Madeleine McCann

[danny.]

this is a country where the police carry guns

I wish the police here carried guns, and were allowed to shoot criminals without themselves getting in trouble. We are so soft in this country and everyone knows it.

As for corruption, a friend of mine was send to jail for 12 months 2 years ago, his crime? He lost control of his car. Yes it was silly of him but he wasn't speeding, he went around a corner too fast for his old Mondeo to handle, and he hit someone in the road and broke their leg. He was a complete wreck afterwards as he felt so bad over what was basically an accident.

Amir Khan goes through a Red light, on the wrong side of the Road, and hits someone - breaks their leg. What does he get (being a famous boxer)? Nothing.

[Dr The Singh]

I wish the police here carried guns, and were allowed to shoot criminals without themselves getting in trouble. We are so soft in this country and everyone knows it.

As for corruption, a friend of mine was send to jail for 12 months 2 years ago, his crime? He lost control of his car. Yes it was silly of him but he wasn't speeding, he went around a corner too fast for his old Mondeo to handle, and he hit someone in the road and broke their leg. He was a complete wreck afterwards as he felt so bad over what was basically an accident.

Amir Khan goes through a Red light, on the wrong side of the Road, and hits someone - breaks their leg. What does he get (being a famous boxer)? Nothing.

Danny, nobody said the UK was perfect but in this age of apocalypse, the UK is still a far better nation then many, I suppose untill you've witnessed worse, you tend to appreciate what you have alot less!!!

[danny.]

Danny, nobody said the UK was perfect but in this age of apocalypse, the UK is still a far better nation then many, I suppose untill you've witnessed worse, you tend to appreciate what you have alot less!!!

You are probably right, I have never lived abroad so have little freedom of speech aside from other's viewpoints and what I have heard.

But I have had a lot of experiences with our "justice" system, both myself and with friends and family, and I still believe it truly sucks.

So, the UK justice system is good, compared to others. But comparisons aside, in it's own right - I'm not impressed at all.

[Chandler]

See what happens when I'm not around: everyone dashes to fall off the nearest tangent!

Of course, this always happens when teach is summoned to the beak's study and leaves the milk monitors in charge.

Lots of lines to be doled out on my return...

[Zingari]

with the help of this drawing i can't see why the police won't be able to wrap this case up soon now , there can't be many people about with such featureless faces .

p.s. chandler , at least put me out of my misery and say it has nothing to do with clonaid or the raelians .

Edited 27 October 2007 by I Zingari

[l444ry]

with the help of this drawing i can't see why the police won't be able to wrap this case up soon now , there can't be many people about with such featureless faces .

p.s. chandler , at least put me out of my misery and say it has nothing to do with clonaid or the raelians .

This useless picture comes from the discredited Jane Tanner's "sighting". If this is the best team McCann can come up with after SIX months then they sack Clarence Mitchell immediately.

[Alexikokopops]

I wish the police here carried guns, and were allowed to shoot criminals without themselves getting in trouble. We are so soft in this country and everyone knows it.

I'd like to hear the family of Jean Charles de Menezes' views on this...

with the help of this drawing i can't see why the police won't be able to wrap this case up soon now , there can't be many people about with such featureless faces .

p.s. chandler , at least put me out of my misery and say it has nothing to do with clonaid or the raelians .

He should be easy to spot, there aren't many people out there without a face.

[Rincewind]

If its useless information why waste a dozen posts and 50000 words telling us about it? There must be hundreds pieces of information that the police ignored.

[l444ry]

JANE TANNER ABDUCTION SUSPECT SEEN

http://www.b3tards.com/u/a609ede35986cfd04...maddie-road.jpg

http://www.b3tards.com/u/420c52b7900bd7084...ildsnatcher.jpg

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t309/le...ualmcCann-1.jpg

Edited 28 October 2007 by l444ry

[Webbo]

JANE TANNER ABDUCTION SUSPECT SEEN

http://www.b3tards.com/u/a609ede35986cfd04...maddie-road.jpg

http://www.b3tards.com/u/420c52b7900bd7084...ildsnatcher.jpg

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t309/le...ualmcCann-1.jpg

I feel kinda guilty about this but that made me laugh.

[Yaxx]

OK folks looks like I'm going to have to give you McCannophobes the answer to my second quiz question which was:'what was the moral to the Scouse fable?'

Answer - the reason why we don't believe Steve and Melanie Jones killed their son Rhys was because Merseyside Police did not brief the Portuguese press first therefore, by extension, the reason why so many believe that Kate and Gerry McCann killed Madeleine is (only) because the Portimao PJ did brief them first.

