31 Dec 2007



30 Dec 2007


Why this Christmas message

Right time to say thanks to everyone who has been supporting them particularly their friends in Portugal who they still have...

Appeal to abductor

Lastly appeal direct to Madeleine just in case she should hear this message

Police may choose to come back to interview them or their friends

Nothing massively significant from private detectives

They are still official suspects - simply means of interest to the police and can assist with their enquiries

They didn’t do anything to harm their daughter

Our relationship has got better with the Portuguese police a new officer has taken over

Want to work towards Kate and Gerry being eliminated

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTemplate?tf=/ctv/mar/video/new_player.html&cf=ctv/mar/ctv.cfg&hub=World&video_link_high=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_500kbps_2007_12_22_1198372429.wmv&video_link_low=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_218kbps_2007_12_22_1198370264.wmv&clip_start=00:00:58.85&clip_end=00:03:31.54&clip_caption=CTV Newsnet: Norah Paul, Madeleine's great aunt&clip_id=ctvnews.20071222.00227000-00227617-clip1&subhub=video&no_ads=&sortdate=20071222&slug=missing_girl_071222&archive=CTVNews
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTemplate?tf=/ctv/mar/video/new_player.html&cf=ctv/mar/ctv.cfg&hub=World&video_link_high=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_500kbps_2007_12_22_1198372429.wmv&video_link_low=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_218kbps_2007_12_22_1198370264.wmv&clip_start=00:00:58.85&clip_end=00:03:31.54&clip_caption=CTV Newsnet: Norah Paul, Madeleine's great aunt&clip_id=ctvnews.20071222.00227000-00227617-clip1&subhub=video&no_ads=&sortdate=20071222&slug=missing_girl_071222&archive=CTVNews






http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTemplate?tf=/ctv/mar/video/new_player.html&cf=ctv/mar/ctv.cfg&hub=World&video_link_high=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_500kbps_2007_12_22_1198372429.wmv&video_link_low=mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/12/22/ctvvideologger2_218kbps_2007_12_22_1198370264.wmv&clip_start=00:00:58.85&clip_end=00:03:31.54&clip_caption=CTV Newsnet: Norah Paul, Madeleine's great aunt&clip_id=ctvnews.20071222.00227000-00227617-clip1&subhub=video&no_ads=&sortdate=20071222&slug=missing_girl_071222&archive=CTVNews



Kate McCann's aunt, Janet Kennedy, who helped collect toys left for Madeleine
Tuesday December 25,2007
Have your say(89)
Kate and Gerry McCann will never give up hope in the search for missing Madeleine, a relative said.
Kate's aunt Janet Kennedy said their family motto of leaving no stone unturned had changed to one of never giving up hope.She was speaking as Mr and Mrs McCann, both 39, from Rothley, Leics, endured their first Christmas without their four-year-old daughter, who went missing from the family's holiday apartment in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on May 3.Mrs Kennedy, who lives in Rothley with her husband Brian, said: "The motto has changed. Rather than not leaving any stone unturned, it is that we never, never give up hope."Eight months on, we have become even more determined and resolute and it (the message) becomes that we never, never give up."We are still very much thinking of Madeleine and a lot of people are staying the course with us. People are showing that they are right in there with the family and that is very important."Kate and Gerry say that every day is a difficult day and we are just the same."Mrs Kennedy helped collect about 1,000 toys left for Madeleine at the village war memorial in the centre of Rothley in the months after she disappeared.Around two-thirds of those toys have now been distributed by the charity Samaritan's Purse to orphanages in Belarus.The presents, which include teddy bears and dolls, have been sent to orphans in the capital Minsk and to the town of Zhodino, 30 miles away, where 86 children aged three to seven live in cramped conditions. Many of their parents have died, become drug addicts or been sent to prison.


May I offer my compliments to the posters on the Daily Express who are managing to focus on the real issues in this case. The man who puts bruises all over his wife and child...Gerry McCann.

I wonder why Kate's Aunty "Rosie" was so bashful - it is just not like her to have so little to say!

Do you not have a real opinion on all that serious bruising on Kate and Madeleine and why Gerry starts to smirk when asked what his feelings are about "sightings of Madeleine"?

You know what they say - "the camera never lies". ...You keep asking us for some real evidence and then when we give it to you........(!) Please check out Kate's elbow and arm - my domestic violence 2 post and let us have your views as to how this happened at the same time that Madeleine "disappeared".

By the way Rosie 2 women are murdered by their partner every week ....and statistics also tell us that violent controlling men who also engage in "stalking" of their partner are the most dangerous..the ones that kill........why did Kate go half way across the world? why did she have a year out from University? why did he follow her? was she trying to get away from him? when they came back to live in the UK how come they went and lived right by aunty in Rothley? are you really acting in Kate's and the twins best interests Rosie? - I would have a long hard think about it if I were you....After all the consequences of telling the truth may be far less serious for Kate and ensure her and the twins safety. Telling the truth and being helpful to the police is very brave and earns a big discount off sentence. 78% in the Daily Mail dont believe them - you worked real hard with over 4000 posts on the Daily Express but all that spin just did not work did it - the PJ are coming...THINK ABOUT IT ROSIE PLEASE and offer her proper care and support BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.

Viv x
and by the way I am NOT the nasty person you have described - you have offended many caring and educated people, knowledgeable about these matters - not just me - I do not have "fantasy" degrees - they are both quite real - I can assure you and so is my 30 years experience. I have helped many women just like Kate McCann and saved many children from appalling abuse. "Docmac" is a real doctor, caring for little babies - not "quackmac" as you decided to brand him. Do you really believe all this unpleasant abuse of caring and educated people actually serves a purpose? Degree educated PJ's? All of your racist abuse? Telling us we are just like "Hitler"? Think very carefully about your own conduct...


30.12.07, 12:50am
i have just viewed these pictures of Kate and Gerry.1) Usually they are castigated for laughing or smiling the wrong way, yet here we have a set of pictures that castigate for not laughing or smiling.2) you can take any pictures of anyone and provided you take enough you will have a set of pictures you can try and cause mischief with.3) How the hell do you expect them to look? Their daughter is missing! Heaven's sakes can you at least try and keep your thoughts in check Sherlock?
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment

30.12.07, 12:52am
and then some;-)i forgot. gerry eyes on the one where he is half catching whats coming from kate - they are lowered, guilt, avoidant - that of the man not so much that doesnt want to be seen but cant stand to see his own insides through the eyes of the other:-)
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:41am
i see the exact same in those photos ecolab as in the one that struck me that i postedaccusatory, suppressed, venomous, rage, loathing.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:38am
• Posted by: EcolabReport Comment

30.12.07, 12:27am
I know exactly what you are talking about - a tortured soul . What surprices me ,is the state of Kates hair. That is not Normal for one, who can afford to go to a hairdresser. But is sign of lack of self....(something) This is why I `m talking of "addiction".I have a lot of photos of Kates injuries.I think they all are taken after Madeleines goes missing. By looking at the varies pictures and ofcource a bit of proffessionel noledge, I have my version of what happends.I think you are close too.
• Posted by: EcolabReport Comment

