Breaking Media, Politicians & Celebrities Since 1995

morning anorak - thought you would be struggling to find some news on this case today!

can we have a pink site tomorrow please?

morning nosey.

great thanks, just had my first coffee and the sun’s coming out.

morning stan

No stan - just an eternal optimist

does anyone know what time this great parliamentry debate is taking place?

Stan, I’m sure that when someone does get charged, it will be all over the front pages.

Until the old bill make a move or a body is discovered, there’s really not much to report.

doesn’t stop us making wild allegations though, eh?

Good Morning All
Flippin freezing here and so foggy I cant see beyond the trees at the end of the garden. Off for a coffee to warm up

Morning all,
Peaking and hopping off.

They are expecting an announcement of arguido status being lifted.

But is it likely to be announced in Parliament? I’d think not.

So is this going to be clarification on the ‘hasty’ statement?

Its very interesting that Clarence has admitted this is important to them.

Good morning all,

hope Senor Costa doesn’t say arguidos cleared, case closed.

May I ask an off topic question I haven’t got out of my head for ages? In “Lassie”, which of the dog masters was it who said the famous sentence at the end of many episodes? I think it must be something like that in English:

“Lassie, we can shelve this case”.
(”Lassie, diesen Fall können wir zu den Akten legen”).

Does anybody remember?

Well, we should know the stance of the Portuguese Government this afternoon then - or will we just have more statements which will be ’spun’ in the direction appropriate to the particular spinners cause?

The two positions were, as I read it:-

1. The McCanns were made ’suspects’ ‘in haste’ in order to beat the legislative changes the PJ knew were coming.

2. The McCanns were made ’suspects’ ‘in haste’ because the PJ feared they were about to leave Portugal as they (the McCanns) knew they were being investigated.

This ‘haste’ is an issue because:-

Option 1. There is insufficient evidence to justify the status (not sure what the requirements in terms of evidence are)

Option 2. The status has caused the McCanns to be obstructive to the investigation and communications between PJ and the McCanns (and indeed the T7) has ended.

Option 3. The involvement of lawyers has effectively halted the investigation.

Or a combination of the above!

Will the Parliamentary ‘debate’ or ‘announcement’ clarify the situation? In my opinion, only if dramatic and/or explicit statements are made!

Ultimately, of course, it is arguably an irrelevance to Madeleine and to obtaining justice for her suffering from the failure in a duty of care.

It may be an excellent example of the inadequacy of the European Union and across border co-operation to prevent harm coming to children.

21 RedRooster.

Clarence has to apepar to be the most morally bankrupt - simply from the fact that he is arguing purely to fund his life. Its his job.

Does he believe in it? Maybe he does, in which case perhaps he can justify his position. Personally I think he should refuse his pay from Kennedy and donate it to the fund. He could make a living from his other interests or from his attendance at lectures etc.

In black and white (with tinges of pink) he is earning his living from the loss of a child, but of course thats jsut what the press and the lawyers are doing, so isnt this just ‘the way of the world’?

The McCanns themselves are responsible for failure in a duty of care to their child, they really seem to be inept as parents, a common issue in todays world of late and arguably unnatural parenthood.

I’m afraid we really havent managed to overcome our inherent natural instincts and behaviour -even the most ‘civilised’ of us in basically an animal (and always will be).

28 Ian

Corrected ‘in’ to ‘is’!

‘even the most ‘civilised’ of us ‘is’ basically an animal (and always will be).

31
aardvarko

Probably it will just be ‘annoying grist for the spin wheel’!