30 Jan 2008


What an interesting article - and verbatim from Trish Cameron she was phoned at 10 pm and told he came in through the window and out through the door. Plus I know I also read this in an early BBC article Maddie's PJ's were WHITE NOT PINK.


PS Docmac - is that enough new article for you - 4! - I do my best :-)))


'Maddy was abducted and we have a suspect in mind' Last updated at 16:09pm on 29.10.07

Portugese police believe three-year-old Madeleine McCann has been abducted and have a suspect in mind, a police chief said today. The toddler vanished from her bed at a holiday resort when her parents were in a restaurant only 40 yards away.
Guilhermino Encarnacao, director of the judicial police in the Faro region, said they were hopeful she is still alive and believe she is still in Portugal.
But he refused to reveal any more details for fear of endangering Madeleine's life.
Footage from the Praia da Luz Mark Warner resort
Madeleine's parents plead for information about their daughter
scroll down for more

Vanished: Madeleine McCann, three, was asleep next to her twin brother and sister
The three-year-old's great uncle, Brian Kennedy said the family "fear the worst but we are hoping for the best."
British Ambassador John Buck was with Madeleine's family this afternoon. He confirmed that three family liaison officers from Leicestershire Police had now arrived and were with the family.
Kate and her husband Gerry, a consultant cardiologist, have told family and friends they suspect their daughter was snatched while her two-year-old twin brother and sister were sound asleep in cots on either side of her.
Madeleine, who was born by IVF treatment, disappeared from the family's ground-floor holiday apartment at the 'family friendly' Mark Warner holiday complex in the Praia da Luz resort as her parents ate at a tapas restaurant close by.
The child's aunt, Trish Cameron, yesterday described the frantic telephone call she received after the couple discovered their daughter was missing around ten o'clock on Thursday night.
"It was my young brother Gerry distraught on the phone, breaking his heart. He said: 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted'.
"They kept going back to check the kids every half hour. The restaurant was only 40 yards away. He went back at nine o'clock to check the children. They were all sound asleep, windows shut, shutters shut."
Kate then went over to the two-bedroom ground-floor apartment and 'came out screaming', said Mrs Cameron. 'The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had been jemmied open.
"Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her."
Portuguese police yesterday sealed off the three-storey block and forensic specialists fingerprinted the ground floor window of the McCanns' apartment. All airports, ports and border posts have been alerted.
But despite a massive search throughout the night by police, sniffer dogs and dozens of holidaymakers, there has been no sign of Madeleine, wearing white pyjamas when her parents put her to bed with twins Amelie and Sean in the bougainvillea-clad apartment.
scroll down for more

Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry McCann
Intriguingly, a Briton who runs a company in the Algarve has told police he spotted a couple carrying a young child early yesterday.
George Burke, from Liverpool, was driving home from nearby Lagos around 6am when he caught the two people in his car headlights. "I couldn't see them clearly because it was dark and windy. They scurried down a side road and out of sight."
Last night, as police helicopters and launches scoured the sea, beach and village, Madeleine's family issued a statement which read: "This is a particularly difficult time for the family and we are all comforting each other. At this time all the family's focus is in assisting the UK and in particular the Portuguese authorities in securing Madeleine's safe return."
scroll down for more

A family torn apart: Parents Kate and Gerry McCann with Madeleine and the twins

Ray of light: Madeleine is described as active and chatty
Mr McCann, a consultant cardiologist at Leicester's Glenfield Hospital, and his wife Kate, a GP, had chosen the up-market resort because it was family-friendly.
A friend of the couple, Jill Renwick, said: "This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful."
She said Madeleine - known as Maddy - was 'gorgeous, active and chatty and intelligent, not shy. She is four next week and starts school this year.'
The McCanns, who have been married eight years and recently moved into a £600,000 detached house in Rothley, a suburb of Leicester, were on holiday with a group of fellow doctors and other young children, paying around £1,600 for a week.
In the evenings, Mark Warner offers a drop-in creche service enabling customers to leave young children with staff while they enjoy a relaxing dinner.
Customers may also pay for individual baby-sitters but the McCanns, both 38, chose not to use either service, instead taking it in turns regularly to check their three young children themselves from the restaurant on the other side of a swimming pool from their apartment.
After Mrs McCann raised the alarm, Mark Warner said it immediately launched a search of all areas within the complex and the peaceful, 1,000-population fishing village.
Resort manager John Hill said: "As well as staff, we had guests helping, also the majority of the Praia da Luz village.
"Police were informed at the same time as the alarm was raised. They arrived about 10.45pm and after statements were taken from the family police decided to escalate the situation."
Paul Moyes, 47, from Cheshire, and his wife Susan own a holiday apartment in the same black as the McCanns. He said: "There was a knock on the door at about 11.30 from a hotel guest telling us a girl was missing and asking us to help in the search.
"There were uniformed police, plain clothes and even off-duty local officers. The search went on all night, people were using torches.
"We searched the beach and the hotel grounds with scores of people. Quite a few of us own holiday homes here so it's a close-knit community and something like this is terribly shocking." Michael Hannar, from Pontefract, Yorkshire, owns a ground floor apartment close to the McCanns.
He said: "I don't believe a three-year-old child would have been strong enough to open the window or shutter.
"Mine are difficult to open, especially if the window is fully closed. The shutter is also difficult to open."
Family friend Mrs Renwick said the McCanns - who met while training at the Western Infirmary at Glasgow - felt let down by police.
"I spoke to them this morning and they said the police had done nothing overnight and they felt as if they'd been left on their own."
Resort manager Mr Hill said: "We're in a sleepy fishing village and manpower for the police, I agree, was low at the time. After the CID were involved more police were called."
In Leicester, neighbours spoke of the loving, protective parents.
Tracey Horsefield, a 32-year-old nurse, said: "They never let those children out on their own. I have never seen Madeleine without her parents."
Mr McCann's mother Eileen, 67, from Glasgow, said the couple had been desperate to have children and eventually underwent IVF treatment.
"Madeleine made their lives complete when she came along. The three children were very close and I don't know how they will cope - how any of them will."
Madeleine's uncle Michael Healy said: "There has been some negative spin put on this, with people criticising them for leaving the kids.
"But it's nonsense, they were close by and eating within sight of where the children were and checking on them. No one was rip-roaring drunk."


docmac said...

