Hi Scandi :blowkiss: I would love to know where this came from also!
Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26
- Thread starter colomom
- Start date
-
Give Us This Day Our Daily Thread December 1st through December 31st 2025- Latest: TootsieFootsie
-
- Status
Hi Scandi :blowkiss: I would love to know where this came from also!
Texana
Overreaching
No, I don't think this is a five year old Maddie. The eyes are not right, and the change due to age is not quite right.
I went to the site - I think this girl is the daughter of the guy making the videos. She is in several of the videos. While I do think the girl looks like Maddie, I agree with Texana - it is NOT Maddie. The eyes are different and so is the bone structure.
But.... it was close enough to motivate me to review several of the videos, some of which are just weird.....
Salem
But.... it was close enough to motivate me to review several of the videos, some of which are just weird.....
Salem
scandi
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 18,226
- Reaction score
- 19,821
ITA with you and Texana. After all we know it couldn't be Madeleine as Eddie let us know she died in Apt5A.
I had to take another look-see as well. I wonder if this person knows the McCann's or is in some way connected to them thru someone else, like almost every other sighting has been
Hello Scandi, Salem and Tex....
I don't think this would qualify as a bona fide sighting. I found this video embedded on Brian's Dreams site, here: http://www.🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.com/MISSING/private/5441page33.htm waaaay at the bottom, dated 1/4/09. The person who posted it made reference to her being an abused child. There is reference to this YouTube account: http://www.youtube.com/user/rose2812?gl=DE&hl=de which is completely creepy to me....not sure why.
Anyway, it seems to be a homemade video. I was amazed by the similarity of the shape of her mouth and nose but, I agree, the eyes are not right. And as Scandi said....
I don't think this would qualify as a bona fide sighting. I found this video embedded on Brian's Dreams site, here: http://www.🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.com/MISSING/private/5441page33.htm waaaay at the bottom, dated 1/4/09. The person who posted it made reference to her being an abused child. There is reference to this YouTube account: http://www.youtube.com/user/rose2812?gl=DE&hl=de which is completely creepy to me....not sure why.
Anyway, it seems to be a homemade video. I was amazed by the similarity of the shape of her mouth and nose but, I agree, the eyes are not right. And as Scandi said....
Colomom - I looked at several of the videos, apparently by the same person and I agree 100% - very creepy. I also agree that I can't explain why I thought it was creepy, but it left me with a feeling of yuck...... Especially the one titled "Could this have happened to Madeleine?" Very weird - I didn't watch the whole thing. I can't understand how someone would think to create such an ugly video?
Maybe the videos should be brought to someone's attention? Like someone in LE?
Salem
Maybe the videos should be brought to someone's attention? Like someone in LE?
Salem
06 February 2009
Maddie and Joana Again? Amongst the Bad Parenthood, the Hazelnuts Liars and the alleged Dogs Injustice
The second half of January was, as I expected, very interesting.
The Maddie case came back in full force! The Joana case was interrupted by a rocambolesque and, I believe, unprecedented legal event. The Metódo3 showed its teeth. And the Freeport distracted us.
by Dr.Paulo Sargento
The last time I wrote, I recall that Dr Gerry McCann had returned to Portugal for the first time since September 2007, allegedly for, together with one of his attorneys, the illustrious Mr. Rogério Alves, have a reunion with His Excellency the British Ambassador in Lisbon [Alexander Ellis], to know what could still be done to find Madeleine.
The trip indeed happened! Mr. Rogério Alves was, as everyone could see, with Dr Gerry McCann, and to what is known, they met with the Ambassador.
Well, it happened! So why to repeat myself?
As I had previously said and now I reaffirm it: the argument used by Dr Gerry McCann is illogical. By his own words, he assumed he had not still read the whole process (which includes ALL the diligences made), because the process had not yet been fully translated. I repeat the question that intrigues me: How can you want to know what you can still do about anything when it is not known, entirely, all that was done? It makes no sense whatsoever! I reiterate that this escapes any logic.
Now then, what was the purpose of Dr Gerry McCanns visit? Without anyone asking, it was guaranteed that he did not come to meet with anyone from the government or anyone connected to the government. But, what government? The current one? Well, here is something that can not escape the logic. Nor, contrary to the previous statement, we can affirm (without a pejorative assessment of the awareness of the statement) that it is a lie.
It even makes sense that Dr Gerry McCann has not come to meet with people connected to the ACTUAL government (and I swear that I am not using rhetorical imagery to induce the reading into the Freeport case). However, nothing was said, and in truth, nothing was asked regarding meetings with elements of previous governments or related to them.
Right! Nice trick! In some corridors, with hushed loudness, it has been made possible to pin point someone to the fourth chair of the said meeting: the first name, truly Lusitanian and the surname, clearly Gaul [Gaulês]! And I stop right here.
Do you know why?
Because, from this time on, not even Mendes Bota was able to save the honour of the monastery: the Man who, according with all the polls, would guaranteedly win a City Council was rejected by the Directorate of the Party of which he is an active militant, allegedly for not corresponding to the appropriate profile for that Town Hall (well, at least, from the mouth of the censors, pardon, of the decision makers, did not came a even more ludicrous story, the lack of political experience). Of course I am talking about Gonçalo Amaral.
Besides of cowardly, of shameful and, obviously, manipulated, this act of refusing Gonçalo Amaral candidacy, is the most naive expectation of a currency exchange that I have seen in Portuguese politics (besides I only have 43 years old and there are political alliances that are secular).
