Itv now

About lying on tv

Interesting, the expert thinks the McCanns are innocent!

Roasted Arizona wrote:Interesting, the expert thinks the McCanns are innocent!

I was just sitting here watching when they came on and thought why are they putting the McCanns on with the innocnet ones?

I was quite interested in the programme before that!

I'm recording it so i may watch it when i've had a few drinks.

Why include the mccanns as an example of innocence ?

And the timing of this programme suggests to me there is a power battle in the underworld.

This programme was produced by Shine TV.

Shine's Chair and CEO is Elisabeth Murdoch, daughter of Rupert, wife of Matthew Freud (of Freud Communications and erstwhile employer of one C E Mitchell).

The same old names pop up with depressing regularity ...

God, depressing indeed.

And broadcast on the same day that the Lisbon trial should have ended (if things had gone to plan).

Coincidence? Maybe.

But I stopped believing in coincidences in 2007 ...

Roasted Arizona wrote:Interesting, the expert thinks the McCanns are innocent!

100 per met innocent.....why say that, they didn't say it with the other 'innocents'

Sharon Leal so called expert studied at Portsmouth University - the Forensic Psychology Department receives funding from a number of sources including the Home office.

She clearly has not done her research on the Mccanns and not read report of Tavares de Almeida or book of Goncalo Amaral, neither has she read the PJ statements, Kate's book or watched all their interviews where it can be clearly seen that lies appear to have been told.

Also not appropriate to mention them imo as ongoing investigation.

cherry1 wrote:Sharon Leal so called expert studied at Portsmouth University - the Forensic Psychology Department receives funding from a number of sources including the Home office.

She clearly has not done her research on the Mccanns and not read report of Tavares de Almeida or book of Goncalo Amaral, neither has she read the PJ statements, Kate's book or watched all their interviews where it can be clearly seen that lies appear to have been told.

Also not appropriate to mention them imo as ongoing investigation.

Agreed Cherry. Yet she went to mention all the attributes of liars i.e. them going into explicit details, giving info about their good deeds (read GM saving the life of a man on the plane, picking up a drunk etc). The Mcs are classics of her descriptions. Strange

It makes you wonder whats going on behind the scenes for their support network to think it necessary to keep thrusting their innocence at the public.
More and more are fed up with it and just not buying it anymore .

Guilty carved in stone throughout the Interweb for ever more.

Lioned wrote:It makes you wonder whats going on behind the scenes for their support network to think it necessary to keep thrusting their innocence at the public.
More and more are fed up with it and just not buying it anymore .

Guilty carved in stone throughout the Interweb for ever more.

The more they push it the less believable they appear.
They'd be better off trying to let Madeleine's abandonment to her fate just fade away.

Not that we'd let that happen of course.

The "100%" was a definite, dismissive. The McCanns are 100% innocent. Nothing more to say here. Let's move on to the guilty ones. She obviously hasn't read the files and doesn't know that the case of Missing Madeleine is unresolved and ongoing. Idiot.

Gary Richardson - Dr Sharon Leal is a fellow at the University of Portsmouth.

The Centre for the Study of Missing Persons is based at the University of Portsmouth. Jo Youle, CEO of Missing People, is Chair of the Advisory Board.

Jo Youle, CEO Missing People:

"The charity Missing People is delighted to be working in partnership with the CSMP.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/

A "100%" innocent mother would not refuse to co-operate by refusing to answer ANY question put to her.

A "100% innocent father would not dismiss the alarming alerts by the dogs.

So we have a Murdoch family production telling us, definitively, that the McCanns are 100% innocent. Then on the same day we have Fox news (another Murdoch production) telling us that the UK police know precisely who the real perps are, but unfortunately can't actually name or arrest them. All on the same day that the libel trial verdict should have been handed down.

Damage limitation, which wasn't actually needed due to the adjournment, but that is exactly what it was.

Somebody's worried.

Iris wrote:So we have a Murdoch family production telling us,  definitively,  that the McCanns are 100% innocent.   Then on the same day we have Fox news (another Murdoch production) telling us that the UK police know precisely who the real perps are, but unfortunately can't actually name or arrest them.  All on the same day that the libel trial verdict should have been handed down.

Damage limitation,  which wasn't actually needed due to the adjournment, but that is exactly what it was.  

Somebody's worried.

That is exactly my view.They wouldnt have to do this if they didnt consider there to be a threat.