Viv I'd like to ask Ms Horsefield two questions. How often were the children let out at all? How often did you see the parents without Madeleine? I'd expect the answers to be not much and often, respectively.

By the way the Telegraph also reported on the white pyjamas on May 4th.

lizzy said...

Hi Viv,
Madeleine's uncle who finds it acceptable to leave your children and have a meal and drinks is obviously from the same mould as Gerry and Kate.What kind of people are they to think this is acceptable behaviour.?

Irina said...

I remember one of the staff in the MW crash was saying that Madeleine was extremely quiet and shy and only communicate with children she knew.
She does seem to be shy and only poses (to please?) rather is captured naturally happy on the photographs.

I have just noticed on the famous photograph with pony (if to look at the fool size of that photograph) there is a man standing and holding pony. I thought (looking on cropped version of the photo) this is the only photo where Kate smiles to Madeleine. I was wrong! She smiles at the man!

sez said...

thanks for the reply yesterday to my comment re the book gerry bought. i have always thought he played a bigger role in this than kate. remember the grumpy gerry on the bus (clip on youtube) i bet he like a lot of men (not all!) keep those kids quiet i work all week. keep them quiet on holiday i work all year to relax not listen to them winge... you know the sort im sure. i bet kate was always on pins trying to keep them quiet so he didnt lose his temper.. another strange thing why phone home straight away with story ready to hand when infact they would of been unsure as to what had gone on.. several hours in after the search maybe but straight away with story ready to tell avery one very odd...

ICantThinkOfAName said...

I got thoroughly p++++ed off with the DE forum and haven't even read it for over 3 weeks. This contribution is just to see if I can access this blog as I have been unsuccesful in the past, my computing skills being normally limited to what people demonstrate to me.

Anonymous said...

Choccy! Otherwise, known as 'icantthinkofaname'. I've just popped in here, and up pops your name. I wondered where you went, and suspected you were unhappy with the DE forum. So was I, but I left voluntarily with more than a few words aimed at exposing the obvious thugs, trolls, and abusers of HYS who routinely attack the person rather than simply dealing with the points raised. I pushed the 'report comment' button on my own posts because they were aimed at the thugs, not the story of the day, and I've insisted that the DE remove me from their forum; it's my non negotiable right, despite DE hopes that disgruntled posters will persevere.
Don't know if we'll be online at same time again, but lovely to see your name: the man of very few, but well chosen words.
See you next time, I hope. xo

docmac said...

Hello ICTOAN! Nice to see you and hope you are well. I also got fed up after being stalked by assasin in all his guises and having my posts misquoted to try and discredit my views. I read there occasionally, but at selected times only ie when Gerry is at work. Well I see you are going to be stalked on here too, judging by the previous post. I'm sure it's the kind of stalking you won't mind, though :-)

LittleGreyCell said...

Evening All (Ohmygod, I'm turning into Dixon of Dock Green)...

...which actually has come in rather handy this evening, as Rosiepops hasn't been 'feeling herself' today.

Take a look at the following and see what I mean:-

30.01.08, 5:20pm

"Listen up good. If you iiiiiiiii am at all bothered by you and your vacuous posts think again".
Posted by ROSIEPOPS (supposedly)

30.01.08, 5:35pm

"If you have anything to say just say it, stop trying to be funny, you just aint go it.

Are you trying to say that I am someone else, yet again? Yawwwwnnnnnn.

Haven't you got anything remotely better than that in your repartee?"


"I am really interested in Kate and Gerry's version of events, we have hardly heard anything from them yet, I bet when they are told it is going to be explosive".

Obviously not one iota of Rosiepops' vocabulary, syntax or style.

I replied to one such post as follows:-

"Goodness, 'Rosiepops', what big teeth you have...and as for your big red cushion and bushy tails, well, if I didn't know better I'd think you were the Big Bad Wolf55 impersonating Grandma..."

Perhaps more accurate than they'd like us to think.

Anyway, I really can't get my head around 1) How slapdash they are at this sort of thing; and 2) How stupid they think everyone else is.

And where's the real Rosiepops, do you imagine? Perhaps sitting in a hall at the LSE swooning at Clarence??

Hope everything's OK, Viv.


LittleGreyCell said...

Oh, time is 19.27

Anonymous said...

Dear Docmac,
I've left a post for you under the 'Soham' article. Meanwhile, yes!!! I'm so happy to see our favourite chocolate fireman appear here.
Thing is this: there were so many kind hearted, questioning, fair people on the DE forum, but they were being targeted, as you rightly point out, by those well practised in the 'dark arts' of sophistry, and ruthless self-interested, dishonestly pretening to be unbiased when in fact it all came down to this: trolls, and McCann mechanics - mere mercenaries serving Gerry McCann, and his paid servants. Paid from public funds; the innocent donations from people less well off than the £100K+ Gerry, the £75K+ Mitchell the mouthpiece. All those widows, orphans, children, disabled, dispossessed people caring for Maddie, and drawn into Gerry's cynical web of self-advancement: the bored cardiologist given the chance to strut the world stage.
A moral tale of our times, I think.

Anonymous said...

Little Grey Cell...you cheeky minx. Always a pleasure to read your posts anywhere, anytime. Yet again - with humour and insight - you get straight to the point.
The McCann mechanics have put themselves in for a routine service tonight; this time in London at the altar of their fake god, Clarence, the man trying to build a great reputation, as in his previous lecture, modestly entitled something like 'The McCanns. The perfect PR campaign.'
Hubris is usually punished severely. Somehow, I don't think Clarence will be the exception. Give him enough rope...

docmac said...


