike those Case Files which were far too complicated for the poor darlings. How did she know they were complicated if she hadn't read them? She didn't say. With each answer the lip trembled a bit more. Enough of this intrusion into private grief! – let's pull the curtain back again before the judge starts on her.

The only one of the claimants' British witnesses who brought a trace of dignity to these proceedings was M/S Cameron. For a short time the self-importance and vapidity of this procession of wilfully deluded "professionals" was interrupted and M/S Cameron, measured, sincere, dogged in her belief in family unity and action as a balm in a situation beyond understanding, spoke quietly of the support that the pair have received over the past six years and the pleasures of her relationship with the surviving children. It was a brief, very human, respite from this fascinating but horrible McCann affair.

Now, Mr Woolfall hasn't talked about the McCanns lately, has he? Do they get that Oscar now or later?

This is part of a recent Blacksmith post:
Oscar Nominations in Lisbon
Thursday, 12 December 2013

The piece is worth reading as a whole because it describes how so-called 'professionals' seem so easily swayed by (and are held spellbound by) the McCanns themselves and what they tell them - to the point where they lose all sense of reason and objectivity.

Thanks almostgothic, so Blacksmith was at the Trial !!

I can't believe Emma Loach agreed to be a Witness ......she must know how the McCanns have lied. It was in the Anniversary videos directed by Loach that Kate lied about the Windows open . It was also in a Loach documentery that the American Actress hired to play Kate's part wasted her time because her role ended up on the cutting room floor . It could not tie in with the rest of the Tapas 9 Statements.

He may or may not have been at the trial, but he will almost certainly have read the Anne Guedes transcripts, which are powerful enough on their own in their depiction of People-You-Would-Never-Choose-As-Witnesses- Even-If-You-Were-Desperate.

Loach is the perfect example.
Maybe she thought she'd sail through it on her Name (or Daddy's Name). I dunno.
Has the good judge (daughter of a viscount) ever seen Cathy Come Home or Riff-Raff? I dunno.

But as sure as hell, anyone who sets themselves up as an expert witness on oath had better damn well prove that they are, otherwise it's tears in the toilet.

No wonder the arbiter of this courtroom fiasco was swatting 'em away like flies ...

There are some very pretty pictures of different kinds of Loach on this link. http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/content.php?sid=2695 But no matter how pretty they are, they are still bottom feeders.

They are indeed pretty - and they all look as if they're doing impersonations of other critters - bumble bees, snakes, zebras, fawns.
Loaches pretending to be something they're not.

I guess there's a lesson in that for someone, somewhere ...

almostgothic wrote:This is part of a recent Blacksmith post:
Oscar Nominations in Lisbon
Thursday, 12 December 2013

The piece is worth reading as a whole because it describes how so-called 'professionals' seem so easily swayed by (and are held spellbound by) the McCanns themselves and what they tell them - to the point where they lose all sense of reason and objectivity.

I saw that on Blacksmith blog and was surprised they'd have Emma Loach as a witness at all. I thought she was there as a representative of the media and that would be weird. If she actually was the one doing some of the videos - !

Does it seem likely McCanns would endorse any kind of video of the case, the supposed night in question, by someone who WASN'T willing to swallow their tale? No. If they wanted veracity they'd have behaved differently; this was all "our version of the truth."

To have Loach up on the stand and stating that her "expertise" on this affair came all from mcCanns - who weren't as we know, willing to reconstruct for the police, to take a lie detector test, without conditions that made it impossible - or even to answer 40 questions honestly - just shows how the media is in this for the money. They don't care what really happened, they want to sell something and not get sued doing it and not be on the wrong side of "public opinion" and certainly in her case not on the wrong side of McCann song sheet. otherwise - no money, no fame, no video, no story.

Amongst those being served by TM are Kate and Gerry, Clarence's career, Carter Ruck - the media... certain prejudices held by the public - who don't want to be shocked out of believing that middle class nice British people do this sort of thing - those not served are Madeleine, freedom of the press, and Justice

She had reason to be troubled since she'd begun with a performance quite beyond satire, breezily telling the court that she was an "expert" on the case and quoting audience statistics that proved how influential Amaral had been in corrupting the public. Ah the public! Modestly she told us how lucky she was to be able to understand complicated things so much better than they... Emma Loach seemed simply star-truck by the pair.

