Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Missing!! > Missing but not forgotten Discussion > Madeleine McCann

Notices

Madeleine McCann Missing from the Algarve region of Portugal since May 3, 2007. Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, have said that they left the children unsupervised in a ground floor bedroom while they ate at a restaurant about 120 metres (130 yards) away.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-30-2012, 12:04 AM
saggymoon saggymoon is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 245
mccanns case and censorship

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_u...?v=Tj1UvxIWnzk

right or wrong?

they also want a million pounds compensation on top!!

when parents of a missing child alledgedly abducted go after money, well, that rings alarm bells to me
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:
  #2  
Old 06-30-2012, 05:33 AM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
In the UK you can say what you want about someone so long as it is true or comes under fair comment or is not defamatory.
If people choose to go around making accusations, then why should they not have to prove it. If their claims are true then there can be no censorship, they just go to court with their evidence and if it is true the court rules in their favour. If they have been telling a pack of lies then obviously the court will not rule in their favour. Why should people be able to make false accusations about people.
I have not heard of the mccanss demanding compensation for themselves. If someone falsly accused me of being involved in a crime I would take them to court too. I am fairly certain if someone suggested Amaral was involved in covering up the abductions because he was involved in criminal activity, he would quite rightly sue for libel too. If Amarel has written things about the McCansn that are not true (I also heard he claimed a child's body had been found in the Jersey care home, but not sure if that is correct), then every single profit he makes should go to the McCanns or the find madeleine fund. Why should an ex-detective with a criminal record for giving false evidence be able to profit by lying about people and falsly accusing them?
If someone leafleted your street with leaflets falsly suggesting you were a criminal would you be happy?
The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:
  #3  
Old 06-30-2012, 10:42 AM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
Amaral has sued people for defamation, when he was accused of being involved in the torture of the mother of Joana Cipriano. So when he sues people for defamation it is OK, when others sue him it is censorhsip
The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:
  #4  
Old 06-30-2012, 03:55 PM
saggymoon saggymoon is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 245
Perhaps you need to read up a bit. The mccanns are suing mr amaral for 1.2m quid for causing distress.

Censorship refers to, obviouslyyou didnt watch the video, banning his book which detailed the facts in the case. They got a temporary ban which was overturned and held up by the highest court. And good. Last I heard it was the nazis burning books.

As for him suing for defamation, it was true that he was defamed because that awful woman and her stupid lawyer said mr amaral tortured her and was there and egged others on. Its a fact he was never there so yes its libel. Mr Amaral and others in the police cant be sued for defamation if they in their police investigation came to conclusions that madeleine had died. Its really that simple. And I do foresee the mccanns losing the case lime every other one they have instigated all courtesy of the madeleine fund.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:
  #5  
Old 06-30-2012, 04:23 PM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
As far as I am aware Amaral has not written the book as part of his policewor, but as an individuel. And if he has made defamatory statements that are either not fair comment or he cannot prove then of course he should be sued for libel.
Anf if people do not want to sell his book then why should they be forced to sell it?

And what libel cases have the mccanns lost. They took Bennett to caught, and he was unable to prove his statements depsite claiming they were true and was banned from publishing them. Now he is facing a possible prison sentence not the McCanns. If it is not libel then why does he not show the evidence he has that it is true? The newspapers had to pay out and print front page apologies. It is amazing that considering so many people like bennett and Butler claim their statements are true, so far not one of these statements has been held up as true in court.

