14 Apr 2010

BRITISH POLICE FOCUS ON GERRY, HENCE THE SPIN!


Typically the sort of bruise that can clearly be seen to Kate's elbow, arm holding phone, is caused in domestic violence cases when someone shoves you backwards with considerable force into a wall. I wonder if that is how Kate got it? She also had bruising to face, visible split over her eye, and grab mark bruising to the arms. This certainly suggests there was considerable disharmony between Kate and Gerry around the time Maddie disappeared given these pictures showing the bruising were immediately after that sad event. Looking at the build of Gerry and Kate it is not at all difficult to see who would be on the losing side. Neither is it difficult to see this man has a very abusive temper. Of course there are a lot of bloggers who will very aggresively tell you she is no poor domestic violence case, they will also tell she killed Madeleine. But I can tell you he is the type to dish out a bit of domestic violence if anyone should dare to disagree with him and he is also the type to have bloggers posting for him. A discussion of such clear evidence in the case should not really provoke an aggressive reaction from "normal" people, should it? I do not think these "Pro Gerry" bloggers who pretend they are something else could be described as anything like normal. Pointing out Kate was covered in bruises, something Fiona Payne ultimately sought to make excuses for several months later, is not making excuses for her, it is simply pointing out a fact. But there are people who simply want you to ignore the facts in this case and listen to their sickening spin. They are men and it is not just women they can be abusive to, but children as well, like little Madeleine.

That vicious look with angry pursed up lips at Kate, as they hold their posters in this stage managed world publicity campaign to make Gerry look like some innocent man says it all really, he cannot hold his vile temper long enough to ever look innocent. That look says "you blow this and God help you and your kids".

'British police said McCanns should be investigated after Madeleine went missing'

By Vanessa Allen
Last updated at 7:30 AM on 11th February 2010
was made a suspect in his daughter Madeleine's disappearance after a British expert said he should be investigated for 'homicide', a Portuguese court heard yesterday.
Criminal profiler Lee Rainbow recommended that police on the Algarve investigate the doctor and his wife Kate because of 'contradictions' in his statement.
The report by Mr Rainbow, of the National Policing Improvement Agency, was sent to in June 2007, a month after the three-year-old disappeared.
Kate and Gerry McCann
Kate and Gerry McCann outside court in Lisbon yesterday. They are suing Mr Amaral for libel over his allegations that the couple faked Madeleine's death
It was dramatically produced yesterday by lawyers for a disgraced Portuguese detective whose campaign of vilification the McCanns are trying to stop.
The couple want Gonzolo Amaral to be legally barred from accusing them of being involved in Madeleine's disappearance.
The detective was sacked from the investigation after he made an outspoken attack on English police, accusing them of failing to investigate the McCanns. He has since retired from the police force.
His lawyer Antonio Cabrita, reading from a Portuguese translation of the previously- confidential report, said: 'The family is a lead that should be followed.
Gonzolo Amaral
The McCanns want Gonzolo Amaral (pictured yesterday) to be legally barred from accusing them of being involved in Madeleine's disappearance
'The contradictions in Gerald McCann's statement might lead us to suspect a homicide. This is a lead that should be investigated.'
The lawyer added: 'Portuguese police had only considered the abduction theory. It was British police who said they must consider homicide as well.'Well indeed, whether they had her abducted or whether they killed her
Mr Cabrita did not outline what ' contradictions' had been found in Mr McCann's statements and refused to give any further details after the hearing.
Mr Rainbow, 37, leads a team of five criminal profilers at the NPIA, and specialises in sex crimes and murders.
The Home Office agency, which describes itself as 'part of the police service', aims to improve police use of information, evidence and science and to support operations.
It is understood to have provided Portuguese police with a 'checklist' of how to proceed.
A spokesman said last night: 'In disappearance cases it is common for the NPIA to advise officers to consider the possibility of the involvement of family and close friends.
'This is good practice for investigating cases. The NPIA gave similar generic advice to Portuguese police.'
Mr Rainbow, who has worked on major investigations including the Ipswich prostitute murders and the disappearance of , did not say there was any evidence the McCanns were involved.
But his confidential report appears to have been a turning point in the Portuguese investigation.
Madeleine's distraught parents were named as official suspects a few weeks later, despite Portuguese police failing to find any evidence against them.
Madeleine McCann
The report by Mr Rainbow, of the National Policing Improvement Agency, was sent to Portugal in June 2007, a month after three-year-old Madeleine disappeared
Mr and Mrs McCann, both 41, listened intently as Mr Cabrita said Mr Amaral should be allowed to repeat his claims that they were involved in Madeleine's disappearance.
The 50-year-old ex-detective has alleged in a new book that she died in a 'tragic accident' and her parents faked an abduction.
Lawyers for the McCanns say he is using the book and the court case to take 'revenge' on them for the end of his career.
Mr and Mrs McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, are suing Mr Amaral for libel over his allegations and are seeking £1.2million in damages and compensation.
They have won an injunction which bars him from repeating his allegations but he is trying to overturn it, claiming it affects his right to freedom of speech.
The hearing ended yesterday, and the judge will give her verdict next Thursday.
, a former GP, admitted last night that she had found it painful to listen to three days of evidence in the court. But she insisted the couple had been right to take legal action.
She said: 'I think this will truly help the search for Madeleine and that's why we have gone through with it. It hasn't been easy but if it helps, then we will go through anything.'

214 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 214 of 214
Gordon said...

Viv.....,
Are you kidding? Last evening I tried about ten times to post a comment and each time it failed - is it the gremlins? Whatever it's blooming frustrating!

