SleuthMom
Former Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 936
- Reaction score
- 7
Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 24
- Thread starter colomom
- Start date
- Status
Can anyone explain to me the purpose or point of this article????
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-separate-rooms-night-Madeleine-vanished.html
McCanns rowed and slept in separate rooms the night before Madeleine vanished
BUT....
From: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/kate-mccann-my-story-460343.html
"As a couple, I think we're stronger than ever. We've got an equal partnership. We don't row, we've never rowed."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-separate-rooms-night-Madeleine-vanished.html
McCanns rowed and slept in separate rooms the night before Madeleine vanished
BUT....
From: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/kate-mccann-my-story-460343.html
"As a couple, I think we're stronger than ever. We've got an equal partnership. We don't row, we've never rowed."
Can't tell you the significance about the ROW, but I really like the sniffer dog map.
Mr and Mrs McCann alway strenuously denied any involvement in her disappearance. Portuguese prosecutors shelved the case and formally cleared them on July 21.
Trail: An aerial shot of Praia da Luz, showing where the Portuguese sniffer dogs lost the scent of Madeleine last year
Mr and Mrs McCann alway strenuously denied any involvement in her disappearance. Portuguese prosecutors shelved the case and formally cleared them on July 21.
Trail: An aerial shot of Praia da Luz, showing where the Portuguese sniffer dogs lost the scent of Madeleine last year
Parmenides
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 181
- Reaction score
- 19
Judging from the Natalee Holloway case and the Madeleine McCann case (considering the sniffer dog map), it seems like a beach must be a very good place to get rid of a body. I guess, once the tide has come in and gone out, it erases all traces of disturbed ground, where the body was buried.
Texana
Overreaching
When I first read that, I thought it meant they went out in a boat the night before. Seriously. So much for speaking the same language!
The interesting thing I found about the article: She was angry enough to sleep in a separate room, and the second interesting thing--He didn't notice?
Note that the article also said Madeleine slept with them on May 1st: Coincidentally, the night Mrs. Fenn heard the crying for over an hour. I'm guessing that Madeleine was so upset at being alone that she wouldn't go to sleep in her own bed that night.
Enfants Kidnappés (http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html) 6/08/08: the British media publish everything and anything on the Madeleine McCann case.
MENSONGES = LIES
http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html
6/08/08
Everything and anything. What next? A Sunday newspaper magazine dedicating its regular feature to what's in the McCanns' fridge?
Everything and anything!
Since the process has been made public and journalists have had access to the case file, on DVD, the media has gone mad and don't know anymore what to invent to attract attention. In a frenzy of publication, wishing, at all costs, to publish before their neighbours, the British press in its entirety, has sunk to a ridiculous level. The idea is to publish everything and anything but faster than their neighbour. As soon as they have a photo, they publish it without considering the consequences for the families of the people photographed. They add two or three extracts from the report accompanying the photo and there you have it. But it is total disinformation!! For a start, we note that photos included in the case file are categorically banned from publication!!!
On the other hand, that same press makes a big deal of a story about a little girl who looks like Madeleine, seen in a service station, claiming that it was not investigated. Wrong! If they took the trouble to be objective and wanted to honestly inform people, they would publish the whole document, stressing that the lead was followed up and eliminated. They would publish the fact that the PJ suggested that Kate came with them to check if it was Maddie but that she responded, and I quote from the case file, that she, "had other things to do," which really staggered the investigators! That is also in the report, gentlemen of the British press! You only have to read on a few lines! Today, with an obvious interest in manipulating public opinion, the tabloids are talking about the s0-called, "unexplored," Dutch sighting. Clarence Mitchell, the parents' spokesperson, stated: "It is shocking and painful, reading this report, not knowing if it was Madeleine or not."
But it is mentioned in the report. The lead was followed up. The authorities did what was necessary. And Mr Mitchell has the case file, so what is he playing at? Also, Kate said that Madeleine did not like being called Maddie and each time she would say that she wasn't called Maddie but Madeleine. We are entitled to ask why Mr Mitchell seeks to manipulate public opinion? Why is it so vital to pretend not to know or to distort the truth? We could also ask questions about the intellectual integrity of certain journalists, intentionally and knowingly disinforming their readers?
In reality, there's nothing new. Nothing that hasn't been talked about in the world's press in recent months. All of these so-called new leads, said not to have been followed up, have been. They have all been studied. The press is only adding another layer to what is already very well known by everyone. Intellectual integrity is in publishing an article without hiding certain details. The truth is in publishing the information such as it is even if it is not pleasant. In this case, many of the details put a flea in the ear of the investigators, very quickly making the parents suspects in the eyes of the PJ. All these details placed end to end form a trail, this trail essentially leading the investigators to one or several pieces of evidence or to a, "dead end." If we regularly set out the details that led the PJ to suspect the parents, it is with the aim of explaining to you why the parents were suspected. In any case, these details are not evidence, just suspicions, strong assumptions.
