aw1654

Ohhh, came on!! Just because the poor man has long hair and beard he is a suspect? How many men look like him? The man on the left is very different from the man on the right. For me, the man on the left looks like a woman on disguise. My believe is the man on the left is a product of a woman’s imagination: so many months after the incident and she described it? Hmmm…
The private detectives are being well paid, so they have to show service…false service, but service.

Here in Portugal, most people believe that Madelaine is, sadly, dead. Thats why he said that.

Wrong judjemets could lead to inocent people to have their lives spoiled: remember the brazilian man who was killed by the british police in London times ago? Well, he was innocent…

dr:30.01

rel:dr:30.01

I wasn’t sure if it was a general remark or that I somehow gave you or someone else the impression that I was thinking the PJ was crap.

++++++++++

No, I was speaking in the most general terms not referring to you specifically, nor everyone in particular, though of course I must be referring to somebody. Therefore, one supposes that anybody who wanted to assume that they are in fact “somebody” could quite validly suggest that my remarks were aimed directly and squarely at them personally.

There, is that clear now?

I wasn’t sure if it was a general remark or that I somehow gave you or someone else the impression that I was thinking the PJ was crap.

Now regarding your post. If you’ve read one of my serious posts on the other thread, you’d seen that imo there’s proof that the pj is [re-]examining all leads. When did I ever complain about mr. Rebelo and his team? “Au contraire”, I think he’s doing a hard job re-examining the case. I admire his guts to get involved in this “high-profile” investigation.

And when did I ever suggest I consider the PJ “a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons”?????
I do think at the beginning the pj made some mistakes [who doesn’t ever make mistakes?], however I don’t know how serious they spoiled the investigation. Have a look at the picture of the lady that’s trying to find fingerprints on the shutters!

I don’t know if Clarrie is trying to sidetrack the investigation, time [and pj] will tell.
I’m sure the T9 know more about the events that lead up to the disappearance of Madeleine, I’m also sure they know more then we know by the stories in the papers. Remember the secrecy law? I don’t know if the T9 muddled the investigation by their statements [assuming there are some serious inconsistencies]. Again, I hope time will tell.

PS: this took me my luchbreak. Have to go back to work. Will be back in the evening.

++++++++++++++++++

Any impression that I may have suggested you in particular hold certain opinions is a combination of my poor writing and perhaps a little over sensitivity on your part?

I was just making the generic point that I don’t believe there is any evidence that the PJ are not conducting the investigation properly, nor following up relevant/appropriate leads.

I don’t much care what Team McCann think/say/do in respect of the PJ/Portuguese authorities, since the former is wholly responsible for having brought themselves to the attention of the latter in the first place.

Now regarding your post. If you’ve read one of my serious posts on the other thread, you’d seen that imo there’s proof that the pj is [re-]examining all leads. When did I ever complain about mr. Rebelo and his team? “Au contraire”, I think he’s doing a hard job re-examining the case. I admire his guts to get involved in this “high-profile” investigation.

And when did I ever suggest I consider the PJ “a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons”?????
I do think at the beginning the pj made some mistakes [who doesn’t ever make mistakes?], however I don’t know how serious they spoiled the investigation. Have a look at the picture of the lady that’s trying to find fingerprints on the shutters!

I don’t know if Clarrie is trying to sidetrack the investigation, time [and pj] will tell.
I’m sure the T9 know more about the events that lead up to the disappearance of Madeleine, I’m also sure they know more then we know by the stories in the papers. Remember the secrecy law? I don’t know if the T9 muddled the investigation by their statements [assuming there are some serious inconsistencies]. Again, I hope time will tell.

PS: this took me my luchbreak. Have to go back to work. Will be back in the evening.

“”"” What is important is finding out what happened to Madeleine.”"”"

Indeed….and all the more reason for Dr G P and Dr K to answer all questions,
put by the PJ, wholly truthfully.

January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
****************
Very correct.Thank you Peter O ….and a big slice of sun for you

January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Hey Jo- have you just graduated from charm school? Didn’t they tell you there’s NO NEED TO SHOUT?

WHY don’t YOU go BACK to your WHISKY…

rel:dr:28.01
*********************
I absolutely reject this type of vile personal comment.
Please not: I do NOT drink AT ALL and surely not wisky
The ones who drink and get absolutely trashed are the english people who come to my country and while they are happily getting pissed they leave their children unattended and they mysteriously disappear

A bons entendeurs,salut!

You mean Totje and Lyn?
*************************

Whether she is alive or not; she deserves to have the truth revealed.
and whether it was an abduction or not, so as long as the PJ doesn’t know for sure either way, they have to investigate all clues that could be overlooked during the beginning of the investigation.
IMO it’s about finding the truth about what happened, finding Madeleine and charge the perpetrator[s] no matter whom they are/ s/he is].

+++++++++++++++++++

Notwithstanding that we don’t know what the PJ know for definite, of course all leads that follow fruitful or unresolved lines of enquiry should be being followed. There isn’t, from a public perception, any evidence that the PJ are not doing this?

Just because the Comical One and his cohorts keep coming up with wizard wheezes to sidetrack the investigation, in my opinion, it doesn’t follow that the PJ should either take them seriously nor respond in a manner that might expose any of their investigation tactics. The PJ and not Team McCann are the ones conducting this investigation.

With the above in mind, it makes no sense for the PJ to pursue lines of enquiry relating to say abduction if they already have incontrovertible proof that abduction is/was impossible. What most of us tend to forget from time to time is that we do not know what truths the PJ are already operating with and how that determines their day to day actions.

Now, none of the above makes sense if you regard the PJ as a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons. I don’t however.

I think she is keeping her options open.

rel:dr:29.01

Anyone notice that the sketch of Jane Tanner’s “eggman” has hair that looks like Jane Tanner’s hair and a sweater similar to what Jane Tanner has been photographed wearing?