Friday, 22 May 2015

McCanns exploit young girl.

A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away (12 months to be exact), and Benfica are playing Seville in the Europa cup final. In the crowd is a little girl watching the game.

What this little girl didn't know, was that very soon she would become the focus of a McCann PR exercise, a PR machine that would become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.


The force of social media. And use it they did.

Let's cast our mind back, back to when this ridiculous rumour grew legs, ran stark naked through your facebook news feeds and said, "Doubt the facts, mum and dad are innocent, here I am, alive and kicking".

May 14th 2014, two weeks before New Scotland Yard are about to begin digging holes in Praia de Luz. The McCanns worst nightmare. Here we have a couple so hell bent on promoting the fact that Madeleine is alive, thus removing themselves from blame, that they will do anything to avoid the swinging rope of human logic.

Let's look at the scenario.

Operation Grange are going to start digging on waste ground a few minutes walk from the apartment the McCanns were staying in at the Ocean Club in PDL
As you can see from the map below, the route to the wasteland ties in with the Smith sighting. Martin Smith and his family witnessed a man carrying a small child, Smith was up to 80% sure this man was Gerry McCann, and convinced the little girl was Madeleine.

1, The Ocean Club.
2. The Smith sighting.
3. The wasteland.

To anyone who has read the evidence, these digs implicate Gerry McCann in the disposal of Madeleine's body.

All of a sudden, as if by magic, social media becomes flooded with this picture of, a totally different girl, a girl who was enjoying the football game, but a girl who has now become a flagship for team McCann.

It doesn't matter that this girl, and her family have a life, not to team McCann, this young girl is collateral. Kate and Gerry fodder.

Despite hundreds of people sending the picture in to the Official Find Madeleine page, it took Kate and Gerry 4 days to admit that the girl in the photograph wasn't Madeleine, by then though, the damage was done. Several newspapers had run with the story, all of a sudden Madeleine, and Madeleine was alive again. You can bet your bottom dollar the McCanns were contacted for a comment, so why didn't Kate and Gerry rule her out?

A more cynical person would say

This is McSpin.

Now, 12 months on, and this photograph has resurfaced again. Nice timing for the McCanns, with thousands of people wanting to read Goncalo Amaral's book, and all of those people reading facts, facts that implicate Kate and Gerry in covering up the death of Madeleine. People are yet again being given false hope that Madeleine is alive, and OFM are not correcting them. 

This little girl is being used as a pawn in Kate and Gerry's long running con. Proving that there are no depths the odious couple will stoop to in their disgraceful attempts to fool people. 

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

Operation Grange - counting the cost.

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann has without doubt touched the hearts and minds of many nations. Never before has there been a case that has been so prominent in the public arena as this one, but without wishing to sound heartless, why has this case been given such prominence over others, and at what cost to the two investigating countries involved?

On 30th August 2014 Mrs S Rhosier made a freedom of information request to the Home Office in London. The content of this letter requested details of the cost of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and also raised some valid points as to why the vast amount of money allocated to this case hadn't been evenly distributed to other cases, 

The example Mrs Rhosier gave was of teenager Mary Bastholm, (pictured left), who disappeared in 1968. Mary was just 15 years old when she vanished, and although her body has never been found it is the belief of the police that she was abducted and murdered at the hands of notorious serial killer Fred West. This is the letter Mrs Rhosier sent:

Dear Home Office,

In 2011, your office authorised the Metropolitan Police to review
the Madeleine McCann disappearance, and daily in the news we see
updates of the searches carried out in Portugal, where UK police
have no jurisdiction. The current cost of this has been reported in
the media as exceeding £20m. Please confirm the actual costs thus
far, including any costs that reimburse the Portuguese police for
use of their manpower, resources and search equipment such as GPR,
helicopters etc., and the ongoing costs of travel and overtime paid
to UK investigating officers delegated to Operation Grange.

In 2011 new information came to light regarding the disappearance
of Mary Bastholm in Gloucester; information which linked her
disappearance to the activities of Fred West, and a request was
made to carry out a small investigation using ground penetrating
radar and side scanning sonar in a particular location where West
was known to have worked. This new information caused great
perturbation to the son of the person who owned the location at the
time and the person reporting the new information was warned off.
Gloucester police did not take this seriously and when a complaint
was made to the then Chief Constable Tony Melville, he refused to
pursue the matter on the grounds of cost and incorrect information.
A key corroborating document was destroyed by Gloucester Police and
they refused to release photographic evidence of it from their
files under a FOI request.

The information still remains valid and therefore I request to know
what distinction you instruct the police to make when asked to
investigate older cases and why there was no funding made available
to carry out this search by Gloucester Police when the case of Fred
West is far more notorious than that of Madeleine McCann. People in
Gloucester still remember Mary Bastholm and until the new
information is acted upon, there is a clear bias in the police
handling of this matter.