I agree with Leigh (thanks, I replied). The minions have been left to McMan the ship. I have little doubt those posts were written by HipOp, Bark or Blandz (not 100% on that one) and Bark respectively.

These people bleat continually about multiple IDs precisely to conceal their own deception.

Let me say that Rosiepops herself is not even the same poster as before. The old Rosie could actually write English. This one is hopeless if you study her posts carefully, even resorting to phrases like 'prove they done it'. Can't spell nor punctuate either, but that is true of many of that lot. I think they got rid of the original because she was too inflammatory and then simply replaced her as the name is important to the group. Of course I could be wrong, as perhaps she is just enjoying more copious quantities of the 'fizzy spring water' nowadays ;-)

I have to be off for a while. May pop in later. If I don't I wish a good evening to you all.

Anonymous said...

Dear Docmac...
And you are a cheeky minx too, says L3. Perhaps, in this quiet time while we all await the next legal step towards Justice for Maddie, it may be good for us all to recognise another justice or injustice, and discuss it sometimes: the blatant corruption of free speech; the need to 'out' trolls, and those well practised in the 'dark arts' of sophistry; the cynical manipulation of honest inquiry.
I like the idea of Viv's direct action, and the 3Arguidos site, although I haven't visited that one.
I think it is sad, but true to say that Missing Maddie will tell us all a lot about this new 21st Century: who seeks truth and justice vs who seeks lies and power.
We'll see, in time, I guess.

felicity said...

Evening all - what a great thread - did you need me to put in am appearance:-)))

Actually I am all of a quiver because huge is threatening to sue me and my mate plainwaters!

Viv xxxxx

30.01.08, 8:23pm

Have you seen the pictures on Viv/Felicity/onaclearday/plainwaters blog of Kate McCann which are supposed to show evidence of domestic violence? Not entirely convincing. One "suspicious mark" seems to be a media microphone. I wonder if the McCanns and their team have kept an eye on the blog particularly the article by "Lizzy" outlining more than 80 supposed lies. Quite a lot of ammo for a libel case there.

• Posted by: U2

Anonymous said...

Dear Viv,
A libel case is more likely to be brought against the McCanns, and their paid servants, in my opinion.

Personally, I like the DE poster named U2. S/he is witty, and rational, although it is always disappointing to see s/he descend into petty politics of the kind quoted in your post above.

Ho hum. Such is the 'new media', I guess. Tiresome to see intelligence diverted into petty ad hominem.

BTW, I'm particularly sorry to see Lizzy mentioned as well. I did hesitate before posting here, as I am aware that the McCann mechanics on the DE are livid at my last posts, and the sudden realisation that the DE is not their toy, and many DE posters appear on other sites of honest inquiry, like yours, the 3Arguidos etc.
I do believe the McCanns deserve a defence in our democracy, as I have often said, and I am particularly sympathetic towards what I think is Kate's vulnerable position. However, the McCanns are not getting the honest, open, credible defence from their supporters which would be enough to quell rising public anger at the antics of the McCann Machine of media manipulators.
Nice to see you turn up, by the way! We've been good in your absence...promise :-)

felicity said...

Hiya darling thanks for just confirming who you are and you are certainly one I wanted to hear from. I saw your exit posts - well done!

U2 is normally reasonable - but the above was just a blatant attempt to put me in fear - it is not libel to point out all the bruises on Kate - that is a fact. Neither is it libel to point out that these bruises are typical of domestic violence - that is also a fact.

There is no prospect of the McCanns suing anyone for libel - they are being investigated for serious criminal offences and would clearly run a mile rather than walk into any court. We have heard all these silly threats before - Clarence is going to spend the rest of his days tracking down everyone who had the audacity to exercise their right to free speech on the internet. I always think I threat has no force unless you can and actually do mean to carry it out - failing that is a sign of hopelessness. The standard defence to libel is fair comment - I think my comments are always fair and in fact demonstrate considerable sympathy towards Kate McCann. I do not see any of their so called supporters on the DE ever do that. They just increasingly demonstrate pure nastiness. Hardly helping their cause.

Glad to see you here!

Love Vivxxxxxxxxxxx

Anonymous said...

...and you know I'm only kidding about you 'turning up', don't you? Remember: I've bought the hat for the wedding, and await Mr Clooney setting the happy date :-)

Anonymous said...

Hi Viv,
What you say about libel is true. Furthermore, anything appearing in print can defend itself with the argument of 'in the public interest', apart from 'fair comment', and 'true in fact' (if it is indeed true in fact).
Bottom line (and I think HugeJanus would appreciate this): the McCanns chose to court public opinion, raise public donations, enlist the media, hire PRs. This very visible public campaign rightly attracts widespread public comment, good and bad.
The threat to sue for libel is a blatant attempt to silence inquiry, and any libel lawyer, Editor or Judge would see it as just that. A hollow threat aimed at innocent civilians, and ignored by hardened media combatants.
Nice to see you too. x

Anonymous said...

Rogatory letters returned to Portugal by HO.

"the case became delicate and it will be very hard to Gordon Browns government to agree to carry out all the requests of the Portuguese police."


Anonymous said...

Hi Anon One.
Hope you don't mind be assigned a number 1 status :-)
Well, if the case became 'delicate', and it will be hard for the UK Govt to comply with Portuguese requests, then I'm reminded of Harold Wilson's statement: 'A week is a long time in politics.'
Interesting how quickly politicians comply when their own position is threatened, don't you think?

Anonymous said...

According to SOL the letters are about to be re-posted back to HO.

Follow Clarries conference on the 3a forum...few posting now that attended.

Closure of MF forum...we closed it.!

Anonymous said...