Tomorrow I am going to examine the PJ case against the McCanns and show that it is a great deal flimsier than my 'allegations' against the Jones's (arguido status now!). But first a subtle riposte to 'Futter' about why I am dragging my McCann theory out. There are two principal sets of reasons for this.

Firstly there is the dynamic of this board. Lots of people come and go on this thread. They post, have a brief skirmish and then **** off for a few days. They then come back and say virtually the same thing all over again and completely ignore everything else posted during the hiatus. As a result it is very difficult to move the discussion past first base.

Another problem on this thread is that one or two ****** seem to find refuge here. They have little or no interest at all in the subject under discussion (one of the ****wits even had the gall to say that this thread was 'primarily' a football forum) and spend all their time heckling. If EVERYONE who is genuinely curious about the McCann case gave these trolls short shrift we would all be less distracted and could get on with things.

The second set of reaons is to do with the case itself and peoples beliefs about it. I have been a timeliner now for a few years and an amateur sleuth for even longer and I have never come across anything quite like it Even the Lindbergh baby case pales into insignificance by comparison.

Madeleine McCann's disappearance is most certainly not a case of infanticide, nor is it simply an isolated case of child abduction. It is a deeply complex affair, the latest and possibly the most important episode in a sequence of events triggered by the Casa Pia scandal which itself was detonated by very powerful forces.

I am absolutely convinced I have cracked this case because my theory explains the very strange antics of certain individuals, the media and all the agencies connected with it. It also explains the very odd behaviour of seemingly unrelated organisations.

But in order for it to have credibility I have to build my case piece by piece so that you can see that each one fits snugly and that a clear and vivid picture emerges. And when it does appear, what is it that you will see? I'll tell you that now:

THE $30 TRILLION BABY

Well you've only got yourself to blame.......it usually takes a few days to comprehend what the hell you're on about most of the time.

And I'm intrigued to know just how many crimes you've managed to solve during your many years of sleuthing as a timelord.......

[Yaxx]

So you might conclude that the mistake Portugal made was to expose this sexual abuse and prosecute the perpetrators. If they had followed the British model they would not now be beaten with this xenophobic stick by 'journalists' desperate to cover up the fact that the McCanns are dissembling to avoid answering questions about their knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance.

And how, pray tell, do you come to the conclusion that the McCanns are dissembling??

[l444ry]

And how, pray tell, do you come to the conclusion that the McCanns are dissembling??

Come on Yaxx. Don't be silly. The case, as you know, has reached an impasse because the McCanns claimed arguido status, refused to answer questions relating to the "evidence" found in the Renault and scarpered home to England. And ever since then Clarence Mitchell has been busy rubbishing every theory except that of abduction.

[Yaxx]

Come on Yaxx. Don't be silly. The case, as you know, has reached an impasse because the McCanns claimed arguido status, refused to answer questions relating to the "evidence" found in the Renault and scarpered home to England. And ever since then Clarence Mitchell has been busy rubbishing every theory except that of abduction.

That's probably because every other theory is complete rubbish. However, Clarence Mitchell does come over as rather smarmy in much the same way as Michael Cole, another ex-BBC hack now spokesman for Mohammed Al Fayed, but I guess he's just doing his job.

As for the alleged 'evidence' in the Renault I think you'll find that it's not quite all that it's cracked up to be. And wouldn't you refuse to answer questions that you knew to be ridiculous or could potentially incriminate oneself?

[Chandler]

quote name='I Zingari' date='Oct 25 2007, 10:54 AM' post='785883']

chandler ;

does your theory involve madeline being a cloned baby experiment and are you choosing to ignore my guess that you are linking this to clonaid and /or the raelians or am i stupidly well off the mark ?

i don't mind being told either way

I must say Mr Zingari that this picture could constitute a prima facie case against the Raelians.

But this one suggests they may prefer their subjects to be a little younger.

Caution - this baby in a jar image morphs into a naff logo faster than you can say 'arguido.'

Lets just say that my conclusions could be described as more 'down to earth' rather than 'out of this world.'

Edited 30 October 2007 by Chandler

[Yaxx]

Lets just say that my conclusions could be described as more 'down to earth' rather than 'out of this world.'

I'm not so sure about that..........

[BigGibbo]

I feel kinda guilty about this but that made me laugh.

That usual suspect one is priceless

[Yaxx]

I have been a timeliner now for a few years and an amateur sleuth for even longer

Just going off at a bit of a tangent......did you by any chance 'timeline' the Jill Dando murder Chandler?

If so, what conclusion did your sleuthing come to?