And the ban being overturned has nothing to do with it being libelous or not. The courts said he had free speech so the book could not be banned. But this was not saying his statements were true or he could not be held liable - it was a "on his head be it" ruling i.e he can publish the book but if it turns out he had libeled someone then he is liable for it. If he can sue others for defamining him, then he cannot claim others should be denied that right. It is actually better for the Mccann case that he has sued Cipriano's lawyer, because now he cannot bleat that sueing for defamation is censorship when he gets taken to court. He has removed that defense for himself now.
The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:
  #6  
Old 06-30-2012, 07:31 PM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
So you think the book has been written and published by the PJ, and not by Amaral as an individuel? Even thought the Portuguese version of the CPS said there was no evidence against either Murat or the parents?
And considering Amaral has a criminal conviction for lying about evidence in a case relating to a missing child he does not really need any one else to demonize him.
  #7  
Old 07-13-2012, 07:31 AM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
He wrote the book as an individuel, not as a police report. he is protected in the police, although he can (and has been) be prosecuted for lying even in the course of police work. The supreme court did not rule the book was a replication of the facts. But we will have to see what the libel trial states. If Amaral is able to prove every single one of his defamatory statements then he is OK, if not then is has committed libel.
remember bennetts books were banned because he could not prove its statements.
  #8  
Old 07-13-2012, 07:34 AM
saggymoon saggymoon is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
He wrote the book as an individuel, not as a police report. he is protected in the police, although he can (and has been) be prosecuted for lying even in the course of police work. The supreme court did not rule the book was a replication of the facts. But we will have to see what the libel trial states. If Amaral is able to prove every single one of his defamatory statements then he is OK, if not then is has committed libel.
remember bennetts books were banned because he could not prove its statements.
The court certainly DID rule it was a replication of the police files. Seems you have decided ahead of the courts that any statement made was defamatory. Are you a judge? Lol
  #9  
Old 07-13-2012, 02:07 PM
saggymoon saggymoon is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 245
for perusal, the appeal court judgement on Dr Amaral's book

And to prove what i said was true

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id344.html
The Following User Says Thank You to saggymoon For This Useful Post:
  #10  
Old 07-18-2012, 10:27 AM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
The Lisbon court of appeal, said their ruling was not a ruling on the factuality of his claims, nor was it a defamation or libel trial. they ruled that to ban the book at that stage would go against freedom of expression. However, a libel trial can, and is, going ahead. If Amaral loses the libel cases, there is a possibility that the book may be banned again as this time the court will have to take into account the fact that another court has rules the book libelous. At the appeal trial the book had obviously not been ruled libelous so the court could not make a judgement on whether or not it was true. If the book is ruled libelous it will also mean anyone who publishes or reproduces the book, or part, thereof, will be liable to libel charges too.

Incidently Amaral has lost a libel case he took to court, and has been ordered to pay not only the defence fees, but the court fees as well.
  #11  
Old 07-18-2012, 07:00 PM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
The Lisbon court of appeal, said their ruling was not a ruling on the factuality of his claims, nor was it a defamation or libel trial. they ruled that to ban the book at that stage would go against freedom of expression. However, a libel trial can, and is, going ahead. If Amaral loses the libel cases, there is a possibility that the book may be banned again as this time the court will have to take into account the fact that another court has rules the book libelous. At the appeal trial the book had obviously not been ruled libelous so the court could not make a judgement on whether or not it was true. If the book is ruled libelous it will also mean anyone who publishes or reproduces the book, or part, thereof, will be liable to libel charges too.

Incidently Amaral has lost a libel case he took to court, and has been ordered to pay not only the defence fees, but the court fees as well.
I fail to see how a dry, factual book written by a senior detective who actually RAN an investigation can be considered libellous.

What we have here is attempted censorship, no more, no less...and it has FAILED. The book is out there. Truth will almost always come out.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #12  
Old 07-19-2012, 02:49 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
Amaral wouldnt know what the TRUTh was if it came up and bit him the bum.

This is a policeman who was convicted of falsifying evidence - he has a suspended sentence . He was sacked from the original investigation for completely cocking up - he has other trials to face Is he complicent in the torture case ? - well let the portugese sytem run its course.

The book is not banned in the UK or America - publishers are perfectly entitled to print and retailers sell it.

hats of to the Mcanns for standing up to the lies and innuendos that have followed them - most people would have wilted .

One day in this case we might find out what happened - how it happened and who took Madeleine - but it sure aint coming from the mouth of Amaral
  #13  
Old 07-19-2012, 04:04 AM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
It remains a fact that Amaral and his team were originally investigating Madeleine's disappearance as an abduction.'

It was British police who developed the evidence implicating the McCanns.
The Following User Says Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #14  
Old 07-19-2012, 04:11 AM
brit1981 brit1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,473
Actually saphhire it is up to the courts to decide if it was fact or not, and that case is not until October. At this point no court has made any claim as to its factuality. If you have any other evidence it is a factual book, contact the defence and act as a witness in the trial. It is also not banned in the UK, so people could publish it if they wanted.

Apparently in the book Amaral claims a body was found in the Jersey care home, which is not true. he is also a convicted criminal, and has a conviction for falsifying evidence in a criminal case. he is also facing another criminal trial for assault, and is being chased by the tax man. Interestingly his former co-accused who worked with him on several cases, is now faces charges (might have been convicted), for blackmail.