Meanwhile, in the Joana case, after the confession, pre-announced by the Illustrious lawyer of Madam Leonor Cipriano (I recall the interview with Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia, in the weekly "The Crime" of December 4, 2008), our courts performed one of the strangest scenes unprecedented in the Portuguese memory: the expulsion of a lawyer from the Court chambers for being suspended by the Bar Association, allegedly because of the failure to communicate his change of address.
This event made a flow, desirably for some, of more ink lines in multiple newspapers. Relatively to this, we yet have to understand what really happened, However, the confession of Leonor Cipriano, that Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia referred to have be written by is own hand, but dictated by the lady is, as I had a chance to say, another point in detriment of Leonor Cipriano herself: its another one among nearly a dozen versions, all different.
What can we conclude here? Two things. The first is that Leonor has lost more of her, already diminutive and very doubtful, credibility of testimony. Secondly, calculating the highest common denominator of the various versions, we find a high consistency of one element in the different versions: Joana, who unfortunately, died, or rather was killed, as most of the forensic evidence indicates.
The letter, in addition to have been written by Mr. Marcos Aragão Correia, was not dictated by a person born in the Algarve area, with a very low level of education. Somehow the statement denotes a kind of legal concern, to the level of its content (namely, the legal possibility of the adoption as it is referred and the insistency on details that could, potentially, constitute evidence for the accusation - pants with blood). But as I reiterate, the excessive use of the gerund [verbal noun] and the reversal of possessives and demonstratives add up to an aspect of linguistic expression more usual in Madeira, or with some effort, in some parts of the Alentejo. Who dictated the letter? A person from Madeira? Or, being in Odemira, a person from Alentejo?
Still in the Joana case, following the aforementioned "confession" a new search was encouraged to the place where, allegedly, the body of Joana was buried. But, after several searches, conducted by the lawyer for Leonor Cipriano and family (which family?) it was assumed the impossibility to continue this task due to the deficiency of cinotechnical means [K9 units]. Indeed, this argument deserves some reflection.
Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia says, like many others, that in Portugal there are no dogs trained to detect the cadaverine scent. Nevertheless, some people said the opposite, some time ago. It is, therefore, a debatable issue. But, then, why was a search and rescue dog taken? Here, for sure the theory that those who dont have dogs hunts with a cat is unfounded. So, I repeat, why would there be a need for an ERVD dog that detects the scent of cadavers?
Although I accept that I am completely uninformed regarding the major aspects of the qualities of those animals, I must, however, present some speculative arguments that have emerged in the consequence of the proclaimed affirmation made by Dr. Aragão Correia: In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to search for evidences against the parents. Why they don't do it now to find Joana's body?
Lets try to reflect upon it.
I would not be surprised and even would agree, absolutely, with Dr. Aragão Correia if the argument of Equalitarian Justice that he pretended to use wasnt betrayed by its content. Let us see what I want to say, illustrating how I think that the argument should be exposed:
a) In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to search for evidences against the parents. Why they dont do it now to try to get evidences against the mother and uncle of Joana?, or alternatively,
b) In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to try to locate her body. Why they don't do it now to find Joana's body?
Indeed, if the issues were raised in this way, I would be in complete agreement with the thesis of Dr. Aragão Correia.
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and placebo devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
In the Joana case, in addition to the search area being much larger and that there are no types of markers, the search should, in my opinion, begin with archaeologists and geologists who would attempt to define areas where signs of intervention not due to natural phenomena existed (ex. erosion of wind or rain in the modification of topographical accidents) and from then on proceed to search with other methods.
I admit that is much more difficult to detect the smell of dead bodies after almost 4 years, than after 2 months. I also admit that it would be much more difficult the discrimination of odours in outdoor areas than inside houses or in clothes dressed recently. I should, therefore conclude the arrival of the friendly and competent dogs (who have 200 positive identifications), in these conditions could constitute a failure.
Actually, allow me one more metaphor: the conditions described for the monte das figueras[figs hill] (which, in itself, involves a number of variables, of difficult, or even, virtual impossible control) and after almost 4 years are have gone by since the tragic death of a girl, the probability of the dogs (even though they are competent) to find the corpse of Joana is, certainly lower the likelihood that someone would have to win the Euromillions in 3 consecutive weeks, betting on the same combination key numbers.
However, to whom would help the failure of these dogs?
Exactly! You guessed it! To the defenders of Madeleine McCann abduction theory. Thus, one of the strongest evidences of the death of little Maddie would be attacked and the headlines would be as expected: Dogs who identified cadaver scent in the Maddie case didnt detect any clues of Joanas corpse. I admit that the confession of Leonor would likewise not be in good sheets. But I do not know why, I think that the media, would basically, belittle the image of the friendly dogs, and consequently of the sardines munchers.
Another issue which has come to light, and about which I have spoken [on TVI], concerns the recent news regarding the involvement of Método3 in the subject that I will only designate as Hazelnuts Traitors. This Agency has shown that it has within people who are: LIARS, SWINDLERS and SKILLFUL COINCIDENCE MANAGERS.
For these not to be just empty words, I begin to explain:
a) LIARS! They promised that Maddie would appear by the Christmas of 2007 ITS A LIE! They even guaranteed to have identified the kidnapper of Maddie - ITS A LIE! (If it is true then report it to the authorities, to not be accountable of any crime in that regard, and Ill give at that time, publicly and humbly my apologies for having said this sentence, but Ill keep the previous)!
b) SWINDLERS! They take advantage of the work of others. The Hazelnuts had already owners. Copying sites is shameful. Exploiting the work of others is disgraceful.
c) SKILLFUL COINCIDENCE MANAGERS! They stated that while working in the Maddie case, 13 paedophiles have been arrested. Dont make the Spanish Police a bunch of fools. Have some sense gentlemen.