It is also establishing a trail. The MP stated that there was no evidence to implicate the parents in Madeleine's disappearance. The MP is right! There is no evidence that is sufficiently solid to support an indictment. Only suspicions remain. Thus, it was completely logical for the parents' status to be lifted, the MP making clear that he believed that Madeleine was dead, but that he did not have evidence of the parents' involvement. Only the acts of child abandonment or neglect could have been maintained but the MP decided to abandon these charges. But don't forget that the investigation is neither over, nor abandoned, nor closed, nor shelved, contrary to what a certain press says. The investigation goes on and will not be closed until Madeleine, alive or not, is found. Also, although the parents are no longer, "arguidos," they have not been exonerated or cleared of anything. The PJ's conviction about the parents has not changed.
The above is translated from an original article on the Enfants Kidnappés web site.
...and copied from: http://helpmadeleine.proboards79.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1270&page=12 #165 and also: http://the3arguidos.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=20888&sid=675ca763520f67333c9ab40ca738a28a
MENSONGES = LIES
http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html
6/08/08
Everything and anything. What next? A Sunday newspaper magazine dedicating its regular feature to what's in the McCanns' fridge?
Everything and anything!
Since the process has been made public and journalists have had access to the case file, on DVD, the media has gone mad and don't know anymore what to invent to attract attention. In a frenzy of publication, wishing, at all costs, to publish before their neighbours, the British press in its entirety, has sunk to a ridiculous level. The idea is to publish everything and anything but faster than their neighbour. As soon as they have a photo, they publish it without considering the consequences for the families of the people photographed. They add two or three extracts from the report accompanying the photo and there you have it. But it is total disinformation!! For a start, we note that photos included in the case file are categorically banned from publication!!!
On the other hand, that same press makes a big deal of a story about a little girl who looks like Madeleine, seen in a service station, claiming that it was not investigated. Wrong! If they took the trouble to be objective and wanted to honestly inform people, they would publish the whole document, stressing that the lead was followed up and eliminated. They would publish the fact that the PJ suggested that Kate came with them to check if it was Maddie but that she responded, and I quote from the case file, that she, "had other things to do," which really staggered the investigators! That is also in the report, gentlemen of the British press! You only have to read on a few lines! Today, with an obvious interest in manipulating public opinion, the tabloids are talking about the s0-called, "unexplored," Dutch sighting. Clarence Mitchell, the parents' spokesperson, stated: "It is shocking and painful, reading this report, not knowing if it was Madeleine or not."
But it is mentioned in the report. The lead was followed up. The authorities did what was necessary. And Mr Mitchell has the case file, so what is he playing at? Also, Kate said that Madeleine did not like being called Maddie and each time she would say that she wasn't called Maddie but Madeleine. We are entitled to ask why Mr Mitchell seeks to manipulate public opinion? Why is it so vital to pretend not to know or to distort the truth? We could also ask questions about the intellectual integrity of certain journalists, intentionally and knowingly disinforming their readers?
In reality, there's nothing new. Nothing that hasn't been talked about in the world's press in recent months. All of these so-called new leads, said not to have been followed up, have been. They have all been studied. The press is only adding another layer to what is already very well known by everyone. Intellectual integrity is in publishing an article without hiding certain details. The truth is in publishing the information such as it is even if it is not pleasant. In this case, many of the details put a flea in the ear of the investigators, very quickly making the parents suspects in the eyes of the PJ. All these details placed end to end form a trail, this trail essentially leading the investigators to one or several pieces of evidence or to a, "dead end." If we regularly set out the details that led the PJ to suspect the parents, it is with the aim of explaining to you why the parents were suspected. In any case, these details are not evidence, just suspicions, strong assumptions.
It is also establishing a trail. The MP stated that there was no evidence to implicate the parents in Madeleine's disappearance. The MP is right! There is no evidence that is sufficiently solid to support an indictment. Only suspicions remain. Thus, it was completely logical for the parents' status to be lifted, the MP making clear that he believed that Madeleine was dead, but that he did not have evidence of the parents' involvement. Only the acts of child abandonment or neglect could have been maintained but the MP decided to abandon these charges. But don't forget that the investigation is neither over, nor abandoned, nor closed, nor shelved, contrary to what a certain press says. The investigation goes on and will not be closed until Madeleine, alive or not, is found. Also, although the parents are no longer, "arguidos," they have not been exonerated or cleared of anything. The PJ's conviction about the parents has not changed.
The above is translated from an original article on the Enfants Kidnappés web site.