But that didn't help her when the questioning began and Emma dissolved slowly into her chair like a messily melting ice-cream. Her "expertise" was based on a few case files that the McCanns had thoughtfully chosen for her. The Archiving Summary or PJ report? No, she'd never read either. The source of her audience statistics? Ah, now that she was asked well, hmm, she thought that she'd read them somewhere but, oh dear, no, perhaps she hadn't. Amaral's book, which she had read – no wait a minute, no she hadn't actually but she'd read, well, something on the Internet somewhere – anyway it was so influential because, you know, it was "so easy to read" that even the public (given an apple and a nosebag to go with it?) could understand it, unlike those Case Files which were far too complicated for the poor darlings. How did she know they were complicated if she hadn't read them? She didn't say.

===========================================

Blacksmith takes liberties and leaves things out, we know. However this is spot on.

Being young and beautiful and well connected doesn't make you wise. Look at any of the Fox News reporters and talking heads, for proof of that - or any of the news casters, for that matter.

kate talks about BOD in her book; surely BOD is a friend, after waxing on how kate's quiet beauty etc etc . Kate mentions how GNR saw a photo of Madeleine on their coffee table and asked if it were their child and "my heart sank for the McCanns" because of course these dundering eejits didn't know that was a photo of Madeleine, "the girl they were meant to be looking for"

Interesting assumptions there, with BOD. She assumes that the cops didn't recognize the photo rather than that they were asking this couple a question to get their response. Because the GNR had a fat stomach and his pants weren't tucked in all the way and he asked a question that could be interpreted as stupid, then he's a fool. Who but a fool would see that photo on the coffee table and NOT ask about it?

My days as a possible swim suit model are 30 years behind me but guess what - in those years I've learned a lot; you'd go a lot further to fool me today than when I was 20. The press seems to think if you have a beer with lunch and aren't going to be cast as a leading man - or a news anchor - you must be pathetic. They are in the business of looking good for camera and parroting whatever crap you are handed to read; they deal in images. We just had here, one of Fox news anchor women state for the record that Santa - like Jesus - was a historical figure, and was white ( a white man). Brilliant.

Not every detective looks like James Bond. Some look like a chubby middle aged man who is stupid like a fox; bumbling detective Columbo (Redwood?). NOT looking like James Bond is probably massively helpful when getting people who deal in image, as so many do - to let their guard down.

(Why on earth would tourists have a A4 size photo of their own child - with the words MISSING CHILD - on it, on their coffee table? Or did McCanns just hand around head shots of Madeleine assuming everyone would know what those were? The detectives questioned them in English, presumably they could read.)

How many times have detectives gone into homes where the actual kidnapped child lay asleep and taken it for granted when told by parents "that's our child" only to discover later that they'd been within ten feet of the kidnapped child?

Wouldn't you EXPECT them to ask who that photo is? Perhaps to ask to see your child, as well, if your story didn't make sense? BOD never says what they answered, when asked, nor what the GNR did NEXT.

People not so blinded by being "star struck" might not automatically assume that people they'd never met, and had no reason to believe - because they were "attractive" - must be innocent. Of course if there's a paycheck in it we can all (evidently) be expected to turn a blind eye; McCanns were ready for Prime Time - or at least Kate was. O'Dowd gushes over her looks like a lover.

Would Murat have been so "dodgy" if not for his Dodgy eye? Amaral so easy to dismiss as "disgraced" had he had a 32" waist and an Armani suit?

kate talks about BOD in her book; surely BOD is a friend, after waxing on how kate's quiet beauty etc etc . Kate mentions how GNR saw a photo of Madeleine on their coffee table and asked if it were their child and "my heart sank for the McCanns" because of course these dundering eejits didn't know that was a photo of Madeleine, "the girl they were meant to be looking for"

Hmm, didn't know that. The GNR were the first on the scene and is this when they looked at a photo of Madeleine on the coffee table? It would be interesting to know which photo it was, for if the GNR turn up to look for your lost child you would have to give them an excellent description and up to date photograph.