30.12.07, 12:23am
Of course I am not saying that this is what I think is hapening here, but I get a feeling that although it looks as though Gerry is controlling Kate, the controller is usually the more needy one, and maybe, if there is a cover up, he is relishing the new relationship they have.====================================Sorry, didnt make that very clear.I meant to say that Gerry is obviously the controlling one, therefore in my eyes the more needy. I always think back to the story where he travelled halfway across the world to be with Kate.I think if Kate has caused an accident, then this will give Gerry even more control, knowing that she is now forever in his hold, and this is the newer less needy relationship he is enjoying.Clear as mud eh muse? .........................no, i get ya. very clear. leave the rambles and lack of clarity to me lol - i excel at it;-);-)I tend to think codependant so she would lie rather than lose him, despite he is the neediest. its pretty clear they come before their kids and a mother has to put her kids before partner in an abusive relationship. she doesnt or didnt.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:15am
yep, sorry for the delay, had to backtrack posts to find where youd put them, then look through them. Deffo injuries again on kate in bottom two.Are these taken before or after madeleien goes missing cos she looks a tortured soul before in any ive seen too.addicted to something, im not sure tbh. when you lose a child you almost immediately look utterly wrecked, so much so you could be mistkaen for a drug addict. Your eyes, facial structure the lot changes. The only thing that horrified me about kate was none of this was evident in the beginning except in a very unnatural feined state almost. Not how it goes at all. Kate took on a more haggard haunted look once the heat was on their own asses. Sociopathic:-):-) I've seen that precise smirk gerry makes a thousand times:-) imo - he knows very well noone has seen madeleine.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:14am
ROSIE30.12.07, 12:03amOn you last post, the issue is that the McCann bashers cant get past the fact that G & K left the children alone. It blinds them to anything else. It is obvious to the McCann bashers that if you leave your children alone, you are obviously also a liar, murderer, conspirator, probably a black mailer (how else could you get everyone else to support you). Added to this they are well off (much jealousy abounds) and a good looking couple that had what looked like a perfect little family and life.My heart goes out to G & K and of course little Madeleine. What they must be going through.• Posted by: dianeh • Report Comment~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I agree with you, I just read and agreed with your other post too, you make some really pertinent points, but they will be ignored on here because it is not what they want to believe.I am so fed up of telling these people that I think it was foolishly idiotic to leave their children like that, but equally I can understand them being relaxed, on holiday, lulled into a false sense of security and because of this they made the most horrendous error of their lives, which may have cost their daughter her life and they have to live with this and find a way of not letting it affect the twins lives too, or this will mean the ruination of their lives also and they do not deserve this and all this hatred, is going to have an affect, it cannot help but do so.I am constantly amazed by some on here, they think up a whole raft of bizarre killing theories and then they go searching for evidence on which to base those theories and when they do not find any they invent it, like these stupid photographs, and the daft accusation they dyed Madeleine's hair, and Gerry must have punched Kate because of the bruises, they seeming cannot see how pathetic all of this nonsense is. It just goes on and on and on.
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:07am
Of course I am not saying that this is what I think is hapening here, but I get a feeling that although it looks as though Gerry is controlling Kate, the controller is usually the more needy one, and maybe, if there is a cover up, he is relishing the new relationship they have.====================================Sorry, didnt make that very clear.I meant to say that Gerry is obviously the controlling one, therefore in my eyes the more needy. I always think back to the story where he travelled halfway across the world to be with Kate.I think if Kate has caused an accident, then this will give Gerry even more control, knowing that she is now forever in his hold, and this is the newer less needy relationship he is enjoying.Clear as mud eh muse? ;-)
• Posted by: bettyReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:06am
MUSE: BLOW THEM UP29.12.07, 11:53pmThe ”slideshow” here simply makes me cry – that man scares the shit out of me.http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/SociopathsAddicted to something???http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5129670769228945538http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5101153304927407394Remainings from a nasty ”blue eye” ? (blow it up 400-500%)? and a ”split eyebrown”http://www.regiaosul.pt/thumb.php?file=images/news/20070918_kate.jpg&sizex=275&quality=100http://picasaweb.google.com/svsport/MsMcCann/photo#5129675901714865666I think it is enough for today• Posted by: Ecolab • Report Comment
• Posted by: EcolabReport Comment
30.12.07, 12:00am
I agree that there is something about the pair which screams control. Often in interviews Gerry will squeeze Kates hand, initially I took this as a sign of support but as time went on, it soon looked like a way of warning her in what she said. This was proven after the interview when he told her not to say anything till they were off mic..................................................Yep, and his eyes dont match the act either in any of those shots or interviews. He is highly controlled in his own manner and kate on the other hand is not. ...................................I have myself been with an abusive man and am very aware of what grip marks look like on the arms. However, I do not think that it is always the case that a man who abuses a woman will physically assault a child....................................Sorry to hear you have had this experience. I have too, lots of it lol in past. I agree with you, not all men will hurt children. The problem is that authroities and help orgs are so inept in this area they can not decipher which men will or wont or could and that costs lives every day. The simple fact is every move and behaviour these men make or will make can be predicted - just the 'experts' dont know how. It depends on why he is abusing and what the dynamic reason is for him being in thatr relationship and the history etc etc but nothing unpredictable about these men at all when you know their minds. I do this all the time and mostly 'underground' it needs to be for safety of others.By the way, i had one so much like gerry imo, they could be twins! I know how far he would have gone and it was avoided with a lot of knowledge, care and a slow and planned extraction. Gerry [and kate] imo would do anything to avoid exposure at all and any cost. ...........................I have seen relationships like this, where the Mother will become increasingly frustrated / jealous of the children as they are usually the cause of the arguments between husband and wife......................................Yep, thats common too. i had that one with my mother, although she took it out on me. This doesnt fit with that pair though. ......................Of course I am not saying that this is what I think is hapening here, but I get a feeling that although it looks as though Gerry is controlling Kate, the controller is usually the more needy one, and maybe, if there is a cover up, he is relishing the new relationship they have.Whose the neediest one? Gerry is scared of his own shadow - hence he is so controlled on the outside. ill go find the photo link.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:47pm
You are some kind of a woman. all my respect to you.I do have some terrible pictures of Kate. You want to see?Nasty eye
• Posted by: EcolabReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:44pm
from my own site ecolab. I think it was yourself posted it in here yesterday after someone else posted a theory id posted too.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:43pm
”whoo hoo - if a picture paints a thousand words...just spotted this pic in a news link and its GOLD!!!I'd sure like to see this one blown up a bit! Telling... I'll refer back to the point i made, why the finger at Kate, this is classic control man shit and Kate sure behaves how your average abused woman does - what do those expressions say?Gerry!Its written all over both of thems facial expressions - perfectly.”http://www.thoughtsfromamuse.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1062&whichpage=9
• Posted by: EcolabReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:40pm
How is it possible to glean all this 'factual' information from photographs? With regard to the bruises, do not forget that Kate has children and these bruises could equally have come from them. Why jump to conclusions on the basis of photographs?
• Posted by: HelenMReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:39pm
but kate and gerry get wound up in all the wrong ways for my liking:-) I see him as a shield alright though:-)
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:36pm
it is cultural and deeply generational for people to blame women and particularly mothers. Often they are guilty too. I also think it is very often right to blame mothers since she is the one who chooses to give life to a child therefore she is the one ultimately responsible for the protection and nurturing of that child. That includes against an abusive man, but so many of these women will cover up or delude themselves even about the man and his potential.When i look at Kate and gerry, all i see is the perfect picture of abusive man and female victime. These guys are very controlled in public as Gerry is. It is the woman that is driven to look the one that is a bit zany with it, so she is the one people will point finger at and revictimise. Every interaction, photograph, facial expression, info about the family, way they talk to each other all looks exactly like the male abuser and female victim to me. There is one photo in particular of the two of them that is taken after madeleines abduction and it speaks volumes re the above too. Also, someone mentioned kates bruised arm in here before. There are actually two bruises, not one on that photograph and they fit perfectly with her being gripped from behind by the handspan of your average man. The deeper bruise is higher, the lower bruise is lighter as it would be. That said, men who are the best of abusers always look like outward saints personified and they very very rarely and often never need to lift their hands - they are too 'good'. :-)
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment
29.12.07, 11:23pm
Yeah, i know, every time i see her little face the disgusting possible reality comes into my mind and its heartbreaking.My hunch, ha ha. This case has me pulling my hair out altogether. I have an avid interst in abuse cases and also criminal cases as well as vast experience of 'abusive people' - not once have i ever seen anything where i cant see exactly what is going on in a case - till now. I could see a clear cut case against murat,the mccanns, [gerry in particular] or a paeddophile[s] Equally all 3 could be discredited in this case.[only 1 of those would retain a very slim possibility she is still alive too imo]. there is not one bit of info coming out the 'pro's' mouths that cannot be shredded either. im on the fence, but if my backside was forced off it - Gerry McCann.
• Posted by: MuseReport Comment