Please indicate why funds are allocated to look for Madeleine
McCann and not allocated to find the remains of Mary Bastholm under
the as yet ignored new evidence, and why the evidence was deemed
'not in the public interest' when Fred West made such a disturbing
impact on the close-knit Gloucester community.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs S Rhosier

I have to agree with Mrs Rhosier, cases of missing children are a highly sensitive area, but surely there should be some level of equal attention and funds available to each individual case based upon it's merits. The following was the reply dated 22nd September 2014:

Freedom of Information request reference: 32767 

Dear Mrs Rhosier, 

Thank you for your e-mail of 30 August concerning decisions to approve historic UK police 
investigations and authorise funding. Your request has been handled as a request for information 
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.  

You asked for the following information: 

1.  The actual costs thus far [of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann], including any costs that reimburse the Portuguese police for use of their manpower, resources and search equipment such as GPR, helicopters etc., and the ongoing costs of travel and overtime paid to UK investigating officers delegated to Operation Grange. 

2.  What distinction you [the Home Office] instruct the police to make when asked to investigate older cases and why there was no funding made available to carry out this search [for Mary Bastholm] by Gloucester Police when the case of Fred West is far more notorious than that of Madeline (sic) McCann. 

3.  Why funds are allocated to look for Madeleine McCann and not allocated to find the remains of Mary Bastholm under the as yet ignored new evidence, and why the evidence was deemed 'not in the public interest'. 

Below are our responses. 

1.  The Home Office paid Leicestershire Constabulary a special grant payment of £525K in 2007/2008 and £221K in 2009/2010 for their work in liaising with the Portuguese police and co-ordinating UK policing involvement in this case.  

The Metropolitan Police received a special grant payment of £1.9m in 2011/2012, £2.8m in 2012/2013, and £2.6m in 2013/2014. 

We have not yet received the costs for 2014/2015 but we expect them to be broadly in line with the costs of previous years. 
The Home Office is provided with a breakdown of the costs by the Metropolitan Police and this has been set out in the attached Annex (FoI response Rhosier – McCann breakdown expenditure). We do not hold details on the costs of individual resources or specific search 

The Home Office will continue to work closely with the Metropolitan Police to review and control the costs appropriately and to ensure that the investigation has the resources it requires to undertake its work effectively. 

2.  The Home Office does not instruct forces on whether to investigate crimes or not; the circumstances of each missing persons case will vary and it is for individual forces to make an operational assessment on how they pursue it. The decision for the police not to act was made solely by Gloucestershire Constabulary. Any questions you may have on the case of Mary Bastholm should therefore be addressed to the force itself. The Government takes very seriously all cases of missing children.  Although most of these cases may not be in the public eye, unresolved missing children cases are never closed and they remain the 
responsibility of individual police forces until the child is found.  

3.  The Government believes it is right that it does all it can to support the search for Madeleine McCann. That is why the Home Secretary asked the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service to undertake a review of the case in May 2011. The Commissioner considered the request and on balance took the operational decision to bring its particular expertise to the case. Special Grant funding may be available to police forces to help meet costs where necessary additional expenditure incurred would place unreasonable strain on the force budget and potentially negatively impact on their capacity to deliver normal policing. Once a claim for a Special Grant has been received, it is considered by officials and then referred 
to Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary for their views, in particular as to whether the operational response is appropriate and proportionate. As is the case in all such instances, regular review and close scrutiny of the on-going and forecast costs is undertaken to ensure expenditure from this budget is appropriate.  

The Home Office therefore agreed to fund this work from a central Special Grant budget, subject to the Home Office and the MPS reviewing together the value and cost of the work at each stage. 

The above figures don't include the estimated 4 million euros spent by Britain's Portuguese counterparts, so the total expenditure we're looking at is more likely to be in the region of £11.5 million (est). 

Spread out over 7 years that's an average spend of £1.64 million per annum. 

It could be argued that no price can be put on the life of a child, but if we are looking at other cases that haven't received anywhere near this sort of money, can we really agree that the amount spent above is anywhere near a level playing field for all missing children? 

Let's not forget that the McCanns are directors of a limited company that is currently spending the grand sum of zero pounds on the search for their missing daughter, yet the McCanns spend money silencing those who speak out against them, go figure! 

Going back to Mrs Rhosier's claim that a request was made to the Chief Constable of Gloucester Police, Tony Melville, to perform a simple investigation using ground penetrating radar, to try and find the remains of a 15 year old little girl who deserves as much as anyone else to be laid to rest properly, and for her family to have closure. 

