Child Friendly Toppings

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 0:14

Where did that one come from, it'll lead us back to the perps. IMHO Child Friendly Toppings 849426

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 1:30

how? gerry talked a load of sh** but i doubt this means anything more than that

i recall him saying that he was the most maligned person in the press since its invention or something like that on that politicians commitee thing

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 1:33

Believe me, it was a "reference" to something, I've seen him and his cohorts use it elsewhere.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 1:58

tyra wrote:Don't suppose anyone wants to hear that it was describing an afternoon spent with the twins, they went for ice cream or pancakes or something.

Thanks for your expert opinion. Child Friendly Toppings 849426

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 7:37

MR.D wrote:Dr David Paynes "special ......".

that's disgusting! Child Friendly Toppings 23324

pipstar1 Tue 25 Aug - 12:31

Was this something to do with a conversation Gerry or Kate had in connection with "tiny tears"? I can't really remember but I also recall "child friendly toppings".

**fishie** Tue 25 Aug - 12:39

Day 124 - 04/09/2007

Kate and I did our first interview for a French Publication today. Any interviews we do now, of which we only accept a small percentage of bids, focus on the issues that we have faced since Madeleine’s abduction. The French have recently adopted a child alert system with some early success stories. With increasing travel and movement of workers in the European Union, it is also important we standardise the way serious crimes are tackled.
This evening we were invited to a friend’s house with the childrenfor dinner.
The twins had a good time with the other kids in the paddling pool and especially enjoyed the banana splits with extra child friendly toppings!

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DAYS_101_to_150.htm

Sprite Tue 25 Aug - 13:08

tyra wrote:
Rapier wrote:Why would anyone use a blog to send a 'coded message' in these days of swift and efficient communication?

Sorry, I think all this proves is there are some sick minds here.

Are we living in a novel, a really badly written one, perhaps something Dan Brown might conjure up? I suppose that's more interesting than the probable reality, the twins had banana splits with loads of extra child friendly toppings and had a lovely time.

It IS a weird thing to say though.

I mean - what wouldnt be a 'child friendly topping' on an ice cream?

Sprite Tue 25 Aug - 13:28

tyra wrote:
Sprite wrote:
tyra wrote:
Rapier wrote:Why would anyone use a blog to send a 'coded message' in these days of swift and efficient communication?

Sorry, I think all this proves is there are some sick minds here.

Are we living in a novel, a really badly written one, perhaps something Dan Brown might conjure up? I suppose that's more interesting than the probable reality, the twins had banana splits with loads of extra child friendly toppings and had a lovely time.

It IS a weird thing to say though.

I mean - what wouldnt be a 'child friendly topping' on an ice cream?

reads to me like they were all on the banana splits but whereas the kids got to create mini mountains of various toppings, the usual stuff, mimi marshamllows, hundreds and thousands, glace cherries, chocolate buttons (okay I'm now officially hungry!) so much so the banana gets buried the adults probably got some honey to drizzle or plain chocolate sauce, possibly even with alcohol, we are supposed to be dignified now we are all grown up, boo.

Just speculating really.

Yes I know what you mean (and Im hungry now too!)

But to describe them as 'child friendly' is a bit bizarre. Its a term I would never think of using in a million years.

Maybe Gerry was trying to impress on us what a careful parent he is only allowing them 'child friendly' toppings?

Sprite Tue 25 Aug - 14:49

MR.D wrote:I do not think this a code, more of a sick joke - for the benefit of Dr Payne.

quote="MR.D"]"Child Friendly Toppings" : I have read that paedophiles use such terms to describe toppings such as "hundreds and thousands", used to make a "special lolly" attractive to young children.

What sort of warped mind could possibly think Gerald could be thinking of this? I hear you cry..

Well, how about the mind of someone who has read Dr Gaspers witness statement regarding Payne and Gerry and their obscene comments and gestures about Madeleine McCann.

Mr.D

[/quote]

Until the 'Yvonne Martin suspicions'/'Gaspar statements' are dealt with properly and not continually swept under the carpet this will continue to rear its ugly head.

It wont go away - however much some people want it to. Its out there in the official files.

For this reason alone I would have thought the investigation needs to be re-opened.

Sprite Tue 25 Aug - 15:46

tyra wrote:What makes you suspect they were not dealt with properly?

The fact that the LP didnt pass on those statements for quite a few months for one. And there is no record of any investigation or resolution in the files.

Like it or not any allegation of paedophilia raises the hairs on peoples necks - and an investigation of this nature not only has to be done, it has to be SEEN to be done. For the sake of all concerned.

Sprite Tue 25 Aug - 15:53

tyra wrote:
Sprite wrote:
tyra wrote:What makes you suspect they were not dealt with properly?

The fact that the LP didnt pass on those statements for quite a few months for one. And there is no record of any investigation or resolution in the files.

Like it or not any allegation of paedophilia raises the hairs on peoples necks - and an investigation of this nature not only has to be done, it has to be SEEN to be done. For the sake of all concerned.

There is no record of resolution of the accusation made against Robert Murat either, do we assume that was never investigated fully too?

There are pages and pages and pages of files about the investigation of Murat. And the resolution was there was no evidence to be found against him.

And yet nothing about the Gaspars statements.

Neither from LP or the PJ.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 16:01

Laffin Assasin wrote:Believe me, it was a "reference" to something, I've seen him and his cohorts use it elsewhere.

can you expand on this please clyde?

