and here is a bit more Amber, just so people know where we both stand on this x
I do not have a problem with peoples' opinions, I also think it is very likely Madeleine is dead and even very likely that was Kate, but would stress once again the reality, we just do not know as the Pt Police made very clear after an exhaustive investigation. So who are these people who think they have the right to insist they do, as a fact?
It is their actions I have a problem with, interfering in the course of justice, writing letters to try and expose everything in the press that would then prevent the McCanns being put on trial, writing abusive remarks to other posters that do not share their opinion. Making this a battle between one side and the other, the Pro McCanns and the Pro Goncalo's. That is what upsets me, even if that little girl is dead, does she not deserve respect, justice, a decent burial?
Does it matter if the letter was written by Tony Bennett personally or some Portuguese man? No it does not, I am not apologising to anyone, I remain disappointed in Pamalam for what she now claims is a series of dishonest and pathetic correspondence by a Portuguese poster trying to con the Home Office and interfere in the course of justice. It may have been thought a smart move to ditch Tony Bennett and rubbish him for just going too far in this Pro Goncalo mania, but everything he says, does, writes and stands for is just exactly the same with the ruling elite on this board. It is not a search for the truth, it is just a campaign for Goncalo.
Since when did two wrongs ever make a right? The McCanns are lying and spinning, I want no part of people who just do the same to make one police officer right.
People do not seem to realise that whatever happened to Madeleine, the more they seek to get it into the British press the less chance there ever is for Justice and if Maddie is still alive, and I have always said that is a big if, recovering her alive.
There are not two camps in this case, there are three, those who lie and spin for Kate and Gerry, those who lie and spin for Goncalo and those that just want to know the truth and support Madeleine and not to have to put up with abuse for that.
It is their actions I have a problem with, interfering in the course of justice, writing letters to try and expose everything in the press that would then prevent the McCanns being put on trial, writing abusive remarks to other posters that do not share their opinion. Making this a battle between one side and the other, the Pro McCanns and the Pro Goncalo's. That is what upsets me, even if that little girl is dead, does she not deserve respect, justice, a decent burial?
Does it matter if the letter was written by Tony Bennett personally or some Portuguese man? No it does not, I am not apologising to anyone, I remain disappointed in Pamalam for what she now claims is a series of dishonest and pathetic correspondence by a Portuguese poster trying to con the Home Office and interfere in the course of justice. It may have been thought a smart move to ditch Tony Bennett and rubbish him for just going too far in this Pro Goncalo mania, but everything he says, does, writes and stands for is just exactly the same with the ruling elite on this board. It is not a search for the truth, it is just a campaign for Goncalo.
Since when did two wrongs ever make a right? The McCanns are lying and spinning, I want no part of people who just do the same to make one police officer right.
People do not seem to realise that whatever happened to Madeleine, the more they seek to get it into the British press the less chance there ever is for Justice and if Maddie is still alive, and I have always said that is a big if, recovering her alive.
There are not two camps in this case, there are three, those who lie and spin for Kate and Gerry, those who lie and spin for Goncalo and those that just want to know the truth and support Madeleine and not to have to put up with abuse for that.
viv
Ambersuz Tue 26 Jan - 18:15
viv wrote:can you just delete me from here, I am just sickened by the attitudes displayed and people just keep chanting she is dead, the British Police are all bent etc, it is repugnant, as is all the concern about other bloggers, rather than Madeleine.
I just do not need to put up with the idiots you allow on here and all the underhand goings on whilst people cash in and play politics, it just leaves me cold.
viv I think the majority of people on this forum think she is dead, me included. I accept peoples opinions whether they agree with me or not....why cant you?
Ambersuz
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 19:16
Did he seriously expect them to answer this? He may want some salacious information for his book but he is very deluded if he thinks The Home Office would supply it to him!!
11 August 2008
Home Office
Direct Communications Unit
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF
Dear Sir
Freedom of Information Request: Press reporting gag in the case of Madeleine Beth McCann.
With the current suspension of the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann, who reportedly disappeared from her bedroom in Praia da Luz, Algarve, Portugal some time between 21:00 and 22:00 on the night of 3 May 2007, and the consequent release in Portugal of the detailed papers from the inquiry case file, the grossly unbalanced reporting of the British 'media' evidenced by the failure to fairly present even the most basic facts uncovered by the joint Anglo-Portuguese Inquiry team has given rise to thoughts about there being a restriction order having been placed on the British press, specifically in respect of those persons who, while not directly or biologically related to Madeleine Beth McCann, were nevertheless directly associated with her disappearance, namely Dr David Payne and his partner, Fiona
Payne; Dr Russell O'Brien and his partner, Jane Tanner; Dr Matthew Oldfield and his partner, Rachel Mampilly Oldfield.