30.12.07, 3:04am
Oh, Rosie!Fess up, and while you're at it, get Kate and Gerry to do the same. It's best. Think of justice for Madeleine, not justification for your errant relatives.It's the big picture, Kate's Aunt Rosie. It's not the petty provincial parenthood of the kind of people who would neglect infants, and end the human race.By the way, the Eye of Ra suits you well: all that bloodlust in defence of anyone who opposes narrow family, clannish (?!) interest.Two - or more - can play this game, Rosie. It's tougher than you ever imagined.Justice for Madeleine, by the way, just to remind you of what this is really all about.Lastly: remember that the UK Charity Commissioners will not tolerate any suggestion that the McCann fund raising is charitable. It isn't. It is a criminal offence to suggest that it is. That's my good deed for you. Mind how you go.
• Posted by: leigh3Report Comment

30.12.07, 2:43am
GUINNEAPIG30.12.07, 2:20amFascinating post! All that vengeance in defence of family? Whatever can you mean :-)• Posted by: leigh3 • Report Comment~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Fascinating post! All that vengeance in defence of your own narrow minded beliefs? Whatever can you mean :-)You see two can play this game Leigh.
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment

We know you play games Rosie but some do not find them very pleasant!



54 people have commented on this story so far.

35 ANTI MCCANN 10 PRO MCCANN (Including one who has two comments included) the remainder their view could not be discerned from their comment
So just 22% are Pro McCann and 78% against - a terrible indictment against the McCanns in the Daily Mail which has, unarguably, been one of the most Pro-McCann papers of all! Also a terrible indictment on the media campaign they have conducted…Rather than convince people of their innocence we have actually seen people turn progressively more and more against them.
A)Maybe if they answer the unanswered questions and did not flee Portugal they might know why they were made arguidos.- Topcat, England
A)I hope they have stopped paying £1000s to the private detective who confidently announced that he would have Maddy home for Christmas!- Gary S, Weybridge
A)The McCanns think they may have to wait six months to find out WHY they were made arguidos? Wasn't it because the BRITISH cadaver dogs detected the scent of a corpse in the boot of their car, and in the apartment? And that there are large inconsistences in the Tapas 9 statements? And didn't the McCanns REFUSE to answer police questions?- Linda, Bearwood. West Midlands
A)The McCanns arguido status does not prevent them from searching for their daughter. The police would have limited jurisdiction if, as they allege, Madeleine had been taken out of the country. I don't understand how it can be the fault of the police that they aren't looking for Madeleine when the McCanns are lucky enough to have the fund to rely on (how many others with missing children have been so lucky?).The McCanns seem content to chuck dirt at others meanwhile Clarence Mitchell is on hand to make snide comments and rushed excuses for them.- Mrs Mclean, London
(A)Why did Clarence Mitchell leave a £70,000 a year job with the Labour Party for a short-term appointment as spokesman for the McCanns?- Alan Pascoe, Tadley, United Kingdom
(P)Why were they made suspects? Because the amateur Portugese police were under pressure to get a result and the McCanns were an easy target. Trouble was the world was watching so they couldn't beat a confession out of the McCanns like they have done in previous similar cases. But then they had an army of ignorant people like you Topcat, ready to back them up and condemn the McCanns on the flimsiest of evidence. One day all you anti-McCann vultures will have to eat your words.- Ian, Benfleet, UK
(A)We must not forget that the McCanns are suspects in the disappearance/possible murder of a child. It was very unhelpful that they fled Portugal and initiated a media-circus, particularly all the emotional Christmas spin. Be brave McCanns, return to Portugal and answer the questions of the police.- Thomas, Glasgow, UK
(A)Maybe all the people they've threatened with legal action in the last six months (without actually going ahead with even a single lawsuit) will know how they feel.- Dave Armstrong, Leeds, UK
(A)They should never ever be cleared as arguido until someone else is arrested and convicted. Which will never happen. You caused this mess, McCanns. Don't expect us to sympathize. Our concern is for Maddie and your twins.- Tomm, NYC
(P)These people are INNOCENT! If it was MY child I would do the same (given their money). I would cling on to false hope! Sorry, It's obvious Maddy is gone forever. Kate, why don't you ask Ben Needham's mum? It might ease your suffering. Most of us out here know you are INNOCENT! But we also know that Maddy is NOT coming home! Ben's mum was not given the publicity and help that you have, though.- Sandie, Lancashire
(N)I really wish Kate would go to the sales and get a different coat/jacket or whatever, that beige anorak does her no favours at all.- Suzy, Staffordshire
(A)And so it goes on and on and on and on.Answer the questions, that should do the trick.- Jill, Leicestershire, England
(P)The PJ will string out the arguido status as long as possible because they know they do not have enough evidence to press charges and they also know that they have no leads. Their reputation is at steak because they committed many mistakes at the start of the investigation and this is precisely why they have no credible leads. So it suits them to publicly claim that they think the parents are involved in an "accidental killing". If the PJ had hard evidence against the McCanns they would have been arrested by now afterall it has been eight months.- M, UK
(P)Topcat, if you know the questions asked then do enlighten the rest of us! Otherwise keep your thoughts to yourself until you actually have answers to this sad sorry affair!- Alison, Salisbury Wiltshire
(N)I think it is all there in the first three comments.- Can, Brigg, N.Lincs.
(A)Yes, Gerry S. Weybridge, Christmas has come and gone and those big mouth detectives have failed to make good on their boast that Madeleine would be home by Christmas. Time to fire them!- Susan, Avon, Ct. USA
(A)If I can see why they have been made suspects then surely they can. That's what they have hired top lawyers and a spin doctor for!- Paul, England
(A)The only question is: why didn't they take care of their children?- Chris Downing, Yorkshire
(A)Groan! 'DJ Shifty' another wild goose chase, as predicted. Sooner the McCanns are questioned again the better, they need to co-operate fully this time! Are we heading for an Easter appeal now?- Sharon, Essex UK
(A)Of course they are suspects they are the two last people to see her alive. I suggest you have a look at our Australian newspapers such as The Age, The Australian, and The Sydney Herald and find out how well laid out and newsworthy they are.- Maureen Rae, NSW Australia
(A)Well the barman story has been discredited and is, once again, an old story rehashed by the M3 agency to grab the headlines.- Rita, Cologne Germany
(A)When will the McCanns stop hiding behind Clarence Mitchell and start "speaking freely" to the Portuguese police about the 100 questions?- Ed, San Francisco, U.S.A.
(A)If they are so intent on finding her then why don't they cooperate with the police in Portugal? Surely if they don't want to be classed as suspect they would do everything to prove to the contrary.- Annie, Hitchin
(A)I can't take any more of this soap opera. It is no longer about a lost child. It is the saga of the publicity-hungry parents.- Peter West, Puntous, France
(A)"We are told it is responsible parenting" -By whom? The Wests?- Marian Hunter, New Zealand
(A)A few unanswered questions might just bring this to a swifter conclusion. Heaven save us from another six months of this publicity hungry pair.- Olderbird, Northants