Let me say that institutions should not be confused with some people who belong to it. Of course, everywhere, there is good and bad. If I am being unfair to the agency Método3, I will apologize publicly after the agency brings to an end its connexion with the acts committed by some of its elements.
To the McCann Couple, I would like to start, exactly, here.
For how long do you intend to keep the link to the agency's Metódo3 in the Find Madeline site? Even after all the information regarding the said agency, it still keeps a privileged spot in the Investigation tab at the site where many people still want to help and contribute? For how long?
And the online store? Is to maintain, even losing a real fortune, as we were able to see, in the accounts of the Madeleine Fund? Who manufactures the T-Shirts? And the bracelets?
If it is true that you have no accounts or credit cards on your behalf, how do pay for your travels? And the expenses at the Ocean Club? How do you live without financial liaisons with any bank? And the mortgage of your home?
And the price of the site? In Portugal, a site maintenance costs 50 per year. When we have no money, we draw our own pages or we ask some solidarity to friends who are competent in that area. To spend a thousand times more is unwise. I am sure that there are thousands of web designers that would help you for free. There are caring people in this world, if they believe that it is for a good cause.
The translations of the process should not be the PRIORITY to be able to know what was done, Dr Gerry McCann? There is STILL enough money in the fund. Please translate the process. It is urgent. It is imperative!
Dr. Kate McCann, we all understand your suffering. I do not want to believe that the idea that you are depressed and obsessively reading for 3 hours a day the process, is an idea of your own. I believe that this is a story of the evil tabloids. Please, sue them because they are giving of you an awful motherly image. A mother of a daughter who has disappeared and who does not rest for more than three hours a day, spending the remaining 19 hours reading. Yes, it could be assumed as worrying and it would translate an emotional disturbance in which the person is, in fact, obsessed and not thinking in anything else, not even in the other children.
And speaking about, the other children.
In the first days after the disappearance of Maddie, where some people weaved considerations to the poor parental quality of the McCanns, I tried to devalue that idea on several occasions, interpreting benignly the various and more carefree parental educational practices of the Anglo-Saxons.
I even conveyed and, today I acknowledge that, stupidly, in the defense of the couple, saying that a culture of greater autonomy and its relationship with the educational development in some countries were in part, the result of parenting practices which promote more autonomy and are less over-protective, saying that the super-protection and affiliation were more common in southern Europe, in particular, and in the Latin people in general.
When I recognize the stupidity of what I said, I must confess that is not in relation of what I said. I stand by it! The stupidity was not to have thought that the educational practices that the McCann demonstrated were predictors of one of the biggest wickedness that I have witnessed against children: to give gifts to the twins, saying that those were sent by Maddie.
Mr and Mrs McCann:
Do not make of Maddie a Santa Claus who gives gifts to the children and that never, I repeat, NEVER, appears or will appear.
Let the twins do the mourning of their sister. You both know she will not appear.
Even if you believe that you had no intervention in the disappearance of your daughter (which I do not believe and I have that right as a citizen), you have been warned that the excessive media attention would increased the likelihood, in the hypothetical case of abduction, that the putative kidnapper would kill the girl. If you do not want to face the grief of Maddie, you have that right and you have your reasons.. But please, let the twins do it.
The girl, unfortunately, will not return. Do not give hope to the little ones because they will not remember her sister. They will not have a memory of Maddie, unless through the pictures and for what is told to them, and unfortunately, for what they will know and understand when they grow up. Do not build false memories through deceiving illusions. Tell the twins that Maddie is a little star [in the sky]. They will know what that means. Until then, do not let any pact to use the twins as a means.
These children live in a strange ambience. Where is the Maddie? Will she be back? And if we are taken to that place? Children do not think like us. They believe they are stolen by the boogeyman. And what if one has gone already?
Mr and Mrs McCann
I have never made any criticisms to your parental qualities.
However, given what you did with the twins I have to firmly say:
You are BAD PARENTS!
Get some counselling!
See you soon!
Courtesy of Dr. Paulo Sargento
By Joana Morais
Maddie and Joana Again? Amongst the Bad Parenthood, the Hazelnuts Liars and the alleged Dogs Injustice
The second half of January was, as I expected, very interesting.
The Maddie case came back in full force! The Joana case was interrupted by a rocambolesque and, I believe, unprecedented legal event. The Metódo3 showed its teeth. And the Freeport distracted us.
by Dr.Paulo Sargento
The last time I wrote, I recall that Dr Gerry McCann had returned to Portugal for the first time since September 2007, allegedly for, together with one of his attorneys, the illustrious Mr. Rogério Alves, have a reunion with His Excellency the British Ambassador in Lisbon [Alexander Ellis], to know what could still be done to find Madeleine.
The trip indeed happened! Mr. Rogério Alves was, as everyone could see, with Dr Gerry McCann, and to what is known, they met with the Ambassador.
Well, it happened! So why to repeat myself?
As I had previously said and now I reaffirm it: the argument used by Dr Gerry McCann is illogical. By his own words, he assumed he had not still read the whole process (which includes ALL the diligences made), because the process had not yet been fully translated. I repeat the question that intrigues me: How can you want to know what you can still do about anything when it is not known, entirely, all that was done? It makes no sense whatsoever! I reiterate that this escapes any logic.