...and copied from: http://helpmadeleine.proboards79.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1270&page=12 #165 and also: http://the3arguidos.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=20888&sid=675ca763520f67333c9ab40ca738a28a
Some further clarification re: the Belgium Pedophile Ring story
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...was-snatched-by-paedophile-ring-to-order.html
According to an email sent by the Metropolitan Police a child abduction ring based in Belgium placed an order for a "young girl".
Three-year-old Madeleine was spotted while on holiday in Portugal by someone connected to the gang who took a picture of her.
The photograph was sent back to Belgium where the paedophile ring agreed that she should be abducted, the email states.
Three days later on May 3rd last year Madeleine was taken from her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in the Algarve while her parents ate at a nearby restaurant.
The astonishing revelation supports Kate and Gerry McCann's long-held theory that their eldest child may have been taken by a child smuggling ring.
The email, sent by an intelligence officer on the Met's vice squad on March 4 this year to counterparts in the Portuguese and Leicestershire police, marks a significant development in the case of the missing girl.
Just last month Portuguese police closed their investigation and cleared the McCanns of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
The email was revealed for the first time in police files made public this week.
The Met Police were tipped by an anonymous source, the files showed.
Met officer John Shord wrote the email to Leicestershire Police on March 4 which was passed on to Operation Task – the British end of the investigation into Madeleine McCann.
It said: "Intelligence suggests that a paedophile ring in Belgium made an order for a young girl three days before Madeleine McCann was taken.
"Somebody connected to this group saw Maddie, took a photograph of her and sent it to Belgium. The purchaser agreed that the girl was suitable and Maddie was taken."
DC John Hughes, from Leicestershire Police, forwarded the email to the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) at Portimao in the Algarve on April 21, the files showed.
The next day the email was sent to Ricardo Paiva, one of the three Portuguese police officers leading the investigation.
On April 28, Portuguese police faxed the information to Interpol in Lisbon and asked them to investigate it as a matter of urgency.
Interpol replied on May 23, passing on all information gathered from its bureaus in London, Brussels, Germay and Finland.
On May 27, Interpol in Lisbon sent an urgent fax to Portuguese police asking for more information, but an undated return fax told them they had all the information that there was.
The email emerged in volume 14, appendix five, of the vast Portuguese police dossier into the closed investigation which was released to the public on Monday.
Paulo Rebelo, the head of the police investigation into Madeleine, ordered that the information be placed in the case file.
The inquiry was then shelved on July 21, less than two months after Interpol was told there was no further information about the paedophile ring.
(continues)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...was-snatched-by-paedophile-ring-to-order.html
According to an email sent by the Metropolitan Police a child abduction ring based in Belgium placed an order for a "young girl".
Three-year-old Madeleine was spotted while on holiday in Portugal by someone connected to the gang who took a picture of her.
The photograph was sent back to Belgium where the paedophile ring agreed that she should be abducted, the email states.
Three days later on May 3rd last year Madeleine was taken from her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in the Algarve while her parents ate at a nearby restaurant.
The astonishing revelation supports Kate and Gerry McCann's long-held theory that their eldest child may have been taken by a child smuggling ring.
The email, sent by an intelligence officer on the Met's vice squad on March 4 this year to counterparts in the Portuguese and Leicestershire police, marks a significant development in the case of the missing girl.
Just last month Portuguese police closed their investigation and cleared the McCanns of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
The email was revealed for the first time in police files made public this week.
The Met Police were tipped by an anonymous source, the files showed.
Met officer John Shord wrote the email to Leicestershire Police on March 4 which was passed on to Operation Task – the British end of the investigation into Madeleine McCann.
It said: "Intelligence suggests that a paedophile ring in Belgium made an order for a young girl three days before Madeleine McCann was taken.
"Somebody connected to this group saw Maddie, took a photograph of her and sent it to Belgium. The purchaser agreed that the girl was suitable and Maddie was taken."
DC John Hughes, from Leicestershire Police, forwarded the email to the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) at Portimao in the Algarve on April 21, the files showed.
The next day the email was sent to Ricardo Paiva, one of the three Portuguese police officers leading the investigation.
On April 28, Portuguese police faxed the information to Interpol in Lisbon and asked them to investigate it as a matter of urgency.
Interpol replied on May 23, passing on all information gathered from its bureaus in London, Brussels, Germay and Finland.
On May 27, Interpol in Lisbon sent an urgent fax to Portuguese police asking for more information, but an undated return fax told them they had all the information that there was.
The email emerged in volume 14, appendix five, of the vast Portuguese police dossier into the closed investigation which was released to the public on Monday.
Paulo Rebelo, the head of the police investigation into Madeleine, ordered that the information be placed in the case file.
The inquiry was then shelved on July 21, less than two months after Interpol was told there was no further information about the paedophile ring.
