McCann : Child Abuse !

Pelo Mundo fora.... spam.

There are many forms of child abuse, here is an example, blatant lies !

http://www.mariacpois.blogspot.com/


The problem is that the press can only report what they know (rather than what may be said or speculated upon).  One journalist who was there from day one said, there were (and are) many aspects of the story from the McCanns that I found difficult to come to terms with. Those papers who did speculate got hit with big claims. Most of us know what the police think happened, but they cant prove it, and nor can the press, so lets hope the truth comes out eventually.

McCann Case : Gonçalo Amaral - Defenceless Lives....Maddie And Gonçalo Know The Meaning Of Those Words Only Too Well !

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Vidas_sem_Defesa.htm

McCann : Carter Ruck Allow Their Blog As A Platform To Peddle The Folklore Abduction!

6 Responses to The Leveson Inquiry – victims of the media turn the tables on the press

1. Maureen Lang says:

   December 1, 2011 at 12:01 pm

   It can no longer be argued that no one in The PJ was responsible for these leaks, and often false information.
   This was a deliberate attempt to influence Public Opinion against The McCanns in the absence of Evidence.
   And I would dearly like to know exactly who was responsible, although I doubt that this information will come as a surprise to anyone.
2. C4 says:

   November 30, 2011 at 8:53 pm

   Brit, I don’t think you need two guess’s as to who this was.
   Someone had a habit of leaving things on desks for journo’s to copy.
   • BrenR1958 says:

     December 1, 2011 at 10:16 am

     Yes you got that correct C4, it really doesn’t take a lot of guessing, but the burning question is this.
     A judge ordered the copies to be destroyed, yet it seems they were not as Kate’s diary appeared in CdeM on the 28th July 2008.
     The McCann family under oath, told the world things that many of us have not heard before of how bad their lives were with press intrusion. And how scared their children were at times.
3. Jen says:

   November 30, 2011 at 6:04 pm

   The trouble is that no matter how many times the press admit they lied and made up stories in order to increase revenue, those that swallowed the lies are refusing to budge. Either through ignorance or the need to hate someone, they refuse to give up their stalking and harassment. The media cannot undo that damage. Only by regulating the internet and applying harassment and stalking laws more rigorously can the damage be rectified.
   • BrenR1958 says:

     December 1, 2011 at 10:40 am

     Jen that is the danger, those lies and made up headlines are still to this day being peddled as fact and people are still believing them. Even e-books are being produced all based on made up headlines and a thesis that has no grounds and still these people refuse to retract what they have written and apologise ,when the proof is shown that their research is flawed.
     Nobody wants to see such stringent regulation of the internet but I think maybe it has come to a point that it might be required.
     The internet is a powerful tool, but unfortunately in this case, it has been used and abused by some in order to abuse and accuse others.
4. Brit. says:

   November 30, 2011 at 1:21 pm

   How did these diaries find there way from the Portuguese police into the Portuguese media and later to the NOTW.
   This should be investigated and made known.

http://www.carter-ruck.com/Blog/?p=104

SCOTLAND YARD POLICE CORRUPTION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL

http://themurdochempireanditsnestofvipers.blogspot.com/2011/11/leveson-inquiry-ian-hurst-metropolitan.html

McCanns : Is There Anyone The McCanns Have Not Shafted ?

Leveson Inquiry:

In a witness statement submitted to the inquiry McCann said that after Colin Myler found out  (he had been shafted )about the Hello! Interview he “was angry and asked me (rhetorically) how he could be expected to help if we gave away stories to rival publications and that ‘the staff here felt let down’.

“The NoW (also shafted) had very generously raised a £1.5m reward for anyone who provided information leading to the return of Madeleine.

“It appeared from our telephone conversation that Mr Myler felt this meant that they had first refusal on any story or any interview we wished to give subsequently.”

 http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html


EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
28 November 2011

DIGGING BENEATH THE SURFACE

As 'core participants' the McCanns regaled listeners at the Leveson inquiry, like Al Capone spraying bullets, with perceived failings on the part of the UK press, the Portuguese press, the Portuguese Police, the broadcast media, the internet...etc., etc. Basically any organisation potentially worth a Carter-Rucking.