[Chandler]

I repeat - some of you really want to know exactly what happened to Madeleine McCann. There are others on here, however (1444ry et al), who do not. Why? Because they already 'know.' So what is it that they 'know?'

They 'know' what the PJ 'know' - that Kate and Gerry McCann killed Madeleine. The fact that the McCanns remain 'arguidas' is some sort of proof of this. And that their choosing of suspect status (which amongst other things, supposedly allowed them both to avoid answering questions and to bolt back to the UK) makes their guilt an irrefutable truth.

But all of this applies equally to the enigmatic Robert Murat yet everyone seems to 'know' that he is innnocent.

It appears that Robert Murat is only guilty of being a fat slob

So lets scratch away a little at the mysterious universal truth of the McCann's guilt and Murat's innocence. Because, when you do, it is immediately apparent that the penetrating insight of the great unwashed is based wholly on PRESUMPTION, CONJECTURE and TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING.

The McCannophobe PRESUME that the PJ in Portimao actually accused Kate and Gerry McCanns of foul play in relation to their daughter's disappearance. In reality, Kate McCann was offered an opportunity to confess to the accidental killing of Madeleine. So exactly how and why did the Vicky Pollards of public opinion come to think that the ludicrous accusation of accidental killing (as yet unsubstantiated by ANY circumstantial, eyewitness and, contrary to press innuendo, forensic evidence) was really a preposterous allegation of infanticide?

Well that's the CONJECTURE bit (Kate McCanns 'coldness' amongst a million and one other things) and the TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING (what 'arguido' status actually means) which I'll leave for next time.

Yeah but no but Kate only done Maddie cos the pills looked like swedgers...

Edited 30 October 2007 by Chandler

[filbertway]

I repeat - some of you really want to know exactly what happened to Madeleine McCann. There are others on here, however (1444ry et al), who do not. Why? Because they already 'know.' So what is it that they 'know?'

They 'know' what the PJ 'know' - that Kate and Gerry McCann killed Madeleine. The fact that they remain 'arguidas' is some sort of proof of this. And that their choosing of suspect status (which amongst other things, supposedly allowed them both to avoid answering questions and to bolt back to the UK) makes their guilt an irrefutable truth.

But all of this applies equally to the enigmatic Robert Murat yet everyone seems to 'know' that he is innnocent.

It appears that Robert Murat is only guilty of being a fat slob

So lets scratch away a little at the mysterious universal truth of the McCann's guilt and Murat's innocence. Because, when you do, it is immediately apparent that the penetrating insight of the great unwashed is based wholly on PRESUMPTION, CONJECTURE and TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING.

The McCannophobe PRESUME that the PJ in Portimao actually accused Kate and Gerry McCanns of foul play in relation to their daughter's disappearance. In reality, Kate McCann was offered an opportunity to confess to the accidental killing of Madeleine. So exactly how and why did the Vicky Pollards of public opinion come to think that the ludicrous accusation of accidental killing (as yet unsubstantiated by ANY circumstantial, eyewitness and, contrary to press innuendo, forensic evidence) was really a preposterous allegation of infanticide?

Well that's the CONJECTURE bit (Kate McCanns 'coldness' amongst a million and one other things) and the TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING (what 'arguido' status actually means) which I'll leave for next time.

Yeah but no but Kate only done Maddie cos the pills looked like swedgers...

Chandler, dya know anything about the royal fmaily thing thats going on?

I'd be intrested to read about that if you do.

[Zingari]

I repeat - some of you really want to know exactly what happened to Madeleine McCann. There are others on here, however (1444ry et al), who do not. Why? Because they already 'know.' So what is it that they 'know?'

They 'know' what the PJ 'know' - that Kate and Gerry McCann killed Madeleine. The fact that they remain 'arguidas' is some sort of proof of this. And that their choosing of suspect status (which amongst other things, supposedly allowed them both to avoid answering questions and to bolt back to the UK) makes their guilt an irrefutable truth.

But all of this applies equally to the enigmatic Robert Murat yet everyone seems to 'know' that he is innnocent.

It appears that Robert Murat is only guilty of being a fat slob

So lets scratch away a little at the mysterious universal truth of the McCann's guilt and Murat's innocence. Because, when you do, it is immediately apparent that the penetrating insight of the great unwashed is based wholly on PRESUMPTION, CONJECTURE and TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING.

The McCannophobe PRESUME that the PJ in Portimao actually accused Kate and Gerry McCanns of foul play in relation to their daughter's disappearance. In reality, Kate McCann was offered an opportunity to confess to the accidental killing of Madeleine. So exactly how and why did the Vicky Pollards of public opinion come to think that the ludicrous accusation of accidental killing (as yet unsubstantiated by ANY circumstantial, eyewitness and, contrary to press innuendo, forensic evidence) was really a preposterous allegation of infanticide?