This is a request for information, namely for any and all records or documents or extracts thereof reporting or evidencing that at any time on or after 4 May 2007 any form of limitation or restriction or injunction or moratorium over the free and fair and unfettered disclosure of any aspect whatsoever of, or any detail whatsoever of, the Inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann and/or over any
information pertaining to any persons directly associated with that disappearance and/or directly associated with the Inquiry, was requested, instructed and/or obtained by any person, or persons, whether employed at any level within or providing any service within the Home Office or any of its ancillary operations, including, but not limited to, the Central Office of Information.
It seeks further:
(a) the identity, or identities, of any and all the persons by whom,
(b) the date and time at which, and
(c) the means of communication through which, any such limitation or restriction or injunction or moratorium referred to above was requested, instructed and/or obtained.
On an administrative point, I request that I be afforded both an acknowledgement of receipt and a response to the above request for information in accordance with the time prescribed in Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Further, I request that such acknowledgement of receipt and response be communicated and delivered to my electronic mail address given hereunder, failing which, by letter to the postal address provided below.
Yours faithfully
Albert Moisiu
11 August 2008
Home Office
Direct Communications Unit
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF
Dear Sir
Freedom of Information Request: Press reporting gag in the case of Madeleine Beth McCann.
With the current suspension of the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann, who reportedly disappeared from her bedroom in Praia da Luz, Algarve, Portugal some time between 21:00 and 22:00 on the night of 3 May 2007, and the consequent release in Portugal of the detailed papers from the inquiry case file, the grossly unbalanced reporting of the British 'media' evidenced by the failure to fairly present even the most basic facts uncovered by the joint Anglo-Portuguese Inquiry team has given rise to thoughts about there being a restriction order having been placed on the British press, specifically in respect of those persons who, while not directly or biologically related to Madeleine Beth McCann, were nevertheless directly associated with her disappearance, namely Dr David Payne and his partner, Fiona
Payne; Dr Russell O'Brien and his partner, Jane Tanner; Dr Matthew Oldfield and his partner, Rachel Mampilly Oldfield.
This is a request for information, namely for any and all records or documents or extracts thereof reporting or evidencing that at any time on or after 4 May 2007 any form of limitation or restriction or injunction or moratorium over the free and fair and unfettered disclosure of any aspect whatsoever of, or any detail whatsoever of, the Inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann and/or over any
information pertaining to any persons directly associated with that disappearance and/or directly associated with the Inquiry, was requested, instructed and/or obtained by any person, or persons, whether employed at any level within or providing any service within the Home Office or any of its ancillary operations, including, but not limited to, the Central Office of Information.
It seeks further:
(a) the identity, or identities, of any and all the persons by whom,
(b) the date and time at which, and
(c) the means of communication through which, any such limitation or restriction or injunction or moratorium referred to above was requested, instructed and/or obtained.
On an administrative point, I request that I be afforded both an acknowledgement of receipt and a response to the above request for information in accordance with the time prescribed in Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Further, I request that such acknowledgement of receipt and response be communicated and delivered to my electronic mail address given hereunder, failing which, by letter to the postal address provided below.
Yours faithfully
Albert Moisiu
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Bren Yesterday at 19:18
Viv, they are not by Tony Bennett, those letters are by someone else, from outside UK.
Last edited by Bren on Mon 25 Jan - 19:38; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Edited to remove location)
_________________
The New 3A's (Maddie Forum) - http://www.the3arguidos.info/
Headlines Today (General Forum)- http://headlines-today.co.uk/
Bren- Golden Poster
- Number of posts: 982
Warning:
Points: 1207
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-20 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
MoondampRoses Yesterday at 19:33
Hello viv, I can't see the goverment divulging information to him about this case either. He just can't help interfering in things in general, can he? Does Pam know that it is Bennett as he is posting under a pseudonym? Even if she does know perhaps she doesn't realise the extent of his 'dealings' as she does not come on here very often and I think that most of her time is spent dealing with important issues and developments concerning Madeleine. Perhaps you could ask Amber to let Pam know the 'gist' of what's been going on with regards to Bennett then Pam could make a more informed decision as to whether she wants to keep his posts on the site. All my very best wishes from Rose xxx
_________________
Try to treat others with the same degree and level of respect that you would wish to be treated with yourself.