(continues)
Claycat
Inactive
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 910
- Reaction score
- 6
Madeleine McCann police didn't reveal sighting of 'Maddy'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nn-police-didnt-reveal-sighting-of-Maddy.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nn-police-didnt-reveal-sighting-of-Maddy.html
Reveal is an interesting word here....
I wonder, do they mean this sighting?
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2459407&postcount=75
Or maybe this one?
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2456228&postcount=31
Even I can tell that neither of these children are Madeleine. I would also think that splashing innocent children's pictures all over the press would be just asking for a lawsuit. So not revealing these sightings to the general public is understandable. As far as revealing them to the McCanns, I read that the McCanns were shown these pictures and immediately dismissed them.
Texana
Overreaching
That's a ridiculous article, frankly.
As for the girl in the petrol station, you have only to look at the hair and the age of the girl to tell it's not Madeleine, clearly.
There were hundreds of sightings of "Madeleine," and the McCanns themselves made it clear from the beginning they a) did not want to go personally to every sighting site and b) did not intend to get involved personally or emotionally with every reported sighting.
We should be seeing just as many articles about the competence of Metado, the detective agency, since they publicly stated that they knew where Madeleine was and she would be home by Christmas.
Barnaby
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,148
- Reaction score
- 24
That is correct Colomon!
Re: The Amsterdam sighting & conversation, the McCanns have made it clear that Madeleine was called just that not Maddy so why the heck would she tell someone she was Maddy? She was 3 & would only have related to her own name not what the Press dubbed her, then again did the McCanns tell yet another lie?
Amazing another alleged sighting from somewhere that the McCanns worked & had friends!
So many "coincidences" in this case!
SleuthMom
Former Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 936
- Reaction score
- 7
He didn't notice because he was already asleep when she decided to move to the kid's room!
I mean, if I am upset at my husband and want to make a point then I will do it when he is awake, not wait until I am in the same bed with him, wait until he fall asleep and then move. :waitasec:Strange couple.
SleuthMom
Former Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 936
- Reaction score
- 7
Do you know if they said something about this after Christmas? I don't recall any statement given by them after the date passed.
Nope, not one word. But, they knew she would not be home by Christmas, didn't they??
Sorry but, I am very tired of all this cr*p.
....and a little bit pi$$ed.
SleuthMom
Former Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 936
- Reaction score
- 7
Nope, not one word. But, they knew she would not be home by Christmas, didn't they??
Sorry but, I am very tired of all this cr*p.
....and a little bit pi$$ed.
And again NO JOURNALISTS following these leads???
I have worked in Media for more than 10 years. I have a site with some famous people I interviewed in the past, I still using the site to show some of my work as well as keep it open in case I want to interview new people.
I would LOVE to interview the Mc Canns, is it hard to get an interview with them as a foreign journalist?
Texana
Overreaching
Not if you can get clearance from Clarence Mitchell first.
And if you agree to stick to soft questions that favor them... again, yes.
Just be prepared to be shut down in a heartbeat when you ask serious questions.
Worth trying, I think.
april4sky
It is not who is right, but what is right, that is
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 9
This picture is beyond sick. :crazy::crazy::crazy:Nope, not one word. But, they knew she would not be home by Christmas, didn't they??
Sorry but, I am very tired of all this cr*p.
....and a little bit pi$$ed.
There is no evidence that Madeleine is dead....NONE!!!
She may still be alive and desperate for her parents to find her.......
.......Poor Madeleine that there are people who are prepared to use her to make up CRUEL and SICK JOKES!!!!!:crazy::crazy::crazy:
april4sky
It is not who is right, but what is right, that is
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 9
It's becoming obvious even in Portugal that the PJ investigating Madeleines case were more than a little incompetent. IMO
iNTERESTEDWOMAN
I'll trade you a bushel of corn for a barrel of oi
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 1,333
- Reaction score
- 53
:waitasec: You come to that conclusion from an article printed in the Telegraph? Oh brother...
hummm, this is what I read : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nn-police-didnt-reveal-sighting-of-Maddy.html
Error 404
Sorry, the page you have requested is not available
Please try again later
This error message may occur for a number of reasons:
We are unable to locate any more files relating to this subject
The file may have been moved or deleted because it is out of date
You may have followed a link from another web site that contains an incorrect or out of date URL (web page address)
You may have typed an incorrect URL into your browser
There may be an error on the telegraph.co.uk site.
april4sky
It is not who is right, but what is right, that is
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 9
Oh brother!! No worries IW try this link.:waitasec: You come to that conclusion from an article printed in the Telegraph? Oh brother...
hummm, this is what I read : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nn-police-didnt-reveal-sighting-of-Maddy.html
Error 404
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nn-police-didnt-reveal-sighting-of-Maddy.html
Hummm, the critisism came from Portugal’s own public prosecutors :clap:
- Status
Similar threads