How does this differ from the fruitless, and vastly expensive excavations that took place in Praia Da Luz last year, the digs that confirmed Scotland Yard were not looking for a live child. 

Chief of Metropolitan Police, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe said only days ago:

"It's not for them to decide (The Police Federation) which investigation we carry out, it's my decision. This investigation is funded by the government, and the only thing that will decide whether or not it continues, are the chances of finding that little girl alive" 

That little girl has a name Bernard, you'd do well to remember it. With every day that passes, every innocent suspect who has their face splashed across the front pages, and by allowing YOUR inept "police force" to do precious little else, other than double up as an extension of the McCanns' PR team, YOU insult her memory.

I doubt Sir Bernard forgets Kate and Gerry's names so readily. Was this ridiculously out of touch buffoon expecting his team to find an alive Madeleine McCann, buried under the wasteland in Praia da Luz? Farcical. Especially given that earlier this year in a radio interview, Sir Bernard said:

"our team that are investigating the, or reviewing the murder of...of sorry, reviewing the missing girl."

It's simple, haul the parents in, drag the tapas "we have a pact of silence" 7 in, and ask them some real questions, without Jammy Dodgers, without being afraid to push for answers, and without being so pathetically weak as those "yes men" at the Leicestershire Police force, who made such an arse of the rogatory interviews in 2008.  In short, do your job, and stop wasting money that could be spent on other missing children. 

Yet again we find ourselves in a situation whereby it's one rule for the McCanns, and another for the rest of the country. For months now we have been promised breakthroughs in this case, and as things stand it would appear that a massive amount of money has been spent, yet we're still no closer to an end product. 

The money being spent is paid by the taxpayer, isn't it high time that as that taxpayer, we as a nation had the right to fair, and sensible spending, as well as be able to see signs of a thorough and just investigation, which surely involves looking at all the evidence, not just the areas that don't involve the McCanns. 

Either do it right, or not at all.

This Morning editors drop slot for missing Ben Needham

In a disgraceful move, ITV's This Morning programme dropped a planned interview with Kerry Needham, mother of missing Ben Needham, at the 11th hour.

Kerry Needham wrote on her facebook wall at 22:10pm last night, of her plans to travel to London and appear on the programme with a view to promoting the search for Ben, who vanished on the island of Kos in 1991.

South Yorkshire police have been following several new leads following Kerry's appearance on a Greek TV station recently, and it was hoped that further information could come to light with the help of This Morning.

Having only been told that she could appear on the show an hour earlier, Kerry received a phone call from the editors of This Morning, cancelling the slot without any explanation. I might add that This Morning's facebook page is available for posts and comments, should people wish to express their feelings, the link is below.

Kerry Needham has never received anything like the same backing as Kate and Gerry McCann, neither financially, or publicity wise. This latest bombshell from ITV has only served to compound the stark reality, one rule for Kate and Gerry, and another rule for the parents of all other missing children in the UK.

That might, and does sound like a pretty bold statement, but it is true. The MSM have pandered to the whims and needs of Kate and Gerry McCann for far too long, so long in fact, and in the face of public unrest, that it is beyond sickening. I ask this:


Not for as long as the earth still spins, so why treat others differently?

The McCanns have basked in self pity for eight long years. too often have we seen Kate and Gerry McCann appear on television, perched on their favourite sofas, Kate with her well practised look of a soul tortured by a terrible crime, the sighs flowing at each question before the previously prepared answers came. Gerry with his smug, "you'll never catch me" face, the constant shuffles and neck scratches as his whiny voice squeaked out the lies, perhaps due to Kate's grip on his broken codpiece, or just the fact his dishonesty constricts his vocal chords? 

We've seen the same rehearsed play year after year. The sycophantic Lorraine Kelly for instance, playing the Uriah Heep role so brilliantly it turns the stomach. "Yes, aha, aww poor you", in her lowered fake tone, with, as usual no reference as to what Madeleine must be going through, and no reference to what she could have gone through in her final moments before the "Kate and Gerry show" first began over eight years ago.

Is it a bridge too far to do a service to a mother whose only wish is to discuss new leads, and to desperately hope new information might come of her appearance?

Sadly for Kerry Needham, and her son Ben, it certainly seems so.

Above, age progression picture of how Ben Needham may look today. If you have any information, that could help find Ben, or shed any light on his disappearance, please contact South Yorkshire police on:

 0114 296 3022 or email them on

Since this blog was published, I am happy to report that the producers of this Morning have arranged for Kerry Needham to appear on the show tomorrow. There were a staggering amount of comments put onto This Morning's facebook page all in support of Kerry Needham. That support will not have gone unnoticed by the producers of the show, and certainly not by Kerry. A full explanation for the way Kerry was treated has not been issued yet. 