MoondampRoses- Golden Poster
Number of posts: 807
Location: UK
Warning:
Points: 986
Reputation: -1
Registration date: 2009-08-23-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 19:33
I don't think so Bren! How can a Pt subject make requests under our FofI Act?
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Bren Yesterday at 19:34
That is not Bennett, I know who it is, and the guy lives does not come from UK.
Last edited by Bren on Mon 25 Jan - 19:37; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Edited to remove location)
_________________
The New 3A's (Maddie Forum) - http://www.the3arguidos.info/
Headlines Today (General Forum)- http://headlines-today.co.uk/
Bren- Golden Poster
- Number of posts: 982
Warning:
Points: 1207
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-20 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 19:36
MoondampRoses wrote:Hello viv, I can't see the goverment divulging information to him about this case either. He just can't help interfering in things in general, can he? Does Pam know that it is Bennett as he is posting under a pseudonym? Even if she does know perhaps she doesn't realise the extent of his 'dealings' as she does not come on here very often and I think that most of her time is spent dealing with important issues and developments concerning Madeleine. Perhaps you could ask Amber to let Pam know the 'gist' of what's been going on with regards to Bennett then Pam could make a more informed decision as to whether she wants to keep his posts on the site. All my very best wishes from Rose xxx
Thanks Rose, I think it would be a good idea if Amber had a word with her. It is pure verbose, meddlesome Bennett at his very worst and it just goes to show that having to stop behaving like this in his own name does not stop him!
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 19:38
Bren wrote:That is not Bennett, I know who it is, and the guy lives does not come from UK.
Bren, I am sorry but it is just not possible for a Portuguese citizen to make such requests!
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
MoondampRoses Yesterday at 19:43
Bren wrote:Viv, they are not by Tony Bennett, those letters are by someone else, from Portugal.
Hello Bren, I've just seen your post. If this is correct it makes my post invalid. How are you able to tell that it is not Tony and it is someone from Portugal. I'm asking as I'm not that good with computers yet but I'm slowly learning. If this is right about the poster of this information coming from Portugal I will have to remove my first post. I hope you are keeping well Bren. Look after yourself. With all my very best wishes from Rose xxx
_________________
Try to treat others with the same degree and level of respect that you would wish to be treated with yourself.
MoondampRoses- Golden Poster
Number of posts: 807
Location: UK
Warning:
Points: 986
Reputation: -1
Registration date: 2009-08-23-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Bren Yesterday at 19:46
Yes I know the person, because they have spoken to me on the phone in the past and it was definitely not Bennett.
Hiya Rose, hope you are keeping well to, will be glad when summer arrives it is turning cold here again.
Hiya Rose, hope you are keeping well to, will be glad when summer arrives it is turning cold here again.
_________________
The New 3A's (Maddie Forum) - http://www.the3arguidos.info/
Headlines Today (General Forum)- http://headlines-today.co.uk/
Bren- Golden Poster
- Number of posts: 982
Warning:
Points: 1207
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-20 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 19:50
The Act only applies to British Citizens and the response is included. Had that been a Portuguese citizen, the HO would have simply said they had no right to any information anyway, but they say this and yet those repeated requests continued to be made:
Furthermore, the Home Office will not comment on any of the information contained in Goncal Amaral’s book, ‘A Verdade da Mentira’ as it would potentially undermine ongoing investigations.
There are a number of sensitivities relevant to your request, given that Madeleine McCann is still missing and the investigation is still ongoing. Confirming or denying whether any information is held could undermine the investigation, prejudice international relations and could endanger the health and safety of members of the
public.
I am sorry to say there are so many people who are not the least bit concerned about Madeleine, or justice for her!
Furthermore, the Home Office will not comment on any of the information contained in Goncal Amaral’s book, ‘A Verdade da Mentira’ as it would potentially undermine ongoing investigations.
There are a number of sensitivities relevant to your request, given that Madeleine McCann is still missing and the investigation is still ongoing. Confirming or denying whether any information is held could undermine the investigation, prejudice international relations and could endanger the health and safety of members of the
public.
I am sorry to say there are so many people who are not the least bit concerned about Madeleine, or justice for her!
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Photon Yesterday at 20:00
viv wrote:
Bren, I am sorry but it is just not possible for a Portuguese citizen to make such requests!
Have you seen his passport??
Photon- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 1596
Warning:
Points: 1855
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-23-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
zodiac Yesterday at 20:08
What is the point of this (insult to Pamalam) thread?
zodiac- Reg Member
- Number of posts: 292
Warning:
Points: 451
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-20 -
How dare you put such a headline up and make false assumptions
pamalam Yesterday at 20:18
Hi Viv
How dare you put such a headline up and make false assumptions.