(P)"This is an exceptionally high-profile case and it is the country's image which is at stake."They've already trashed whatever image there was.- Kim, Sweden
(A)Yes, the tag of "suspect" must be getting in the way of numerous US and UK interviews, book deals, film deals, magazine articles etc.What a nuisance, eh?- Annie, England
(A)"So they can talk freely about the case"?God help us.(A)We have been saturated with this drivel from the McCann camp for seven months now - and they want to talk freely?- Lin, Scarborough England
(A)The McCanns should not have to question the reasons why they are suspects, it was their neglect in leaving children alone that led to the disappearance. If they had used the available childcare then Madeleine would not be missing.- S Fletcher, UK
(A)Home for Christmas? Poor Madeleine.- Billy J Walker, Yorkshire
(P)Sandie of Lancashire: "These people are INNOCENT!"What facts do you base your statement on? You know as much/as little as the rest of us. The same as Clarence Mitchell. The same as the whole McCann family put together. And, if you like, the same as the Portuguese police at the moment.Absolutely nothing.- Lizzy, Surrey
(A)Answer the questions.- Safc, Sunderland
(P)Has anyone thought that they were given the Arguido status as the PJ knew they were planning to go home that week (they had not kept it secret) and the PJ were worried about them talking about the case once they were back in the UK? The Arguido status is just a way for the PJ to get them to keep their mouths shut. Look at the bigger picture people. They were allowed home because there was not enough evidence against themm to stop them - they did not FLEE anywhere.- Aj, UK
(N)Six months. For goodness' sake, give it a rest!- Roger, Brighton
(N)Shouldnt Metodo 3 find all these answers? after all they are paid by the McCanns to do their job, the PJ is working with the portuguese tax money!- Maria Margarida, Brussels
(A)Alison, Salisbury and Ian, Benfleet - why do you attack Topcat's comments? Nowhere does he(she) state that he(she) knows what the questions are. And the McCanns did leave Portugal of their own volition. The McCanns have to understand that they will be suspects as they are the last known people to have contact with Madeleine. Even their army of supporters must see that. If they are innocent then it is just part of the process of elimination.- Alf, Northampton - England
Portugual's image certainly is at stake - if the police don't own up to making a big mistake in making the family suspects the country will be tarnished far longer by this shameful cover-up.- Cathy, Kendal, England
(P)Please people don't you think the McCanns are suffering enough without this constant sniping. Of course they don't want Madeleine forgotton which is why they are constantly in the news.- Janet, Poole
(P)The McCanns and their friends cooperated fully with the police. There are no "missing hours", no "unanswwered questions", no "blood in the car", no "corpse in a dead dog" etc. - it was all rubbish put about in the summer by a corrupt officer who tried to frame Kate and was then sacked. The delay in revealing the "evidence" against the McCanns is easily explained - there isn't any. If there were the police wouldn't be hanging onto prolonged secrecy to cover it up.- Cathy, Kendal, England
(N)I'm sorry we can't find her - but who ever is responsible for Maddie's disappearance surely did a nice job in hiding her. May they rot in their personal hell or step forward and speak.- Vasco-Gouveia, Lisbon - PT
(P)Kate and Gerry, like you I would never give up. If she were mine, nothing would stop me. Ignore the morons you get in these rooms, they are sad people that have no lives, keep shouting from the highest trees I would, and never never never give up, stay in the news - keep Maddie a current affair, remind everyone, everyday you can never let it rest, never.- Mike, Gold Coast, Australia
(A)Somebody tell this awful couple that only three things cannot be hidden... the sun, the moon and the truth. Justice is coming for Maddie.- Tony Quinlan, Essex
(A)Cathy from Kendal obviously works for the Portuguese police and has full inside information on all aspects of this case to be quite so adamant. No one knows the facts for sure, but we all know the McCanns were negligent and the sole reason that Madeleine went missing. So stop blaming everyone else. The buck stops there with Team McCann.- Pam, UK
(A)The facts remain the same. There are many questions still unanswered, inconsistencies in too many areas. M3 did NOT deliver by Xmas as they stated they would. That they knew who had Madeleine and where! - Sassy, Spain
(A)Dear me Cathy, from Kendal. Do you believe the moon is made of cheese too?- Harry Shearer, Harrow, London
(N)Afraid of the country being tarnished?! It already is.- Barbara, UK
(A)McCanns - just book an EasyJet flight back to Portugal asap, and answer the PJ's questions, for goodness' sake!- Anne, Nofolk, UK
(A)Annie, England I think you are spot on. The public has lost sympathy with this couple, when they lost sight of the search for the child, in favour of a grandiose publicity machine, of their own creation. If the McCanns wanted to keep out of the limelight they could have done, but no. You cannot play the media both ways.I agree, the "arguido term" should never be lifted, until they can prove their innocence. - Clarence, Oakham
(A)Of course the McCanns are the main suspects - there is, as yet, nothing to connect Murat or the paedo (alleged) with the crime, whereas the McCanns left their daughter unattended (allegedly), were the last people to see her, and will not answer some important questions, because any question will now be important and why suddenly leave Portugal after declaring their intentions to never leave without Maddie?- Mo, Spain
(N)AJ - very interesting point - I had not thought of that! You are possibly spot on!- Tom, Lancs
(A)I'm older, so forgive me, I can't help but think of my mother's stern advice - never leave your children alone. That was at home. She never bothered to mention a foreign country. Everybody in the world knows that the McCanns want their baby back, just like god knows how many other babies, but they do themselves no favours with this "outside the law" crusade. It only creates suspicion.- Ed, Scotland
(N)When you say the country is tarnished Barbra, I assume you mean UK?- Vic, Portugal
(N) Praying for Maddy.- Michelle Yeldham, Merseyside=504749&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&ct=5&expand=true#StartComments

29 Dec 2007


Published: Friday December 28,2007 by Christabel
What do you think of this then? The PJ setting themselves up for a fall in the European Court of Human Rights? I think so.• Posted by: Rosiepops • Report CommentSorry RosieYes I think they are and I hope they go to the European Court of Human Rights

Why do the McPologists continue to write this rubbish when they know nothing of the law. As will be seen below the PJ simply cannot be taken to the European Court of Human Rights! Actions have to be taken against the Member State, in this instance, Portugal. The McCanns would have to be prove that one of their fundamental human rights had been breached and also have to exhaust all remedies in Portugal first - right up to the highest court of appeal. It is not a breach of human rights to investigate parents suspected of the homicide of their child and these two idiots also seem to have overlooked the fact that there are also a team of British police officers headed by a Detective Superintendent, no less, investigating them in the UK! So, they would have an awful lot of legal actions to get through both in the UK and Portugal before they could go anywhere near the ECHR and even then, they would need to have a case - which, quite clearly, they do not. We do not get any legal actions at all commenced by the McCanns - simply threats - that speaks volumes....