Thursday, 14 May 2015

Vague nannies and contradictions.

In total there were 14 employees who worked for the child care department of the Ocean club resort during the time the McCanns went on holiday. Now I'm not being funny, but either some of these nannies were on LSD, or Madeleine had the ability to become invisible to some, whilst managing to be in plain sight of others. Kate and Gerry it would seem, possessed the rare gift of morphing from one parent into the next...far out man!

Let's start with the 2nd of May, the day after Mrs Fenn heard crying for approximately 1hr 15 minutes, before immediately stopping when the parents returned from a night out:

Catriona Baker:

Before I go any further with the dubious Miss Baker, let me bring you up to speed on something rather odd. Before Baker's rogatory statement, which was a change from her original statements taken from those staggeringly laid back Leicestershire policemen, Baker was summoned to the McCanns pad for tea and biscuits. Bear in mind the McCanns were still arguidos at this stage, and so would have broken judicial secrecy laws had they discussed the case.

"I visited the family in their home at their invitation to see how they were getting along in November of 2007."

Personally I regularly invite people round to see how I'm "getting on". You can imagine the call

"Hi Cat, it's Kate McCann, we wondered if you'd like to pop round and see how we're getting on..........the fund, yes it's swelling nicely..........yes I'm sure we can arrange something............ok see you then, bye, bye, bye"

Unless of course they were just after a few tips on child care. They could sure use em.

Anyway, I best crack on or I'll be off on a thousand tangents, and I get told off for that.

Baker categorically states that she took Madeleine to the beach with 4 or 5 other children. Here we have our first discrepancy because if we look at Emma Wilding's statement, who was also a nanny at the beach that day.........

Emma Louise Wilding:

Discussing the same day as above May 2nd, 2007:

"When questioned, she states that on Wednesday May 2, her group and Madeleine's group went to the beach, but she is not sure if Madeleine was in the group or not"

So out of 10 children she doesn't remember if Madeleine was at the beach or not. Okaaaaaay.

Let's look at the 3rd of May, and more from Emma Wilding, who has a bizarre recollection of Madeleine being dropped off:

"When questioned she states that on May 3, 2007 it was the father that took Madeleine, as was customary, between 0900 and 0930; she remembers that she just said 'hello' to him, because as Madeline (sic) did not belong to her group she did not talk to him very much."

"She only noticed Madeleine and not her father, and nothing seemed abnormal or unusual."


Moving on, are you still with me? I'm losing the will to live putting this in order.

After the clarity of Madeleine being dropped off  comes the rest of the day. Who saw Madeleine during the day of the 3rd?

Catriona Baker:

Ah the amazing Miss Baker again, she claims that she took Madeleine sailing, and that this event was witnessed by two others, Chris Unswork and Alice Standley, although this isn't backed up by either "witness" anywhere in the files. Interestingly in Bakers first statement (prior to her visit to Rothley) she states that:

".........until Thursday May 3rd, the little girl came every day."

My head hurts, so she wasn't with her on the 3rd after-all, well not until she miraculously remembered she was in a later statement. Hmmmm.

I'm not done with our confused friend Catriona yet, she goes on to make another calamitous cock up, this time in her rogatory (the statement she made AFTER visiting the McCanns in England):

"The next time I saw them (Kate and Gerry) was on Saturday at lunch time, as on Friday I spent part of the morning at the Portuguese police answering questions."

Oh Miss Baker, either you had too much sun and sangria, or your memory is so bad it deems your statements unreliable. You see Baker didn't make her first statement until Sunday the 6th of May, now why would she say she hadn't seen Kate and Gerry before making her statement, when clearly she had.

Charlotte Pennington:

States that she "she had direct contact with Madeleine McCann, telling her stories and speaking with her."

Although she also claims that "it was usual for Madeleine to be called "Maddy", as this is how she [Madeleine] presented herself"

Pass the paracetamol! Kate said Madeleine hated being called Maddie, why would she introduce herself as such?

Emma Wilding:

"She is not sure whether during the morning Madeleine's group had outdoor activities, mainly at the pool; she does remember that around 1230 Madelew's (sic) father went to fetch her for lunch."

"She remembers that during the afternoon of May 3 Madeleine was at the Mini Club, but she does not remember at what time she arrived, and if on that day Madeleine accompanied the other children at 1645 as was customary."

"She is also not sure whether her parents joined her during the snack, as was customary."

So another vague recollection, we already know Miss Wilding gets rather confused about things. Wilding hardly comes across as a reliable witness.