Pray tell me were did you get the idea that it was from Tony Bennett.
This article was written by Albym (Remember Albym he is the one that does a lot of the translations) for your benefit as well as other peoples.
No way would I doubt Albym’s word.
This document was sent to me direct from Albym, on a pdf document. From the same Email address he uses when he sends me the translations.
Yes Albym lives in Portugal, but how do you know if he is a Portuguese citizen or not.
If you care to look back on Joana’s site she also posted this at the same time, after Albym sent both of us the pdf.
How dare you put such a headline up and make false assumptions.
Pray tell me were did you get the idea that it was from Tony Bennett.
This article was written by Albym (Remember Albym he is the one that does a lot of the translations) for your benefit as well as other peoples.
No way would I doubt Albym’s word.
This document was sent to me direct from Albym, on a pdf document. From the same Email address he uses when he sends me the translations.
Yes Albym lives in Portugal, but how do you know if he is a Portuguese citizen or not.
If you care to look back on Joana’s site she also posted this at the same time, after Albym sent both of us the pdf.
pamalam- Newbie
- Number of posts: 16
Warning:
Points: 100
Reputation: 2
Registration date: 2009-11-11 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Ambersuz Yesterday at 20:19
http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/books-f153/book-by-albert-moisiu-madeleine-beth-mccann-a-mystery-story-t2697.htm?highlight=albert
viv, this is NOT Bennett!
I've known about the book for a long time and if it had been Bennett he would have been boasting about it long ago and asking for donations long before now.....
Think about it.....
viv, this is NOT Bennett!
I've known about the book for a long time and if it had been Bennett he would have been boasting about it long ago and asking for donations long before now.....
Think about it.....
Ambersuz- Administrator
Number of posts: 15701
Age: 50
Location: Spain. The land of the goats but Paula has eaten them all since!
Warning:
Points: 7627
Reputation: 34
Registration date: 2008-07-21
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Ambersuz Yesterday at 20:33
Written by Albert Moisiu, July 30, 2009
Thank you for that objective, albeit light, review of the book. One has to wonder why the family perseveres to have an English version quashed.
You mention being unsurprised, given the evidence amassed up to September 2007, at the suspicions then held by Dr Amaral and, indeed, the entire investigation team. What is surprising is the manner in which the UK police forces, originally assigned in direct support of that team, about-faced and marched back to their island, and their insularity, seemingly switching allegiance from the objectiveness of the police investigation to the subjectiveness of the opinions voiced by the family, friends, and other vocal subordinates employed to render those opinions in public.
We, in Europe, are very fortunate to have such a book available to the general public, along with other material made available to the world media by the Portuguese authorities, but much less fortunate when we hear of some 11,000 pages of information being stolidly withheld from scrutiny, even by way of the British Freedom of Information Act, by those same UK police forces and, in particular, their superiors in the Home Office.
One might be tempted to conclude that certain people may not wish the truth of the case to emerge.
http://www.euroweeklynews.com/columnists/lost-in-translation/confessions-and-lies.html
Here is a comment on a euro weekly article that Albert left....
viv its 2 different people for sure!
Thank you for that objective, albeit light, review of the book. One has to wonder why the family perseveres to have an English version quashed.
You mention being unsurprised, given the evidence amassed up to September 2007, at the suspicions then held by Dr Amaral and, indeed, the entire investigation team. What is surprising is the manner in which the UK police forces, originally assigned in direct support of that team, about-faced and marched back to their island, and their insularity, seemingly switching allegiance from the objectiveness of the police investigation to the subjectiveness of the opinions voiced by the family, friends, and other vocal subordinates employed to render those opinions in public.
We, in Europe, are very fortunate to have such a book available to the general public, along with other material made available to the world media by the Portuguese authorities, but much less fortunate when we hear of some 11,000 pages of information being stolidly withheld from scrutiny, even by way of the British Freedom of Information Act, by those same UK police forces and, in particular, their superiors in the Home Office.
One might be tempted to conclude that certain people may not wish the truth of the case to emerge.
http://www.euroweeklynews.com/columnists/lost-in-translation/confessions-and-lies.html
Here is a comment on a euro weekly article that Albert left....
viv its 2 different people for sure!
Ambersuz- Administrator
Number of posts: 15701
Age: 50
Location: Spain. The land of the goats but Paula has eaten them all since!