Hi Anon 1,
Thanks for the update. As for the London meeting tonight: it's one small step for him, and one big yawn for mankind...in the long run. He's a sprinter; not a marathon man, in my view.
See ya next time. Gotta go.

Sickofconspiracies said...

Taken from the sky news blog.

for a couple of loving parents to murder their daughter, bury and cover all traces in the space of an hour while on holiday is stretching it a bit far....(YEP YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN!!)
The fact that they are educated doctors with not a blemish on their names.
The fact that they were on holiday with two other families.
The fact that they invited the world’s press to help with not one speck of real dirt sticking to them.
These are just some of the reasons why I am convinced the McCanns did not kill their daughter Madeleine, 4.
Increasingly, a whispering campaign has become a titillating news item that has become a deluge of news reports about why and how they murdered their daughter.
It is perhaps all too obvious that eventually the finger would point at the parents. After all, they say that in cases of child molesting and abduction half the time it is the nearest and dearest who is to blame.
This however, is perhaps more to do with the ineptitude of the Portuguese police investigation that has been ragged, eccentric at best.
That it took them three months to invite in specialists to pick up the vital strands of DNA evidence strewn around the flat.
That they seized the hire car of the McCann’s, found so-called “key, crucial DNA evidence on the back seat,” then allowed them to have it back to drive around....(THAT BIT MADE ME #### MYSELF LAUGHING!!)
That they allowed dozens of local people, including one of the main suspects to wander around the crime scene....(HMMMM WHO WAS IT HERE WHO SAID THE MCCANNS ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN!!!)

That they did not shut the border with Spain till practically the next day.
From the word go, they did not take this crime seriously........(HMMMMM WELL US 'TROLLS' HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT FROM DAY ONE MATE!!)

I am not going to claim to be able to solve the mystery, but I am convinced that Maddie was snatched by a local paedophile, who had been watching the family’s movements.
It was coming to the end of their holiday. The fifth night they had put their children to bed and wondered down to have dinner with their friends, all doctors bar one.
The apartment door was shut, but within easy reach of the road. In any case it is almost certain that the plastic shutters on the apartment were used to get out, perhaps in too.
The small village had apparently very little crime ..... . . until you scratched the surface. While there had only been one murder of any substance for nearly three years in the area, there was, it turned out, a seedy underworld inhabited by numerous expatriates..........

A long term English couple, who lived in the small nearby village where suspect Robert Murat grew up, told me there were “half a dozen” paedophiles living in their village alone.
It was sketchy and unsubstantiated, but there was no doubt, as in any place where northern European expatriates drift in their hundreds, there were quite a number of bad eggs amongst them.
Then, there was the Russian connection. Robert Murat’s friend Sergei, a handsome young man.

Either way, I do not see how the McCanns could have done it.
Much has been made of the missing hour-and-a-half window between 7pm and 8.30pm between Madeleine being put to bed and the parents coming down to dinner.
While Gerry was seen playing tennis, Kate was apparently in the flat . . . she must be guilty then? Not really. She was probably relaxing, having a bath, putting on her make up for the evening.
The latest report in one of the salacious Portuguese tabloids, Kate apparently killed Maddie and then hid the body in the fridge of their apartment before “passing it through various locations” and finally moving it in a hire car, perhaps on a “suspicious” trip to Huelva three weeks later......

But given that the apartment fridges are tiny, they would have had to chop her up first. Would they have then calmly sat at dinner with their friends at 8.30pm, showing no sign of a struggle or the anguish of murdering their daughter?
Surely one of the so-called Tapas Nine would have spotted something?
On top of this, Portuguese police had their finest detectives flown in from Lisbon the following day.
Is not likely they would have checked the fridge, and more crucially monitored their movements three weeks later on their publicity tour around Europe?
One other thing, if they had killed Madeleine and then somehow driven her body away in the tiny time scale that evening, they would have needed to have gone more than 25 miles – the distance from the resort sniffer dogs and police searched. That would mean driving for at least half an hour on the poor windy backroads inland from the Algarve. They did not know the back roads, nor a good spot to hide the body. How would they have hidden the body? Using a shovel? Hold on, would not there then be a shop somewhere that sold them a shovel? Is anyone missing a shovel? If so, please call the Olive Press newsdesk

It is all so far fetched it is quite ridiculous....a sick craving for power.

So please guys, give it a break!

sickofconspiracies said...

I'm not against the anti-McCanns and I enjoy some of the posters here (ironside, docmac, Viv...),I'm not related to the McCanns and I will never attack people personally for not agreeing with me. I cannot say what really happened, but I find the idea of them killing their own little girl and disposing of her body in those circumstances very far fetched, but I also think that leaving children on their own in a foreign country to go out with friends is appalling. I'm up for discussion any day...anyone?

Anonymous said...

Evidence of abductor? Of course how could I forget JT's bundleman.

Anonymous said...

Hello 'sickofconspiracies'.
Yup. I see your points, but I don't believe in 'conspiracies' either. However, I do believe that there are enough 'inconsistencies' and 'contradictions' in the statements made by the McCanns, their friends, and family to justify further inquiry. This is an 'ongoing investigation' according to the Portuguese and British Police, the British Forensic Service (with their world famous reputation), and child protection agencies.
Frankly, I don't give a damn whether any adult is offended by this 'ongoing investigation'. Child protection laws exist for the child, not the adults.
It took 14 months for forensic evidence to be finalised in the case of the Soham murders. Do you remember that? Schoolgirls Holly and Jessica murdered by Ian Huntley for his sexual gratification, and his girlfriend provided a false alibi.
Bad things happen to children, and any responsible, fair minded adult supports honest inquiry, without fear or favour, in my view.
Of course, you are entitled to your view.

Anonymous said...

Oh sorry I forgot to mention the father was stood outside while bundleman was running off with his child.

felicity said...