Well, we have long understood the importance Gerry McCann attaches to 'evidence.' So, there he was, diligently presenting some of his own, when Kate leapt in with the following (well it was a joint submission):

KM: "These were desperate times. You know, we were, having to try and find our daughter ourselves and needed all the help we could get and we were facing (we'll come onto the headlines) 'Corpse in the car.' How many times I read 'body fluids in the car,' and it gets repeated so often that it becomes fact. There were no body fluids."

'There were no body fluids,' says Kate, categorically and absolutely, whether they might have originated with a body, soiled nappies, or previously worn pyjamas.

Taking Kate McCann's autobiographical pre-occupation with sex, fear and pain, together with Justice Secretary Ken Clarke's classification of rape on a sliding scale of seriousness, tempts the judicial caution: "De minimes non curat lex!" (The Law does not concern itself with trifles). Perhaps, from time to time, the Law ought to do so. Concern itself with trifles, that is. Or should that be 'truffles?'

When the hunter-gatherers of mainland Europe sally forth with their truffle hounds (a more cost-effective alternative to the more traditional hog, which has a tendency to eat the treasure rather than be content with finding it), do they explore the woodland at random, excavating at the roots of whatever tree might take their fancy, or set the dog onto the first patch of toadstools they encounter? Do they ever. They leave it to the dog to indicate where best to dig, taking its well trained reaction as evidence for the presence of a subterranean mushroom. Just as you or I might view the departure of migratory birds as evidence that Winter is approaching. We cannot see the imminent fall in temperature but we’ll feel it soon enough.

Maybe fungi are inadmissible in a court of law.

But the Leveson inquiry was not constituted as a court of law, and there were at least two parasites present so, on learning of the 'incredible' allegations of 'corpse in the car,' what might Lord Justice L and his associates have made of the fact that a sniffer dog detected blood in the wheel well of said vehicle?

No one had been called upon to change the radials, so it wouldn't have been the result of a maintenance mishap.

 But the dog signalled its presence.

Truffles being worth extraordinary sums these days, is it likely that prospectors would take their costly, trained animals for 'walkies,' dismissing their 'nose to the ground' behaviour as unreliable ('if tested scientifically, Sandra')? Dream on.

 So if a dog trained to detect minute residues of human blood indicates blood, what have you got? Blood. And blood is? Why yes - a body fluid!

Prior to their personal appearance, David Sherborne, representing victims of alleged press intrusion, told the inquiry how the Drs. McCann 'found themselves at the centre of a media storm after their daughter Madeleine went missing in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007.'

Not quite 'found themselves,' David. 'Placed themselves' rather. As confirmed by authoress Kate McCann:"Dave, ... sent an e-mail to Sky News alerting them to the abduction of our daughter. (p.79).

"...Rachael had contacted a friend of hers at the BBC seeking help and advice..." (p.80).

"Jon Corner...was circulating photographs and video footage of Madeleine to the police, Interpol and broadcasting and newspaper news desks. (p.86).Your child disappears during a family holiday abroad, so the first thing you do is...?

Tell the folks back home, of course, including non-family members who will 'take it upon themselves' to broadcast the news as widely as possible.Mr Sherborne continued: "Moreover, Mr McCann will explain how in the months following the abduction of Madeleine, the behaviour of the press changed from an attitude of support to one of hostility.

Er, 'abduction' M'Lord? What abduction?

The appropriate term is 'disappearance.'

But let's not quibble, shall we.

Let's hear some more of what the protagonists themselves have to say. Kate McCann, for instance, describing the root cause of her 'violation:'"You know, I'd written these words, my thoughts, at the most desperate time of my life...it was my only way of communicating with Madeleine...There was absolutely no respect shown for me as a grieving mother or as a human being, or for my daughter."

Your only way of communicating with Madeleine during that first week?


A pity you didn't think to address her directly during any of your 'pieces to camera,' a criterion which, by the way, the FBI study in cases of unexplained disappearance.

Granted, that still does not excuse the lack of respect shown you in your time of grieving.

 But why grieving?


Were you not a mother desperate for the return of her daughter, there being no evidence that she had come to any harm, certainly not at that early stage?Naturally, husband Gerry was just as concerned that rampant press behaviour could place daughter Madeleine in jeopardy.

GM: "I think there's been contempt demonstrated by the media...both for the judicial process and, at times, Madeleine's safety."Now why are these particular acts of contempt unsurprising.

Could it be because Kate herself has written that she clandestinely gave the folks back home 'the green light' to voice their disgust at her treatment by the PJ during a police interview that took place within police headquarters at Portimao, Portugal.