Now then, what was the purpose of Dr Gerry McCanns visit? Without anyone asking, it was guaranteed that he did not come to meet with anyone from the government or anyone connected to the government. But, what government? The current one? Well, here is something that can not escape the logic. Nor, contrary to the previous statement, we can affirm (without a pejorative assessment of the awareness of the statement) that it is a lie.
It even makes sense that Dr Gerry McCann has not come to meet with people connected to the ACTUAL government (and I swear that I am not using rhetorical imagery to induce the reading into the Freeport case). However, nothing was said, and in truth, nothing was asked regarding meetings with elements of previous governments or related to them.
Right! Nice trick! In some corridors, with hushed loudness, it has been made possible to pin point someone to the fourth chair of the said meeting: the first name, truly Lusitanian and the surname, clearly Gaul [Gaulês]! And I stop right here.
Do you know why?
Because, from this time on, not even Mendes Bota was able to save the honour of the monastery: the Man who, according with all the polls, would guaranteedly win a City Council was rejected by the Directorate of the Party of which he is an active militant, allegedly for not corresponding to the appropriate profile for that Town Hall (well, at least, from the mouth of the censors, pardon, of the decision makers, did not came a even more ludicrous story, the lack of political experience). Of course I am talking about Gonçalo Amaral.
Besides of cowardly, of shameful and, obviously, manipulated, this act of refusing Gonçalo Amaral candidacy, is the most naive expectation of a currency exchange that I have seen in Portuguese politics (besides I only have 43 years old and there are political alliances that are secular).
Meanwhile, in the Joana case, after the confession, pre-announced by the Illustrious lawyer of Madam Leonor Cipriano (I recall the interview with Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia, in the weekly "The Crime" of December 4, 2008), our courts performed one of the strangest scenes unprecedented in the Portuguese memory: the expulsion of a lawyer from the Court chambers for being suspended by the Bar Association, allegedly because of the failure to communicate his change of address.
This event made a flow, desirably for some, of more ink lines in multiple newspapers. Relatively to this, we yet have to understand what really happened, However, the confession of Leonor Cipriano, that Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia referred to have be written by is own hand, but dictated by the lady is, as I had a chance to say, another point in detriment of Leonor Cipriano herself: its another one among nearly a dozen versions, all different.
What can we conclude here? Two things. The first is that Leonor has lost more of her, already diminutive and very doubtful, credibility of testimony. Secondly, calculating the highest common denominator of the various versions, we find a high consistency of one element in the different versions: Joana, who unfortunately, died, or rather was killed, as most of the forensic evidence indicates.
The letter, in addition to have been written by Mr. Marcos Aragão Correia, was not dictated by a person born in the Algarve area, with a very low level of education. Somehow the statement denotes a kind of legal concern, to the level of its content (namely, the legal possibility of the adoption as it is referred and the insistency on details that could, potentially, constitute evidence for the accusation - pants with blood). But as I reiterate, the excessive use of the gerund [verbal noun] and the reversal of possessives and demonstratives add up to an aspect of linguistic expression more usual in Madeira, or with some effort, in some parts of the Alentejo. Who dictated the letter? A person from Madeira? Or, being in Odemira, a person from Alentejo?
Still in the Joana case, following the aforementioned "confession" a new search was encouraged to the place where, allegedly, the body of Joana was buried. But, after several searches, conducted by the lawyer for Leonor Cipriano and family (which family?) it was assumed the impossibility to continue this task due to the deficiency of cinotechnical means [K9 units]. Indeed, this argument deserves some reflection.
Dr. Marcos Aragão Correia says, like many others, that in Portugal there are no dogs trained to detect the cadaverine scent. Nevertheless, some people said the opposite, some time ago. It is, therefore, a debatable issue. But, then, why was a search and rescue dog taken? Here, for sure the theory that those who dont have dogs hunts with a cat is unfounded. So, I repeat, why would there be a need for an ERVD dog that detects the scent of cadavers?
Although I accept that I am completely uninformed regarding the major aspects of the qualities of those animals, I must, however, present some speculative arguments that have emerged in the consequence of the proclaimed affirmation made by Dr. Aragão Correia: In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to search for evidences against the parents. Why they don't do it now to find Joana's body?
Lets try to reflect upon it.
I would not be surprised and even would agree, absolutely, with Dr. Aragão Correia if the argument of Equalitarian Justice that he pretended to use wasnt betrayed by its content. Let us see what I want to say, illustrating how I think that the argument should be exposed:
a) In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to search for evidences against the parents. Why they dont do it now to try to get evidences against the mother and uncle of Joana?, or alternatively,
b) In the Maddie case a dog was brought from England to try to locate her body. Why they don't do it now to find Joana's body?
Indeed, if the issues were raised in this way, I would be in complete agreement with the thesis of Dr. Aragão Correia.
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and placebo devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
In the Joana case, in addition to the search area being much larger and that there are no types of markers, the search should, in my opinion, begin with archaeologists and geologists who would attempt to define areas where signs of intervention not due to natural phenomena existed (ex. erosion of wind or rain in the modification of topographical accidents) and from then on proceed to search with other methods.
I admit that is much more difficult to detect the smell of dead bodies after almost 4 years, than after 2 months. I also admit that it would be much more difficult the discrimination of odours in outdoor areas than inside houses or in clothes dressed recently. I should, therefore conclude the arrival of the friendly and competent dogs (who have 200 positive identifications), in these conditions could constitute a failure.