It is misleading to state the british police developed the evidence against the mccanns. They provided the fss and the dog searches which the PJ incorrectly thought was evidence against the mccanns. At this time the british police were not actively investigating the case. The British police now working on the case have come out and said they believe it was an abudction.
The Following User Says Thank You to brit1981 For This Useful Post:
  #15  
Old 07-19-2012, 04:33 AM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by brit1981 View Post
Actually saphhire it is up to the courts to decide if it was fact or not, and that case is not until October. At this point no court has made any claim as to its factuality. If you have any other evidence it is a factual book, contact the defence and act as a witness in the trial. It is also not banned in the UK, so people could publish it if they wanted.

Apparently in the book Amaral claims a body was found in the Jersey care home, which is not true. he is also a convicted criminal, and has a conviction for falsifying evidence in a criminal case. he is also facing another criminal trial for assault, and is being chased by the tax man. Interestingly his former co-accused who worked with him on several cases, is now faces charges (might have been convicted), for blackmail.

It is misleading to state the british police developed the evidence against the mccanns. They provided the fss and the dog searches which the PJ incorrectly thought was evidence against the mccanns. At this time the british police were not actively investigating the case. The British police now working on the case have come out and said they believe it was an abudction.
It was not I that stated it. It was the British Ambassador to the US.
The Following User Says Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #16  
Old 07-20-2012, 09:33 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
for goodness sake this is just semantics - Police forces across the world cooperate - This case was and still is a portugese case . Of course the british police would help in anyway and they did - they helped look at the DNA evidence and then gave it back to the PJ - what is so startling about that ? It would be entirely natural to treat everyone as suspects and the parents would be the first up. But that it is why in a modern democracy you dont just declare people guilty because they look dodgy or you think they are. Youy need cast iron evidence that will be held up in court . The mccaans were never charged with any crime - the evidence wasnt there - they were not charged in Portugal , they were not charged with anything in Britain either.

So not sure what the point is on this -
  #17  
Old 11-19-2012, 05:22 PM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by gord View Post
for goodness sake this is just semantics - Police forces across the world cooperate - This case was and still is a portugese case . Of course the british police would help in anyway and they did - they helped look at the DNA evidence and then gave it back to the PJ - what is so startling about that ? It would be entirely natural to treat everyone as suspects and the parents would be the first up. But that it is why in a modern democracy you dont just declare people guilty because they look dodgy or you think they are. Youy need cast iron evidence that will be held up in court . The mccaans were never charged with any crime - the evidence wasnt there - they were not charged in Portugal , they were not charged with anything in Britain either.

So not sure what the point is on this -
This is a wildly inaccurate statement to make.

The evidence was and is there. Thanks to Wikileaks, we now have PROOF of this, in black and white.

The evidence includes Madeleine's DNA, and cadaverine.

The British Police were the ones who first developed this evidence, and supplied the dogs.

The British government were the ones who then did a back flip, and applied undue pressure to their own and the Portugese investigation, along with the US government.

What remains unclear is WHY. Embarrasment would be my guess...and a wish for it all to go away.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id353.html
__________________
Everything I post is my opinion only, can change at any time, and is not intended to replace fact.
Critical Thinking is often criticised.
KISS
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #18  
Old 11-20-2012, 03:48 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
This is a wildly inaccurate statement to make.

The evidence was and is there. Thanks to Wikileaks, we now have PROOF of this, in black and white.

The evidence includes Madeleine's DNA, and cadaverine.

The British Police were the ones who first developed this evidence, and supplied the dogs.

The British government were the ones who then did a back flip, and applied undue pressure to their own and the Portugese investigation, along with the US government.

What remains unclear is WHY. Embarrasment would be my guess...and a wish for it all to go away.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id353.html
I am really staggered sometimes by your statements my post above was not widly unaccurate -

1. The mccaans were never charged by anyone ??

2 The police from the UK assisted with case - normal but it was always a portugese case

3 there was no conclusive evidence found either way on what happened to madeleine .