Of the remaining 11 nannies; Jacqueline Mary Williams, Kirsty Louise Maryan, Leanne Danielle Wagstaff, Lyndsay Jane Johnson, Amy Tierney, Lynne Rhiannon Fretter, Pauline Frances McCann, Sarah Elizabeth Williamson, Sarah Elizabeth Williamson, Stacey Portz and Susan Bernadette Owen, not one of them places Madeleine at the Ocean Club on either the 2nd or the 3rd, although many of them state they knew who she was.

Can we trust the statements of the nannies? Well, certainly not all of them, so who was lying, and why?

Mary Poppins sang of the importance of a spoonful of sugar, in the case of these statements it's more like a rather large pinch of salt.

All statements can be viewed here:

Sunday, 10 May 2015

Meltdown at shill HQ

News of the fund to assist Goncalo Amaral with his legal fees spread like wildfire, causing the nasties who support Kate and Gerry McCann to spit their usual vitriolic venom.

Friday, 8 May 2015

Sonia Poulton: The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann

The best things come to those who wait. A quote that has evolved over time, and become more appropriate for the purpose it needed to serve. We live in a society that expects to have a product the moment we first set our hearts and minds upon it................Sometimes though, it is better to wait.

In the case of Sonia Poulton's forthcoming documentary, The Untold Story of Madeleine McCann, many have become disheartened at the length of time the project is taking, but why? Yes Sonia told us that the documentary would be available after the end of March, and every one of us were looking forward to seeing what she and her team would produce. However, delays happen, and for anyone who has followed the case of Madeleine McCann for any length of time will tell you, it would be no easy task to put together a high quality documentary, that combines exceptional credibility, whilst still having all the ingredients to keep the viewer absorbing what is put across.

Simply researching one topic, one small area of the case, just for a post, can often lead down many rabbit holes, so much so, that the original post can be forgotten, as the further you look into something, the more you find out, and the more you are impelled to research and read. Imagine that on a much larger scale, and with many people putting their ideas forward as well.

I have no doubt, that if Sonia and her team are, as they promise, doing their best with this documentary, that the workload, and the vast amount of information they will have had to wade through, will have taken them by surprise. To that end, surely delaying the release, so the documentary can be the best it can be, must only be a good thing. Sonia has nothing to gain, and everything to lose by rushing, and risking ridicule by throwing together a half cocked project.

I recently spoke to Sonia, and had a full and frank conversation about concerns, and hopes for how the documentary might turn out. Upon conclusion of the chat I was immediately more buoyed about the work the team were doing.

Sonia has spoken to many people, and to her credit has taken advice from those who have followed the case heavily since day one. The biggest bit of advice production wise, was to take as much time as was necessary to cover the story in the best possible way. Further to that, as you can imagine, there are many legalities that must not only be covered, but made airtight. This is not, I am told, a simple case of throwing together a youtube video, with, in Sonia's own words "a handcam, and uploading".

"If we want different results than what has come before, then the documentary had to be up to a certain broadcast standard, for MSM, (mainstream media) and broadcast medium"

Sonia went on to say of the legalities:

"We have to go through legal channels which are thorough, because we are up against a litigious group of people"

You have to agree with that statement. Of course the proof will be in the pudding, but surely until then, we should all be giving our full backing to Sonia, and her team. Let the documentary be judged upon merit, and not upon guesswork, or frustration. We've waited 8 years for something that promises to be as big as this to filter its way into the public arena, beyond the hashtag, beyond the forums, and beyond facebook, surely we can wait a little longer for the finished article.

Only last week, we all bore witness to the effects of pulling together, and showing our support for Goncalo Amaral, which has not only lifted all of our spirits, given us hope, but proved just how much can be achieved when we stand as one.

On that note, I would like to wish Sonia and her team the very best of luck, and will be supporting them all the way.

Clarence 'Cash for Lies' Mitchell - trounced

This morning, 8th May 2015, we finally got the news we'd long been expecting. Clarence Mitchell, the Conservative candidate for Brighton Pavillion, was well and truly trounced.

                        A walloping, a clobbering, a loss that's got to sting!

Mitchell, stated to the electorate, way back in 2013 at the start of his campaign:

"It's a huge honour to be selected as the Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Brighton Pavillion, the beating heart of the UK's most divers, tolerant and creative city"

Creativity of course, is something Mitchell is only too familiar with. In 2007 he was sent in by the Labour Government, whom he worked for as director of media monitoring, to assist Kate and Gerry McCann with the press. He was paid a hefty salary by the British taxpayer, in return for which he lied to the mainstream media, who then printed his lies, to be read by, you guessed it, the British taxpayer. 