Let me see if it works this time.

Unknown said...

Hiya Sue, I wonder if this little outfit who seem to like visiting my blog on a daily basis, might be the source of some little gremlins, if so, then I would not have been wrong to name and shame them: (see the record from my live log below)

http://www.charltonnetworks.co.uk/contact.aspx
Go (2)
2 United Kingdom flagspacer United Kingdom, Charlton
(Warwickshire)
89.145.220.153 [ isolate ] [ name ]
Charlton Networks xDSL

Win Vista


MSIE 8.0


1280x800

360360 | Return
[ isolate ] [ name ]
Wed Apr 21
04:22:50 PM www.google.co.uk justice for maddie and the twins justiceformaddie.blo
gspot.com
Go (2)
2 United Kingdom flagspacer United Kingdom, Charlton
(Warwickshire)
89.145.220.153 [ isolate ] [ name ]
Charlton Networks xDSL

Win Vista


MSIE 8.0


1280x800

359359 | New
[ isolate ] [ name ]
Mon Apr 19
10:48:31 PM direct access none justiceformaddie.blo
gspot.com/2010/04/br
itish-police-focus-o
n-gerry-hence.html
Go (2)
2 United Kingdom flagspacer United Kingdom, Charlton
(Warwickshire)
89.145.220.153 [ isolate ] [ name ]
Charlton Networks xDSL

Unknown said...

Now I wonder if they are being paid from the erm Find Maddie Fund, I can assure them I have not got her!

Gordon said...

Sue! Is that supposed to be me?

Unknown said...

Sorry I do know quite a few Sue's so probably just typed that by mistake, I meant you, SB!

Must have been on auto pilot, sorry again!

Gordon said...

Viv......,

I see in today’s 'Mirror' that Lorraine Kelly is entertaining the Mccanns on GMT next Tuesday. My, things a looking very grim if that’s the only support they can muster up for the forthcoming anniversaries. It had to happen sooner or later - how long can you realistically continue to keep plugging the same old time worn verbiage before the populace seriously start to doubt your credibility.
I quote "Lorraine's been very supportive of the family", said a source. "This is a thank you and a reminder that she's still missing".
Who is still missing - Lorraine Kelly? What source - a family member or Mitchell? A thank you to whom from whom? What a pathetic attempt!

Have I noticed from the live feed that you have had visitations from Dundee? If so I note that Ms Kelly lives with her family in Dundee when not in London. Could this be yet another example of the Irish/Scottish connections?

Unknown said...

Hi SB

Yes, I did see that on J Morais blog but did not think it was particularly newsworthy. I have been aware we would obviously be hearing something from the McCanns any day soon though.

They are scraping the bottom of the barrel that is for sure. I am not sure how any presenter can try and keep up the pretence with these two. I know that the police are still investigating them and that has to be kept quiet on TV, otherwise the McCanns would be able to say there is prejudice against them and they are being put at risk but even so, just think these annual interviews are such an utter farce.

Unknown said...

Due to the further serious abuse I was received on here, I no longer rely upon the feedjit that I had installed I have a better programme.

There are certainly hits from various parts of Ireland and Scotland, in fact all over the world. Feedjit is not recording all people that visit here, they can hide themselves and change their actual location shown!

There have been over 90 hits to this blog today and I exclude myself from being recorded.

Unknown said...

and the person who was posting the abuse is still visiting this blog!

Gordon said...

Viv....,
The difficulty with posting is directing me way of track so you must forgive me if I appear to be out of context with the general thread.

Referring to your reply about Kate, I acknowledge everything you say as realistic and highly possible given her public performance over the last 3 years and the few known details of the woman’s temperament. You rightly say if she is subjected to conjugal violence she is intelligent enough to know where to find support so I cannot believe that she would allow her husband to completely control their daughters destiny without taking some action to secure her safety - even to her own detriment! I therefore remain convinced that Kate was willingly involved in the fate of poor little Madeleine.

Your latter comment I think to be very feasible. Suddenly, late in life a mother to 3 small children, no bonding with Madeleine, unable to cope on her own with little or no help from her lord and master and a strong likelihood of alcohol/drug abuse. Still no excuse for failing to protect your own child!

Unknown said...

Hi SB

I am glad you have commented back on that one because it is interesting to know what you think.

I do not think many people have actually studied female victims of domestic violence as I have and understand quite what terrible things they can finish up doing, not just killing their children but their violent husbands also.

Whilst the law may show some sympathy when it comes to sentencing that is not an excuse, just mitigating the sentence due.

Kate does frequently come across in her interviews on TV as highly manipulative and in fact a very poor liar, as he is.

Unknown said...

I think when I saw Kate with a very professional looking hair and makeup job in May 2008, telling us how Madeleine "just moved on" and how she went out and left her again, a lot of sympathy I may have had for her, went right out the door!

Unknown said...

In fact, given that I now conclude Kate took them in early that evening in readiness to get rid of Madeleine, there is little that can be said in mitigation for her, other than I think it is highly possible it was men who were seriously abusing Madeleine, but she knew about that and took the remedy. Totally shocking.

Unknown said...

To me this is why the women are prepared to admit the most shocking child neglect (which is not actually true, I don't think) to cover something that is just so utterly terrible they could not face admitting it. They would rather just keep on and on telling confusing and contradictory lies to make things really difficult for the police to unravel and convict them.

Send out "private investigators" to go and bribe bent witnesses etc as to what they supposedly saw to make sure people think this was just an accident or a genuine abduction caused by shocking neglect.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 214 of 214   Newer› Newest»