Hi there sick of conspiracies - so am I!

I note you identify yourself as a troll - well you said it.

You are just trotting out a load of unsubstantiated comments that you wish to elevate to the status of facts. I would just pick up on one - it is not half the time, it is found to be the parents - it is 95% of the time - and the McCanns are not defying the statistics here.

In the interests of free speech you are of course welcome to state your opinion on here - even though I plainly do not agree with it. Thanks for at least being polite - I have had a few messages appear on here from McCann supporters that certainly could not be described in that way.

Viv x

Anonymous said...

Hello again 'sickofconspiracies',
So, you're a troll? Naughty boy, but just for clarification: there are two 'anons' on this forum, and I've designated the succinct one to the position of...number one, of course, just so I don't get confused, let alone anyone else.
Meanwhile: I hope you are not a troll at heart. It's good to hear other points of view, honestly held, fairly discussed, and we can agree to disagree.
But if you are a troll...uh, oh. This is the wrong place for you.
Night night. Must go polish my broomstick.

Anonymous said...

Dear Viv,
Goodluck with controlling the trolls. This is a place for calm, reasoned discussion, so far. I don't think you'll have any problem with dumping troublemakers if they appear.

sickofconspiracies said...

I'm not the troll lol, just the guy I'm quoting. You should ignore the rude pros, they will hate it.
I agree on the 95%of times being the parents and on the many inconsistencies. If only the Mc's were less up themselves and their friends could tell the real truth of their childcare arrangements...
I believe none were checking their kids regularly if they were at all. They are arrogant and seem to live in a different world (I sometimes find that some middle class professionals and upper class people seem to have their own set of morals, e.g its a terrible thing if single mums leave the kids and go to the Pub, while 'we are middle class doctors and were being very responsible')they convince themselves that the bad things they do are not that bad because they are the 'better citizens'. This really grates me, but I still find it hard to believe that they are responsible for their daughter's death. I'm so looking forward for the PJ questioning.

felicity said...

sick of hiya again

the idea of parents killing their child is far fetched - but sadly it does happen. Additionally many children suffer appalling emotional and physical cruelty which can be a living death. Sad but true.

For the sake of children we cannot just say 'oh that is far fetched' We have to take it seriously - every time.

Luv Viv x

Anonymous said...

sickof...so you enjoy reading docmacs posts...then do you want to comment that a Tapas 1 has broken ranks and his evidence implicates another 2 of the Tapas crew.

JT never left the table, so no sighting of bundleman.
The GNR was not contacted until ROB returned to the fold...where had he been?

felicity said...

Hope you get an answer to that anon - to save us all getting confused it would be great if you could call yourself something - anything rather than anon.

viv x

PS Answers to Doc's points are always keenly awaited!

Anonymous said...

Ok I will sign bottom of posts merc.

SueB said...

Madeleine's parents 'not suspects'

British police and child protection officers do not suspect Madeleine McCann's parents of involvement in her disappearance, the couple's spokesman has said.

Clarence Mitchell said officials had assured him in private briefings that they were treating the case as one of "rare stranger abduction".

He was speaking as he launched an outspoken attack on the "appalling" standards of some media coverage of the disappearance of the Kate and Gerry McCann's daughter in Portugal in May.

Mr Mitchell, who acted as the couple's spokesman shortly after Madeleine went missing and reprised this role four-and-a-half months ago, said he was completely convinced of their innocence.

He told a packed theatre: "I have never once seen or heard anything from either of them to give me any cause for suspicion in any shape or form.

"I have also had briefings privately from the police and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) centre that also gave me complete reassurance that the authorities, in this country certainly, are treating this as a case of rare stranger abduction, as they call it."

But Mr Mitchell said he felt "shamed" as a former reporter by the "sloppiness" and "laziness" of certain journalists in covering the story.

Speaking at a debate on The McCanns and the Media at the London School of Economics, Mr Mitchell said: "What we have taken issue with, and our lawyers continue to review, is the aspect of coverage that is not only distorted but wilfully misrepresentative at times of the facts as we know them or the lack of facts. In that vacuum I'm afraid some very sloppy standards have crept in."

He singled out "the sloppiness and laziness of some of the journalists, and the lack of independence of thought and checking of facts".

Mr Mitchell said he understood putting a story about Madeleine's disappearance on the front page could add 70,000 sales to some newspapers, meaning there was "definitely a commercial imperative" to reporting on the case. He assured the audience they could be certain that "every single one" of the negative stories they read or heard about the McCanns was untrue.


sickofconspiracies said...

Talking about conspiracies...
Everytime I visit this blog, I lose my internet connection. It only ever happens with this site... very spooky.
Anon, the JT sighting has always struck as odd to me,and so was the fact that G spent so long talking outside to JW. you just don't do that when having dinner with friends.
Does Docmac know the new tapas1 evidence as fact? The problem I find is the with the segredo de justicia nothing is fact and everything consists of leaks, speculation and Clarrie's statements. So I find it hard to comment. The DX is making a great living out of rumours and recycling of old stories.
But if it is a fact, then its quite suspicious.
Anyway I'm off to bed.
Goodnight to everyone.

Anonymous said...

I have heard something finally.
I cannot repeat it here, either in part or full as the details are too shocking to contemplate, and I have no intention of pre-empting or jeopardising any legal process, especially as these fora and blogs are read by some who have malicious intent. By that I mean wish to disrupt the legal process.
Suffice to say it has been confirmed that poor wee Madeleine is never going home.

Posted by docmac.

Doc has a source..FACT

sickof....If you wish to challenge doc on his information, challenge away...could prove very interesting.


Irina said...

It was mentioned that PJ wanted to interview not only T7, but the government reps as well, who were send at the time.
May be that is a problem that created delay?

felicity said...

Sick of - you make a really good point there - you just dont stand there for about 15 minutes talking to an acquaintance whilst in the middle of a dinner party!