Yes folks, we. the taxpayer, paid him to tell us porkies! 

and boy did the master manipulator deliver, here are just some of Pinkies stinkers:

“There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever, nothing, to suggest Madeleine has been harmed, let alone killed”  LIE

and an odd statement to make given that in 2008 he also said:

“Madeleine is probably dead”

“I can categorically state that Gerry did not have a blue tennis bag”

When talking about the Helping to find Madeleine fund Mitchell described it as:

“Independently controlled” LIE

“Kate and Gerry would have no issue with taking a lie detector test”

“There are wholly innocent explanations for any material the police may or may not have found”

When talking about the “tapas 7” and the McCanns he stated:

“None of them were wearing watches or had mobile phones on them that evening” LIE

“Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest, and utterly open with the police and all of their statements since the moment Madeleine was taken”

“We have nothing to hide”

“We are always willing to cooperate with the Portuguese police”

“I am a decent human being”
.........yeah right, and I'm an astronaut Clarence. 

In October 2007 Mitchell promoted himself and his involvement in the Madeleine McCann case, at Coventry University. He titled this public display of self gratification 

"Missing Madeleine McCann: The perfect PR campaign" 

During the hour long talk he bathed himself in glory and self worth about what a fine job he had done, and how very hard he had worked to earn his reported £75,000 a year salary. A figure that could well have risen after he resigned from his position with the Government to work solely for his "friends" the McCanns. A very strange move if he truly believed Madeleine would be found safe and well. Upon stepping down from his job with media monitoring from the Labour Government, he gave this explanation:

"More importantly, I have [resigned] because I feel so strongly that they are innocent victims of a heinous crime that I am prepared to forego my career in government service to assist them."

Back to his speech in Coventry, and the slippery eel talks with great bravado of how he "fed" the media stories, and of how, when they quoted him or the McCanns in an unfavourable light he would: 

"pull journalists to one side and say, look, if you want further co operation, this is what we said, and this is what we meant" other words manipulating the press to favour the McCanns, in exchange for stories. Still describing yourself as a "decent human being" Clarence? because to me, that sounds like you were a lying weasel, with the morals of an alleycat!

Mitchell described the people of Brighton Pavillion as "tolerant", it's a pity, for him at least, that he didn't show the same tolerance. Taken from a report from Alice Hudson, who wrote of Mitchell's appearance with his fellow candidates on question time:

On multiple occasions throughout the evening, Mitchell was reduced to berating the audience for their rudeness towards him. Not a good night for the Tory, who may find come polling day that shouting at people is not the best way to get them to vote for you.

Well find out he did, and how:

Wednesday, 6 May 2015

Goncalo Amaral - a brief history

Goncalo Amaral was born on the 2nd of October 1959 in the village of Torredeita near Viseu, Portugal. 

1973 joined the Public Administration, aged 14.

November 1981 began to study the formation of agents of the Judicial Police, and took office in 1982 as Agent.  

1992/1997 studied at night time, the Faculty of Law of Lisbon, having graduated in Law and Criminal Sciences.

1997/1998 attended the course of sub-inspectors of the PJ, being ranked first among 100 students.

In 2000/2001 completed the course coordinators of PJ. He served in Lisbon, the Algarve and the Azores.
Goncalo was involved in solving all sorts of violent and organized crime: theft, robbery, murder, drug trafficking.

Goncalo has been unfairly hounded by the British press, not least of all Antonella Lazzeri, (pictured left) reporter for The Sun newspaper, supporter of the Hillsbrough disaster cover up. Lazerri's latest piece described Goncalo as a "monster", so no bias there whatsoever, from the serial nasty, and McCann suck up.

But back to Goncalo, who despite all the unprecedented hatred from the McCann "media unit", has never wavered in his quest to see the truth told. 

His work is widely recognized by colleagues and superiors, as well as judges and prosecutors, judicial officials and lawyers, with whom he had the pleasure of dealing with for many years. 

Snr Amaral, co-ordinated the case from 3 May until 2 October 2007 when in an act never before recorded in the history of the Judicial Police, he was removed from the investigation. The reason for which, and where the order came from has never been revealed. Political pressure from the UK is believed to be the most likely cause though with Amaral getting ever nearer to the truth. 

On July 1, 2008, after a 27 year police career, Amaral retired, and would begin his pursuit to have his voice heard.

Despite being persecuted by the McCanns, Goncalo has never given up hope, and neither should we. In the name of truth and justice we owe this man huge gratitude and support.

Recently a fund was set up to support Goncalo Amaral's need for an appeal, after a court ruling ordered him to pay the McCanns £250k for writing a factual book. The book didn't contain lies, the money was awarded as the judge felt the McCanns had a right to be "presumed" innocent. 

The fund has shown the huge level of support Goncalo has, it has given those who disbelieve the McCanns, and who are sick and tired of their vicious ways, the chance to become involved in the fight against injustice. 