Actually, allow me one more metaphor: the conditions described for the monte das figueras[figs hill] (which, in itself, involves a number of variables, of difficult, or even, virtual impossible control) and after almost 4 years are have gone by since the tragic death of a girl, the probability of the dogs (even though they are competent) to find the corpse of Joana is, certainly lower the likelihood that someone would have to win the Euromillions in 3 consecutive weeks, betting on the same combination key numbers.
However, to whom would help the failure of these dogs?
Exactly! You guessed it! To the defenders of Madeleine McCann abduction theory. Thus, one of the strongest evidences of the death of little Maddie would be attacked and the headlines would be as expected: Dogs who identified cadaver scent in the Maddie case didnt detect any clues of Joanas corpse. I admit that the confession of Leonor would likewise not be in good sheets. But I do not know why, I think that the media, would basically, belittle the image of the friendly dogs, and consequently of the sardines munchers.
Another issue which has come to light, and about which I have spoken [on TVI], concerns the recent news regarding the involvement of Método3 in the subject that I will only designate as Hazelnuts Traitors. This Agency has shown that it has within people who are: LIARS, SWINDLERS and SKILLFUL COINCIDENCE MANAGERS.
For these not to be just empty words, I begin to explain:
a) LIARS! They promised that Maddie would appear by the Christmas of 2007 ITS A LIE! They even guaranteed to have identified the kidnapper of Maddie - ITS A LIE! (If it is true then report it to the authorities, to not be accountable of any crime in that regard, and Ill give at that time, publicly and humbly my apologies for having said this sentence, but Ill keep the previous)!
b) SWINDLERS! They take advantage of the work of others. The Hazelnuts had already owners. Copying sites is shameful. Exploiting the work of others is disgraceful.
c) SKILLFUL COINCIDENCE MANAGERS! They stated that while working in the Maddie case, 13 paedophiles have been arrested. Dont make the Spanish Police a bunch of fools. Have some sense gentlemen.
Let me say that institutions should not be confused with some people who belong to it. Of course, everywhere, there is good and bad. If I am being unfair to the agency Método3, I will apologize publicly after the agency brings to an end its connexion with the acts committed by some of its elements.
To the McCann Couple, I would like to start, exactly, here.
For how long do you intend to keep the link to the agency's Metódo3 in the Find Madeline site? Even after all the information regarding the said agency, it still keeps a privileged spot in the Investigation tab at the site where many people still want to help and contribute? For how long?
And the online store? Is to maintain, even losing a real fortune, as we were able to see, in the accounts of the Madeleine Fund? Who manufactures the T-Shirts? And the bracelets?
If it is true that you have no accounts or credit cards on your behalf, how do pay for your travels? And the expenses at the Ocean Club? How do you live without financial liaisons with any bank? And the mortgage of your home?
And the price of the site? In Portugal, a site maintenance costs 50 per year. When we have no money, we draw our own pages or we ask some solidarity to friends who are competent in that area. To spend a thousand times more is unwise. I am sure that there are thousands of web designers that would help you for free. There are caring people in this world, if they believe that it is for a good cause.
The translations of the process should not be the PRIORITY to be able to know what was done, Dr Gerry McCann? There is STILL enough money in the fund. Please translate the process. It is urgent. It is imperative!
Dr. Kate McCann, we all understand your suffering. I do not want to believe that the idea that you are depressed and obsessively reading for 3 hours a day the process, is an idea of your own. I believe that this is a story of the evil tabloids. Please, sue them because they are giving of you an awful motherly image. A mother of a daughter who has disappeared and who does not rest for more than three hours a day, spending the remaining 19 hours reading. Yes, it could be assumed as worrying and it would translate an emotional disturbance in which the person is, in fact, obsessed and not thinking in anything else, not even in the other children.
And speaking about, the other children.
In the first days after the disappearance of Maddie, where some people weaved considerations to the poor parental quality of the McCanns, I tried to devalue that idea on several occasions, interpreting benignly the various and more carefree parental educational practices of the Anglo-Saxons.
I even conveyed and, today I acknowledge that, stupidly, in the defense of the couple, saying that a culture of greater autonomy and its relationship with the educational development in some countries were in part, the result of parenting practices which promote more autonomy and are less over-protective, saying that the super-protection and affiliation were more common in southern Europe, in particular, and in the Latin people in general.
When I recognize the stupidity of what I said, I must confess that is not in relation of what I said. I stand by it! The stupidity was not to have thought that the educational practices that the McCann demonstrated were predictors of one of the biggest wickedness that I have witnessed against children: to give gifts to the twins, saying that those were sent by Maddie.
Mr and Mrs McCann:
Do not make of Maddie a Santa Claus who gives gifts to the children and that never, I repeat, NEVER, appears or will appear.
Let the twins do the mourning of their sister. You both know she will not appear.
Even if you believe that you had no intervention in the disappearance of your daughter (which I do not believe and I have that right as a citizen), you have been warned that the excessive media attention would increased the likelihood, in the hypothetical case of abduction, that the putative kidnapper would kill the girl. If you do not want to face the grief of Maddie, you have that right and you have your reasons.. But please, let the twins do it.
The girl, unfortunately, will not return. Do not give hope to the little ones because they will not remember her sister. They will not have a memory of Maddie, unless through the pictures and for what is told to them, and unfortunately, for what they will know and understand when they grow up. Do not build false memories through deceiving illusions. Tell the twins that Maddie is a little star [in the sky]. They will know what that means. Until then, do not let any pact to use the twins as a means.