Are you sure you actually on the McCanns side in trying to suggest they are not responsible for harming their daughter? They have certainly demonstrated themselves to be parents culpable for causing immense harm to their children. By dumping them in a creche all day every day, rather than treating them as inclusive members of their family - worse still compounding that by leaving them every single night exposing them to serious emotional and physical harm - even after Maddie had been awake and crying for best part of two hours, alone, save for the twins.

If you are a parent yourself, I am sure you would have to agree that, in itself, would cause a child immense emotional harm and would certainly be enough in the UK to seriously get the Social Services Department on their case.

When you consider they were capable of doing this, the suggestion the PJ do in fact have evidence they did far worse is placed in context - they are the sort of parents responsible authorities would be very concerned about - they pose a serious risk of harm to their children. In accordance with their statutory duties Leics Social Services were duty bound to investigate them - we do not of course know what steps are being taken because in UK law anything whatsoever to do with the welfare of a child is highly confidential. So in court proceedings the child is referred to as X etc and surnames are not disclosed. I can see this is alll beyond the comprehension of McCann supporters on the Daily Express.

Shall I tell you something else - in the first interview with Jane HIll that I placed on here last - there is a comment that Maddie was a happy normal little thing - let us run off and hunt the monster! this becomes even more alarming when we hear the twins are now looking for the monster that took Maddie... Please do not try to preach to me we are talking about normal parents here, who are capable of bringing up normal happy children. By their own actions they have lost one of them altogether and are terrifying the other two by such detail dislosed to them.

It has been clearly announced the PJ have evidence..including forensic evidence against the McCanns, analysed by the FSS (on three occasions now!) and it was this that led to them being made arguidos - why do you have a problem accepting that? The full details of the forensic evidence as reported by Jane HIll BBC in September has been confirmed by a number of respected posters on here. Why did Kate McCann herself say she feared she was about to charged - no suspect is going to say that unless they see the police have a powerful case.

In early January a further interim report on the investigation had to be placed before the Investigating Judge in Portugal - are you seriously trying to suggest he saw no evidence, no reason to continue spending probably millions by now investigating the McCanns - instead he said well I know you dont have any evidence at all but just carry on doing your best to try and frame them. I hope you are not going to come here and make such silly suggestions because if so, you are going to be ignored in future.

Finally I would add you are the only person that has complained they have lost their internet connection when coming on here - with such paranoid comments you do make your intentions very suspect IMO. I think I know who you are and why you are here..as the McCann supporters on the Daily Express cannot resist running me down on a daily basis sometimes for several hours at a time I do read that site.

Viv x

felicity said...

Hi Irina

You make a good point and I have sometimes stressed I think it is quite possible PJ would have other witnesses to interview here. I think it would be vital to interview witnesses to give evidence at what the McCanns were saying AT THE TIME. This sort of evidence is always very welcome by a court - who are only too well aware a guilty party will change their evidence over time in an attempt to exculpate themselves.

So I think the relatives and friends who received the telephone calls would have to be interviewed and statements taken - Leics police may of course, have already done this - this is not the sort of harmful detail Clarence Mitchell is likely to leak is it!


Viv x

LittleGreyCell said...


Dear Anonymous (is it, you, Leigh??),

Many thanks for your very kind words last night!

I've just had another post from someone signing themselves 'Rosiepops' ...is this one genuine do you think?:-

"How silly ya' is to suggest ah' ain't de real Rosiepops, de biggest fan uh de most wonderful McCanns (who, incidentally, ah' have neva' met). Dey've done nodin' wrong, dey're da damn best parents in de whole wo'ld and ya' is all ludicrous. Now do ya' recon' me?" ROSIEPOPS

Frankly, I don't know what to believe now...



LittleGreyCell said...

Morning Docmac,

Thanks for your reply to my post yesterday.

Amazing how some of the Rosiepopses don't even bother to copy the 'real' one's syntax, isn't it? What's that about? Is it arrogance, or denial, or just plain stupidity?

Goodness,when they start to give even the Pros a bad (worse) name, I should think the time has come to abandon ship (which will probably go a considerable way to helping Kate and Gerry).


:) LGC

LittleGreyCell said...


Hi there SickofConspiracies,

Can you please tell me why is it that conspiracies of any sort come in for the same sort of stick that stories in the Sunday Sport of Elvis riding Shergar on Mars do?

Would you say that Tory MP Derek Conway didn't conspire with his family to keep quiet about the hefty slices of dosh he was dolling out to them for doing not very much work at all?

Did the British Government not conspire to pursuade the public that Iraq had deadly weapons that could arrive on their doorstep in the next 45 minutes - plagiarising some poor student's dissertation which they found on the net in order so to do - to give them a good excuse for an invasion which they were set on in any case?

Do the supermarkets not conspire in forming cartels for price-fixing when it comes to selling you a pint of milk?

What is it about conspiracy theories that lifts some peoples's eyebrows skyward??

Conspiracies happen all the time, all over the place.

And they certainly happen when people commit crimes and are very scared they might go to jail for them. (Ask Jonathan Aitken what HIS view on the existence of conspiracies is).

Best wishes,


Anonymous said...

Hi Little Grey Cell,
Yes, tis I...the one who flounced off in a fury. I've insisted the DE remove me permanently from the forum, although they took some persuading, even though I had pushed the 'report' button on my final posts because they were intended to challenge and expose the main forum thugs, rather than address the story of the day. DE moderators are trying to deal with the problem of trolls and wreckers, but not quickly enough, in my opinion, and I don't want to be associated with a forum which is in grave danger of breaching the Press Complaints Council's Code of Conduct, and the Obscene Publications Act. PHEW! You see? I'm still chucking toys out my pram :-) Here's my dastardly plan: read Viv, mccannfiles, and only homepages of my preferred DE posters. I see doctordoom, librarising,ictoan are noticeable by their absence too. See you sometime, and will read you here or there anyway.