And afterwards of course we had the 'good marketing ploy' that was tantamount to signing the child's death warrant. No one can accuse the McCanns or their holiday-making associates of being safety conscious, that's for sure.

The 'judicial secrecy' line has long since worn thin.

In fact it's worn out.

That means, unfortunately, we have no defence against assault with tongue-twisting (or brain numbing) logic.

Speaking of the British press particularly, Gerry says they "didn't know the source, didn't know whether it was accurate. It was exaggerated and often downright untruthful and often, I believe, on occasion was made up."

Often, on occasion...? Was the witness leaving it to the stenographer to 'delete as appropriate,' one wonders.

Barely a minute later and he gives us, regarding mid-June, "We decided we had to stay, in Portugal, to be close to Madeleine..."

So how did he know that, a month after her 'abduction' to order, his daughter Madeleine was still on the Iberian peninsular even. Being in Portugal's not much help if your child's been spirited away by boat to (nearby?!) Barcelona.

After a period of time there was little new news to report.

GM: "For example, there must have been 'McCann Fury' on the front page of many newspapers over that Summer that would quote an un-named source or friend and, unless our phones were hacked, which I don't think they were, then these were made up because they were simply not true."

Simply not true, eh? Run that by me one more time. 'Unless our phones were hacked,..., then they were made up.' So, if your phones had been hacked then they would not have been made up, i.e. they would have been true, because expressions of 'McCann fury' would have been overheard.


Does the tree in the forest only collapse if someone hears it fall?

 No. 'McCann fury' was clearly vented whether reporters realised it through illicit acts of telephony or otherwise.

Oh, the despicable UK press!

GM: "The first really bad thing was an article that was written in a Portuguese paper which was entitled 'Pact of Silence.'

Although we might be concerned at the Portuguese media's being struck by a stray bullet here (collateral damage, as it were), we might be somewhat more interested in Gerry's choice of the word 'bad.'

Were the Portuguese press simply being as naughty as their UK counterparts, or was their report 'bad news' for the McCanns at the time, given the source of the headline - David Payne, who is reported to have said directly to a Sol journalist, "We have a pact. This is our matter only. It is nobody else's business."

Sounds pretty much like a pact of silence to me. A bad thing alright.

Concerning the not so small matter of their litigious exploits, Gerry informs us that

"We were told that we had, after taking counsel's advice, that we would be very likely to be successful in such a claim, and my understanding of that was that there would be a very strong argument that Express Group Newspapers knew that the allegations, or many of them, were unfounded or certainly couldn't prove any of them."

In easy stages: A very strong argument does not define certainty. Many (not all) of the allegations were known to be either unfounded or could not be not proved. It is not impossible that this entire sub-set fell into the latter category, i.e. not provable at the time the claim was made. That something cannot be proved at any given instant does not make a proof impossible in the long run (the discovery and exploitation of nuclear fission was not a one-step process).

It wasn't exclusive guardianship of the truth therefore which allowed the McCanns to attack the press, but their realization that Fleet Street was not in possession of the evidence necessary to substantiate all of their claims. Speculative they may have been. Necessarily untrue they were not.

For a couple so studiously observant of the law, in the shape of 'judicial secrecy,' media and contractual obligations (they'd already set up a limited company, don't forget) it is something of a revelation that they appear knowingly to have breached their own contract with Transworld publishers."News International actually bid for the rights to the book, along with Harper Collins, and one of their pitches was the fact that they would serialise the book across all of their titles, and we were somewhat horrified at the prospect of that, given the way we'd been treated in the past, and the deal was actually done with the publishers, Transworld, that excluded serialisation.

"Now, we were subsequently approached by News International and Associated to serialise the book, and after much deliberation, we had a couple of meetings with the general manager and -- Will Lewis and Rebekah Brooks and others, and what swung the decision to serialise was News International committed to backing the campaign and the search for Madeleine. And that passed our test of how it could help..."

So they 'do a deal' with Transworld which excludes (read as 'prohibits') serialisation, as something that would have 'horrified' them, then do another deal with News International subsequently for 'backing' (i.e.'money') contingent upon serialisation; the very thing their extant agreement with Transworld excluded. Or am I missing something?
What Gerry's adroit turn of phrase does not make clear, deliberately one suspects, is that the McCanns must have sold Transworld the rights to publish in book form, whilst reserving the right to serialize elsewhere.

Thus it was excluded.