Warning:
Points: 7627
Reputation: 34
Registration date: 2008-07-21-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
viv Yesterday at 21:04
Those letters are the same as what Tony Bennett was writing and the Home Office would have required a British address to reply to. TBH I just feel sickened by what I see.
viv- Platinum Poster
- Number of posts: 1479
Warning:
Points: 1607
Reputation: -4
Registration date: 2009-08-30 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Ambersuz Yesterday at 21:09
Albyn might have family in the uk.....in which case could use their address...
Ambersuz- Administrator
Number of posts: 15701
Age: 50
Location: Spain. The land of the goats but Paula has eaten them all since!
Warning:
Points: 7627
Reputation: 34
Registration date: 2008-07-21-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
jjp Yesterday at 21:15
Surely this thread based as it is on a complete fallacy should be locked?
I don't believe that there is any reason for anyone to be disappointed in Pamalam.
I don't believe that there is any reason for anyone to be disappointed in Pamalam.
jjp- Elite Member
- Number of posts: 336
Warning:
Points: 734
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2008-12-13 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Bren Yesterday at 21:31
On the 3a's Beo set up a place for documents to be stored, Albym kindly uploaded some FOI letters to that part of the domain, which people could use as a basis for their requests. Whether Bennett copied them and then added his tuppence worth I don't know, but Albym is definitely NOT Bennett. Alybm has worked hard for Justice for Maddie and he is working tirelessly doing translations for all of us.
Sorry viv, I tried to tell you by PM, but associating Alby with Bennett IMO is an insult to Albym.
Sorry viv, I tried to tell you by PM, but associating Alby with Bennett IMO is an insult to Albym.
_________________
The New 3A's (Maddie Forum) - http://www.the3arguidos.info/
Headlines Today (General Forum)- http://headlines-today.co.uk/
Bren- Golden Poster
- Number of posts: 982
Warning:
Points: 1207
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-20 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
pamalam Yesterday at 21:38
viv wrote:Those letters are the same as what Tony Bennett was writing and the Home Office would have required a British address to reply to. TBH I just feel sickened by what I see.
Hi Viv
What are you talking about?
Have you read the full article plus the reference document links?
Albym is a very educated and intelligent person why would he want to copy something Tony Bennett wrote.
If Tony Bennett wrote an article what has that got do with Albym.
If the article was by Tony Bennett, but I can assure you it is not. I would have stated that he wrote it. I have no reason to lie about the situation.
I think you owe me and Albym an apology; there is no way that I would put anything on my site that did not come from an official source.
I don’t take kindly to my name been used and abused.
Viv send me TB letters so that I can forward them onto Albym
pamalam@hotmail.co.uk
pamalam- Newbie
- Number of posts: 16
Warning:
Points: 100
Reputation: 2
Registration date: 2009-11-11 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
eddie Yesterday at 22:20
We all feel passionately about this case and often we can allow ourselves to be riled up.
I hope Viv and Pamalam can resolve this and the appropriate apologies can be made, if necessary, as I am sure they will.
Remember; we are all here for the same thing girls!
I hope Viv and Pamalam can resolve this and the appropriate apologies can be made, if necessary, as I am sure they will.
Remember; we are all here for the same thing girls!
_________________
IF WE DON'T STAND UP FOR CHILDREN, THEN WE DON'T STAND FOR MUCH...
eddie- Moderator
Number of posts: 9871
Age: 39
Location: essex
Warning:
Points: 5887
Reputation: 30
Registration date: 2008-07-22-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Photon Yesterday at 22:21
I think that only one apology is necessary, Eddie.
Photon- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 1596
Warning:
Points: 1855
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-23-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
eddie Yesterday at 22:25
Photon wrote:I think that only one apology is necessary, Eddie.
Evening Photon,
Yes that is probably the case. I am sure Viv, when she realises her mistake, will do the right thing
_________________
IF WE DON'T STAND UP FOR CHILDREN, THEN WE DON'T STAND FOR MUCH...
eddie- Moderator
Number of posts: 9871
Age: 39
Location: essex
Warning:
Points: 5887
Reputation: 30
Registration date: 2008-07-22-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
jjp Yesterday at 22:59
And after such a public statement - perhaps that apology should be on the open forum.
jjp- Elite Member
- Number of posts: 336
Warning:
Points: 734
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2008-12-13 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
MoondampRoses Yesterday at 23:14
Hello Pamalam, I feel I may owe you an apology for joining in on the thread with my observations. I genuinely thought this was an article written by Tony Bennett as the language tone & style was very similar. I think Bren is probably correct when she says that Tony Bennett may have used Albyms style of writing. That is the only thing that would explain the similarities. I only wondered if you knew about the similarities & the fact that it may have been written by someone else. I hope I did not offend you or Albym with my post, if I did I sincerely apologise. Thank you for all your hard work that you do on Madeleine's behalf. With all my very best wishes from Rose xxx
Last edited by MoondampRoses on Mon 25 Jan - 23:17; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : To alter a couple of words)
_________________
Try to treat others with the same degree and level of respect that you would wish to be treated with yourself.
