mccanns case and censorship

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.

brit1981 said:

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.

Click to expand...

It was not I that stated it. It was the British Ambassador to the US.

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 -

gord said:

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 -

Click to expand...

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

SapphireSteel said:

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

Click to expand...

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

gord said:

I am really staggered sometimes by your statements my post above was not widly unaccurate -

1. The mccaans were never charged by anyone ??

Click to expand...

They should have been. For neglect, at least. My opinion only of course.

gord said:

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 .

Click to expand...

Just an enormous mountain of circumstantial and forensic evidence, plus the instinct and belief of both the British and Portugese Police.

:waitasec:

gord said:

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

Click to expand...

:lol:

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.

:seeya:

:cow:

:sick:

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

gord said:

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

Click to expand...

Yes you have it 100% correct.

:cow:

its not beyond the realms of probability that thebritish govt covered up two nhs doctors for their shameful acts at best murder at worst, this country covers up all sorts of evil acts, fact im afraid witness saville case jerseycase wakes chikdrens home and others, we have innocents being arrestesd, the victims laughed at while the real onesget away

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. :lol:

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.

:banghead:

:cry:

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

gord said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

:banghead:

:cow:

SapphireSteel said:

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.

:banghead:

:cow:

Click to expand...

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

There has not been one shred of proof from wikilieaks or anyone else this was any sort of a cover -up. All the wikileaks cable said was that at the time of them being made aguidos the UK ambassador belived it was the UK police who developed the evidence being used against the McCanns. Not once was there mention of a cover -up. And as the evidence against the mccanns turned out to be DNA results which had been misunderstood by the PJ and the dog alerts, which accoridng to the AG final report did not pan out in the end, there is nothign suspicious about it. We all know from the PJ files that the UK police assisted in this case, and helped arrange the aid from Grime and the FSS, it was hardly a secret.

It is normal, at least in the EU, for police forces to co-operate if there is a foreign element, and the FSS took work from overseas cases routinely. I have heard of american cases where material was sent to european countries for further analysis. In the UK the police regularly assist other countries if there is a UK connection - for instance when two UK nationals were victims fo a crime in the caribbean, UK police assisted.
madeleine's dna was never found, all was found was material that either she, her parents, her grandparents, her siblings, her other relatives more thna likely contributed - in fact as all the others were witnessed using the car, it makes it more likely it came from them. It is just basic inheritance that any sisteen year old would be taught.

Does anyone actually have any proof that the british police developed evidence other than the dna results and the dog?
Does anyone have any proof that madeleine contributed to the dna found, and that this material came from he rbody rather than transferance from her belongings?
Does anyone have any proof that the dogs do not alert to bodily fluids from living people, and that their alerts are 100% proof of a body which belonged to madeleine mccann, and was placed there by her parents?
So far not one person has actually been able to demonstrate any of this.

Going back to the mccanns and censorship, I see that ten thousand twitter users are now facing legal action for libel as well as exposure, for falslynaming, (and implying, and linking to sites that do the same) a person as a peadophile without a shred of evidence other than gossip and things they had read. So it is not just the mccanns who think they have the right not to have falsities spread about them on the internet.

SapphireSteel said:

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.

:banghead:

:cow:

Click to expand...

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'.

Gem2626 said:

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'.

Click to expand...

The absence of proof cuts both ways.

For example, there is no proof whatsoever of an abductor. None.

After all the money, all the years, all the "investigations" and searches, Madeleine is still just as missing as she was the day her parents left her to fend for herself and her baby brother and sister, in a strange apartment, in a strange country.

The proof we do have is -

proof of lying, proof of governmental interference, proof of a "wider agenda", proof of high stakes (money), proof of a dead body belonging to a child of the McCanns being in 5a, on Kates clothing, and in the Renault they hired 25 days later. We have proof Gerry carried her to the beach at 21.55. We have proof the lied about the window shutters, the calpol, the David Payne visit. We have proof that the British Police first developed evidence against the McCanns, and proof the US Ambassador had discussed the case.

But somehow, all of this proof is less compelling than the absence of proof of a cover up to the McCann supporter.

