Metaphoric Comprehension by Dr Martin Roberts

METAPHORIC COMPREHENSION

By Dr Martin Roberts
20 July 2015


Metaphorical understanding is arguably the most powerful intellectual device we have. Fascinating to study, and no less so to employ, the metaphor is without doubt of inestimable value when it comes to the transference of ideas. Take the following, for instance:

Throughout the entire history of high-rise construction, there have been only three recorded instances of steel-framed structures collapsing as a result, supposedly, of fire damage. All three instances occurred in New York on September 11, 2001.

To be compared with:

“I can’t ever remember where the Government has acted as a PR adviser/stroke minder for a family in a situation like this. This is just one of the factors that make this story so extraordinary.” (Roy Greenslade - former tabloid editor, speaking of the McCann case).

It makes one pause for thought rather. The sort of thought that might accompany a further comparison:

The BBC’s Jane Standley describing the recent collapse of building 7, the World Trade Centre, while standing with her back to an image of said building, intact and still erect.

With

“Some more breaking news for you this morning. Errr... We're just hearing that a search is underway for a 3-year-old British girl who's gone missing in the Algarve area of Portugal; and she went missing last night. Hundreds of people have been searching for the girl; and that search continuing this morning. So we will try to get as much on that as for... for you as soon as we can; errr... that, errr... missing girl in Luz and we will bring it to you as soon as we get further detail.” (Transcript: Nigel Moore).

Notice the time of the broadcast – 7.48 a.m., on the morning of 4 May, 2007.

‘“Yaddah, yaddah”, what’s the matter?’

Bridget O'Donnell (the Guardian, 14.12.2007) wrote:

“The next morning, we made our way to breakfast and met one of the Doctors, the one who had come round in the night. His young daughter looked up at us from her pushchair. There was no news. They had called Sky television - they didn't know what else to do. He turned away and I could see he was going to weep.”

That tells us all we need to know, surely, especially as only two days later (16.12.07) we had confirmation of same, sort of, from David James Smith, on behalf of Timesonline no less:

“It is widely believed among the Portuguese media, and perhaps the police too, even now, that the McCanns called Sky News before they called the police. For the record, Sky News picked up the story from GMTV breakfast television, at around 7.30am the following day.”

‘For the record’ – Got that!

Well Jill Renwick certainly got it (the message from Kate McCann that is) via a 7.00 a.m. communique (text or voice, the account is a touch ambiguous in that regard). According to Bridget O’Donell (again):

‘McCann family friend, Jill Renwick, revealed how panicking Kate sent her a text saying: ''I need help.'' Jill Renwick has known the McCanns since they all worked together at a Glasgow hospital more than a decade ago.

‘She spoke to Kate at 7am on the morning after Madeleine vanished and said: ''Kate was at the police station in hysterics. When we spoke she said the police weren't doing enough.''’

Helpfully, the Guardian (2.6.07) embellished Renwick’s commentary with: "They didn't know what to do. So I phoned GMTV.

(We’d better just gloss over the fact that the McCanns did not even leave for the police station until after 8.00 a.m. that morning or we’ll lead ourselves astray).

The sequence of events is perfectly clear is it not? Kate McCann ‘phones Jill Renwick, who in turn ‘phones GMTV, who break the story, so that SKY News can run it a few minutes later. The Tapas 7 then ring SKY Television (to ask for confirmation, or a set-top box perhaps, who knows?). End of story.

Well it might have been had Martin Frizell not ‘relived the moment’ in the company of Kate Garraway, for the purposes of last year’s Channel 5 documentary, Madeleine McCann – A Global Obsession, the ‘promo’ for which reads:

“In May 2007, Frizell - then editor of GMTV, ITVʼs breakfast programme - took the unprecedented decision to put a call through to the studio from a family friend of the McCanns. A three-year-old British girl had gone missing in the sleepy Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz and the family was distraught. By that afternoon, it was the leading news story on a number of channels.”

Sensing the importance of what he had just heard, Frizell put Jill Renwick in direct contact with his presenters that morning. As Frizell himself recalls:

“On May 4, 2007, I was the editor of the country’s most popular breakfast show broadcasting to millions of viewers every day. It was a Friday. It was just after 8.00 a.m. and the mood was lighthearted.”

For her part Kate Garraway describes how:

“We were having a generally jokey moment on a Friday morning and, suddenly, and I think you can even see on the footage, I sort of go a bit like that ‘cause you, the call came through on my earpiece saying – “we’re going to do an interview with a woman, she’s really concerned about her friend, her friend’s child has gone missing and she’s desperate for help.”

The actual broadcast dialogue that Friday morning (4 May, 2007) proceeded as follows:

KG: “We’ve got some more breaking news for you this morning, very serious story is developing and is coming through to us and it’s of a 3-year-old British girl has gone missing in Portugal. We can speak now to Jill Renwick, who err, who’s a family friend – ‘What can you tell us about what happened?’”

JR: “They were just, you know, watching the hotel room erm, and going back every half-hour….and the shutters had been broken open and they’ve gone into the room and taken Madeleine.” *

Martin Frizell (in documentary mode once more) continues:

“My instincts had been right. The story that we’d just broken was developing fast.”

So fast, in fact, that SKY News had broken it some fifteen to twenty minutes earlier!

Moral support is later offered by Mary Nightingale (ITN):

“I remember seeing the Maddie story on GMTV first of all.”

So too did David James Smith no doubt – for the record of course.

Apparently Martin Frizell has, for the past seven or eight years, been under the mistaken impression that it was he and his GMTV colleagues who ‘broke’ the McCann story via the UK broadcast media, when it was SKY News after all. Which obliges us to return to that vexatious question of who informed SKY News, since the record (as espoused by David James Smith at least) is clearly wrong in that respect.

The first default setting in this instance would appear to be the Tapas 7, one of whose members let it be understood (by Bridget O’Donnell) that they had ‘phoned SKY Television before breakfast that Friday morning. Whoever they were, they must have put the call in before that 7.48 a.m. broadcast, obviously.

It seems, however, as if ‘they’ was something of a proxy vote as far as Bridget O’Donnell’s doctor was concerned. With the sole exception of David Payne, none of the Tapas 7 made any ‘phone calls early on the morning of 4 May. David Payne’s solitary pre-dawn ‘ping’ was at 1.17 – way too early to have been a news feed for SKY, whose reporter was only just learning the details at the time of the 7.48 broadcast.