Did they ask because it was not an up to date photograph I wonder? The Police always ask what appears to you and me to be stupid questions, but they have to have confirmation on something.

LJC wrote:

kate talks about BOD in her book; surely BOD is a friend, after waxing on how kate's quiet beauty etc etc . Kate mentions how GNR saw a photo of Madeleine on their coffee table and asked if it were their child and "my heart sank for the McCanns" because of course these dundering eejits didn't know that was a photo of Madeleine, "the girl they were meant to be looking for"

Hmm, didn't know that.  The GNR were the first on the scene and is this when they looked at a photo of Madeleine on the coffee table?  It would be interesting to know which photo it was, for if the GNR turn up to look for your lost child you would have to give them an excellent description and up to date photograph.  

Did they ask because it was not an up to date photograph I wonder? The Police always ask what appears to you and me to be stupid questions, but they have to have confirmation on something.

I'll look. It was early on, they had the missing posters or pics made up quickly on the private printer of some person who worked at Ocean Club. handing round the photos without a number to call or the info that this child is missing would be stupid. Also not giving one to the police so they'd have it, would be stupid. So if O'Dowd and her husband had one and the cops didn't, whose fault is that exactly?

From day 1 the McCanns ignored the Portugese Police. They engaged Metodo when it was illegal to appoint their own Detectives, they gave daily briefings to the Press as if they were Royalty. Then moan when the case is shelved after over a Year although apparently they could have had it re-opened if they made a request within 2 weeks. This couple ignored the fact that their own negligence led to Madeleine's disappearance . Has it just been having a good PR Guy or real interest in this couple which has kept them in the limelight for over 6 years.....it really is some achievement.

Panda wrote:From day 1 the McCanns ignored the Portugese Police. They engaged Metodo when it was illegal to appoint their own Detectives, they gave daily briefings to the Press as if they were Royalty. Then moan when the case is shelved after over a Year although apparently they could have had it re-opened if they made a request within 2 weeks. This couple ignored the fact that their own negligence led to Madeleine's disappearance . Has it just been having a good PR Guy or real interest in this couple which has kept them in the limelight for over 6 years.....it really is some achievement.

The money the papers are making has something to do with it certainly. They need to print what the people want in order to sell papers but they can also generate and did generate lots of material that was nonsense in order to sell the story, not the facts of the case, not anything that would help to find Madeleine but nonsense of all kinds. The McCann story in some way is the way they get people buying the paper in order to deliver other material as well. It would be interesting to look, once this story really had legs and was making big headlines, what other stories appeared on the same pages or the one next to it. Murdoch's group was clearly striking a nerve with a certain demographic, you know, "it was the Sun wot won it" - would not be surprised if they used McCann story to further a larger or different agenda that makes a lot more sense politically such as getting the Labour party out and one more favorable to the wealthy and corporations (like Murdoch) in.

widowan wrote:

Panda wrote:From day 1 the McCanns ignored the Portugese Police. They engaged Metodo when it was illegal to appoint their own Detectives, they gave daily briefings to the Press as if they were Royalty. Then moan when the case is shelved after over a Year although apparently they could have had it re-opened if they made a request within 2 weeks. This couple ignored the fact that their own negligence led to Madeleine's disappearance . Has it just been having a good PR Guy or real interest in this couple which has kept them in the limelight for over 6 years.....it really is some achievement.

The money the papers are making has something to do with it certainly. They need to print what the people want in order to sell papers but they can also generate and did generate lots of material that was nonsense in order to sell the story, not the facts of the case, not anything that would help to find Madeleine but nonsense of all kinds. The McCann story in some way is the way they get people buying the paper in order to deliver other material as well. It would be interesting to look, once this story really had legs and was making big headlines, what other stories appeared on the same pages or the one next to it. Murdoch's group was clearly striking a nerve with a certain demographic, you know, "it was the Sun wot won it" - would not be surprised if they used McCann story to further a larger or different agenda that makes a lot more sense politically such as getting the Labour party out and one more favorable to the wealthy and corporations (like Murdoch) in.