These children live in a strange ambience. Where is the Maddie? Will she be back? And if we are taken to that place? Children do not think like us. They believe they are stolen by the boogeyman. And what if one has gone already?
Mr and Mrs McCann
I have never made any criticisms to your parental qualities.
However, given what you did with the twins I have to firmly say:
You are BAD PARENTS!
Get some counselling!
See you soon!
Courtesy of Dr. Paulo Sargento
By Joana Morais
Texana
Overreaching
Dr. Sargento's comments at the end of Colomom's post ("You are bad parents!") echoes a family event we had. My younger daughter, at the age of 4, was pushed down from one level of a tree house to the next (plywood floor) by a cousin. She had a massive, horrible, swelling bruise on her temple, but fortunately, as x-rays showed, no serious harm.
Another cousin about age 7 or 8, was asked by the parents of the offending cousin, if he had anything he wanted to tell them.
He looked at them very seriously and said, "Your son is a Bad Boy."
(Side note: We only heard this full story this year. The Bad Boy Cousin's parents, who knew their son was responsible for our DD's injury, did not offer ro pay for or help with the medical expenses. They ran and took cover.)
Bad parents are bad parents, period.
Another cousin about age 7 or 8, was asked by the parents of the offending cousin, if he had anything he wanted to tell them.
He looked at them very seriously and said, "Your son is a Bad Boy."
(Side note: We only heard this full story this year. The Bad Boy Cousin's parents, who knew their son was responsible for our DD's injury, did not offer ro pay for or help with the medical expenses. They ran and took cover.)
Bad parents are bad parents, period.
Texana
Overreaching
Okay, so bottom line:
Did the McCanns or anyone else ever release Madeleine's height and weight as part of the "missing" publicity?
This has a yes or no answer. It's a fact. Either they did, or they didn't.
I'm not interested in hearing what they were told to do, what you agreed with, or what the Portuguese police should have done.
Did they, or did they not?
The McCanns would have easily had access to that specific data, based on Madeleine's last physical check up. As conscientious as Kate was about giving the children healthy food, I know she also took them to regular checkups and vaccination appointments.
Yes, or No. Easy answer.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 90
The PJ are the one's you should be critisizing for "not" putting out Madeleine's description Texana. :waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:.
The UK and US would certainly have done so!
But no it was left to the McCanns themselves...the parents of a missing child!!...to get Madeleine's photo and description they thought important out there.
Did the PJ even bother to find out Madeleine's height and weight? If so have they ever publicized it?.....They are supposed to be the professionals after all,
"not" the McCanns! I have no idea whether Madeleine's height and weight has ever been reported. Have you?
"Interesting" Texana that you only took exception to the "If" part of my post, (I think the highlight in your post explains why) but you chose to ignore the following.
"Texana there are quite a few things worth considering including this post I read recently by someone who said they had seen the contents of the DVD......
...."False claims being deliberately put out to manipulate peoples opinions…….Kate never stated that she had been with 6 corpses before travelling to Portugal……nor did she ever state that she took cuddlecat to work with her."
****
Now I haven't seen confirmation of this myself but I think colomom said she has a copy of the DVD! maybe she can confirm for us if these "claims" are true or not. :waitasec:
But if Kate didn't make these statements.....Geeez! didn't the "Anti-McCanns have a field day...or rather months with "lies."
........
And now we also know......
Found in 5a.
"Strangers DNA :waitasec: Strangers fingerprints! :waitasec:
Yet some still insist that there is no "evidence" of an abductor."......
Who's to say none of these belong to an Abductor." :waitasec:
******
As I said "Interesting"
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 90
The above statement by Paulo Sargento tells us everything about his "honesty," as in "lack of."
He was a "witness" in the Joana Cipriano case.
What a coincidence that he has a connection to Goncalo Amaral. :waitasec:
He also knows better than we do that there was "no" forensic evidence to confirm Joana Cipriano is dead.
It's strange how Goncalo Amarals cases end up accusing the parents even though he fails to find "any" trace of their childrens "bodies."
Joana Cipriano....No Dead Body!!...No DNA!!
Not even where the PJ claim the childs body was cut up. :waitasec:
I have no idea as to the guilt of Leonor Cipriano but there are definate red flags regarding Goncalo Amaral and his way of running an investigation. IMO
Texana
Overreaching
April, it's hard for me to read your posts with all the different colors and new paragraphs with incomplete sentences. I picked one thing to respond to because frankly, the rest was confusing.
If the McCanns had wanted the world to know what Maddie's height and weight were, they could have made those facts public on their website.
I do think it's odd that you label anyone who disagrees with the abduction theory as Anti-McCann. Perhaps we are just Pro-Madeleine.
If the McCanns had wanted the world to know what Maddie's height and weight were, they could have made those facts public on their website.
I do think it's odd that you label anyone who disagrees with the abduction theory as Anti-McCann. Perhaps we are just Pro-Madeleine.
So right Texana, they did enough PR, hair groomed, make up on, matching accessories, website set up bank details for donations included, Press releases, conferences, balloon releases, not a tear in sght, blogging about jogging, details about coloboma despite warnings that this could be Madeleine's death sentence! One would presume that a trivial detail, LOL, like her height might have been included, that is of course if they really wanted to find her or thought that she could be found!
Texana
Overreaching
Exactly.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 90
My post was clear enough Texana.
I think perhaps you didn't like the content.
I notice you don't have any trouble with the parts that do interest you.....Like Anti-McCann. And perhaps I have trouble thinking of some as Pro-Madeleine when I see the damage done to the search for her by unfair and untrue accusations against her parents....especially as there is no, and never has been "evidence" to support those accusations by people who "think" they know better.