Which leaves the McCanns.

Gerry made a number of calls. He also sent and received several text messages (which I think we might dismiss as a sensible means of communicating an out-of-the-way emergency to a televised news desk). Concentrating on his voice calls up to and including 7.15 therefore, we may note that none of them involved SKY Television, as their switchboard number simply doesn’t feature in the schedule.

What about Kate McCann? She made so many calls before 10.30 that morning the phone ‘ping’ map couldn’t keep pace! It must have been she who had SKY Television on ‘speed dial’ therefore.

Just how likely is that? Are we to attribute such initiative, such presence of mind, to the same woman who, by 7.00 a.m., thought only of contacting a friend in the UK with a plea for help, and left said friend to dial GMTV on her behalf?

Someone clearly contacted SKY News, and did so before Jill Renwick spoke to anyone at GMTV. They were either very quick off the mark that morning, or even quicker the night before. On balance it would appear that the McCanns were not that fleet-of-foot (24 hours elapsed before they were ready to face the press, Gerry McCann reading from a prepared script – it didn’t take that long to write his little ‘words cannot describe’ speech, surely?).

Should anyone feel this conclusion to be unjustified, they might prefer to place a little more faith in SKY News’ own reporter, Ian Woods:

“It is absolutely not true that they (the McCanns) reported it to SKY News before they reported it to the police. We didn’t know that Madeleine had disappeared until 8.15 on the Friday morning – not the Thursday night, the Friday morning, at 8.15, and that was because a friend of the McCanns, knowing that their child was missing, and knowing that they were desperate, ‘phoned a television station called GMTV – another television station, not SKY News – and did a telephone interview at 8.15 on the Friday morning. That was the first time any journalists knew anything about this. Kate McCann did not call SKY News. And I know that it has been put out there as an accepted fact, and I’ve heard, you know, Carlos Anjos talking about this on Portuguese television, that he knows that the McCanns called SKY News. It…it…it is just not true.”

Run that by me one more time, Ian…

“8.15 on the Friday morning… was the first time any journalists knew anything about this.”

‘Believe half of what you hear, three-quarters of what you see’ so they say. Well, here’s that three-quarters once again (‘Breaking News’ being broadcast by SKY at 7.48 a.m.):

Given Ian Woods’ effective denunciation of his own broadcasting company, what could possibly have been incriminating about his either inferring or explaining that someone contacted SKY that Friday morning after Kate McCann had ‘phoned them – someone like Jill Renwick, for instance? Why deny knowledge if it springs from an admissible source?

The implication appears to be that the source itself was inadmissible.

So if it wasn’t the McCanns, then who was it? In sum, not only do we not know the ‘who’ in this instance, we do not know the ‘whence’ either.

There are good grounds for suspecting the FCO’s earliest diplomatic initiatives to have been kick-started from within the U.K. Should the paradoxical appearance of a press release in the Telegraph, timed at 12.01 on 4 May, be substantiated in all respects, then it too will ultimately have been FCO progeny, since an FCO spokesperson was cited therein.

Is it at all reasonable to suppose that the FCO could have had a vested interest in statements issued via the press, but not those broadcast on national television?

Martin Roberts

 * Before we had even heard the name Madeleine McCann, the script had been written, distributed, and was being learned by rote, albeit to an embarrassing degree, by seemingly every member of the McCann's extended family and various friends. The source of which, and undeniable, Kate and Gerry McCann. Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted Includes a section on the phone records.

Season Greeting Mr Gamble: The Brenda Leyland Conspiracy

And conspiracy it is, rest assured. Criminally so in fact.

David Cameron, Theresa May and Bernard Hogan-Howe, to name but a few that choose to ignore the culpability of the parents in relation to the death of Madeleine McCann.

Not to be confused with Jim Gamble, who, without remit, inserted himself in this case from the outset. One can only wonder why?

There is no abductor, there is only the parents.

Season Greeting Mr Gamble...

Jim Gamble ex cop, befriender of Kate and Gerry McCann, collaborator, collaborating with dangerous online vigilantes/McCann supporters, collaborating also with Sky Crime Reporter Martin Brunt his Dodgy Dossier Report, who together, and with others I have yet to mention, played their parts in the attack carried out against Ms Brenda Leyland. This lady sadly and tragically, days after their assault, was found dead in a hotel room.

Gamble's conduct and involvement in the attack on Brenda Leyland is truly shameful, as is that of the McCanns, Brunt, Murdoch, Mitchell, and not forgetting the chubby, dumpy legged lady, the feeder of ducks, one of the online vigilantes, one of the main players, if not the main player in this malicious campaign, in this appalling act, the heinous attack on Brenda Leyland.

Other than being an ex cop I know little of Gamble. What I do know I have "heard" him say online, and in interview etc, and frankly he comes across boorish, vulgar, a common low breed, malicious, ignorant in every way -wickedness personified.

And for anyone who does not know of the type of comments he makes, the following one of his Twitter postings demonstrating, and leaving the reader in no doubt whatsoever the character of this man. Here we have Gamble congratulating Martin Brunt for attacking Ms Brenda Leyland a lady innocent of the accusations made against her by Brunt, Gamble and those online vigilantes who Gamble and Brunt both befriended/communicated with on Twitter/elsewhere to enable their planned assault on this lady.

His comment is shocking, sickening! more

Also in the news.

Damning new Madeleine documentary promised for 2015 Portugal Resident

Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted

Introduction: Dr Martin Roberts.

Insight is a truly wonderful thing. It nourishes and advances those who are able to appreciate it. For the rest, knowledge is merely borrowed for the purposes of reference, not genuinely shared. Things are either what they are because we appreciate and understand what has been established, or they are simply taken on trust, on an ‘it is said by others’ basis.

For seven years past a watching international community has been witness to a growing clamour of borrowed knowledge regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, hearsay tearing repeatedly through the fabric of reason like a succession of tornados in America’s mid-west, and bringing us more recently to the most ludicrous of situations; one in which a UK police force is given a seemingly limitless budget, so as to review and pursue a case over which it has no legal jurisdiction, and in deliberate disavowal of the evidence collated by the original investigators. In an admitted collaboration with the UK government, they are acting ‘as if the abduction happened in the UK’ without first, or indeed ever, establishing whether ‘abduction’ happened at all.

It is at this point that I refer you wholeheartedly to the post that follows.

Besides being wonderful, insight is also scarce – so scarce in fact that, in all these seven years no one has truly been able to cut the Gordian knot that is the ‘abduction’ of Madeleine McCann, never mind cut it completely in two. Or three for that matter. For that we must defer to Himself. What he presents here is not ‘opinion’, coloured so as to conform to a context of allegiance, nor interpretation influenced by surmise. Here we have evidence, pure and simple - evidence conveniently shunted into a siding by all those who cannot bear to confront the truth, and largely undervalued by others unduly concerned with the incessant regurgitation of garnish so often first coughed up by ‘a source close to something or other’.

Law enforcement agencies, crime writers and Hollywood film producers are all perfectly aware that the crux of any crime resides at the point of commencement, when the perpetrator, however practised they may be, is most likely to have made a mistake. The disappearance of Madeleine McCann involved circumstantial criminals who did exactly that. To appreciate what these data are telling us therefore, it is necessary to discard the shroud that has been thrown over them in the intervening years and look afresh at what has been staring at us all from the outset. 

How likely is it that two people can be independently mistaken about an open or shut situation? How likely is it that these same two people should independently, yet simultaneously, decide to ‘prune’ their respective cell ‘phone memories? How likely is it also that two different dogs, on two separate occasions, could show interest in different, yet mutually corroborating, scents, and at the very same loci?

These are the fundamental issues addressed here, and for which various bizarre, unrealistic, even childish explanations have been proffered over time – as knowledge for the undiscerning. If instead we open our eyes to another’s insight, it soon becomes apparent that the origins of, and explanations for, many of the reputedly paradoxical phenomena associated with the case of Madeleine McCann do indeed reside at the very beginning. - Martin Roberts

Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted

Should I so desire, I could lay before you, anomalies related to this case, by the score. As equally by the score, I could inundate you with unanswered questions. But that is not my intention here today. Rather, I present just three, but extremely important questions for your consideration.

But these three chosen questions are not exclusively for your perusal, they are in fact directed at what I shall call the McCann Establishment, or for ease here on in, the Establishment.

That the Establishment now includes the Prime Minister David Cameron, who as a result of pressure by Rebecca Brooks, pressure being a polite word for coercion, as coercion is for blackmail one must say, is for the intents of this post, quite academic.

As for the involvement of the Home Secretary, Theresa May, that involvement becomes a good deal less academic, given the Home Secretary's overall responsibility for the policing of the Nation. Granted that some of that responsibility is now diminished since the introduction of police and crime commissioners, a system laid bare to justifiable charges of nepotism, I easily add. But that is by the by and concerns us little, for there was no such office at the time of initiating a "review" of the Madeleine McCann case by DCI Andy Redwood and Scotland Yard's finest. Something, I think I can maintain, that is unique in the history of English policing.

But that uniqueness is far from alone, as we shall see.

Is it not unique, that in the case of a missing child, presumed dead by the investigating police force and for good reason, that when the very cornerstone of the McCann's claim for a case of stranger abduction, turns out to be a tissue of lies, but is then seemingly ignored by those charged with this nonsensical review?

The McCanns set the parameters.

Before we had even heard the name Madeleine McCann, the script had been written, distributed, and was being learned by rote, albeit to an embarrassing degree, by seemingly every member of the McCann's extended family. The source of which, and undeniable, Kate and Gerry McCann.

"The shutters had been jemmied and poor wee Madeleine was taken." echoed every family member, with  unwavering similarity. 


Update: Pennies from heaven.

Meanwhile, Madeleine's uncle, John McCann, from Glasgow, countered criticism from those who say the couple were wrong to leave their children alone in the holiday apartment while they ate dinner at a nearby restaurant.

"If you look at the layout of that place, it was entirely safe. The issue at stake here was, that the flat was broken into, and wee Madeleine was abducted," he told BBC Radio Five Live. BBC online

Only the shutters weren't jemmied, and wee Madeleine was not taken.

Cause and Effect

So let us look at such.

"The shutters had been jemmied" cause.

"and poor wee Madeleine was taken" effect.

I hardly need to say it do I? No cause, no effect.

It is that simple and so fundamental to the McCann's claim of abduction. No jemmied shutters, no abduction.

Never forgetting, the jemmied shutters story was not some wrongly evaluated, mistaken concept, it was orchestrated by the parents of the missing child.

 As simple as that may sound, it is in fact, of such profundity that it cannot, and should not, be ignored. The cornerstone for abduction, and all that surrounds it, is a house of cards. A house that took a shift years ago. The only thing propping it up now, is the litigious nature of the McCanns, to say nothing of a totally corrupt establishment. 

Now call me old fashioned if you will, but this bothers me. But it bothers me more, that this fundamental and crucial component of this case, not only remains unaddressed, but seemingly, is totally ignored.

To finish up this part of the post, there being two other fundamental issues I wish to address, let me try and apply some perspective to this staggering and blatantly obvious miscarriage of justice.

If our featured two were suspected of robbing a Post Office, and it's not by accident that I use a PO as an example, because, you may be surprised to know, there is no greater crime in the UK than making an unauthorised withdrawal from said establishment.

So if our two suspects, under questioning, uttered the kind of testament or set in motion testament such as we have witnessed, what might you suppose, the outcome would be?

Parts two and three will be delivered when and whenever, creativity and the will to write are pretty rare commodities for me these days.

But do bare in mind, should you come under attack, from whatever quarter: No jemmied shutters, no abduction. And also remember who set the parameters, within which, enabled the child to be "abducted," the parents, Kate and Gerry McCann.



Part Two, The Deleted Phone Logs

 Are they such an important issue you may ask? Well they were important enough for the McCanns to lie about them, so they must be.

 That we have already ascertained in part one, the setting up with family members the case for abduction, the deleted phone logs, selectively deleted I must add, and at a time, the day before in fact, of Gerry McCann's announcement to the world that his daughter had been abducted. Via of course, the jemmied shutters that weren't  

What follows, is the only section of this article where some parts are not provable, but given the circumstances, let us take a look at the situation circumstantially.

The speed, or should I call it indecent haste? (and being all the more suspicious for it)  The indecent haste with which the McCann Machine (Government machine) rolled into action was, putting it mildly, quite staggering.

I think at this moment, I shall let the Portuguese coordinator of the case, Goncalo Amaral, take over the narrative. This on the 4th of May

GA:  At ten in the morning, twelve hours after the disappearance, the British Consul to Portimão goes to the Department of Criminal Investigation.

We inform him of the actions taken up to then and the next stages being considered. He doesn't seem satisfied.

Someone hears him on the telephone saying that the police judiciaire are doing nothing. Now, that's strange! Why that untruth? What objective does he have in mind? Giving another dimension to the case? Perhaps, I don't know a thing about it, but this is not the time for conjecture; we have to concentrate on our work, of finding the little girl.

Why indeed?

A little later still on the 4th May John Buck, British Ambassador to Portugal, descends on the scene.

GA- The McCanns are put up with David Payne.

We want to search the accommodation of the family friends to try to pick up Madeleine's clothes, especially those she was wearing on May 3rd at 5.35pm when she returned from the day centre with her mother and the twins.

Evidently, this initiative is not widely supported. The British ambassador meets with the team directing the investigation. The political and the diplomatic seem to want to prevent us from freely doing our work.

GA- I'm sure this check is necessary.

JB- The clothes? Are you mad? if I understand you properly, you want to go into the apartment to take clothes to have them analysed?

GA- Yes. What's the problem? It's a perfectly normal procedure in cases like this.

JB- Of course, but with this media hype...I don't think I have ever in my life seen so many journalists....And I didn't come down in the last shower.

I leave you to arrive at your own conclusions regarding that little nest of vipers.


To the phone logs then.


To fully understand the importance of this clip, one has take into account, that having just fled Portugal, the McCanns feel free to tell all the lies they wish and to do so with impunity. Never realising of course, to just what degree the files of the investigation would be made available to the public once the investigation was shelved.

Gerry and Kate McCann's fury after 14 texts slur

Gerry McCann reacted angrily yesterday to claims he received a string of mystery texts the day before his daughter vanished.

Police applied to Portugal's supreme court to seize his phone records after learning of the alleged messages.

They claim Gerry was sent 10 texts from an unknown number 24 hours before Madeleine disappeared.

And detectives say four messages arrived from the same mystery number the day after she went missing, according to court documents.

But Gerry and wife Kate have dismissed the claims as "utter rubbish".

A source close to them said: "They have had their phone records available for inspection for months. But the police never asked for them. And now they have formally asked, they have been refused.

"Any suggestion of Gerry receiving 10 texts the day before Madeleine disappeared are utter rubbish.

"He hardly used his phone during the holiday and most of the friends with them didn't even have mobiles.

"The only time his phone rang was when work called and he explained he was on holiday. There are no mystery texts. Gerry has nothing to hide. It's yet more nonsense coming from Portugal." more

Whoops!

I haven't bothered with the second sheet that shows the final two calls. More on the deleted phone records from Paulo Reis, a worthy read.

So from whom, and what was the content of the fourteen texts messages that Gerry McCann selectively deleted and subsequently found the need to lie about?

Just one last question and then we shall move on. A question you might ask yourself for that matter.

Would Gerry McCann have the wherewithal to implement and carry out such hair-brained scheme as the one we have witnessed without the gears being set in motion by third parties of no little importance and influence?



Part Three, Cadaver Odour.

Disregarding the thousands of column inches that have been written on the subject. Disregarding the thousands of arguments for the accuracy of the dogs' alerts and to a lesser degree, the arguments against the importance of said findings, and quite shamelessly by some that, not should know better, but do know better, we have but a few things to consider.

Firstly, two irrefutable facts. No one had previously died in the McCann's holiday apartment, likewise nobody had previously met their end in the car hired by the McCanns.

Keeping in mind, that all that has been written about the dogs, for the purpose of this article, and for the sake of my argument, we shall ignore.

What we can't ignore however, are two simple facts, but by virtue of their simplicity, they do in fact become the most damning.

You may wish to remember, that the dogs alerted uniquely to things McCann without exception. On the other hand, you may choose to ignore these facts. It doesn't matter. And why doesn't it matter you may well ask?

It doesn't matter, because Kate McCann acknowledges the existence of both blood residue and cadaver odour, both in the hire car and on her own clothes.

The reasons for such we are asked to believe, range from rotting meat in the car (odour) to the transporting, however unlikely, dirty nappies of the twins. (DNA)

Regarding the cadaver odour on  Kate McCann's clothes, what we are asked to believe is even more unlikely than the dirty nappies explanation. So unlikely in fact, it staggers the imagination.

The reason for Kate McCann's clothes smelling of cadaver, we are incredulously asked to believe, is that prior to the ill fated holiday in Praia da Luz, Kate McCann, as a part time locum in a general practice, came in contact with cadavers. Any number of them, depending on which source you read.

But that's not all we are asked to believe, she came into contact with said cadavers wearing her holiday clothes. And if you like that cake, I have some topping for it, she took Madeleine's soft toy, Cuddle Cat, along with her for the ride.

How hard to confirm or deny this, DCI Andy Redwood?

And of course, not only does Kate McCann acknowledge the existence of cadaver odour, but her husband too, Gerry McCann. Why else would he go to such lengths (America) to discredit the accuracy of the dogs?

And it was to such lengths he went, contacting lawyers in the US and quoting the Eugene Zapata case where the judge wouldn't accept as evidence, the alerts of the dogs.

How did that one work out for you Gerry McCann? Not too good when the Zapata eventually admitted to killing his wife and the subsequent revelations that the dogs were right all along.

How damning do the actions of the parents have to be? Madeleine McCann disappeared in the most controversial circumstances imaginable, and the last two people to see here alive, and statistically the most likely people to be involved in that disappearance, the parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, are doing their utmost to explain or discredit the stench of death that surrounds them. 

I'm sorry, not in my world. Madeleine McCann was not abducted.

For Brenda Leyland RIP

All issues mentioned here are searchable and verifiable.

Madeleine McCann Fundamental Issues

Unedited

Should I so desire, I could lay before you, anomalies related to this case, by the score. As equally by the score, I could inundate you unanswered questions. But that is not my intention here today. Rather, I present just three, but extremely important questions for your consideration.

But these three chosen questions are not exclusively for your perusal, they are in fact directed at what I shall call the McCann Establishment, or for ease here on in, the Establishment.

That the Establishment now includes the Prime Minister David Cameron, who as a result of pressure by Rebecca Brooks, pressure being a polite word for coercion, as coercion is for blackmail one must say, is for the intents of this post, quite academic.

As for the involvement of the Home Secretary, Theresa May, that involvement becomes a good deal less academic, given the Home Secretaries overall responsibility for the policing of the Nation. Granted that some of that responsibility is now diminished since the introduction of police and crime commissioners, a system laid bare to justifiable charges of nepotism, I easily add. But that is by the by and concerns us little, for there was no such office at the time of initiating a "review" of the Madeleine McCann case by DCI Andy Redwood and Scotland Yard's finest. Something, I think I can maintain, that is unique in the history of English policing.

But that uniqueness is far from alone, as we shall see.

Is it not unique, that in the case of a missing child, presumed dead by the investigating police force and for good reason, that when the very cornerstone of the McCann's claim for a case of stranger abduction, turns out to be a tissue of lies, but is then seemingly ignored by those charged with this nonsensical review?

Before we had even heard the name Madeleine McCann, the script had been written, distributed, and was being learned by rote, albeit to an embarrassing degree, by seemingly every member of the McCann's extended family. The source of which, and undeniable, Kate and Gerry McCann.

"The shutters had been jemmied and poor wee Madeleine was taken." echoed every family member, with  unwavering similarity. 

Only the shutters weren't jemmied, and wee Madeleine was not taken.

Cause and Effect

So let us look at such.

"The shutters had been jemmied" cause.

"and poor wee Madeleine was taken" effect.

I hardly need to say it do I? No cause, no effect. It is that simple and so fundamental to the McCann's clam of abduction. No jemmied shutters, no abduction.

Now call me old fashioned if you will, but this bothers me. But it bothers me more, that this fundamental and crucial component of this case, not only remains unaddressed, but seemingly, is totally ignored.

To finish up this part of the post, there being two other fundamental issues I wish to address, let me try and apply some perspective to this staggering and blatantly obvious miscarriage of justice.

If our featured two were suspected of robbing a Post Office, and it's not by accident that I use a PO as an example, because, you may be surprised to know, there is no greater crime in the UK than making an unauthorised withdrawal from said establishment.

So if our two suspects, under questioning, uttered the kind of testament or set in motion testament such as we have witnessed, what might you suppose, the outcome would be?

Parts two and three will be delivered when and whenever, creativity and the will to write are pretty rare commodities for me these days.

But do bare in mind, should you come under attack, from whatever quarter: No jemmied shutters, no abduction.

Jim Gamble: Judgement or Agenda? Re-Up

Given Jim Gamble's more recent blatant display of  agenda, edifying the authors, Summers and Swan and their failed literary attempt, Looking For Madeleine. I thought it might be of interest, perhaps more so than ever, to re-up this post from 10 April 2010. Covering as it does, many of the issues surrounding the then head of the CEOP, Jim Gamble. Unfortunately I cannot guarantee all links, but there is still ample sufficiency, to hopefully hold your interest.






I think I can safely say that my previous article Jim Gamble CEOP A Question If I May established the fact that Jim Gamble is a competent policeman of some twenty five years experience, well versed in the ways of the world.

With that in mind, I have to ask the question, does this statement by Gamble reflect that experience, or is it in fact, given Gamble's career accomplishments, totally anomalous?

Though it defies all logic, Gamble's unequivocal support of the McCann's is not unique, he has previously been vocal in support of another, the extremely suspect, if not indeed outright corrupt, Colin Port, Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset.

But that little nest of vipers I will address later in this article if not in a separate post altogether, because truth be told it makes my head spin. Everybody that is anybody is seemingly connected, from the disgraced Ronnie Flanagan, later to become Sir Ronnie, to Gamble, to Port, to murders and cover-ups, to you name it, everybody seems to coloured by the same brush. The hard part in all this, is trying to find the glue, if not to stick this shabby bunch together, then at least find enough cohesion to at least make an article out of it all. As I say, of this later, but don't be holding your breath.

The CEOP were active in this case from the very beginning, but before scrutinising that involvement, let me post a few relevant words, the rest of it being puff, from a Mirror article dated October 2007.

Cop hunts down net pervs
By Ros Wynne-Jones

EXCLUSIVE COP WHO HUNTS DOWN THE INTERNET PERVERTS PREYING ON KIDS

......And as head of the CEOP, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre, missing Madeleine McCann is inevitably never far from his mind.

"We absolutely support the McCann family," he says, sitting in his glass-walled office in Pimlico, Central London.

"They are to be applauded for their tireless work to keep the campaign to find their daughter in the public consciousness. It is a case for every parent of 'There but by the grace of God, go I'." Mirror 7th October 2007

"We absolutely support the McCann family, they are to be applauded for their tireless work to keep the campaign to find their daughter in the public consciousness."

Well, there's no ambiguity in that statement, crystal clear, unequivocal support from, and I shall not use the CEOP acronym here, lets call it as it is, because to do otherwise would be somewhat diversionary; unequivocal support from Jim Gamble.

Now that is quite a statement coming from an officer of the law, I assume that's what he still is, that he holds a rank of some description. It becomes even more of a statement, considerably more, when we consider to whom it pertains. And to whom it pertains is the parents, and the last two people to have seen to have seen Madeleine McCann alive before allegedly being abducted.

I have little inclination to quote chapter and verse as to what evidence there was at the time in support of this allegation by the parents, quite simply, it is the same amount today as it was then, nothing, zero, zilch. Likewise I have no inclination to spend a week making a list of factors that point to to the contrary. What I am inclined to however, is to state quite categorically that this statement of support by Gamble should have had alarm bells ringing from one end of this country to the other.

But if we add to the equation that which I have so far left out, then what I previously described as quite a statement becomes something else entirely. It becomes astonishing, and given that it is issued by a man supposedly charged with protecting children it becomes more than astonishing, it becomes sinister, and more than sinister it becomes criminal, both morally and legally.

So what is the missing expression in our fore-mentioned equation, it is the date?

The date of publication which quoted Jim Gamble's "absolute support the McCann family" was the Seventh of October 2007, a month to the day after the McCanns, quite understandably, had been declared Arguidos, persons of interest, suspects in all but name in the case of their disappeared Daughter.

Now you can call me old fashioned, you can call me whatever you wish, but I have a problem with this statement of support from Jim Gamble issued under the guise of the CEOP.

As much as he may like to think it is, the CEOP is not Jim Gamble's personal fiefdom, it is a Government organisation funded from the public purse. It's purpose, so we are told, is to combat child abuse via the internet. It is not platform for Jim Gamble to utter statements of support to suspects, period, no matter who they may be.

The CEOP was not conceived and brought into being in order that Jim Gamble may pursue his own agenda. The CEOP is not be vehicle from which to launch "Minute for Madeleine" video clips in an effort to legitimise the McCann's claim of abduction, when there is not one scrap of evidence to support this claim and there being much to indicate the impossibility of such an occurrence taking place.


Let us move on.


We know that the CEOP were on the ground in Portugal, "helping with the investigation" within two days, and what do we know of their activities there.

We know that they Profiled Robert Murat, this from Goncalo Amaral's book A Verdade Da Mentira. I include the rest of the passage for context and interest.

Members of the British agency CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre), take a close interest in Murat and work to develop his psychological profile. GA

With amazement the police officers discover a series of books and manuals exclusively intended for police services and government agencies.

Missing and Abducted Children: A Law-Enforcement Guide to Case Investigation and Program Management, National Centre for Missing & Exploited Children;

Training Courses, CEOP (Serious Organised Crime Agency - Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre);

Making Every Child Matter...Everywhere, CEOP (Serious Organised Crime Agency - Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre).

Mark Harrison himself wonders how Gerald McCann could have obtained these books.

Which led to, again from Goncalo Amaral.

FOR THE PROFILERS, MURAT IS THE GUILTY PARTY

Since Murat's first interview, which they attended, the specialists have continued to refine the profile of the suspect. They have heard about the statement from one of his so-called childhood friends, put on file by the police department: according to him, Murat had an affirmed penchant for bestiality.

He recounted his attempts at sexual relations with a cat and a dog, subsequently killed, he states, with cruelty. Moreover, he allegedly attempted to rape his 16 year-old cousin. This individual describes Murat as someone violent with behavioural problems, a sexual pervert, sadist, and misanthropist. We are somewhat sceptical.

All the same, according to the English profilers, there is a 90% chance that he is the guilty party. That seems to us to be a bit too easy. We think that drawing conclusions based essentially on the statement of an ex-convict is rather dangerous.

Yes it does seem a bit easy doesn't it, perhaps they had other reasons for reaching the conclusion they did.

Nevertheless Murat ended up as Arguido, but not before a little help from Jane Tanner, Lori Campbell and no doubt the odious one helping things along from under some nearby rock.

But I would be remiss if I didn't mention the expediency of Leicester Constabulary in forwarding to the PJ Campbell's suspicions of Murat. Pity they couldn't manage quite the same urgency when it came to forwarding the statements of possible paedophillic behaviour by Gerry McCann and David Payne. But never mind, they did manage to find the energy to fly out to Portugal to try and suppress the release of the documents when it be became apparent that the statements were to be made public.

It does make me beggar the question, I wonder how much time the CEOP spent profiling the statistically most likely persons to know her fate and the last persons to see her alive?*

The photo appeal; I don't want to dwell on too much, but suffice to say much was made of it by all concerned. Let me paste this from the Times, it being the shortest report I have but still includes all the players, Gerry McCann apart that is, for he was pleased as well. And you might want to remember herself from the NPIA, there being a chance she might pop up in the future.

May 21, 2007

Madeleine police appeal for holiday pictures

“We will then assess those pictures – at a rate of 1,000 pictures per hour – so that over a quick period of time we will pass meaningful information to the Portuguese authorities.”

The appeal was launched today by the UK law enforcement agencies assisting the Portuguese authorities – Leicestershire Constabulary, Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), CEOP and the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA).

Anne Harrison, Detective Chief Superintendent from the NPIA said that it was possible Madeleine was still in Praia da Luz but was being hidden and appealed for anyone that knew where she was to come forward.

“We do not know the reason why she was taken but the Portuguese authorities have searched extensively around Praia da Luz and she has not been found. It is possible she is being hidden or concealed in some way and if you know where then by now you may have realised it is in everybody’s interest that she is returned to her family”.

She also wanted anyone who took part in the initial search for Madeleine before the Portuguese police arrived to contact them on 0800 096 1233. Times

Now I might not be so cynical as to the reason for this appeal if the CEOP had actually sent a pic or two to the PJ. But they didn't and I remain just as cynical as ever I was.

And lastly, the blatant attempt by Gamble to whitewash the McCanns, legitimise the abduction theory, and as far as I am concerned, pervert the course of justice.

An attempt I might add, as crass as it is obvious, and as distasteful as it is illegal.

These screen shots taken from, and with a voice-over approved by  hardened crime fighter of twenty five years experience, Jim Gamble, CEO of the CEOP.
















She will now be six years old. It says it all.

Judgement or Agenda?

To round off, a few opinions of others that I have saved along the way, I concur with the writer's opinions, and the talking points the make do save me writing more at this ungodly hour.

No names no pack drill, but thank you all for your contributions and pray forgive me taking liberties with your words.

What evidence do the CEOP have that the mysteriously disappeared child has been abducted? What evidence do the CEOP have to support she has been abducted by paedophiles? If the CEOP have evidence to support that the mysteriously disappeared child was abducted and was abducted by paedophiles then why has this new evidence not been presented to the Portuguese authorities who have primacy in this investigation? If the CEOP have evidence to support abduction an abduction by paedophiles then this I believe is new evidence. New evidence that could re-open the archived case!

~ ~ ~

And CEOPS merrily go along with age-progressed pictures of a child whose dead body has been scented by two recovery dogs? Purrrrrlease!

~ ~ ~

Jim Gamble is being used to threaten any would be dissenters, letting everyone know that Gerry is still in total control of the UK police and all their investigations. How bizarre that given that Madeleine’s fate is still unknown senior policemen are sharing a platform with the statistically most likely person to know her fate and the last person to see her alive.* Even if one is convinced of the parent’s innocence it is an inexplicable way for a police officer to behave

~ ~ ~

What is it about Gamble that instinctively seems to concern so many of us? I cannot put my finger on it and I cannot even fully justify the feeling I have. I just know that it does not sit easily in my mind at all that he is seemingly ignoring the findings of the dogs and statements of Martin Grimes , the Gaspars etc., etc., etc., and that there is an inordinate amount of information to be ruled out before he can sit at conferences with these people as if he is their friend and victim support aid.

I would feel much happier about Gamble if he took a more objective role in this case. Or at least come out publicly and told us why these currently ex-arguidos are totally innocent in the eyes of CEOPS.

If, like Kate McCann, he knows something that nobody else knows, wouldn't it be better for him to come out and tell the public and put us all out of our misery? Because, after goodness knows how long, Kate McCann is sure as Hell never going to tell us how she 'knew' Madeleine was abducted. Her just 'knowing' is absolutely no compensation for the millions of pounds and hundreds of thousands of hours spent.

Where is Gamble's shred of evidence of abduction? Just one will do!

~ ~ ~

I have posted some additional reading below, because human nature being what it is, I have no doubt there will be visitors here from the CEOP, so in a way I could say this is for you.

Perhaps after reading these four articles, assuming you can be arsed, you might want to ask yourselves why the CEOP is involved in this case at all, but more particularly you might ask yourself a further question, why has the CEOP given, and continues give, it's categorical support to the McCanns and their abduction theory. A theory I might add that is so implausible that it becomes contemptible to any thinking person.

Please feel free to make use of the comments facility, particularly if you can argue the case as well as is done below.

Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted: The Shutters Revisited

How did the alleged abductor snatch Madeleine in a time slot of no more than 3-4 minutes?

by Barbara Nottage

One of the curious aspects of the alleged abduction of Madeleine McCann is the extraordinarily tight timetable in which the abduction is supposed to have taken place. Dr Gerald McCann says he went to check on the children at about 9.05pm on 3 May 2007. He also said elsewhere that he had been an unusually long time in the apartment toilet, and that he had been inside all four rooms of the apartment. In addition, he told the world that he had had time during his visit to gaze down on Madeleine, whom he was to describe as ‘lying in the recovery position’, and think how lucky he was to have such a beautiful daughter. By this reckoning, He could not have left the apartment until around 9.10pm or several minutes later.............

.........The abduction scenario

So let’s examine this situation more closely.

The scenario put forward by the McCanns and their friends runs as follows:

· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3 May.

· The McCanns went down to the ‘Tapas bar’ at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening, with other members of the group arriving during the next half-an-hour or so.

· Dr Matthew Oldfield ‘checked the apartment from the outside’ at around 9.00pm to 9.03pm.

· Dr Gerry McCann returned to his apartment (5A) from the Tapas bar to check on his children at around 9.05pm. The walk to the apartment would have taken one to two minutes. So on his own timing, he would have arrived there around 9.07pm.

· Dr Gerry McCann was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the toilet - maybe up to 5 minutes, though we have never been told why. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleine’s bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.

· Dr Gerry McCann says he noticed that the door to the children’s room was ‘wider open than before’. He says that at 8.30pm it had been open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).

· The fact that the door - according to Dr Gerald McCann - was now (at 9.05pm) more open more than it was before (at 8.30pm), has been used by him to suggest the possibility that the abductor may have been already in the apartment when he checked on the children, although he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. Dr Gerry McCann has said that the abductor might have been hiding behind a door or in a wardrobe while he spent several minutes doing his ‘check’ on the children. more

.

Let's Not Concern Ourselves, They're Only Details
by Himself

Just what does it take to get arrested by the Leicester police?

The corner stone of this nonsensical abduction story offered by the McCanns has always centred around the window and the "jemmied shutters."

I have written about the shear impossibility of such a scenario here, and Dr Martin Roberts addresses the same likelihood and can be found at this link.

Below in black and white and on video tape are the accounts of McCann family members and friends, etched in stone as it were, and there is only one indisputable source for these accounts, Kate and Gerry McCann.

But firstly, prior to reading these accounts, we have to take a good look at the latest incredible words of Kate McCann.

This single paragraph is but one of many taken from the McCanns feeble effort to limit the fallout from what came to light in Lisbon. This latest blog entry written by Kate McCann? after their failed and misguided attempt to silence Goncalo Amaral and as such silence the truth.

The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'

In the immortal words of John McEnroe, you cannot be serious, you really really cannot be serious.

Apart from a few lines by way of introduction, I have just posted the relevant parts of various articles.*

~ ~ ~

Agony as 3-yr-old vanishes from holiday flat

A HUGE hunt was going on last night for three-year-old Maddy McCann, feared snatched from her holiday flat.

Maddy is believed to have been taken as she slept in the complex on Portugal's Algarve as her doctor parents ate at a bar 120ft away. Her scent was picked up by a police sniffer dog. But it petered out after 400 yards.

Yesterday, 24 hours after the young child vanished in quiet Praia da Luz, anguished parents Gerry and Kate, both 38, of Rothley, Leics, begged for her return.

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy was abducted. They're devastated."

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad.

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted'."

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken. more

The Rapidly Revolving Door
by John Blacksmith

Gerry McCann went back to the third version of his checking visit, the dodgy printed timeline which matched what he had told the police in his first witness statement, where he also mentioned the lavatory visit, timing his trip at 9.05. That document was never going to be accepted by either a judge or jury, not just because of these very changes but because the group had effectively colluding in preparing it after their first witness statements, so it was both worthless and suspicious, as the McCanns’ lawyers knew.

Never mind. Something had to be done, and so Gerry became the first ever victim of MMR syndrome – McCann Memory Recovery - when, four and a half months after the event, he suddenly recalled “sensing” an intruder’s presence in the apartment. To strengthen the story there was that wide-open bedroom door that Mathew Oldfield had seen. Gerry and Kate only ever left it ajar, never wide open or closed. That, surely, was clear evidence that someone was already there, in hiding, ready to leap into action as soon as the patio doors clicked shut. Now, with the actual approach and entry all having taken place before his arrival, the only time required as he walked down the back staircase to encounter Jeremy Wilkins, was fugitive exit time.