Anonymous said...

Doh! It's 14.50 GMT

LittleGreyCell said...


Well, good to see you, Leigh!

I posted earlier this afternoon on another thread on Viv's site (no good asking me - I'm a woman of a certain age!) that I had an official warning today from the DE for "targetting" another poster.

Only trouble is, they couldn't tell me which one, since 'Rosiepops' was a cast of thousands yesterday, and I merely put "Rosiepops isn't feeling herself this afternoon". (Discovered that was the only post they removed). One of the Rosiepops's complained and that was that. Ah, the independence of the British press...

(Maybe Richard Desmond thought I was trying to usurp his position as chief porno publisher, but I didn't actually mean it that way!)

Anyway, I've written about it before, but the DE is extremely partisan to the Pros, which is probably why CM hasn't yet got it to bite dust.

The 3 Arguidos has some excellent stuff, too, Leigh. I can post you a link to the Madeleine pages if you like (it IS a little daunting to navigate around!).

Have a good evening, and I hope to see you on here regularly.


LittleGreyCell said...


Well, good to see you, Leigh!

I posted earlier this afternoon on another thread on Viv's site (no good asking me - I'm a woman of a certain age!) that I had an official warning today from the DE for "targetting" another poster.

Only trouble is, they couldn't tell me which one, since 'Rosiepops' was a cast of thousands yesterday, and I merely put "Rosiepops isn't feeling herself this afternoon". (Discovered that was the only post they removed). One of the Rosiepops's complained and that was that. Ah, the independence of the British press...

(Maybe Richard Desmond thought I was trying to usurp his position as chief porno publisher, but I didn't actually mean it that way!)

Anyway, I've written about it before, but the DE is extremely partisan to the Pros, which is probably why CM hasn't yet got it to bite dust.

The 3 Arguidos has some excellent stuff, too, Leigh. I can post you a link to the Madeleine pages if you like (it IS a little daunting to navigate around!).

Have a good evening, and I hope to see you on here regularly.


Anonymous said...

Just saw your post on this link, although I have posted to you on another link above.
Slam dunk, copy! Take a look at what I posted to you. I'm so chuffed that your copy here makes the same point. Ahhh...'great minds think alike', but in the meantime, I guess we'll just have to do with our observations :-)
I'm tempted to look at the 3Arguidos, but it might make more annoyed than I already am over the handling of this story, poor little missing Maddie.
Personally, I think the public are perfectly entitled to comment on this issue in whatever way they choose, preferably within the laws of libel, although the McCanns and friends have committed bigger libels, so maybe it's 'six of one, and half a dozen of the other'.
However, I am very unhappy at the breaches of the Press Council's Code of Conduct, and in the Daily Express, the Obscene Publications Act, plus the issue of the UK Charity Commissioners' need to protect the public from fraudulent claims of charitable fund raising.
Yikes. Just thrown more toys out of the pram!
I hope you've copied your posts. Did you see the way a newcomer 'Honey1' was treated the other night? That was the last straw for me. It was the persistent, blatant abuse of a blind woman whose only 'offence' against McCann supporters was that she posted in capital letters. I'm fuming about it, and I never fume in vain. When I calm down, the DE will get its comeuppance. See you sometime, sweet LGC. xo

Anonymous said...

By the way, DE posters might claim they were unaware of Honey1's disability at first. That's irrelevant in publishing. Ignorance of the law is no defence; it's just mitigation. DE and its moderators are bound by professional codes of conduct, and the law. It is for them to obey such rules, and laws. If their readers' transgress, then it is for them to intervene, and prevent further infringements.
Just thought I would clarify there, LGC, lest you think I've gone completely off my trolly! I'm just angry, and waiting to calm down before putting these issues in front of the proper authorities.
PHEW. All done now. See you next time, fearless crusader, although thankfully you always have the presence of mind to keep your sense of humour. See ya.

Anonymous said...

20.10 G.M.T.
You now have an official stalker...lil ol me. Sorry, but this issue of the abuse of publishing rules and law infuriates me. I'm aware of what happened to you, although I didn't see it in 'live time'. I thought the moderators would get a grip. They didn't. If the 'proper authorities' fail to act, then I will get as dastardly as the perpetrators. One of my oldest, dearest friends holds more influence in publishing, politics, and business than the McCann apologists. I'm willing to give the 'proper authorities' a chance, one last time. Then: thermonuclear response is justified, I think.
Justice for Madeleine, and every missing or abused child, however long it takes. A worthy cause, as so many of us believe, with no desire for personal or professional profit...unlike those who are now making money over her dead body.
The world? Would you pay tuppence for the way it is sometimes? I wouldn't when I'm angry. When I calm down, I know that values are priceless, timeless, just as the innocence of any child is a treasure worth protecting.
OK. Stalker going now :-)

felicity said...


You two are an absolute pleasure to read and I am delighted and honoured to have you on board...thermonuclear ROFLMAO. When ROB joins in as well it is pure harmony and just like the good old days. I wonder where DAD is?

Luv you loads
viv xxxxxxxx

Anonymous said...

Hi Viv,
Just a quick note as I'm v v busy for a few days. Yes, it's nice to see the good old names, isn't it? I see DE moderators are getting a grip, but firing off in the wrong direction, sometimes. No doubt, 2345 will deal with that. Lazarus should be given no place in a mainstream newspaper, ever. He's a thug, and his repeated breaches of decency exposed the DEs lax policy, in my opinion.
See you another time. Will catch up with posts too. Ta ra for now.
Have a great weekend to you, yours and everyone else on your forum, and our DE friends.
P.S. I think Dadto3 reads DE a bit, but became disgusted with the thugs' antics, so posts v little now, until the next story breakthrough, of course...

felicity said...