I have several friends in a few places , not one of them is interested in the McCanns , I think that is true of the U.K., but the Press keep bringing out these ridiculous "suspects " to generate interest, and a photo of Madeleine on the front page is a good "ploy" to make people buy the Paper . Had the Press investigated the Fund and exposed misappropriation there would have been no need for a review and investigation IMO.

Panda wrote:

widowan wrote:

Panda wrote:From day 1 the McCanns ignored the Portugese Police. They engaged Metodo when it was illegal to appoint their own Detectives, they gave daily briefings to the Press as if they were Royalty. Then moan when the case is shelved after over a Year although apparently they could have had it re-opened if they made a request within 2 weeks. This couple ignored the fact that their own negligence led to Madeleine's disappearance . Has it just been having a good PR Guy or real interest in this couple which has kept them in the limelight for over 6 years.....it really is some achievement.

The money the papers are making has something to do with it certainly. They need to print what the people want in order to sell papers but they can also generate and did generate lots of material that was nonsense in order to sell the story, not the facts of the case, not anything that would help to find Madeleine but nonsense of all kinds. The McCann story in some way is the way they get people buying the paper in order to deliver other material as well. It would be interesting to look, once this story really had legs and was making big headlines, what other stories appeared on the same pages or the one next to it. Murdoch's group was clearly striking a nerve with a certain demographic, you know, "it was the Sun wot won it" - would not be surprised if they used McCann story to further a larger or different agenda that makes a lot more sense politically such as getting the Labour party out and one more favorable to the wealthy and corporations (like Murdoch) in.

I have several friends in a few places , not one of them is interested in the McCanns , I think that is true of the U.K., but the Press keep bringing out these ridiculous "suspects " to generate interest, and a photo of Madeleine on the front page is a good "ploy" to make people buy the Paper . Had the Press investigated the Fund and exposed misappropriation there would have been no need for a review and investigation   IMO.

I'm truly gobsmacked if the same old, worn out Maddie stories still sell papers!     

I haven't seen any sympathy or belief in the McCanns in my neck of the woods, and the response I've received has been of a deep distrust of them.  I'm continually surprised by how quickly people bring up the shocking distance from the tapas bar to the McCanns apartment and the blood and cadaver dog alerts.   I only know two people that believed the doctors' Mccann; one of them changed her mind after her son, who is in law enforcement, set her straight, and the other completely distrusted them after watching Crimewatch.

You just have to look at the other thread with the Advent Calendar rubbish on it :(

So far we have had Voucherdigg holidays, prison officers in tee shirts and now an advent calendar costume in a nightclub. WHO tips the press off about these "stories"? We don't even need to ask ourselves why. TBH I don't know which is the more pathetic; Mother's Little Helpers for concocting and drawing attention to this rubbish, or the MSM for printing it.

Iris wrote:You just have to look at the other thread with the Advent Calendar rubbish on it :(

So far we have had Voucherdigg holidays, prison officers in tee shirts and now an advent calendar costume in a nightclub.  WHO tips the press off about these "stories"?  We don't even need to ask ourselves why.  TBH I don't know which is the more pathetic; Mother's Little Helpers for concocting and drawing attention to this rubbish, or the MSM for printing it.

Indeed Iris! I'm so sad for Madeleine, but I simply do not believe one word her rank parents have ever uttered! The fact that nobody in the UK takes them to task on their endless distortions and lies, has made a mockery of MSM and journalism, and now NSY has jumped on this epic, sleazy bandwagon. If you didn't laugh out loud, you'd tear your hair out.

I struggle to understand WHY the McCanns can't be charged about the Fund. Even though it is a Private Company , it was financed by the public in the mistaken belief it would be used to find Madeleine. Esther McVey publicly announced the Fund would not be used for Legal Expenses after a meeting of Directors. When she found out three months later that the Fund WAS paying Legal Fees, she resigned. Recently she was promoted by her Party and it would have been an ideal time to bend someone's ear about the Fund , yet she chooses not to, especially after the Crimestoppers debacle and knowing the waste of money spent by SY!!!!! you wouldn't get my vote Esther.