**Alfiefinn** Tue 25 Aug - 16:25

tyra and String, perhaps the LP and PJ are not ready yet to reveal the results of their investigations into the Gaspar issue.You say that after pages of investigation no evidence was found to substantiate accusations against Mr Murat. Surely then, if investigations into Dr Gaspar's allegations had been fruitless a similar official statement about lack evidence or, indeed, complete innocence would have been made? It seems rather unfair to leave the victim of such allegations in no-man's land, doesn't it?

**Alfiefinn** Tue 25 Aug - 16:34

exactly String, but one of them is 'lucky' enough to at least be able to show that there's no evidence for that accusation, whilst the other is left to dangle, because no-one official has effectively said that there is/or is not any evidence in respect of the allegations.

**Alfiefinn** Tue 25 Aug - 16:37

That's entirely possible Rapier, but why has no-one officially said that and allowed closure on the allegations?You know, sort of, " It was a allegation which we had to investigate, but have found no evidence to support it". It's odd, isn't it.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 16:41

I'm sure if this happened again, the police forces would ensure that forums the world over were supplied with all the gory details, after all forums are the most important thing when it comes to police investigations.

**Alfiefinn** Tue 25 Aug - 16:41

tyra, that maybe so, but at least he has got on his side the fact that the allegations were investigated and it has been publically stated that no evidence was found. And really, when the press were having a field day in Portugal back in 2007 and felt that they could get away with it they'd probably have used it anyway, in a general attempt to blacken his name. No matter what other stories were doing the rounds about the McCanns. It would have meant more papers sold and that's all they care about.

**Alfiefinn** Tue 25 Aug - 16:44

String, I fervently hope that nothing like this ever happens again don't you? I'm sure everyone would much rather have discussions about pleasanter things, but sadly,, the info. has been put out there.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 17:14

Nellie wrote:
MR.D wrote:
Nellie wrote:
Marky wrote:
MR.D wrote:Dr David Paynes "special lolly".

that's disgusting!

Yes it is. Going the way of The Satirical Thread on 3As. I suppose it was bound to happen.

It is disgusting. Payne and Gerald made disgusting comments and gestures about Madeleine McCann, according to another Doctor.

We talk openly about David Payne and Gerald having a paedophile interest but this is never, ever commented on by Mitchell, Dumb and Dumber or anyone else. Surely it is ludicrous, unhelpful and lurid - but not a peep out of Team McCann.

WHY?

Another Doctor who wasn't even sure of what or who they were talking about. And whose husband didn't agree with her.

But they still reported it , at great risk

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 17:35

To me, the whole 'child friendly toppings' thing was just another of Gerry's feeble attempts (imo) to tell us all what great parents him and Kate are, and how as they were still on holiday the kids didn't always have to have healthy food/fruit/no junk food or chocolate, etc. etc. Neither have ever sounded as if they had fun with their children and this was one of many statements that seemed to back up that perception.

However, in light of the whole pact/cover up/changes of story/pretendy suspects etc, its all too easy to become much more suspicious, and the McCanns, as well as their friends, certainly appear very good at generating doubts. Lets be honest, - suspicions were being voiced before the Gaspers views came to light.

The possibilities are vile and the thought that it is a deliberate ploy is even worse imo, - ...no smoke without fire and all that. Hopefully one day soon it will be proven whether it's smoke we're seeing or a whole lot of toxic polution.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 17:36

Rapier wrote:What risk? They did it expecting confidentiality to the UK police who would never have released it. It was only the wretched Portuguese judiciary who put them in this difficult position. I don't have any problems with them voicing a worry, however small, in confidentiality, and I'm sure it was discounted just as confidentially. But to make it public? Totally wrong.

If you report something , you are privy to , say only a few people hear it , the accused gets pulled in , possibly get sacked for his remark .
it could be a racist remark etc
then the Person is going to think , who grassed me up , and other people in the close circle start pointing the finger at you , you are excluded from the group . deemed a grass etc
not invited to the Golf Club etc , you may be in the right , but on a Pro level you should have just let it go , but no you had principals , but you are now a social pariah ..that was the risk

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 18:31

pipstar1 wrote:Was this something to do with a conversation Gerry or Kate had in connection with "tiny tears"? I can't really remember but I also recall "child friendly toppings".

It's really sad that I remember this but it was when they visited 'friends' of theirs who visited [they had to go to their villa as the McC's had no pool] the twins had banana splits with child friendly toppings

**fishie** Tue 25 Aug - 18:44

pipstar1 wrote: Was this something to do with a conversation Gerry or Kate had in connection with "tiny tears"? I can't really remember but I also recall "child friendly toppings".

IIRC Kate was recalling a conversation with Gerry's sister.

Gerry took his sister to the airport and while saying goodbye he apparently cried.
The sister called Kate and told Kate the her 'tiny tears' husband broke down.
The source is I think Panorama,'Madeleine McCann one year on',with Kate being interviewed by John Corner.
Sorry I can't search YouTube at the moment,but it is still there.

Guest Tue 25 Aug - 20:41

MR.D wrote:"Child Friendly Toppings" : I have read that paedophiles use such terms to describe toppings such as "hundreds and thousands", used to make a "special lolly" attractive to young children. Mr.D

where did you read this? i googled the expression and got links back to this thread.

Sponsored content

Child Friendly Toppings

Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings

Re: Child Friendly Toppings