If you wish to read more about the ECHR and look at case law etc:


You may lodge an application with the Court if you consider that you have personally and directly been the victim of a violation of the rights and guarantees set out in the Convention or its Protocols. The violation must have been committed by one of the States bound by the Convention.What rights are protected by the Convention and its Protocols?The following rights, in particular, are protected :
the right to life;
the right to a fair hearing in civil and criminal matters;
the right to respect for private and family life;
freedom of expression;
freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
the right to an effective remedy;
the right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions;
and the right to vote and to stand for election
What do the Convention and its Protocols prohibit?The following, in particular, are prohibited :
torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
arbitrary and unlawful detention;
discrimination in the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention;
the expulsion by a State of its own nationals or its refusing them entry;
the death penalty;
and the collective expulsion of aliens.

What conditions do I have to satisfy to lodge an application?

What are the conditions relating to me personally?
You do not need to be a national of one of States bound by the Convention. The violation you are complaining of must simply have been committed by one of those States within its “jurisdiction”, which usually means within its territory.
You can be a private individual or a legal entity such as a company or association.
You must have directly and personally been the victim of the violation you are alleging. You cannot make a general complaint about a law or a measure, for example because it seems unfair; nor can you complain on behalf of other people (unless they are clearly identified and you are their official representative).
Are there any procedures that must be followed beforehand in the national courts?
Yes. You must have used all the remedies in the State concerned that might have been able to redress the situation you are complaining about (usually, this will mean an application to the appropriate court, followed by an appeal, where applicable, and even a further appeal to a higher court such as the supreme court or constitutional court, if there is one).
It is not enough merely to make use of these remedies. In so doing, you must also have actually raised your complaints (that is, the substance of the Convention violations you are alleging).
You have only six months from the date of the final decision at domestic level (generally speaking, the judgment of the highest court) to lodge an application. After that period your application cannot be accepted by the Court.
Against whom can I lodge an application?
Against one or more of the States bound by the Convention which, in your opinion, has/have (through one or more acts or omissions directly affecting you) violated the European Convention on Human Rights.
The act or omission complained of must have been by one or more public authorities in the State(s) concerned (for example, a court or an administrative authority).
The Court cannot deal with complaints against individuals or private institutions, such as commercial companies.


I am so sick of this woman, of late, seeking to tell everyone what a nice person she is. See for example the post below. She has the audacity to tell everyone she 'has never really lost it on this forum' 'does not deserve the things people write about her' and 'does not bear a grudge'. I have selected below just some of the vile posts her and her cronies have written to me and others on the Daily Express and ask you to judge for yourself. I have also included some comments from me and others on 12/11/07 so that it can be seen I was having a pleasant chat with other posters about looking after children when she and Dave Lidl (who has more posts removed than get left) decided to savagely attack me for no apparent reason - they had not even been part of the discussion.

This was the way in which they sought to shut people up - it is just a little more subtle now - in fact they often seem to resort to just filling the forum with utter rubbish. As will be seen she has been warned many times and banned on one occasion over her remarks to me - amazingly I was also banned - I would challenge her to find any posts at all where I have spoken to her in this way.

Enough of your lies to people Rosiepops - you are a nasty vicious scheming woman who will stop at nothing to support your precious McCanns.

28.12.07, 6:54pm
BET YOU PUT ME DOWNAS ONE THOUGH ROSIE ;-)LOL28.12.07, 6:36pmSWEDISHMUM28.12.07, 6:34pmI am pretty cross right now and I have never really lost it on this forum before and of all the people I would have thought may have made me lose my temper, I would not have put you down for one of them! IMO I did not deserve those things you wrote, there are many here who maybe do, but you chose to ignore those and aim at me, oh well a good friend said to me today "What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger" and she is right. I can't let your words upset me for long.Now I am willing to let this go, because actually I do not bear grudges, question is are you?I think Madeleine was abducted, I think she is quite possibly still in Portugal. I also think the PJ have been found wanting.I stand by those beliefs and until I am proved wrong, I simply refuse to vilify this dear little girls parents, who I think are and will suffer enough, without me trying to make their pain worse.• Posted by: Rosiepops • Report Comment

11.11.07, 6:42pm
This user has been warned
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment

(concerning me)

joke of the weekPublished: Saturday November 10,2007 by Rosiepops HELLO LIZZY10.11.07, 2:07amPleased to see they have not driven all the lovely kind hearted people on here away. JUSTICE FOR LITTLE MADDIEAre you looking forward to seeing the documentary or have you already seen it? I just cant wait!  Posted by: Viv  Report CommentYou asked for it Viv. If it were not for you and your sly insulting attacks, I would be in my bed now.Go on plead innocence I dare you!what's the matter viv You think if you shout it loud enough people will actually believe you care?I see through you, right through you.If you cared one little bit for that poor child you would not keep viciously attacking her parents and vilifying them daily as you do.Don't you know that children get extremely distressed if they feel their parents are upset? Have you not learned that in your fantasy law degree?:No? didn't think so.NOT NICE IS IT VIV WHEN YOU GET A TASTE OF YOUR OWN MEDICINEWELL I FEEL BETTER NOW NOT HAD A RANT FOR AGES hi v • Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
. hiVPublished: Saturday November 10,2007 by Christabel NOBODY LOVES YOU NOBODY CARESBOO HOO.I SEE YOU DON'T SLEEP TO WELL.I THINK GERRY KNOCKED YOU BACK THATS WHY YOU HATE KATE SO MUCHDO THEY KNOW OUR REALLY A CLEANERPublished: Saturday November 10,2007 by Christabel Still spitting you poison I see.If I want to do antything for anyone what the s**ts it got to do with you.I AM SICK TO DEATH OF YOUR SNIDE COMMENTSYour one bloody big liar shame your friends on here can't see through you.You foget what forums you have posted your lies on. God if only some of these knew.Did they hve to put the plaster on your leg because it as to smll for your big gob.metion my name once more in your derogatry remarks and some of the crap I have of yours I will pint. See what your friends think about it.You sad little woman, no wonder hubby P**sed off.

