Lazzerie-lies-in-the-sun

by **PeterMac** 28.07.13 10:52

Some good short articles recently on
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
Most recently dissecting the diary.
For example - snippped

Children’s Rights
Diary Entry
Saturday, June 2nd
"Whose human rights are more important, those of a paedophile or of a vulnerable defenceless child ?"
END
Interesting that Kate McCann should pose the above question as I have a similar one she may wish to answer:

Whose human rights are more important those of selfish parents who thought only of themselves, their own needs and in so doing abandoned their children, failing in their duty of care to these children, OR those of a vulnerable defenceless child ?

More interesting is that Kate McCann is describing Madeleine as a ‘vulnerable defenceless child ?’
So in June 2007 she did understand and recognise that the position she left her three children, was one where her children were left ‘vulnerable’
And
In June 2007 she did also understand and recognise that Madeleine, Sean and Amelie were defenceless children!
Well of course she/they did - they are fooling no one with - 'we felt it was safe!'
Yeh, about as safe as sticking the kids in a hungry lions den and popping back ever half hour to 'listen for their screams' Expecting them to come out of it unscathed! I can see Kate McCann 'listening' at the "den door" - 'oh all quiet' as she would say, taking this to mean, all was well - then noticing Lenny licking his lips his mouth more widely open...

by Guest 28.07.13 11:28

Thanks for pointing me in that direction again, Peter. Worthwhile to read and certainly has little gems smilie

by **PeterMac** 06.08.13 9:12

Bumped to say that there are now many more articles on this site.
Each one dissecting one aspect and picking away at it.

by russiandoll 06.08.13 9:33

I especially like this one : [italics mine]

Without question the stories told by the McCanns and their companions with regards their checking of the children on the night Madeleine was reported as missing are untrue.

Gerry and Kate McCann did not suffer from poor memory not to the knowledge of the public and surely if they did, in their particular line of work, medical professionals this would have been discovered pretty quickly by their family, friends, patients, and employers the NHS.

It would seem ludicrous (as their spokesperson Clarence Mitchell would say) to believe that this couple, who insist absolutely that their daughter was not only abducted, but taken from her bed (a child known for not sleeping well and most nights getting out of bed to either wander around or to alert her parents to the crying of her two year old twin siblings) a couple who claim to remember the exact position the child was sleeping at any given time, a couple who claim to remember exactly how widely open they left the bedroom door, who claim to remember just about everything of that night with one exception –

How they entered and exited the apartment!

And that has got to be the one thing that they absolutely could not forget.

No one, not anyone on the planet leaving their home for whatever reason – FORGETS HOW THEY EXITED THEIR HOME, FORGETS HOW THEY RE-ENTERED IT!

my addition : and certainly not a couple who established a rather rigid routine for everything during that holiday, which included, according to Kate in her book, an abandonment of using the front door from early on.

by aiyoyo 06.08.13 17:49

I especially like the one titled "Kate Mccanns Chant".

by lj 06.08.13 22:38

From th same site : Take 1 - Andy Redwood

Redwood:

I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind. We were untouched by anything that’s gone before, and, as part of that, two key elements of it is to go:

Re

1. Madeleine is alive,

and the other is:-

2. Sadly she’s not...

And in relation to her being alive, yes, there is a real possibility that she’s alive.

How embarrassing. It seems the rogatory interviews were contagious after all.

But the " We were untouched by anything that’s gone before" shows he does not listen to all conclusion and warnings from Portuguese and British side.

by **tigger** 07.08.13 6:31

lj wrote:From th same site : Take 1 - Andy Redwood

Redwood:

I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind. We were untouched by anything that’s gone before, and, as part of that, two key elements of it is to go:

Re

1. Madeleine is alive,

and the other is:-

2. Sadly she’s not...

And in relation to her being alive, yes, there is a real possibility that she’s alive.

How embarrassing. It seems the rogatory interviews were contagious after all.

But the " We were untouched by anything that’s gone before" shows he does not listen to all conclusion and warnings from Portuguese and British side.

But he states THREE times that she's alive and does not use the word 'dead '.

That was the point at which I lost hope of an unbiased investigation. Imo SY had no business going pubic with anything at all.

by Guest 07.08.13 9:43

Tigger, do flip in an "l" before we start making jokes about it ...
big grin

by lj 07.08.13 14:35

tigger wrote:
lj wrote:From th same site : Take 1 - Andy Redwood

Redwood:

I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind. We were untouched by anything that’s gone before, and, as part of that, two key elements of it is to go:

Re

1. Madeleine is alive,

and the other is:-

2. Sadly she’s not...

And in relation to her being alive, yes, there is a real possibility that she’s alive.

How embarrassing. It seems the rogatory interviews were contagious after all.

But the " We were untouched by anything that’s gone before" shows he does not listen to all conclusion and warnings from Portuguese and British side.
But he states THREE times that she's alive and does not use the word 'dead '.

That was the point at which I lost hope of an unbiased investigation. Imo SY had no business going pubic with anything at all.

Didn't they say at the start they won't make anything public anyway?