How otherwise could they have sold the same product twice, Transworld and News International each paying independently for publication?

Either way, if I were Transworld supremo I'd be inclined to think we'd been 'shafted.

' If the McCanns were actually in breach of contract, the negative PR fallout that would doubtless arise from any legal action against them would outweigh any fiscal benefit in the long run, whilst seeing vast tracts of one's forthcoming publication reproduced in newsprint, however legally, before the book had even reached supermarket shelves, hardly indicates 'cue applause' (unless of course you're the McCanns' agent).

And there's yet more 'secrecy' in store. This time with rather sinister overtones.

GM: "We were told we were under judicial secrecy not to give details of events. What became very apparent was, you know, the media were trying to create a timeline of what happened, and we had obviously created a timeline and given it to the police and tried to narrow down to the closest minutes when we think Madeleine was taken to help the investigation. But when that information goes into the public domain and the abductor shouldn't know it, or the only person who should know it were the people who were there, then that's a concern. It can contaminate evidence.

You could incriminate yourself by knowing something that you shouldn't have known."The interpretation of 'creation' here could give some cause for concern, since no distinction is made between media and McCann versions of the activity, but the subsequent paragraph raises even more questions.

Information as to the precise time of Madeleine's disappearance shouldn't be known to 'the abductor,' apparently.

'The only person who should know it were the people who were there.'

But hold on. The abductor was there wasn't he?

 So why should he, she, or they not know, or be allowed to know, when exactly they committed their crime, to the extent that such forbidden knowledge could 'contaminate evidence?' Having watched the McCanns, 'for several days I'm sure,' said Kate once-upon-a time, the abductor(s) would have had little difficulty either in reconstructing the McCanns' hallowed timeline for themselves, without waiting to read it in the press or on the Internet.

It really is a pity that Adam couldn't resist the taste of apples.

According to Gerry, "You could incriminate yourself by knowing something that you shouldn't have known." Is/are the abductor(s) running the risk of incriminating themselves more deeply by knowing exactly when they did the deed, almost to the nearest minute, or does this remark have more general significance, i.e., might it apply to that person in possession of the 'key bit of information' (or bit of key information) the McCanns have been so desperate for hitherto?

The Leveson inquiry may be concerned with ethical standards adopted (or not) by the UK media, but, like taking a 'doggy bag' to a buffet, it would be well worth any serious investigator's time to collect up the McCanns' regurgitations for later consumption.

Even if they do have to be translated into Portuguese first.


Like Mother Like Son. Maddies Been Gone Just The Two Weeks But Gerry's Fine Now The FUNDS Stacking Up

McCanns New Campaign - Dirty Tricks On TWITTER.

Informed : TWITTER, MP Tom Watson AND Scotland Yard

Something is happening on twitter that I believe you should ALL be aware of . The McCanns have a group who troll for them on the Internet and  their new game is to have peoples accounts suspended who do not believe in the fairytale abduction. It is all too easy to suspend an account as I have recently discovered !

I have been informed the McCanns 'trolls' have now 'employed' Mark Williams ‘ child protector’ as their spokesman to have non believers accounts suspended, on Twitter . I do hope Mark is not so foolish as to fall into the McCanns trap and this is just a silly rumour ! To be on the safe side however I have reported this to Scotland Yard , Twitter and MP Tom Watson who I hope will contact Mark to see if this very serious allegation has any truth . 

(Mark Williams YET to question Kate McCanns first witness statement TOYS left on the bed when the 'story' goes it was just old cuddle cat and a pink blanket!)

Some background info on  Mark Williams .

http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2011/07/shady-past-of-mccann-supporter-mark.html

https://twitter.com/#!/mwilliamsthomas

• #twitter total fail. They would do well to learn from #Facebook who would have had this account removed a very long time ago .
  website tweet (2 hours 25 min ago)
• Give me confidence that they were focused on child protection although they did not handle the last case well. Here we are again...
  website tweet (2 hours 26 min ago)
• This is the 2nd time #twitter has failed to act quickly re child abuse content - after last occasion I had good chat with them & they did ..
  website tweet (2 hours 27 min ago)
• Time for sleep - goodnight
  website tweet (10 hours 21 min ago)

McCann : Theresa Parker - Martin Grime And Eddie Worked On This Case...Theresa's Body Has Since Been Found And Her Husband Charged With Murder.

SNIP

We also saw video played in the courtroom to demonstrate how another dog, Eddie, found a sample pair of pants hidden in the Walker County Jail that was perfumed with a cadaver scent. Eddie is an English Springer Spaniel belonging to Martin Grime, a world-renown forensic K-9 expert based in the United Kingdom.

Grime testified he was paid $450 a day, plus travel and living expenses, by the FBI to search some areas in Walker County in connection with Teresa Parker's disappearance.

During a visit to Parker's home back in September 2007 Grime said he and Eddie sniffed around their garage.

"He immediately gave a positive bark response within the garage between a truck parked to the left of the entrance and a boat parked to the right," Grime said.

Grime added Eddie did not seem interested in the vehicles but in a scent that was wafting in the air, based on the way the dog held his nose upward. Grime said Eddie then "hit" on an abandoned house next door. Testimony shows that house was never repaired after a fire gutted the inside and killed a child several years ago.

During lengthy cross-examination Grime said there is no evidence to show Eddie smelled anything incriminating against or linked to Mr. Parker.

Like Higgins, Grime said cadaver dogs can only prove useful when there is other evidence that corroborates the dog's "hits."

The FBI has a keen interest in the outcome of this case.

If Parker is convicted the case could pave the legal way for future prosecutions where there is no evidence other than dog "hits" in connection with a person accused of murder.

It would appear Eddie 'hit' on two cadavers ,Theresa Parker and the dead child from the neighboring home.

http://www.scentevidence.com/2009/07/dog-debate-at-center-of-murder-case.html

Theresa's husband, former LaFayette police officer Sam Parker, was convicted of her murder in September 2009... The 51-year-old police officer who allegedly had a history of alcohol and domestic abuse and Theresa were in the process of getting a divorce when she disappeared... Theresa’s niece testifies: “He called his badge his get-out-of-jail-free card”... Authorities have finished their investigation... While police said they hope to find a cause of death, Chattooga County Sheriff John Everett said Thursday there are no obvious physical signs to indicate how she died.

http://behindthebluewall.blogspot.com/2010/09/ga-theresa-parkers-body-found-sheriff.html

McCann : News Of The World And The Sun Hacked The McCanns

Another vital clue pointing to kidnap came two months ago when the News of the World revealed how Maddie's treasured Cuddle Cat toy had been found on a high ledge in the room, out of her reach.

The McCanns have never mentioned a high ledge, however they may have mentioned a high ledge when  explaining to a family  member how Madeleine fell in the apartment, here we have evidence of phone hacking !

The SUN, also hacked the McCanns, articles relating to sedation have been blocked online ,  searching now for an article where the SUN published the McCanns admitted  giving the children Calpol, McCanns admitting to a family member yes BUT NOT publicly........ more evidence of phone hacking.

McCanns assumed it was PJ listening in to their calls but it was the British media !

Their suspicions were first aroused by questions they were asked by Portuguese police which were based on information that could only have come from private conversations.

During lengthy interviews when they were first made suspects, they were asked questions which implied they had conspired during mobile phone conversations to hide who was at the dinner party - and when - on the night that Madeleine disappeared.

They are also thought to have been asked why the toddler's Cuddle Cat toy was washed twice - information that could well have come from surveillance of phone calls.SURVEILLANCE ! Or were the Daily Mail ALSO hacking the McCanns  ????

Although the couple have been back home in Rothley, Leicestershire, for 12 days, they fear the practice is continuing. A source close to the family said:

"The assumption is that it is taking place.

Everyone involved is very careful, particularly with their mobile phone calls and what they say.

"There was an assumption from the early days that their mobile communications were unsafe and could be listened to.

"They believed it in Portugal and they believe that is still happening now that they are back home......more evidence of phone hacking

Paul McMullan taped ALL interviews and journalist Simon Tomlin also records his telephone conversations, so I would imagine that any phone hacking of 'clients ' would have been recorded. Phone hacking is now out in the open and the McCanns have stabbed journalists who protected them in the back, lets hope a hacked recording of the McCanns falls into the lap of someone who wishes to expose the truth !

This information also forwarded to MP who has great interest in the case


http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.com/2011/11/mccann-well-known-fact-that-mccanns.html


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482815/Madeleines-parents-British-police-bugging-phone-calls-emails.html#ixzz1fHNhz5Jt


http://newsoutlines.blogspot.com/2007/10/maddie-was-still-alive.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482815/Madeleines-parents-British-police-bugging-phone-calls-emails.html