Iris wrote:So we have a Murdoch family production telling us,  definitively,  that the McCanns are 100% innocent.   Then on the same day we have Fox news (another Murdoch production) telling us that the UK police know precisely who the real perps are, but unfortunately can't actually name or arrest them.  All on the same day that the libel trial verdict should have been handed down.

Damage limitation,  which wasn't actually needed due to the adjournment, but that is exactly what it was.  

Somebody's worried.

And these are the very people who claim to know nothing about Telephone Hacking or Collusion with Senior Police Officers and Members of Her Majesty's Government.....  

almostgothic wrote:

And broadcast on the same day that the Lisbon trial should have ended (if things had gone to plan).

Coincidence? Maybe.

But I stopped believing in coincidences in 2007 ...
------------------------------------------------------

Oh goody, another chance to see this bit of television history.

On the very same day the trial 'resumes' presumably!

   

malena stool
...telling us that the UK police know precisely who the real perps are, but unfortunately can't actually name or arrest them."
--------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if the UK Police KNOW who they are then not naming and arresting them MUST be 'hampering and harming' the 'search', beyond belief!

The McCanns should get CR to immediately demand the MPS disclose the child 'abducting' perps to the public.

So that no other child is at risk of being 'abducted' from their bed in a diliberately left unlocked, out of sight, apartment.

Do you honestly think that if the parents of a real 'abducted' child knew, that the police knew who the perps were that had their daughter, they would be laughing at a football match, instead of ripping into the police about what they KNOW?

Me neither!

RING: RING.

"'ello, 'ello, 'ello is zat you 'otlips. mwahhhh. Listen, i shall say siz only once, we know who's got your kid but we can't arrest zem or even tell youz the slags names."

"Andy can you hurry up? i'm having me third bath of the day"

"Oh yeah, soz, was just wondering if you'd like to come down the Yard and i can shows youz my revelation"

"Not today Inspector Clueless, hee hee, that's what i and my husband, Gerry, call you. We are getting ready to be be photographed at Everton Football Club, to show our togetherness. Don't want to be pictured with tears running down me face, ruining me make up. It's good to know you is still on the case and saving us an absolute fortune in pretendy 'search' costs we'd have to pay from our pension/holiday private fund we set up to mug the gullies. Gotta go. Luv to Bernie. So not today. Stay in touch." mwahh, mwahh.

"Oh, ok"

Maybe time for Madeleine to 're-appear' from her SCOTTISH castle/spa 'lair'?

If she's in one.

I think there is an element of fear about all this because the McCanns nor SY are no longer in control. I have never known such a case , doubt if anyone else here has ...it's a real cliffhanger as to what the end result will be , certainly searching for Madeleine has been in the back seat for a long time.

Why did she have to say 100o/o innocent though, she didn't with the other innocent people.



Who she trying to convince ....she should off had good old Dave the PI....someone find the interview when he was saying one thing and shaking his head ....doing the opposite...

https://www.itv.com/itvplayer/the-lying-game-crimes-that-fooled-britain/series-1/episode-1-the-lying-game-crimes-that-fooled-Britain

For anyone brave enough to watch it again.

How foolish and unprofessional for anyone to say in a case that hasn't been solved that, in their opinion, certain individuals are 100% innocent.

Amazing isn't it, how so many 'experts' in various professions have queued up in droves to risk and even trash their own reputations by nailing their colours to the McCanns-Are-Innocent mast.

ETA - OH has recorded this prog so I haven't yet seen it, but from reading the posts of those who have, here and elsewhere,  the incongruous 'McCanns are 100% innocent' segment looks like a blatant attempt at taking product placement one step beyond the normal parameters.
I mean, one expects to see soft drinks, cars and other products being strategically inserted in media offerings, but ... two former (and maybe soon to be again) arguidos?

Not Born Yesterday wrote:https://www.itv.com/itvplayer/the-lying-game-crimes-that-fooled-britain/series-1/episode-1-the-lying-game-crimes-that-fooled-Britain

For anyone brave enough to watch it again.

How foolish and unprofessional for anyone to say in a case that hasn't been solved that, in their opinion, certain individuals are 100% innocent.  

Thanks NBY....I started watching it but have to go out now so will catch up later.

One thing struck me, there are only two elements keeping this case alive. One is the fact that the Parents are Doctors and the second that Madeleine disappeared in a Foreign Country.