So no Texana, sorry but I can't think of anyone choosing to do that as Pro-Madeleine.....because I can think of nothing less helpful to her.
If Madeleine is found it will be because of her families efforts and those who support those efforts.....Certainly not the PJ's.
Here again is just part of my post about accusations against Kate that you apparently didn't "understand"
....."Kate never stated that she had been with 6 corpses before travelling to Portugal……nor did she ever state that she took cuddlecat to work with her."
Texana you didn't choose to ignore these particular accusations when they were originally made.
Which is why I'm not surprised that you haven't commented on them now.
scandi
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 18,226
- Reaction score
- 19,821
My post was clear enough Texana.
I think perhaps you didn't like the content.
And perhaps I have trouble thinking of some as Pro-Madeleine when I see the damage done to the search for her by unfair and untrue accusations against her parents....especially as there is no, and never has been "evidence" to support those accusations by people who "think" they know better.
So no Texana, sorry but I don't think of anyone choosing to do that as Pro-Madeleine.....because I can think of nothing less helpful to her.
If Madeleine is found it will be because of her families efforts and those who support those efforts.....Certainly not the PJ's.
Here again is just part of my post about the accusations against Kate that you chose not to see :waitasec: or apparently "understand":waitasec: ....
"Kate never stated that she had been with 6 corpses before travelling to Portugal……nor did she ever state that she took cuddlecat to work with her."
Texana you didn't choose to ignore these accusations when they were originally made.
I wonder why?
Hi April, Be nice ;} That is one thing I notice, that everyone else is. I don't think I have met a 'pro' that doesn't have a little chip on their shoulder about Madeleine's parents, to the distraction in Sleuthing the case it takes respect for Madeleine and getting Justice for her #2. Saving the parents from the steely eye of the law seems to be #1. I even know one poster who became intolerable to post with as she had once talked to Gerry on the phone and talked to Philomena daily.
IMO after over a year and a half, this Youtube by Spudgun still says everything when you look at the basics of the case. That one thought at the end always grabs me so hard, that of anyone in the whole wide world that should have cared about and protected her the most, they didn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=ZRvgK6M2_7Q Thank you Spudgun xox
The corpses and taking CC to work with her we learned about right after they were made Arguidos. Kate did a couple of interviews, and so if it is not in the Portuguese press it is on video where she said these things. It could be a relative, her mother, spoke on Kate's behalf about this.
About Joana's case, the word is {from a poster affiliated with the GNR when Joana went missing} is that her blood was found in the family fridge and she was cut up in pieces and fed to the pigs. Joana Morais has quite a bit of info on that case, and I'll read it again in the next day or two. Heck, there is a confession for her death and 2 citizens were found guilty and serving time for her murder. You don't think she died? I'm just trying to see what you are saying April.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2005
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 90
Hi Scandi, :hand:
Haven't you noticed who is nice to who, and why?
You may call accusing the parents of a missing child, especially when there is no "evidence" that they harmed her, sleuthing...but I don't.
Scandi I just watched the video...just to please you.
But sorry IMO it is nothing but cruel propaganda.
It's also out of date as Gerry McCann has been back to Portugal...
And the nasty claims that the McCanns haven't searched....when in fact they and their supporters are the only ones working to find Madeleine.
Who else do you think is searching?
I haven't met or spoken to either of the McCanns, I just don't buy into propaganda, lies and smears.
There were lots of smears and lies in the press and on hate sites but with the release of the DVD we are learning which were lies.
If you can confirm that "Kate" and I mean Kate! not a source, family member or friend, the press like to quote when they make things up, ever made such statements about her jeans or cuddlecat, then please do it.
As for the Joana Cipriano case. As I said I have no idea if her mother is guilty of killing her, or even if she is dead.
It's true that no trace of her body has ever been found and though Goncalo Amaral claims that Joana's body was cut up in the kitchen and stored in the freezer (Goncalo does seem to have a thing about bodies being hidden in freezers...but no proof!:waitasec
he was unable to find any trace of her or her DNA. Yes there was a confession but there are questions now about how that confession was obtained.
There is an ongoing trial with Goncalo Amaral and a number of PJ who are accused of beating her to get that confession.
The PJ don't deny that they were with Leanor when she received her injuries...they just claim she threw herself down the stairs.
Both accused found guilty in Joana's case apparently confessed.
Now even if those confessions were beaten out of them...Or not!...WHY didn't they confess where they hid Joana's body....Mmmm could it be because you can't tell what you don't know!!
Remember no DNA found even though she was supposedly cut up....In the kitchen.
I'm not certain if it's true but I read recently that in Portugal if you have a confession you don't need to present any further evidence....Now how convenient would that be.
That would never be allowed in this day and age in most countries.
I hope Joana's case gets taken before the European court of human rights....because IMO it stinks!!
Whatever the truth I would like to see true justice for Joana.
I will be away for a while so If I don't get back to you Scandi you will know why. :hand:
I think maybe Texana will be pleased.
And definately Barnaby....As I don't think she likes me. :innocent:
Texana
Overreaching
April, I already told you you should consider it a compliment when I respond to your posts, and yet you say I'll be pleased if you don't post for awhile.
I've never thought disagreeing on issues was a reason to not like someone. There's always common ground somewhere.
You can always come hang out in the jury room and see for yourself how people can talk and get along even when they vehemently disagree on issues or cases.