Hiya Anon

Thanks for that. It would be nice to hear from Dadto3. I have no doubt there will be a massive breakthrough in this story - the only question is when! It could take some time, I think, at the European level but who knows really! I have a feeling there will be a lot of charges...the criminal behaviour has just continued unabated and Clarence Mitchell is an absolute disgrace in aiding and abetting that IMO.

You have a good weekend too!

Viv x

Cheeky Minx said...


Afternoon, Stalker! :)

Yes, I do agree with everything you say. You are (obviously) much more clued up than I am about the rules and regs of the printed media (my field is Broadcast Media), but I get just as angry!

This has all really been an eye-opener for me and I'm feeling quite naive, since I've done political satire for donkeys years and thought my cynicism was developed enough. But I just didn't realise to what extent the tentacles of self-interested power could reach out and influence what I had been assuming was a reasonably-detached media.

Having said that, though, I remember during the first Gulf War that most of the nationals were putting out what were plainly 'in the national interest' partisan pieces which, in my view, bordered on being heavy propaganda. This even included the Indie, although it was brave of them to publish regular, hard-hitting pieces from Robert Fisk on the front page, telling it like it was (grisly).

I can't say too much about my background for obvious reasons, but let's just say I've been in the very fortunate position of 'having a voice' during various times of major political upheaval, and it's been great to have had an opportunity to give an alternate point of view. (Does this make any sense at all??)

What has been happening with the Madeleine case is extraordinary, in my opinion. Has it surprised you, Leigh? (I'm aware that you can't say too much, either!).

A major problem the press has is the ever-swinging scimitar over its head, dangled by successive governments threatening the abolition of self-regulation. I imagine it will do its dastardly job someday soon, although I do hope I'm wrong. But look what happened to the BBC with the unbelievably biased Hutton Report! Grim, isn't it?

Anyway, it's wonderful to share these views, Leigh! And I love the idea of being a fearless crusader - although is it OK if I don't do the lycra stuff? Never been very fond of pantomime...



LittleGreyCell said...


Hi Viv!

Many thanks for including me in your kind comments. I can assure you it's an absolute pleasure to be able to post on your wonderful site, where there's so much interesting information, lots of lovely people to exchange ideas with and where you can feel safe.

So thank YOU! :)


felicity said...


The pleasure is all mine!

Great to read you - fire away!


Viv xxx

Anonymous said...

21.05 G.M.T.

Yes, LGC. Everything you say is right, in my not so humble opinion :-) Hey! So sue me!
Yet this: the world weird web of the 21st century is an experiment for Print; a testing ground for how far to allow free for all comment; an opportunity to get nearer to readers, and of course, make advertisers happy, and receive their thanks in cash.
Yet this also: mainstream Print is bound by certain rules, regulations, laws. A certain Code of Conduct which is now being re-written, depending on how this 'new media' of online and forums works out. A tortuous procedure, to be sure, but Clarence and others are soaking in quicksand, although their vanity refuses to see this.
Old rules still apply; new rules have yet to be written.
Old rules of journalism: defend your readers' rights; they are your lifeblood; your money; your future; your duty if you aspire to be more than just ad sheets.
Advertisers rely on editorial to represent readers; editorial relies on advertisers to make the money needed to keep that boat afloat.
It's a simple relationship, really. Much simpler than broadcast rules...and good luck with that one, LGC! I don't think I'd have the patience for it :-) xo
And if all else fails in Print: there's always the thermonuclear option: nuke the opposition to free speech. Who owns Print anyway? The dimwit mechanics of 'new media' manipulation or the owners/occupiers/journalists? My money is on the latter.
Goodbye Gerry, Richard, Brian, Clarence, in due course when it suits the Press, not you.
Ooops. Sorry LGC (nah, not sorry really.) Still chucking toys out of the pram, as you can see!

hope4truth said...

Oh Niki

Sorry about the flu...

Well done on the cigarettes :o)

And just after I posted to you I thought blimey in a couple of months it will be Easter again I wonder if Niki finished her chocolate stash from last year yet???

I am looking forward to egg's aleready...

Hope to see you soon xxx

hope4truth said...


When the Taxi Driver came forward I remeber asking if Madeleine was dead in Kate's arms and was shot down as being sick stupid and what ever other words the pros wanted to throw at me...

I was not trying to be sick as what better way to move a body than in plain view (Gerry could well have carried her in his arms after she died) a horrible thought but by god what ever happend to her it was not nice...

Then I read the below and there are sick people in the world that did exactly what I had said...

Sadly anything is posible when people are sick and desprate enough...

A court heard how a Big Issue seller killed his girlfriend's baby and then wheeled the body through the centre of Cardiff to the child's mother.

BBC Wales's Jason Mohammad: "When they arrived at their council flat, he put the lifeless body in a cot"
Stuart Firth assured Maria Kearney the five-month-old was asleep in her pushchair.

The couple then travelled back to Ely on a bus with Firth clutching Seanie Kearney's body close to him.

And when they arrived home he placed the child in a cot and pretended she was still sleeping.

Hours later, Miss Kearney went to check on the baby and found her cold and stiff.

Jane McDonald, prosecuting at Swansea crown court, said Miss Kearney became hysterical and raised the alarm.

Seanie was confirmed dead at Cardiff Royal Infirmary.

'Utterly ashamed'

Firth denied harming the child but a year later both he and Miss Kearney were charged with murder.

Seanie's mother spent several months in jail on remand before Firth owned up to what he had done and Miss Kearney was released.

Firth admitted manslaughter and was jailed for four years. The court heard he had three previous convictions for violence.

David Aubrey, his barrister, said he had tried to blank out the killing. He said he was utterly ashamed that for so long he failed to own up and that the mother who had lost her child had to face criminal proceedings.

The judge, Mr Justice Douglas Brown, said he accepted Firth had not intended to cause Seanie such serious harm.

But he had a public duty to mark the death of a child in this way with a substantial sentence