Your continued claims that this was a cover up by the US and British goverment somehow instructed the Portugese Police to shut down the case is ludicrous - and that is also my opinion of course
  #19  
Old 11-20-2012, 04:13 AM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by gord View Post
I am really staggered sometimes by your statements my post above was not widly unaccurate -

1. The mccaans were never charged by anyone ??
They should have been. For neglect, at least. My opinion only of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gord View Post
2 The police from the UK assisted with case - normal but it was always a portugese case
3 there was no conclusive evidence found either way on what happened to madeleine .
Just an enormous mountain of circumstantial and forensic evidence, plus the instinct and belief of both the British and Portugese Police.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gord View Post
Your continued claims that this was a cover up by the US and British goverment somehow instructed the Portugese Police to shut down the case is ludicrous - and that is also my opinion of course


I think it is ludicrous to deny that cover-ups and conspiracies happen, knowing what we know about the shenanigans surrounding Hillsborough, for example.

We also know that the McCanns called in friends at very high levels from Day one, in the form of Gordon Brown and his boss, Tony Blair.

There is proof that they called in politcal interference and attempted to steer the investigation from the get go. They have attempted censorship. They have profiteered from their daughter's disappearance.

They never looked for her.

I actually think it's ludicrous they aren't in jail, and that any one at all is naive enough to believe they are innocent too, but that's just me.





__________________
Everything I post is my opinion only, can change at any time, and is not intended to replace fact.
Critical Thinking is often criticised.
KISS
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #20  
Old 11-20-2012, 09:43 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
I think it is ludicrous to deny that cover-ups and conspiracies happen, knowing what we know about the shenanigans surrounding Hillsborough, for example.

We also know that the McCanns called in friends at very high levels from Day one, in the form of Gordon Brown and his boss, Tony Blair.

There is proof that they called in politcal interference and attempted to steer the investigation from the get go. They have attempted censorship. They have profiteered from their daughter's disappearance.

They never looked for her.

I actually think it's ludicrous they aren't in jail, and that any one at all is naive enough to believe they are innocent too, but that's just me.





sorry but just because cover ups have happened in the past in other areas doea not make this case any more likely to be a cover up or not.

What you are claiming is that the prime minister and Chancellor of the UK knowingly instructed the police , and FSS to cover up the death / disposal of a young girl. ?? Not only that this would have to include portugese goverment at a high level as this was a portugese case, Not only this but in past posts you have also claimed the US ambassador was also involved in this cover up ???

Do have this correct ? if I dont please let me know exactky what you are claiming
The Following User Says Thank You to gord For This Useful Post:
  #21  
Old 11-20-2012, 07:24 PM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
All Governments indulge in cover ups, both big and small.

It is part of being a government.

It is called "politics".

If folk got a grip and actually thought about it, they are essentially defending the honour of a bunch of politicians.

Like politicians never lie.

We know that this is categorically untrue. They lie all the time, on every level. Big ones, little ones, white ones, bald faced ones.

Why the insistence that in this case above all others, there is complete truth, transparency and decorum, a complete lack of deception or self-interest or boys club agreements, from a bunch of politicians?

It is just farcical really. Some politicians told me so, it must be true. I thought that sort of thinking went out with Hitler.



__________________
Everything I post is my opinion only, can change at any time, and is not intended to replace fact.
Critical Thinking is often criticised.
KISS
  #22  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:07 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
I have heard a lot of crazy things in this case but now accusing a chancellor a prime minister and a US ambassador to pervert the course of justice by shutting down a murder/ manslaughter trial in a foreign country - for what motive ?? This would be a serious criminal act and is just not credible in fact it is rediculous -

Politicians in this countery are going to jail for fiddling expenses yet we are suppose to suspend belief that they woould commit criminal acts to protect to middle class NHS doctors ?? - but also include the US

No evidence , nothing to suggest this - if this is the esttent of sleuthing that we are now at ?

If it wasnt such a serious case ity would be hilarious
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gord For This Useful Post:
  #23  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:46 AM
SapphireSteel's Avatar
SapphireSteel SapphireSteel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by gord View Post
I have heard a lot of crazy things in this case but now accusing a chancellor a prime minister and a US ambassador to pervert the course of justice by shutting down a murder/ manslaughter trial in a foreign country - for what motive ?? This would be a serious criminal act and is just not credible in fact it is rediculous -

Politicians in this countery are going to jail for fiddling expenses yet we are suppose to suspend belief that they woould commit criminal acts to protect to middle class NHS doctors ?? - but also include the US

No evidence , nothing to suggest this - if this is the esttent of sleuthing that we are now at ?

If it wasnt such a serious case ity would be hilarious
I have posted and reposted proof of the US involvement and that it was the British police who developed the evidence against the McCanns, since evaporated. (wikileaks).