MoondampRoses- Golden Poster
Number of posts: 807
Location: UK
Warning:
Points: 986
Reputation: -1
Registration date: 2009-08-23-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Claudia79 Yesterday at 23:35
I just read this. It's obvious that it's not Bennett we are talking about. In fact, Albym is a very respected poster and has fought a lot for Justice for Madeleine, doing a lot more than most of us who only write anonymously behind a computer screen.
Having said that, I would also like to say that even if it was something written by TB, Pamalam (or any other blogger for that matter) would still have the right to publish whatever she wanted. If I don't like a blog or if a blogger publishes something I disagree with, I don't post on it and I don't visit it and that's it.
Pamalam, please give my regards to Albym. Haven't seen him around lately and I confess I miss his posts.
Having said that, I would also like to say that even if it was something written by TB, Pamalam (or any other blogger for that matter) would still have the right to publish whatever she wanted. If I don't like a blog or if a blogger publishes something I disagree with, I don't post on it and I don't visit it and that's it.
Pamalam, please give my regards to Albym. Haven't seen him around lately and I confess I miss his posts.
Claudia79- Moderator
Number of posts: 891
Age: 30
Warning:
Points: 1051
Reputation: 0
Registration date: 2009-08-25-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
pamalam Yesterday at 23:39
Apologies accepted rose.
But I really would like to see Tony Bennett’s letters. So that I can send them on to Albym for him to decide if TB has copied / forged his letters.
If anyone has access to them please email them to me.
pamalam@hotmail.co.uk
This is written at the head of the article.
I grant permission to Jo Morais and/or Pamalam to publish this article on their respective Internet sites, unedited save for possible website formatting, either in whole or in part, as a complete PDF file, formatted web content, or in any other way they deem fit.
All views expressed in the article and correspondence written by me are my own.
Included in the appendices are copies of correspondence which was sent or received by me by way of electronic mail and, in some cases, additional paper copies by registered mail.
All original copies are retained by me.
Albert Moisiu
December 2009
Here is the pdf that was sent to me and Joana
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/GuestAuthor.pdf
But I really would like to see Tony Bennett’s letters. So that I can send them on to Albym for him to decide if TB has copied / forged his letters.
If anyone has access to them please email them to me.
pamalam@hotmail.co.uk
This is written at the head of the article.
I grant permission to Jo Morais and/or Pamalam to publish this article on their respective Internet sites, unedited save for possible website formatting, either in whole or in part, as a complete PDF file, formatted web content, or in any other way they deem fit.
All views expressed in the article and correspondence written by me are my own.
Included in the appendices are copies of correspondence which was sent or received by me by way of electronic mail and, in some cases, additional paper copies by registered mail.
All original copies are retained by me.
Albert Moisiu
December 2009
Here is the pdf that was sent to me and Joana
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/GuestAuthor.pdf
pamalam- Newbie
- Number of posts: 16
Warning:
Points: 100
Reputation: 2
Registration date: 2009-11-11 -
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Laffin Assasin Today at 1:51
viv wrote:I don't think so Bren! How can a Pt subject make requests under our FofI Act?
Viv, you've just blown any credibility you had left, right out of the WATER.
Take a break, go learn to dive , or learn to rationalise, FFS.
Your a spent force, a DICK SPRING like "HEADLESS-CHICKEN"
Laffin Assasin- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 2603
Warning:
Points: 2956
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2009-08-22-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Laffin Assasin Today at 1:56
viv wrote:I don't think so Bren! How can a Pt subject make requests under our FofI Act?
Have you ever come across Heather Brooke ? http://www.yrtk.org/about-author/
you ain't half as enlightened as you claim to be, IMHO.
Laffin Assasin- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 2603
Warning:
Points: 2956
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2009-08-22
viv wrote:MoondampRoses wrote:Hello viv, I can't see the goverment divulging information to him about this case either. He just can't help interfering in things in general, can he? Does Pam know that it is Bennett as he is posting under a pseudonym? Even if she does know perhaps she doesn't realise the extent of his 'dealings' as she does not come on here very often and I think that most of her time is spent dealing with important issues and developments concerning Madeleine. Perhaps you could ask Amber to let Pam know the 'gist' of what's been going on with regards to Bennett then Pam could make a more informed decision as to whether she wants to keep his posts on the site. All my very best wishes from Rose xxx
Thanks Rose, I think it would be a good idea if Amber had a word with her. It is pure verbose, meddlesome Bennett at his very worst and it just goes to show that having to stop behaving like this in his own name does not stop him!