Have a nice whatever--for where ever you are--
I've never thought disagreeing on issues was a reason to not like someone. There's always common ground somewhere.
You can always come hang out in the jury room and see for yourself how people can talk and get along even when they vehemently disagree on issues or cases.
Have a nice whatever--for where ever you are--
scandi
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 18,226
- Reaction score
- 19,821
Hi April,
Thanks for your response. I do agree with Texana that we should all be able to agree to disagree and still have intelligent conversations. For some reason this case more than most has split posters into camps of pro and anti, and that is too bad. I think that happened because the case became daily news in much of the world and emotions started to run high. Since LE around the world always must rule out the parents first, it happened with K & G too and then when they couldn't be ruled out we started to see posters start thinking in circles that revolved around the guilt or innocence of the parents. That's all. Nothing personal about it except everyone wanted Madeleine found in the worst way. Some were very critical about how the parents went about this finding of her.
I'll see if I can find that link about the cadavers and CC.
We see things differently about Amaral too. I think of him as a champion for Madeleine and can only thank him for all the truths he has brought to the forefront in the case.
Oh, and the gal who let contact with Gerry and Philomena go to her head, I never meant she was you. No, she had a way of bein' downright nasty with those who didn't see her point of view, and I have never seen anyone of her ILK in that regard post here. I would know her right away because ofher shoe collection! LOLOL
xox
Thanks for your response. I do agree with Texana that we should all be able to agree to disagree and still have intelligent conversations. For some reason this case more than most has split posters into camps of pro and anti, and that is too bad. I think that happened because the case became daily news in much of the world and emotions started to run high. Since LE around the world always must rule out the parents first, it happened with K & G too and then when they couldn't be ruled out we started to see posters start thinking in circles that revolved around the guilt or innocence of the parents. That's all. Nothing personal about it except everyone wanted Madeleine found in the worst way. Some were very critical about how the parents went about this finding of her.
I'll see if I can find that link about the cadavers and CC.
We see things differently about Amaral too. I think of him as a champion for Madeleine and can only thank him for all the truths he has brought to the forefront in the case.
Oh, and the gal who let contact with Gerry and Philomena go to her head, I never meant she was you. No, she had a way of bein' downright nasty with those who didn't see her point of view, and I have never seen anyone of her ILK in that regard post here. I would know her right away because ofher shoe collection! LOLOL
xox
Hi Scandi, :hand:
Haven't you noticed who is nice to who, and why?
You may call accusing the parents of a missing child, especially when there is no "evidence" that they harmed her, sleuthing...but I don't.
Scandi I just watched the video...just to please you.
But sorry IMO it is nothing but cruel propaganda.
It's also out of date as Gerry McCann has been back to Portugal...
And the nasty claims that the McCanns haven't searched....when in fact they and their supporters are the only ones working to find Madeleine.
Who else do you think is searching?
I haven't met or spoken to either of the McCanns, I just don't buy into propaganda, lies and smears.
There were lots of smears and lies in the press and on hate sites but with the release of the DVD we are learning which were lies.
If you can confirm that "Kate" and I mean Kate! not a source, family member or friend, the press like to quote when they make things up, ever made such statements about her jeans or cuddlecat, then please do it.
As for the Joana Cipriano case. As I said I have no idea if her mother is guilty of killing her, or even if she is dead.
It's true that no trace of her body has ever been found and though Goncalo Amaral claims that Joana's body was cut up in the kitchen and stored in the freezer (Goncalo does seem to have a thing about bodies being hidden in freezers...but no proof!:waitasec
Yes there was a confession but there are questions now about how that confession was obtained.
There is an ongoing trial with Goncalo Amaral and a number of PJ who are accused of beating her to get that confession.
The PJ don't deny that they were with Leanor when she received her injuries...they just claim she threw herself down the stairs.
Leonor Cipriano
Both accused found guilty in Joana's case apparently confessed.
Now even if those confessions were beaten out of them...Or not!...WHY didn't they confess where they hid Joana's body....Mmmm could it be because you can't tell what you don't know!!
Remember no DNA found even though she was supposedly cut up....In the kitchen.
I'm not certain if it's true but I read recently that in Portugal if you have a confession you don't need to present any further evidence....Now how convenient would that be.
That would never be allowed in this day and age in most countries.
I hope Joana's case gets taken before the European court of human rights....because IMO it stinks!!
Whatever the truth I would like to see true justice for Joana.
I will be away for a while so If I don't get back to you Scandi you will know why. :hand:
I think maybe Texana will be pleased.
April, I do not know you personally & therefore I neither like nor dislike you as a person! We have differed on occasions & I have become agitated with your attitude towards members who do not agree with you & therefore rather than become annoyed & cause drama on the boards, I chose not to reply to your posts, that is not an indication of dislike just what I consider to be prudent & respectful behaviour on a chat room which is graciously provided for me & others to enjoy!
Regarding your comment above about searching, I am sorry but setting up websites & engaging fifth rate shady investigators after the fact just doesn't cut it for me!
If the child genuinely went missing there was a distinct possibilty that she woke up, got out of the apartment & wandered off! Please tell me what parent in their right mind would not have been walking the streets in the hope of finding the child? Remember that this is a real possibility & the McCanns, Kate in particular, did not physically search that night, can you explain that to me? I sure have difficulty in understanding it!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
Guardians Monthly Goal
Our goal for the month is 50 new Guardians members to sign up. Have you been thinking about becoming a member?
Click here to find out how!
Online statistics
- Members online
- 57
- Guests online
- 1,510
- Total visitors
- 1,567