:waitasec:

:dunno:

i think this little snippet I came across belongs in this thread

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/mzungu/2009/New photos for 2012/image0-2.jpg

Clutchbag said:

i think this little snippet I came across belongs in this thread

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/mzungu/2009/New photos for 2012/image0-2.jpg

Click to expand...

I don't understand. What is this meant to prove? That someone shares the same opinion?

SapphireSteel said:

We have the sighting (such as it is) of Tanner, who saw Madeleine being carried away.

We have the sighting of the Smith Family, who unquestionably saw the same thing.

The difference is, the Smith Family later identified Gerry McCann, and Tanners sighting is clearly falsified.


UK police communication re: Martin Smith's sighting, 20 September 2007
Processos Vol XIII
Pages 3996 – 3997 (in English)
Email from John Hughes to DIC Portimao, C.C. to Stuart Prior
20th September 2007
Subject: Fwd Smith family
From Lindsay Long to John Hughes
20th September 2007

Re – Smith family

Location : Portugal Out of Force Area

Origin: Mr Martin Smith Ireland.

Text: Reported that he had passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th May and returned to UK. Is saying that after seeing the McCanns on the news on 9th Sept when they returned to UK he has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 PM news on BBC and saw the McCanns getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.

Is asking a member of OP task ring him back. He was with group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite worried and shaken whilst speaking to me.

So now we are going to accuse the "worried and shaken" Martin Smith of lying too? Apparently the UK Police took his information very seriously indeed.

I must say, for the McCann supporters who rubbish and dismiss any theory of governmental interference and misinformation out of hand as "ludicrous", they are rather too happy to accuse totally uninvolved and innocent witnesses of the same thing.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

:cow:

Click to expand...

BBM

The Smith family did not unquestionably see the same thing. Martin Smith said he was 60-80% sure it was Gerry. Therefore he did not unquestionably think it was Gerry.

No one else in the family made statements saying they thought it was Gerry. In fact Martin Smith says in his statement that 2 of the adults there did not think it was Gerry. According to him his wife agreed (60-80%? less..more?) that it was Gerry yet she hasn't made a statement. Which is kind of strange considering this is a missing child we're talking about. This leads me to believe she is less sure that it was Gerry than he is.

Where is Gerry placed at 10? Seeing as the alarm was raised for a missing Madeleine at 10 the PJ would have most certainly have asked witnesses where Gerry was at this time. Have any independent witnesses come forward and said that Gerry was not at the tapas bar when he says he was.

Why would Kate raise the alarm when Gerry was in the process of disposing of Madeleine's body???

It makes no sense whatsoever.

Gem2626 said:

BBM

The Smith family did not unquestionably see the same thing. Martin Smith said he was 60-80% sure it was Gerry. Therefore he did not unquestionably think it was Gerry.

No one else in the family made statements saying they thought it was Gerry. In fact Martin Smith says in his statement that 2 of the adults there did not think it was Gerry. According to him his wife agreed (60-80%? less..more?) that it was Gerry yet she hasn't made a statement. Which is kind of strange considering this is a missing child we're talking about. This leads me to believe she is less sure that it was Gerry than he is.

Where is Gerry placed at 10? Seeing as the alarm was raised for a missing Madeleine at 10 the PJ would have most certainly have asked witnesses where Gerry was at this time. Have any independent witnesses come forward and said that Gerry was not at the tapas bar when he says he was.

Why would Kate raise the alarm when Gerry was in the process of disposing of Madeleine's body???

It makes no sense whatsoever.

Click to expand...

As I said before, the McCann defence is based entirely on tearing other evidence apart.

No one knows where Gerry was at 10 because the reconstruction never took place...in fact, Gerry's whereabouts for most of 3 May are still uncertain.

The reconstruction never took place because the McCann refused to cooperate.

The truth is now lost to the mists of time...which was the point.

I have absolutely no doubt that Martin Smith did not lose sleep over a "60%" certainty...he was 100% certain, otherwise why lose sleep and go to the trouble of contacting the police again?

It is so predictable that now Martin Smith is wrong/rubbish/mistaken too.

Everyone is, except the McCann.

:banghead: