A theory I have supported for a while. Lets hope you are right.

1032
Daisy Says:

January 14th, 2008 at 9:51 am
*******************
Hola,Daisy
So many questions today…Have you seen how Madeleine would look like 8 months later?
As I said,”they” believe she is alive then? or is this pure speculation again?

—-

Hola Jo,

Lucky I saw your posting. Another thread has started and I was over there. I don’t think Maddie would look like that FBI pic. Doesn’t look anything like that to me. Children change, but not so much in 8 months. I find it difficult to believe that she might still be alive after so long. Going back to the other thread now.

January 14th, 2008 at 10:14 am
*******************
I did think about Murat made arguido to suit the investigation…..this is too much for my small neurones

January 14th, 2008 at 9:51 am
*******************
Hola,Daisy
So many questions today…Have you seen how Madeleine would look like 8 months later?
As I said,”they” believe she is alive then? or is this pure speculation again?

Imo I think the PJ are picking up Murats expenses in return for him keeping quiet and also using him as a sort of bait.

I think the PJ know exactly where Murat was both nights (2nd/3rd). These new accusations and sightings of him from the McCann camp are playing into the PJ’s hands, being obvious disinformation and helping in proving the PJ’s theories.

Remember Murat was the McCanns interpretor and he would know a lot of information that the PJ would rather keep in house.

Murat imo is working with the PJ and has been since the early days. He was made arguido just to flush out the McCanns. The “I’m broke” and “charge me or release me” statements have been just to keep up the appearance of Murat as a prime suspect.

If true, in Murat, a real Englishman has emerged at last, one who will take it on the chin, risk ruin, banishment and the slurring of his name, all to see justice done!

here’s a revised list

I am still trying:

What do you think DuncanR (and other mods)?
Who is agw, really?
Will this be a big week?
What has happened to Garth?
Is Sledgehammer friends with Matt O?
Are Maria and Daisy alter-egos?
Will Tony continue to be censored?
Will Daisy finally shut up for good?
Will GS remember to wear bloomers?
Will Ian’s good behaviour continue?
Will Totje revive that rabbit?

——

853 Mods and Admin

“Could you wait ’til he’s back online to discuss this, but I do know he added a footnote in explanation after editing your posts”.

REPLY: Yes, of course, I thought it must be this, he’s added a footnote and I’ve simply not seen it. I don’t think this has happened more than once or twice though?

I’m very happy to accept guidance if you’re concerned about the libel angle

—————

Mods and Admin,

May I make a suggestion regarding this issue of “footnotes” by M&A? If Admin or one of Mods places a footnote, there is no guarantee that the poster will see it, as it is “after the fact”, i.e. comment. Not everybody goes back over what they have posted and may miss such footnotes by M&A. My suggestion would be to, additionally to placing the footnote, to send a very short email to the poster. This way, the poster will be made aware of the comment/warning, etc.

GRrrr…..

Peter O - Oh me, oh my! I just realised what I said. If I am not careful, I am going to get a reputation as the forum trollop, (ludicrous, unhelpful and hurful), with my innocent, yet potentially suggestive comments. Goodness, naked cartwheels and back flips and now my throbbing comment. Edit….

+++++++++++

As a good lady friend of my Mother in Law once remarked…. Being considered a trollop at a certain age is indeed perhaps disadvantageous to ones ambitions . However, as one matures, having a reputation is certainly an advantage for ladies of a certain age. Men are far more interested in chasing ladies with alleged reputations and as one knows dear while men may be entertaining during the chase there are for the most part disappointing at the kill. Fearsome lady! Though a lot of fun around a dinner table.

Let’s hope your prediction is true, veritablequandary. Just doing boring things, when I finally sat down again another story sidetracked me.
—–
Weekends tend to be slow on Anorak. (Well at least the system doesn’t crash so much, but not sure the benefit outweighs the cost.) A reflection perhaps of what Peter Mac says about not paying cops overtime. Edit….

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

Posting on your own time I suspect is not as much fun as posting on your employers time. That and weekend responsibilities.

Excellent post in Forums re Katie Trebling Story.

http://www.anorak.co.uk/forums/topic.php?id=944&replies=1

Some interesting moral/ethical/philosophical issues here other posters may perhaps want to address?

Thanks for posting.

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

P.S. Your piece has been ‘promoted’ to front-page of Anorak (See Twittering Section)

Just saw an article in today’s Daily Express in which the McCann’s tell the PJ to “put up or shut up”:

“Either charge them or clear them so that no more time is lost in getting back to looking for a little girl missing for more than eight months.”

The McCann’s currently have the PJ, Metodo3 and Hogan International all “on the case” in one way or another; not to mention the world-wide audience subjected to their relentless media campaign. Their arguido status does not seem to have hindered the search in any significant way. On the other hand, Gerry’s famous “marketing ploy”, may, by his own admission, have put the little girl’s eye, not to mention her life, in jeopardy.

This outburst is particularly ironic, given that, as reported, neither the McCann’s nor their friends went out to search for the little girl on the night she disappeared or during the days that followed. This fact alone I find quite staggering. She may well have wandered out of the apartment in search of her parents, become disoriented, lost, knocked down by a car even. (They themselves told us via the media that she had a tendency to get up in the night - gold stars and all that).

Please, please, someone, put these people out of our misery.

I don’t know, I can understand having a fund and wanting people to recognize her.

I disagree about sharing the eye information, some uses of the fund, and the turn on the PJ when even one of their friends admitted it was natural for an investigation to look at the people who actually there first. Saying that, yes, I do believe this advertising has gone too far and may have ended up hurting the McCanns children more.

It is truly hard to imagine.