I agree, Andy has offered so many times, and in such laudatory detail, statements about the parents innocence, that the only conclusion can be that that is their axiom.
It is funny though, that in complete contrast with his other teleprompter read answers, this question throws him off and his answer is as muddied as the answers of the tapas 7 in the rogatory interviews.

by **tigger** 07.08.13 14:59

Châtelaine wrote:Tigger, do flip in an "l" before we start making jokes about it ...

Way too late as I gaze myopically at a tiny screen wondering what you meant..... (Is there an embarrassed emoticon?)

I'm a ten finger typist - pecking away at a screen with a manic spellchecker is hell!

@lj
Privileged! Why?

I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind.

by **PeterMac** 07.08.13 15:51

tigger wrote:
I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind.

And again we see the sort of gibbering that the Tapas Rogatories recorded when pertinent questions were asked.
And the same thing that G&K revert to in some of their less tightly scripted TV interviews.
Like Oprah
""It's just nonsense you know, there's no... that people can have theories and that's all it is, there's no evidence to suggest any of that and it's absolute ludicrous, you know, and it's..."

Gibber, blabber, hope the question goes away . . .

by lj 07.08.13 16:22

tigger wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:Tigger, do flip in an "l" before we start making jokes about it ...

Way too late as I gaze myopically at a tiny screen wondering what you meant..... (Is there an embarrassed emoticon?)

I'm a ten finger typist - pecking away at a screen with a manic spellchecker is hell!

@lj
Privileged! Why?

I believe she’s still alive because, at the beginning of this case… a huge privilege for us at the Metropolitan Police to be part of this investigation…er, investigation review. Is that we came with a completely open mind.

He is the "chosen" one??
Isn't that what most co-conspirators fall for? The idea that they are part of a trusted circle.

They should do something about his Freudian slips though. Maybe just use the teleprompter? Just like the McCanns: all questions have to be submitted long before.

by **tigger** 07.08.13 17:35

Has anyone ever heard a detective say he felt privileged to take on a case of say burglary or armed robbery?

Has PeterMac ever felt honoured or indeed privileged to take on a case?

The McCanns must be holy since even the priest said ..'when I came into their presence..' I wouldn't even say that if I was invited to meet the Queen.

by aiyoyo 07.08.13 18:06

tigger wrote:Has anyone ever heard a detective say he felt privileged to take on a case of say burglary or armed robbery?

Has PeterMac ever felt honoured or indeed privileged to take on a case?

The McCanns must be holy since even the priest said ..'when I came into their presence..' I wouldn't even say that if I was invited to meet the Queen.

Ya, it's a very odd thing to say -- that one is privileged to take on a missing child or homicide case.
It is circumstance of tragedy and privileged is not the correct word.

He made it sounds like he was representing celebrity or royalty.

by **PeterMac** 07.08.13 18:42

tigger wrote:Has anyone ever heard a detective say he felt privileged to take on a case of say burglary or armed robbery?
Has PeterMac ever felt honoured or indeed privileged to take on a case?

No. It is a nonsense thing to say. You are doing a job, giving a public service if you want to be all misty-eyed about it, but when you are allocated a particular crime to investigate it is just part of what you do.

by lj 07.08.13 19:03

aiyoyo wrote:
tigger wrote:Has anyone ever heard a detective say he felt privileged to take on a case of say burglary or armed robbery?

Has PeterMac ever felt honoured or indeed privileged to take on a case?

The McCanns must be holy since even the priest said ..'when I came into their presence..' I wouldn't even say that if I was invited to meet the Queen.

Ya, it's a very odd thing to say -- that one is privileged to take on a missing child or homicide case.
It is circumstance of tragedy and privileged is not the correct word.

He made it sounds like he was representing celebrity or royalty.

This whole thing has a whiff of a cult: including the very aggressive and unwarranted attitude of their followers. Some people say sociopaths can't work together: they can, especially when it is so obvious that the others have no scruples and will do anything to achieve their goals. They all share the megalomania, and think that the bigger they make their saints Kate and Gerry, the bigger they will look.

It's all rather pathetic, even frightening, and bodes nothing good when the supervisor of an multimillion pound investigation (pardon me investigation review) shows all these symptoms.

by jozi 08.08.13 11:44

aiyoyo wrote:
tigger wrote:Has anyone ever heard a detective say he felt privileged to take on a case of say burglary or armed robbery?

Has PeterMac ever felt honoured or indeed privileged to take on a case?

The McCanns must be holy since even the priest said ..'when I came into their presence..' I wouldn't even say that if I was invited to meet the Queen.

Ya, it's a very odd thing to say -- that one is privileged to take on a missing child or homicide case.
It is circumstance of tragedy and privileged is not the correct word.

He made it sounds like he was representing celebrity or royalty.

Ya but, but it is the most famous Missing Child in the world and his name will go down in history books.....or not !!!

I agree what a stupid thing to say ?

by aiyoyo 08.08.13 13:45

It is a privilege or honor to meet someone revered or attend a pleasant/important function.

High profile or not (even if Royalty) it can't be a privilege to head a homicide squad.