12.11.07, 10:03am
VIV12.11.07, 8:32am WHO ARE YOU OF ALL PEOPLE TO TELL PEOPLE HOW TO BE GOOD PARENTS? AGGRESSIVE; ARROGANT. I BET YOUR KIDS ARE A NIGHTMARE IF THEY TAKE AFTER YOU• Posted by: DaveLidl • Report Comment~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't know how long you have been reading or posting here, but the above comments of hers are par for the norm. She also claims to have a legal background?! Not only that she now appears to see herself as some kind of child expert. I only hope to God that she has very little to do with children, a personality like this can be very damaging to a childs inquiring, impressionable mind. I wouldn't let her within a mile of any child of mine.Yet she maintains she is a nice pleasant poster who never insults people, incredulous isn't it?Again she has crossed the line on here and the reason? Because someone has had the audacity to disagree with her. Pathetic isn't it?
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
13.11.07, 12:37am

11.11.07, 9:07pm
IRONSIDE11.11.07, 7:05pmI am waiting to read your *petition/book* for when I have a touch of insomnia, much better than taking pills!• Posted by: Rosiepops • Report Commenti don t know what your problem is. i read the petition which was posted by ironside, pasted it, sent it to my mp, duly signed. you seem to have an inferiority complex with many on this forum. no need to reply to my mail, your ignorance deserves no further reply.
• Posted by: ALIASReport Comment
11.11.07, 7:32pm
"WELL I HAD A CUP OF COFFEE11.11.07, 7:16pmand changed my mind. I may have changed my mind ,but I see you still have you head up your backside though..• Posted by: Rosiepops • "Be careful with that caffeine, Rosie, it might wake you up, and then you'll realise that yet again you've stooped to the level of personal abuse which you so frequently condemn everyone else for.Though must admit I'd rather have my head up my own backside than up the McCanns' rear-ends like you.
• Posted by: DoctorDoomReport Comment
11.11.07, 7:16pm
and changed my mind. I may have changed my mind ,but I see you still have you head up your backside though..
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
11.11.07, 7:01pm
Away an bile yer heed !
• Posted by: oldhippyReport Comment
11.11.07, 7:01pm
OLH HIPPY11.11.07, 6:50pm"Rosiepops was not saying that the McCanns were not looking for Madeleine. You must know that she meant the police were not looking, yet you have to pass a comment to make her look foolish."The very suggestion! I'm deeply hurt by that remark, Old Hippy. Everyone knows Rosiepops is quite capable of making herslef look foolish without any help from me!• Posted by: DoctorDoom • Report Comment~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Did you ever read *The Little Book Of Complete B******s*? Or did you write it?
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
11.11.07, 6:50pm
I do this quite a lot with these two words. You are of course correct.
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
11.11.07, 6:42pm
This user has been warned
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment
11.11.07, 6:20pm
"In fact I really wish they would get on and do it (question the McCanns). To me this is all prevarication, if this was done they could either charge, or eliminated from their enquiries freeing them up to pursue other lines of enquiry."What, question the McCanns again before the final results are back from the bumbling British forensic lab? Oh yes, Rosie, you'd just love that wouldn't you!"I would still like to see this search done, Madeleine could be close by and yet nothing is being done to find her."Agreed, Madeleine probably is close by - certainly not in Morocco or Bosnia - but short of digging up the entire region it looks like she might stay close by for ever..."The matter of neglect should just be shelved until it is discovered what happened to Madeleine. Madeleine and her whereabouts should take priority over everything right now."I think you'll find the PJ HAVE shelved the neglect issue, Rosie dear. It's YOU who keep harping on about how it was the McCanns' only fault, and not an important one at that."Apart from the two teams of investigators that the McCann's have hired, who else is actively looking for Madeleine?"Well, certainly not the parents...it would seem the PJ are actively looking for her body. The private detectives are actively running up huge expenses on holidays in Morocco and Bosnia. Gerry is actively playing golf and Kate is actively watching other people look after her remaining children (according to husband Gerry) in case she does something silly again."Isn't it about time the the PJ held a press conference and told us exactly what is happening here?"Since you ask, No.Isn't it about time you grasped the simple fact that they are observing Portuguese laws and procedures because the various crimes occured in Portugal? Those procedures do not involve giving fatuous press conferences to keep happy the likes of you.• Posted by: Rosiepops •
• Posted by: DoctorDoomReport Comment


12.11.07, 12:16am
I believe that you were right and the social worker was wrong and must have forgotten her basic training on child protection. Children who get very upset about taking clothes on and off particularly underwear and children who behave in a sexually precocious way are two basic risk factors that social workers are trained to recognise, althugh not all work in child protection they should still kno w this. Before the McPologists jump risk factor means precisely that - an indicator that needs investigating not an assumption there is abuse.
• Posted by: VivReport Comment

12.11.07, 12:04am
Viv, what you said about not wearing underwear is an indicator of sexual abuse rang bells with me. A few years ago when my daughter was three, my neighbour told me that a little local girl had comeround to play with her daughter. They would have been four. She said that they had been playing upstairs, but then she found her daughter in the back garden putting her underwear back on. When questioned, she said that the other little girl had told her to take them off and to get in bed with her.I found this a little alarming. Then my daughters friend said they no longer wanted to play with this local girl as she was 'always taking her knickers off'. I rang social services to make a referral, and I was told that this was normal behaviour for a girl of that age.My daughter has never done anything like that. After the phone call, I felt guilty for ages incase I had seen somthing that wasnt there. To this day, I look at that girl and I wonder....Bluebell - You are probably not wrong with that theory. If he even was asked to look in on Kate. Its hard to know what to believe isnt it?
• Posted by: bettyReport Comment

Wind your neck in.It was icantthinkofaname that mentioned the urinating and this was a little bit of trivia.I see you upsetting other people again by referring to them as possible child sex offenders.You are priceless.
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment

12.11.07, 12:03am
Exactly! In all seasons children are expected to wear the appropiate and basic items of clothing without argument. It is beyond me why a parent would allow the child to protest against this rule and win!
• Posted by: ElizabethReport Comment
11.11.07, 11:53pm
now a vision of litle hats and gloves repeatedly been tossed from the pushchair does indeed spring to mind! Kids dont they cost you a fortune eh? My eldest one is just as dipheaded now with his wallet car keys etc as he was when he was a little boy "now where is your PE kit darling" Dont know mom !
• Posted by: VivReport Comment

11.11.07, 11:47pm
I have not seen the unclipped photo of Maddie on the horse, but Kate does not look like she is overly dressed.I agree with Viv in that a 4 year old should wear what you tell her to. How long it takes you to enforce it is a different matter.
• Posted by: bettyReport Comment
11.11.07, 11:42pm
Yes and loving and caring for your children in the UK where you can buy a 'bag of brown' (heroin) on most street corners for as little as £5 means giving them proper supervision, discipline, rules and routine. I think it was yesterday a poster had pointed out that the one photo recently released of Kate with Maddie on a pony was itself a picture of neglect because it was a cold April day and prior to the photo getting clipped you could see everyone but little Maddie had a coat on - she does look pale and cold in that pic althugh obviously smiling. I noted in response to this one regular McPologist told us on no less than five occasions children not wear jumpers and cardigans - she breezily told us her own children will not. Another man even said his child would not wear shoes and another even underpants (which reallly rang alarm bells - sexual abuse indicator). To such parents I would say this - it is your job to protect your children from harm and that includes making sure they are properly dressed. I had three boisterous little boys but if I decided they were wearing a coat they wore it - there was never an issue of them telling me what they were an were not going to do at aged 3 years - what hope would they have with such a child at 13 years of age! No wonder kids get into so much trouble when you have parents with attitudes like this!
• Posted by: VivReport Comment
11.11.07, 11:28pm
Illegal drugs sadly are all around us. In the schools,bars,the boardroom, the street corner, everywhere. That is why we parents have to watch our vulnerable young ones. I know you are one of those parents. Too often I hear parents,eager for freedom, relieved and delighted when their children reach their teens, They consider them to be grown,on their own and able to take care of themselves. Not so. False assumption. They need our love, care and vigilance now just as much, probably more, as they did when they were happily swinging in the park and playing in the paddling pools. I know you, as a loving Mother, will be watching carefully over those lovely three boys.
• Posted by: ElizabethReport Comment
11.11.07, 11:18pm
You know how to get me goingdont you! lol Anyway bless you darling I can definitely see you are not a druggie "speed" is amphetamine not coke but either would have the effect you describe but speed lasts a lot longer to get everything done. Before you ask - know from working with them not using it ! but not usually the middle class - usually the children of rotten parents who turned to heroin and crack because they are so screwed up - they are the socially excluded class who quite often do not even have a home. Suppose you get the drif why I get so upset about duff parents
• Posted by: VivReport Comment