Could you be "reflecting in the mirror" ?
Laffin Assasin- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 2603
Warning:
Points: 2956
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2009-08-22-
Re: I am very disappointed with Pamalam
Laffin Assasin Today at 2:00
viv wrote:Those letters are the same as what Tony Bennett was writing and the Home Office would have required a British address to reply to. TBH I just feel sickened by what I see.
Mind you, you still think maddies alive, at times, what can I say ??
Laffin Assasin- Platinum Poster
Number of posts: 2603
Warning:
Points: 2956
Reputation: 1
Registration date: 2009-08-22-
9 comments:
his is what the Home Office have to say to intermeddling bloggers, who send a barrage of Freedom of Information Act requests and pontificate about the law that they plainly do not understand written by Barmy Bennett. When are they going to sit up and listen! How dare they just insist Madeleine is dead so they know better!! Did you ever, ever, stop to think that Madeleine and other childrens' lives and safety could be at risk. How dare you demand an apology from me.
There are just a few people who really do need to take a long hard look in the Mirror, all those that just want to make money out of Madeleine, both sides. All those who just want to con and deceive. So you tell me it was not Tony Bennett, it was some Portuguese Blogger seeking to con the Home Office and damage a serious police investigation, well that is just fine then isn't it! But I did read 3 As, I did read the sickening Bennett drivel and this drivel emanates from him. You make think you are clever but actually, you are very sad and very sick.
You have no right to criticise Kate and Gerry McCann, you are every bit as bad!
Harm and prejudice
The investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is still ongoing. There are significant unknowns in relation to her disappearance. Leicestershire Constabulary are the lead force in the UK dealing with this investigation but the principle investigation agency is Policia Judiciara (PJ) in Portugal.
We believe that significant harm to the investigation could result from either confirming or denying that we hold the information you have asked for.
Should this investigation lead to a prosecution, saying whether or not this information is or is not held by the Home Office would risk undermining the human rights of any suspect to a fair trial and the rights of a victim, particularly if the prosecution would fail due to such an announcement.
If the Home Office was to either confirm or deny that it did or did not hold any information that was gathered in the course of this investigation, it might risk compromising the conduct of this investigation.
This could ultimately prejudice the administration of justice. In any event, to confirm or deny that any such information that was or was not obtained in the course of a criminal investigation, either voluntarily or through compulsory powers, ought not to be generally disclosed, save as far as it is necessary for the purposes of establishing or defending rights in litigation.
There is consequently a strong public interest in ensuring that evidence is not contaminated for any future trial. In addition there is a strong public interest to preserve relations with the Policia Judiciara (PJ) in Portugal whilst Madeleine remains missing.
Two of the Home Office’s objectives are to support the efficient and effective delivery of justice, and to lead visible, responsive and accountable policing.
The manner in which the Home Office works to support the Police Service as a whole is one of our core business functions.
If the Home Office prejudiced such a high-profile and sensitive investigation by confirming or denying that we either do or do not hold any of the information that you have requested, we would be seen as working against the efforts of both UK and Portuguese policing authorities, undermining their determined efforts to locate Madeline McCann and her assailants. This would not be in the best interests of the public..
Any prejudicial effects to these ongoing investigations could jeopardise the health & safety, of Madeline McCann, in that it might significantly affect the chances of her being found.
There is no actual public interest served in releasing information that may jeopardise the health & safety of any individual.
There is a strong public interest in the UK maintaining the arrangements it currently enjoys with other States in matters of judicial and mutual legal cooperation in criminal and other matters.
Any act that would prejudice this investigation may discourage other States with complying with reasonable requests issued by the UK or from pursuing legitimate investigations in the UK for fear that the product of such requests or investigations may be disclosed to private citizens.
Sorry to normal readers but the likes of Photon, Laffin Assasin etc etc need to know what people really see them as, SICK.
This is not about Kate and Gerry McCann v Goncalo Amaral
This is about a missing little girl, her name is MADDIE
Please carry on posting on the other post.
see also the repeated arguments of "Zodiac" here from page 3.
I think there is something seriously wrong with people who need to just keep chanting a child is dead when there is no clear evidence of that and also seeking to insist there is something decidely bent about British authorities.
Madeleine may well be dead but she still has a right to be looked for if there is the slightest chance she is alive. Would these people want internet bloggers chanting this for years if it was their child? Probably not.