It needs to made perfectly clear at this point, that no matter what happens, Kate and Gerry McCann will never receive a penny from the fund for Goncalo Amaral's legal fees, it will be used only for that purpose, not to line his pockets or anyone else's, in any way shape or form.

In Goncalo Amaral, we have a man who did nothing more than express his right to freedom of speech. A man who led an investigation, determined to find out what happened to a three year old little girl, Madeleine McCann. A man who merely told it as it was. A man who, by doing so, encountered the wrath of Kate and Gerry McCann.

Kate McCann said of Goncalo Amaral:

"He deserves to be miserable and feel fear."

And boy did the "holier than thou" woman mean it. The McCann's legal team managed to freeze Goncalo Amaral's assets, much in the same way a spiteful person pulls the wings from an insect, the McCanns left Snr Amaral, with no means with which to mountt a serious defence. A truly sinister tactic, the idea being that, without the means, Snr Amaral would roll over and concede defeat. Nobody could have blamed him for doing so, but, this was not going to be the case. 

Goncalo has fought, and battled the McCanns every step of the way, he will not be silenced by the bully boy tactics of "Team McCann", and nor should he be. 

Too many times have we seen people bow down for the McCanns. The press, who, despite receiving a torrent of accusatory comments, and hatred from Kate and Gerry, some of which, were totally unfounded, and went unchallenged, have backed the lying McCanns to the hilt.

Let's take a look at a few paragraphs 
from Goncalo Amaral's book, "The Truth of The Lie", and in particular, his take on the first day of the investigation, May 4th 2007:
"It is Madeleine's mother who realised she was gone and is immediately talking about abduction.
We need information about the parents and their friends, to know who they are, what they do, if they have problems in their country, if the children were victims of abuse, if the family, neighbours, friends could have noticed any suspicious behaviour, what are their jobs, if they work full-time, etc. Is any member of their family depressed or suffered from depression in the past? Do the couple maintain good relationships? Are they implicated in serious litigation? Do they have enemies? For what reason? So, I telephone Glen Powers, the English liaison officer in Portugal, inform him of events and request that he relay our requests for reports. We consider these to be of the greatest importance and await sensitive responses to guide our investigation."

What Goncalo describes next is the first signs of a possible lack of co-operation from British authorities. Having recognised the need for as much background information as possible on the McCann's, Goncalo is frustrated at the speed, or lack of it that this arrives;

"We're not getting any response from Great Britain. We've had no reports on the subject of the couple, their children and their friends, which doesn't help us to tighten up the investigation. We would like, for example, to know if Madeleine was adopted by the couple, which would allow us to eliminate the hypothesis of parental abduction. If the information is not reaching us, it's obviously reaching the British Ambassador. We are astonished by this prompt mobilisation of the English authorities. So, who are the McCanns? Who are their friends? We don't need diplomatic intervention: what we would like, is answers to the questions sent to the British police authorities by Glen Power."

So why was this information so slow in being delivered to Goncalo? It was requested urgently first thing in the morning of the 4th. Even by the end of that day there was still nothing from Engalnd.

Goncalo also considered the theory the British gutter press are now beating like an irritatingly loud drum. The possibility of a burglary gone wrong. Goncalo wrote:

"The idea of a robbery gone wrong is not to be ruled out either. During the holidays, burglaries are not rare, and the police are not always informed, because hotels avoid spreading this kind of information. Even if the examination of apartment 5A reveals no trace of a break-in - contrary to what the parents insist and that Sky announced - we have to take stock of the petty crimes committed in the seaside resort and at the tourist complex. We are counting on the management of the hotel so that no incident of this nature remains hidden. Even if we don't have much belief in the scenario of a burglar who enters the apartment for a burglary and leaves it with the child, dead or alive, this hypothesis, as ridiculous as it may be, must not be neglected."

4th May 2007 and there's a possible CCTV sighting. So let's pretend for a moment your 3 year old daughter has been abducted. The next day you're informed of a possible sighting, the police want to take you to identify a photograph to see if it's her. What would your reaction be? I'm guessing not the same as Kate's here:

"Madeleine's parents are already back in Vila da Luz when we receive photos taken on an area of the motorway: you can make out the figure of a little girl, who looks like Madeleine, accompanied by a couple. These images come from a CCTV camera on the motorway linking Lagos to the Spanish border. The McCanns are asked to come to Portimão in order to proceed to an identification. It's the end of the day. Kate Healy seems annoyed at coming back and made uncomfortable by the speed of the police car taking her. We are somewhat astonished by her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back. The identification turns out negative."