28 Dec 2007


On 24 December Sky News confirmed that Pamela Fenn heard Madeleine crying for two hours whilst left alone on 2nd May, the night before she disappeared. Whilst their spokesman Clarence Mitchell has stated "so far as Kate and Gerry are concerned there was no tennis bag" neither he, nor the McCanns have sought to deny Pamela Fenn's claims and plainly Sky would not confirm this report which has been in the public domain for several months, if it were not true. I am therefore somewhat amused to see their drones on the Daily Express getting their heads together and then producing some synchronised posting seeking to deny this. Are they actually acting on the instructions of Clarence Mitchell or the McCanns given they do not bother to deny the truth or merely out of the goodness of their little hearts. By repeatedly getting their heads together (see Mandz below, " I got called away") they not only show how blatantly dishonest they are - they also continue to make themselves a laughing stock.

On the subject of being a laughing stock..... I note Mandz no longer likes the titles dreamed up by them to create divisiveness on the forum "anti-McCann" or "pro-McCann" she has, in her infinite wisdom, decided to go one better so that the terms have now become "anti-cretin" or "pro-cretin". Has no one had the heart to tell her that accordingly she seeks to support a couple of mad dogs or mentally retarded people! Now come, come Mandz, even I would not use such strong language to describe Kate and Gerry! YOU could help the PJ with their investigation! I am simply speechless!!!! I would love to see the PJ reading such remarks on the DE forum and watch them laugh till their tummies hurt....

Clearly. Mrs Fenn's evidence against the McCanns is utterly damning!

The diehard drones:

27.12.07, 7:39pm
Could you tell me how Mrs Fenn was apparently certain it was Madeleine crying and if anyone was, how could she be sure it was Madeleine and be able to distinguish between Madeleine's, Sean's and Amelie's cry.
• Posted by: ChristabelReport Comment

27.12.07, 7:39pm
How come you and Rosiepops managed to both reply to a post that I made over half an hour ago exactly at the same moment?Are you two psychic?• Posted by: DadTo3 • Report CommentI have been meaning to mention this for the past 20min however got called away! As for Psychic no I am not however I wish I was that way I could help the PJ with their investigation!
• Posted by: MandzReport Comment
27.12.07, 7:28pm
It was reported in a newspaper she allegedly said the child was crying then it was reported after that she was outraged by this as she said no such thing therefore went on record to say she heard NO CHILD CRY........As for being scared was she not burgled and tried to cling onto the man's legs as he went out the window? If true then she can be that scared can she....
• Posted by: MandzReport Comment

27.12.07, 7:27pm
I know what I read, she categorically states she did not hear Madeleine crying on that night or any other night.She also says she caught an intruder in her flat shortly before Madeleine was abducted.Her daughter also states that she saw a strange man lurking around on a couple of occasions outside the McCann's apartment and this would *seemingly* fit in with the *alleged* gr-any video that the PJ has *allegedly* sent off to the FBI for enhancements, which is supposed to show unusual male activity around that apartment.Not to mention that this would also fit in with the men seen by the nannies seen hanging around this apartment and this like all the above has been reported to the Portuguese police as well as to the manager of the MW complex.All these men seen hanging around this apartment have allegedly been officially reported, so unlike such a lot of information in this case can easily be verified,
• Posted by: RosiepopsReport Comment


The other images are also available including about three shots where she is sitting on a sofa with him with his hand on the worse area of bruising at the top of her left arm (see other post) - you can clearly see a lot of bruising - grab marks to her arm. Also when enlarged have a look at her right eye this looks bruised and bloodshot. -
The injuries look like she was very forcibly grabbed by the arm and then thrown - landing on her elbow. These shots are taken very shortly after 3 May, I think about 8 May. I will leave you to surmise what might have been going on to cause Kate these injuries.


If there is one thing I have noticed, when oldhippy rushes to deny something, it must be true! Penelope merely refers to a mystery uncle - given they both have large extended families this could clearly refer to a number of people - so why did OldHippy get specific - referring to Gerry's brother. I do not think it was him! She says he is a "very decent chap". John McCann gave up his full-time job with Astrozeneca to act as a full-time director the "Leaving no stone unturned" fund. He also went on Sky News complaining "why are we wasting so much time negating rumours". Well true, how would this help to find Madeleine or be a legitimate use of the funds. How much money is he drawing from the funds to keep him and his family on ? Is this a legitimate use of the funds? On the Sky Video, just like his younger brother is smiling and smirking in the early days following Madeleine's disappearance. "Very decent chap" - I dont think so?

To those who have done lots of research can you tell me who this uncle was who felt the need to immediately - was he a consort for the 63 year old mum of Dr Payne?


Published: Thursday December 27,2007 by oldhippy
Remember that uncle who rushed off on the night of 3rd May? Could he have been involved in hiding the body initiallY?• Posted by: Penelope1 • Report CommentPenelope, where have you got this story about a mystery uncle?It's not true Penelope. The only other brother of GM is John who wasn't there, and appears to be a very decent chap.

26 Dec 2007


Two small bruises in a line can clearly be seen on the left arm of Kate McCann and also possibly corresponding bruise on the right arm just going under the sleeve. This is an extremely common injury to domestic violence victims where an aggressive controlling man will grab the woman by the upper arms so that she is powerless to escape from him. Notice also the very different facial expressions in this picture - Kate looking subdued and frightened, Gerry looking challenging and smug. He also "controls" her with his arms which is totally inappropriate in such a picture, just few days after Madeleine went missing. Her job to "hold" the picture, palms up, limp and submissive. Every picture tells a story - this one very explicitly... NOTICE ALSO the sudden appearance of a Scots McPologist seeking to even deny there are any bruises on the Daily Express e.g. 3.10 pm 26.12.07: I wonder why she bothers to deny what we can so clearly see????
"Funny how it is only the Conspiracy Theorist's who see this bruise.Funny how the PJ did not see it.Funny how all the hundreds of people who have been it close, very very close contact with K, did not see it.Funny isn't it.Could you give me any explanation for that?Serious question."
• Posted by: oldhippy


What gives anyone the right to think they can cyber-bully someone off an internet forum with such a vitriolic catalogue of abuse? How low will these Kate and Gerry lovers stoop?

What a bunch of personality disordered nasties!

Ecolab: Your calm and measured response to this does you great credit! Kind Regards!

This type of post only exemplies how desperate they must be feeling and just how nasty they are!

I notice "Alroy" is not currently posting ....er apparently.. but this "you are....(!) is exactly his style...