They have not the slightest clue what the British investigation involves, but they know best. They get letters from the Home Office and then miraculously proclaim, well that is just lies, everyone in Britain is just telling lies. I think they need a mental health check. The poster of this thread correctly pointed out that CEOP are not endorsing Gerry McCann or his claims that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger, but that does not satisfy them, we say she is dead. We say she was not abducted. Their minds cannot extend to the prospect of Madeleine being abducted but her own parents being involved, it is all black and white to these internet idiots.
http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/main-maddie-thread-latest-news-f1/ceop-does-not-endorse-mccann-claim-of-abduction-t7479-30.htm
Why would it be shelved in Portugal and ongoing in the UK? Zodiac asks?
Because Portugal say it is shelved and UK say it is ongoing? What is wrong with this person?
Morning Viv and All,
I was reading yesterday about ‘Sarah’s Law’. The paedophile alert scheme is set to be extended across the county. All parents, apparently, will be given the right in asking the police if anyone with regular unsupervised access to their children has a conviction for child sex offences.
Of course not all paedophiles have police convictions. Some years ago I was told by the Borough Commander that one of the biggest paedophile offenders in the country lived within walking distance from me. The man lives in a £5M house and needless to say is very wealthy. He was able to tool himself up with a heavy legal team and so far has been able to avoid conviction. So this law is no use with regard to him.
I digress a little, I just wonder if a parent living next or close to David Payne whose children played on walked pass his house unsupervised, could ask the police whether anything was known. It would be interested to see if they got an answer.
I suspect Payne has no criminal convictions connected to paedophile activity but it would be nice to know for sure.
Hiya Wiz
For a small number of people so far the sex offender disclosure scheme seems to have been helpful in alerting moms etc as to whether their proposed new partner/their partner has a relevant conviction. Any steps that are going to protect children in this way are obviously welcome.
But as in all types of crime really, the Mr Bigs just get away with it. The man you refer to in the 5M house, it is a bit like the petty drug dealers get caught but the importers invariably do not.
I suppose we do need to be a bit careful in assuming Payne actually is a sex offender. I have no doubt that any information requested on this lot whilst they are under investigation would be refused for the very simple reason I have always outlined it would prejudice the investigation and their right to a fair trial upon any prosecution.
This is the nub of what is upsetting me about these knowitall interfering bloggers. They seem to be deliberately working against the interests of justice and it does not matter how many times this is explained to them they just carry on.
I would be extremely upset if it became known that had prevented offenders against Maddie from being put on trial, because that obviously leaves further children at serious risk of harm. That letter that was written, is specifically demanding information about Payne etc. If he has offended against Maddie, or any child, or poses a serious risk to children I want the police to deal with him, not vigilantes or the press for that matter.
When the police have knowledge that an offender poses a risk but they do not have enough evidence to actually prosecute they can manage those risks in other ways including with the involvement of SSD etc. We certainly know the SSD have been involved with the McCanns, the rest we are not entitled to know and can only hope for the best!
As I am sure you know, all information in relation to possible sex offending against living children is highly confidential for fear of identifying that child.
Thinking back Viv to the Soham murders, Ian Huntly managed to secure a job as a school caretaker after the previous caretaker was dismissed for having an inappropriate relationship with a female pupil. So it appears lightening does strike twice!
After Huntley was convicted, it was revealed that he had been investigated in the past for sexual offences and burglary, but had still been allowed to work in a school as none of these investigations had resulted in a conviction.
It is alarming how people slip through the net.
Hiya Wiz
There was a very serious failure in appropriate information sharing from one force to another and between relevant agencies in relation to Huntley.
It was found that he had been prosecuted a number of times but often evaded conviction for some very serious offences. Those offences clearly evinced a pattern of escalating behaviour that would in the end lead to just the sort of terrible tragedy that happened.
I know that there are much better information sharing protocols now in place and national computer databases recording all relevant information about persons known to the authorities. But that system still relies on people inputting that date, checking it and passing it on. There is always going to be the risk of those checks not being made, but it is clear that much tighter procedures are now in place to check anyone who, for example, wishes to work at a school with children. Caretakers have often been found to be sex offenders, common sense must surely tell anyone those applying for such a job should face stringent checks. Particularly in light of the Soham disaster.
Sadly, it is always the case, there is lack of proactive behaviour to try and stop sex offenders etc. There always has to be a tragedy before steps are taken and of course we know, Baby P etc, those steps are still not enough to get around the likes of certain councils with very poor senior management.
Post a Comment