But this was like playing with a Rubik Cube because of what the Tapas 7 had already put in their witness statements: move one, you may have to move them all. If he’d done his check at 9.05 what had he been doing between 9.07, say, and when Jane Tanner saw him by the back gate about 9.20 at the earliest? A trip to the loo, a gaze down at his daughter – and then what? He must have been talking to Jeremy Wilkins, that’s where the unaccounted 10 -15 minutes had gone. But argh! Jane Tanner had said in her statement that, whatever time they had both gone, she had followed him only five minutes afterwards.

Shrug. That was another bridge that would have to be crossed if they ever went back to Portugal. For now it would be good enough: out went Clarence with the story that so enraged the Portuguese cop. more

Decisions, decisions
by John Blacksmith

The background to Mitchell's untruthful statement to the press lay in the problems that the defence team were uncovering in the abduction claim, problems that they patiently outlined at their offices to Gerry McCann one afternoon in September.

Mathew Oldfield confirmed that at just after 9.30, when he supposedly checked the apartment, while missing Madeleine herself, the children' bedroom door was open wider than Gerry McCann left it. So the abductor supposedly seen by Jane Tanner must have moved it, committed the crime and departed before Oldfield's arrival but after Gerry's departure, which was itself fixed in time by another witness, Jeremy Wilkins. Was there enough time for the abduction to occur within these limits?

In the famous “Let’s Dismember Noddy” timelines, the ones that the Tapas group insisted were truthful, there are two times given for Gerry’s visit. The first version says he checked at 9.10 – 9.15 PM.

On the second, the one with “Gerald” on it, Gerry, who was wearing a watch during his check, has corrected it to 9.15 exactly.

The same document, as can be seen, says that Jane, who was not present during the Noddy massacre, went for her check at 9.20, something she confirms in her witness statement, “five minutes after Gerry”.

So in that five minutes everything has happened. Gerry has made the two minute walk to his apartment, more

.

~ ~ ~

NI police colluded with killers

Police colluded with loyalists behind over a dozen murders in north Belfast, a report by the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland has confirmed.

Nuala O'Loan's report said UVF members in the area committed murders and other serious crimes while working as informers for Special Branch.

It said two retired assistant chief constables refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Special Branch officers gave the killers immunity, it said.

The officers ensured the murderers were not caught and even "baby-sat" them during police interviews to help them avoid incriminating themselves.

The Special Branch officers "created false notes" and blocked searches for UVF weapons.

They also paid almost £80,000 to leading loyalist Mark Haddock, jailed for 10 years last November for an attack on a nightclub doorman.

Responding to the report, Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde offered an apology to the victims' families.

He said the report made "shocking, disturbing and uncomfortable reading".

NI Secretary Peter Hain said: "I am convinced that at least one prosecution will arise out of today's report."

Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams said republicans would "not be surprised or shocked by the revelations".

"We think that it's an incentive that the mechanisms which were put in place for accountability, which we put in place and which we have argued for, now need to be deployed, not only to make sure that this does not happen (again), but if it does, that those guilty will be dealt with properly," he said.

The report, published on Monday, called for a number of murder investigations to be re-opened.

But it is unlikely that any of the police officers involved will be prosecuted - the ombudsman said that evidence was deliberately destroyed to ensure there could not be prosecutions.

Nuala O'Loan said investigation was a lengthy task.

"What emerged during our inquiries was that all of the informants at the centre of this investigation were members of the UVF," she said.

"There was no effective strategic management of these informants. As a consequence of the practices of Special Branch, the position of the UVF, particularly in north Belfast and Newtownabbey was consolidated and strengthened over the years. How could this happen?"

Mrs O'Loan said former Chief Constable Sir Ronnie Flanagan was interviewed by her office, but was unable to assist the investigation.

The report said: "Others, including some serving officers, gave evasive, contradictory, and on occasion farcical answers to questions.

"On occasion those answers indicated either a significant failure to understand the law, or contempt for the law."

The ombudsman's investigation began more than three years ago when Belfast welder Raymond McCord claimed that his son, also called Raymond, had been killed by a police informer.

The former RAF man, 22, was a member of the UVF who had some involvement in drugs.

In 1997, he was beaten to death and his body dumped in a quarry.

Mr McCord has said he wants those who murdered his son to be put in prison.

He said he had received a death threat at the weekend from the UVF.

Among the investigations which could be re-opened are the murder in north Belfast in 1992 of 27-year-old taxi driver Sharon McKenna, who was shot at the home of an elderly friend.

The names of the police officers and the informers have not been made public.

However, it is known that the main informer at the centre of the investigation is Mark Haddock, who was named in the Irish parliament 15 months ago as a UVF killer.

Some of the Special Branch officers criticised in the report have rejected the ombudsman's allegations as "unfounded and incapable of substantiation".

In a statement, the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers' Association said they had always acted in the best interests of the pursuit of justice and had nothing to be ashamed of.

The officers also challenged the ombudsman to disclose the details of any evidence of their criminal behaviour discovered during her investigation. BBC NI

Madeleine McCann: Hacks n' Ho's

As you may know, I have in the past, preserved for posterity, those that have either shilled for those responsible for the death of Madeleine McCann, or have got rich off the back of this tragic four year old.

Even though for the most part, I have put image making behind me, I see no reason why the latest pair of abominations to sully the memory of Madeleine McCann, scurrilous hacks, Summers and Swan, should be spared the same infamy.

The only difference of course, unlike those that have feasted on the body of the dead child previously, Summers and Swan's attempt to get rich in the same manner, has like their book, been an abject failure.

And no amount of shilling by third parties, will lift this odious piece of trash from the cesspit where it surely belongs.

I have added one or two others of the aforementioned shills and slags to this little gallery, just to remind us who they are. And it is a few, there being dozens more I could have readily added.

But to open the play, first up second up fifth up (pride of place is now given over to twenty five year career cop Jim Gamble's tweet, which, in one hundred and forty characters, manages to speak volumes. Not about the book I add, but about Gamble himself)  is the original graphic I stumbled upon, and as is said, the rest is history.

That must be why it has sold a grand total of twenty six copies on Amazon, over the past week.

Not much child protection going on here, Jimmy.