So we have Kate not searching, and not being interested in going to identify a possible sighting. What a fine mother she is, surely she'd be doing everything in her power to find Madeleine, unless of course she knew exactly where she was, and exactly what happened. How dare she attack and attempt to destroy this man's life. Goncalo Amaral will have his day, he will be proved right and when he is, I'd like to think Kate McCann, her smug husband Gerry, and every piece of money grabbing scum that helped them cover up the truth of what happened to Madeleine, will reside in prison for the rest of their naturals.

Tuesday, 5 May 2015

Burglary stories doing the rounds again.

When it comes to breaking news on the Madeleine McCann case, who better to go to for unbiased views than Sky "reporting live from Gerry and Kate's rear quarters" News?

Only two days ago, we were treated to an amazing quote from those McCann lovers at Sky News:

"Portuguese police abandoned their investigation after 15 months without establishing any clues to the mystery and for three years there was no official search for Madeleine."

No clues? So a British Police dog, trained to alert to the scent of dead bodies, barking at the clothing of Kate McCann, wasn't a clue, the same woman who refused to cooperate with the investigation by not answering questions put to her about what she saw, and what she did, when she claims, that she found out Madeleine was gone, wasn't a clue? SHUT UP!!

Let's face facts, in recent weeks, they've flirted with and protected the dossier compilers, received inside information from the McCann's lawyer, Isabel Duarte, (who herself obtained the information in extremely dodgy circumstances), and now they're getting their exclusives from Summers and Swan, creators of the biggest flop since Gerry McCann confused his Viagra, with blue Smarties.

Anthony Summers and Robyn Swan wrote a book that promised to be the most truthful, and mind blowing to date, in truth, what they delivered was something totally different, it was a rehash of all things McCann. The book contained nothing new, and nothing that would have the McCanns choking on their sea bass, before hurriedly reaching for their mobiles, and speed dialling Carter Ruck to stop it reaching the shelves. It was in essence, a pro McCann production, and sales reflected this, as it hit the bookshops with a fizzle. 

So no surprise then, that the authors who delivered such an extraordinary waste of trees, have now come forward with some not so new "information". 

I of course refer to the latest reports that, despite no comment from New Scotland Yard, burglaries are being investigated, and are once again, the main focus of attention.

The thought process behind this being, that Madeleine was taken in a burglary gone wrong. of course this happens all the time, Bobby the robber, watches an apartment, spots the occupiers to-ing and fro-ing every 15 minutes, rushes in, leaves no sign of a break in, knowing he is limited for time, rushes the job, and instead of taking jewellery, cash, passports etc, cocks the whole thing up in a blind panic, and snaffles a three year old little girl by mistake. Purrrlease!

As you can read from the report, Anthony Summers states that:

"Our source told us that after stumbling across 18 burglaries last year, they have now discovered a total of 28 in the area of Praia da Luz in the years around 2007 when Madeleine disappeared."

In and around the years of 2007? Not very precise is it. You see what Anthony Summers is very cleverly doing, is to make out there was a huge spate of burglaries in a very short space of time. Not so.........
"in and around the years of 2007"  

The plural use of the word years is important here, it indicates that these 28 burglaries took place over more than one year. Then of course we have the the next part of the quote, "in and around". By definition, the word around means on all sides of, so at the very least we have 28 burglaries, or thefts from a dwelling, within a 3 year period. That equates to just over 9 a year, hardly out of the ordinary, and hardly likely to be the work of, one single gang. For that to be the case, we would have to believe that Bobby the bungling burglar, was the only thief in the area for at least 3 years.

Quite aside from the fact that:


Somebody must have told New Scotland Yard this minor detail. It's there in the PJ files, the McCanns told friends and family, that the shutters were, "smashed", "jemmied" and "broken"  Yet, as can be read below, their was no sign whatsoever of a break in of any kind. 

So how did Summers and Swan come to obtain this information, from, as Sky described it, "a source". Clearly they are not the official spokespeople for the McCanns, that is the job of Clarence "as and when" Mitchell. New Scotland Yard have, since the departure of Andy redwood at least, run a very tight lipped operation. The distinct lack of leaks to the press has been noted since Redwood retired, and handed the reigns over to DCI Nicola Wall.

New Scotland Yard aren't talking to the press any longer, certainly where the main investigation is concerned, yet we are still seeing pro McCann stories filtering their way into the tabloids. Stories that, no matter how unlikely, divert attention from the McCanns, and onto a burglar, or a dead patsy. Is that a coincidence? The McCanns have, since day one, used the press for their own gain, as a guardian angel, always there to blame those unable to answer for themselves, be it the dead, or the ridiculous. 

It's high time the media stopped cow towing to this pair of liars, and started reporting the truth.