26.12.07, 1:57pm
I am surprised Ecolab that you have the Gall to reapear on this forum after yesterdays disgusting demonstration. Although I do not always agree with some of the posters on here I do believe they are all entitled to voice their views and I respect that. You on the other hand are a sad and disgusting individual who is totally disrespectful to anyone with opposing views to yourself. You are Vulgar, insulting and offensive and as far as I am concerned, and several others who yesterday voiced their disapproval of your attitude, I have no further wish to even speak to you, you are a Paria amongst decent and honest people and should remove yourself from this forum, ASAP.
• Posted by: Dobywalah


I was just reading DE forum and noticed your comment - thanks so much! Hope you had a lovely day and also have a great new year. I miss you too ! - we had some great debates and even a good laugh sometimes.

I found the DE forum a very odd place today - notice that Jane Gin and Tonic has heen on all day and all night and almost every single post is from her and she sounds very angry and depressed. It seems she is alone at christmas time and that is very sad.

VivIf you are reading this today, all the best to you and yours.... You are still a miss on here. I don't post as often now, but keep reading the forum, and check on your website now and again.Keep up the good work and keep questioning everything.... God Bless to all.
• Posted by: SandieL

Lovely to hear from you, even if indirectly!

Kind Regards
Viv x

25 Dec 2007



HO, HO, HO!!


As we can see on the 20th December you tell us Tracie who you slipped up and mentioned on the DE is someone you speak to on another forum but then Whoa on the 24th you tell us you never post on other forums. You tell lies about eveything dont you? Some lies you tell are real big bad lies arn't they? That is the trouble with being a liar and writing so many posts - just like Kate and Gerry you have said too much - liars always trip themselves up!

Love Viv xx

PS Are Sky News still Gerry's favourite newscasters? Gosh I remember that huge list of news sites he used to have on his blog back in his halcyon days of thinking he was a clever little con merchant - then it really shrank to just Sky and the BBC, didn't it - is he going to get cross and cross Sky off now - or is he just going to just think sod it and cross the lot off - bury the news eh! What a bunch of barstewards they all are casting aspersions on this wonderful family! Poor Gerry just keep losing things and it is really sad - his daughter, his tennis bag, the twins buggy, his wallet - poor man what next eh? Anyways Happy Christmas to you -did you get a nice fat bonus for all your hardwork? Try not to get too sozzled you have got a 7 day a week job there!

Are you going to do a bungy jump with Claris? When will that be? Look forward to it!

Hope you like me christmas tree lights - I love your santa !

PPS We know who Tracie is :-)



20.12.07, 10:12pm


20.12.07, 9:55pm


15.12.07, 7:57pm

Pro truth's are tee total?

that's Christabel, Tracie, Alroy I think, and me!

• Posted by: Rosiepops

You are not in contact with other 'pro's', or so you say. I have asked before, who is Tracie
then? Do you also need to go off before answering the question or will you ignore it as
before? By the way Alroy/Lazarus/Mark/Johncar/Arch Rationalist et al is not teetotal, but I'm
sure you knew that anyway.
• Posted by: docmac • Report Comment

Are you paranoid man? what is the problem? So I made a mistake and included someone
from another forum
I converse with, so what, where is that in the greater scheme of things
and why is it so important?
For pity's sake haven't you got anything better than to pounce on a stupid little mistake I
made 5 days ago? you must read every single post I make, I am glad you attach so much importance to my words, but I have to say it is a little sad.
• Posted by: Rosiepops


24.12.07, 11:23pm

I have tried telling him/her but she/he will not listen, he/she has a real problem with me and I
haven't a clue why. has got it into his head that I post on other forums and I don't, crikey I have enough with this one, I do have a life and I do enjoy living it.

• Posted by: Rosiepops


McCann family spokesman Clarence Mitchell flatly denied that Mr McCann had lost a bag during the family's holiday.

He said: "As far as Kate and Gerry are concerned, there is no missing tennis bag

Those sound like very carefully chosen words to me "as far as Kate and Gerry are concerned" - so when it turns out that of course there was he cannot be accused of lying of them! This is in sharp oontrast to his former claims "Ludicrous" "utterly false" etc.

What a slimy little man - if even you no longer believe in them Mr Mitchell perhaps you could do the decent thing just like all the rest did - refuse to be their spokesman - we know you took a job that everyone, even a former News of the World Editor didnt want! Perhaps there was nothing that they perceived to be attractive clouding their better judgment?

23 Dec 2007


On all the earlier videos and pictures Kate's eyes look blue to me. However when she appeared in the Spanish video there was something different looking about her - her eyes are brown and it gives her a much softer more genteel look. The brown eyes are also there on the new Christmas video. Is she even wearing coloured contact lenses to put on a show for us?




questions Gerry's false account of the distance /obstructions between TAPAS bar and apartment

and also questions why they left the children

generally does sound far less favourable to the McCanns and states Murat may know his own fate in New Year but "McCanns may have to wait much longer"

Thanks a lot for your help! and I do now take the point you were making about Sky. If they are turning against them - this is a disaster for Kate and Gerry who gave Sky the exclusive rights to the story...At the end of the day Sky would not continue to support them if it has become so clear that they are guilty!



Excellant post!

Dr Doom wrote:

"As someone in the trade I can confirm, absolutely, that's the case, and Sky News and the Murdoch media empire are well on-track to secure the rights, with only Richard Branson's financing the parents being a problem.

Sky News were given the very first, exclusive interview with the McCanns just days after the child was reported missing. A bizarre thing for the McCanns to do: selling their story to just one media outlet was the least efective way of getting their message out. An open-to-all press/media conference would have been far more appropriate, but of course would pay far less... It would also would have meant having to answer questions from lots of awkward journalists rather than just the one, with the pre-arranged questions...

For those in the media trade, that was the first real sign that this whole missing child affair was not what it seemed. We have yet to be proved wrong...

As we all know, from the very earliest days pounds signs have been the guiding influence in everything the McCanns have done, and nothing has changed recently.

The desire to empty the official fund before the first anniversary is entirely understandable. The McCanns know they cannot get away with using it personally any more, and that details of much more than just mortgage payments will have to be revealed in due course...

As the first anniversary approaches (and make no mistake, plans are well under way for this - in the full knowledge that short of a miracle by the PJ, turning up the body, Madeleine will still be missing...) the McCanns will want all the book, programme and film deals signed ready. The million pound fund (and all the as yet unaccounted for interest...) will pale into insignificance beside the money the McCanns will personally make as we enter Year Two.

Be under no illusion - hiring Metodo 3 had nothing to do with finding a child, but was a brilliant dramatic move on Team McCann's part, as will be their dismissal and replacement of Metodo in the New Year. This whole affair has been so sickeningly well orchestrated as to be almost unbelievable.

The film script is almost certainly well underway, and quite likely several endings are already being discussed. Safe to presume none of them involve Madeleine being returned alive...

The book, likewise, is as good as written several times over, and a safe bet Clarence is already negotiating for final rights...

With Murdoch and Sky/The Sun/Times/20th Century Fox on one side and Branson and Virgin Media on the other, the parents are going to be set up for life if the PJ fail to secure a conviction...

Of course, Clarence wins either way. His inside knowledge of the couple will secure his financial future whatever the fate of the parents...

• Posted by: DoctorDoom