Just because you find it impossible to believe, does not mean that it cannot happen. There are plenty of examples of nepotism, favoritism, international political pressures, diplomatic pressures, secret handshakes, the Establishment taking care of its own, littering the halls of "justice" in the UK.

I don't see why the McCann case is exempt from the same lack of transparency and general shadiness as say, the butt covering that ensued around Hillsborough, or the murky goings on around the Charles and Di debacle.

You say "why would they risk criminal charges?" Why would who risk criminal charges? If the word comes from above to drop the investigation, there are no criminal charges to be had. The police are hardly going to investigate their own bosses for telling them to drop a case, are they?. Every employee I know does what their boss tells them, including detectives in the British and Portugese police forces.

There was one brave detective that protested, and we all know what happened to him. He was drummed out of his career and thoroughly smeared, then subjected to years of legal actions besides.



__________________
Everything I post is my opinion only, can change at any time, and is not intended to replace fact.
Critical Thinking is often criticised.
KISS
The Following User Says Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:
  #24  
Old 11-21-2012, 08:54 AM
gord gord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
I have posted and reposted proof of the US involvement and that it was the British police who developed the evidence against the McCanns, since evaporated. (wikileaks).

Just because you find it impossible to believe, does not mean that it cannot happen. There are plenty of examples of nepotism, favoritism, international political pressures, diplomatic pressures, secret handshakes, the Establishment taking care of its own, littering the halls of "justice" in the UK.

I don't see why the McCann case is exempt from the same lack of transparency and general shadiness as say, the butt covering that ensued around Hillsborough, or the murky goings on around the Charles and Di debacle.

You say "why would they risk criminal charges?" Why would who risk criminal charges? If the word comes from above to drop the investigation, there are no criminal charges to be had. The police are hardly going to investigate their own bosses for telling them to drop a case, are they?. Every employee I know does what their boss tells them, including detectives in the British and Portugese police forces.

There was one brave detective that protested, and we all know what happened to him. He was drummed out of his career and thoroughly smeared, then subjected to years of legal actions besides.



An email exchange between two ambasadors is not proof of anything except they exchanged an email - how does that suddenly become proof of US involvement in closing the case down ?

Again the UK police helped the PJ in the case - that is normal cooperation - how does that suddenly become proof that they closed the case down ?

teh rest of your posts about the PM and Chancellor ..well just does not have any basis on anything factual apart from your own imagination. Quoting MOO all the time doesnt make it correct
The Following User Says Thank You to gord For This Useful Post:
  #25  
Old 11-21-2012, 09:48 AM
Gem2626 Gem2626 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
I have posted and reposted proof of the US involvement and that it was the British police who developed the evidence against the McCanns, since evaporated. (wikileaks).

Just because you find it impossible to believe, does not mean that it cannot happen. There are plenty of examples of nepotism, favoritism, international political pressures, diplomatic pressures, secret handshakes, the Establishment taking care of its own, littering the halls of "justice" in the UK.

I don't see why the McCann case is exempt from the same lack of transparency and general shadiness as say, the butt covering that ensued around Hillsborough, or the murky goings on around the Charles and Di debacle.

You say "why would they risk criminal charges?" Why would who risk criminal charges? If the word comes from above to drop the investigation, there are no criminal charges to be had. The police are hardly going to investigate their own bosses for telling them to drop a case, are they?. Every employee I know does what their boss tells them, including detectives in the British and Portugese police forces.

There was one brave detective that protested, and we all know what happened to him. He was drummed out of his career and thoroughly smeared, then subjected to years of legal actions besides.




This 'brave' detective was convicted of perjury in another missing child case. Other detectives in the team beat a woman up. There is nothing 'brave' about men hitting women or police hitting anyone.
Other people have come forward saying that they were too beaten up by this same police force. Whether their claims are true or not I don't know but knowing the past behaviour of this police force it could quite well be true.

IMO the only reason didn't fall foul to the PJ's usual tactics is because they're English and they wouldn't get away with it.

I don't understand how the past behaviours of the PJ and their failings in the investigation can be ignored when there is proof yet there is no proof of any cover up by the UK but this can be explained with 'well it does happen'.
The Following User Says Thank You to Gem2626 For This Useful Post:
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
School Censorship golfmom Up to the Minute 1 05-29-2008 02:36 PM
Case Against The Mccanns Is Strong poco Madeleine McCann 90 09-24-2007 09:21 AM


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:25 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!