Well that's the CONJECTURE bit (Kate McCanns 'coldness' amongst a million and one other things) and the TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING (what 'arguido' status actually means) which I'll leave for next time.

Yeah but no but Kate only done Maddie cos the pills looked like swedgers...

thanks chandler ; ( re: raelians and cloning)

the cloning angle was the only thing that i could think of that seemed to warrant the massive cover up and conspiracy that you seemed to be implying with " THE $30 TRILLION BABY" statement.

so if its not to do with madeline being a cloning experiment what could you possibly mean with

THE $30 TRILLION BABY ?

any clues ??

[Yaxx]

Chandler, dya know anything about the royal fmaily thing thats going on?

I'd be intrested to read about that if you do.

Royal Cock-Up

(allegedly)

[filbertway]

Royal Cock-Up

(allegedly)

Naah chandler can make it more exciting that that

[Chandler]

thanks chandler ; ( re: raelians and cloning)

the cloning angle was the only thing that i could think of that seemed to warrant the massive cover up and conspiracy that you seemed to be implying with " THE $30 TRILLION BABY" statement.

so if its not to do with madeline being a cloning experiment what could you possibly mean with

THE $30 TRILLION BABY ?

any clues ??

You'll just have to do an audit of all the things that could be worth $30 Trillion. There again m'duck, you might prefer to wait for my last chapter - I assure you that it will be worth the wait.

Re Yaxx's query - I haven't timelined Dando's killing. But if you want my opinion... the forensic evidence against the brain damaged disabled aka Barry George/Bolsaro has been discredited, the circumstantial case is tenuous and the eye witness testimony suggests someone else altogether.

But I have little sympathy for him as he once got off a rape charge only because his victim refused to testify. He also had a reputation as a stalker and battered his ex wife to the point she was forced to flee back to Japan.

Edited 30 October 2007 by Chandler

[Yaxx]

So rather than wait for me to demonstrate that the McCanns are 100% innocent of infanticide Yaxx the Custody Sergeant at Lutterworth Nick decides to leap in with a bit of hair splitting and pompously declare that in all probability they are innocent.

The great chump also tells us that he does not subscribe to the 'conspiracy school of thought.' Hasn't it occurred to you, you great thick plodding oaf that the whole scheme to frame the McCanns (for that is EXACTLY what it is) by the PJ is, at the very LEAST, a police conspiracy and that the only question for us to consider is how high up the food chain does this plot go?

The fact that you have failed to place the McCann abduction in the broader context of child disappearances and abuse scandals in Portugal and that you have ignored local police collusion in these matters (including officers at Portimao handling the so called 'investigation' in to Madeleine McCann's disappearance) shows that your professional interest and self styled expertise in this case is woefully ill informed.

And anybody who could pass off a quote like this without comment...

"Control Risks is so trusted it's sometimes referred to as the 'commercial arm of MI6'. If anyone can find Madeleine McCann, they can."

... is either a spook himself or has the mental age of six.

Thankfully this 'great chump' is not a custody Sergeant at Lutterworth nick, nor any other nick for that matter. And I rather think you're the last one to accuse anyone else of being pompous....pots and kettles comes to mind Chandler.

Neither am I splitting hairs. 'In all probability' is not the same as 'definitely'. Similarly there is a subtle distinction between 'probably' and 'possibly'. Whilst it is possible that the McCanns killed their daughter (accidentally or otherwise), this 'thick plodding oaf' firmly believes that the more probable explanation is that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Why? Because at this juncture there is absolutely no conclusive evidence, forensically or otherwise, to link them to the disappearance of their daughter. Indeed, far from being 'woefully ill informed' I would agree that this case should be placed into the broader context of child disappearances and abuse scandals. Where I tend to disagree is in your presumption that this is all a huge conspiracy. Again, it is possible but is it probable? An analogy can be drawn here in the UK with the case of Barry George. It could be reasonably argued, for instance, that he was 'framed' for the murder of Jill Dando. Flawed forensics gave detectives the 'silver bullet' with which they could charge David George despite the most flimsy of circumstantial evidence against him. Were the police guilty of conspiracy? Not really. Just crass stupidity, much the same as in Portugal.

Insofar as Control Risks is concerned, I was merely quoting Charlotte Eager, the journalist who wrote the article for the London Standard's ES Magazine. She in turn was quoting a former employee who also said that in fact 'that might be underestimating their position'.

Finally, I can assure you that I do not have the mental age of six.