Friday, 4 December 2015

One day I'll lie away.........

Well, she's back again, with a real corker

No, you're not 

First I would like to thank everyone for contributing to this thread.

I did this research a few years ago and it has been sat waiting to be 'recognised'.  Thanks to Jill and Tony for hosting the discussion.  
Recognised? Great artists wait to be recognised. You have done fuck all, my dear, except a huge disservice  to the truth

I compiled many threads on the subject as well as summary's to help assist, but it's not a subject that can be addressed simply.
Or in other words, you obfuscated with as much bollocks as possible 

What I feel everyone should know is that the discrepancy questions and the 'Who saw Maddie' research is not a theory in itself.

It is basically the 'canvas' of the week for everyone to base their own theory on.
Sadly it's a canvas covered in shite 

After realising the discrepancies starting Tuesday, I felt that looking at witness statements to see if there was any PROOF that she was seen during the week would help to support that possibility or not.  I had NO IDEA what I would find.  I don't look for details to fit a theory, I look to see if details support what is 'known'.
There are no discrepancies starting on Tuesday 

I was quite shocked to see that Fatima's statement was the ONLY statement that was 'relative' proof that Maddie was seen, but was on Sunday which allowed for something to have happened before the discrepancies started TUESDAY.
Complete bollocks. You cannot just keep saying this and expect people not to question it. You and Baldy do make me laugh - you accept as true a sighting by a cleaner who crossed ways with the family briefly, and why not, as there is nothing to suggest otherwise, but you reject the versions of child care workers who spent every day with Madeleine on a pretext that they might have been ''confused''

Please know that if Fatima's statement had been about WEDNESDAY, THIS THREAD WOULD NOT EXIST
.  I would be relatively satisfied that Maddie WAS seen during the week, and would then look for reasons why the discrepancies started on Tuesday (and why there appeared an effort to cover something up)
Relatively satisfied. Christ, the world according to a Canadian fence painter 

However, Sunday supported the discrepancies starting Tuesday because of maybe trying to cover something up.
What?! Again in a human language, please.

I have seen NOTHING to change my mind since I did the research in 2010 (or sooner)
So you're still wrong 

Please keep in mind this isn't about trying to prove Maddie WASN'T seen during the week...It's about trying to find proof that she WAS seen.
There is ample proof that she was seen, from independent witnesses who knew her well, all of which you have arbitrarily dismissed. 

Proof she WAS seen would be the basic 'canvas' for  nothing having happened to her until that day..
So nothing happened to her until that Thursday, as there is proof she was seen.

No PROOF she was seen, tells us that anyone suggesting somehing happened earlier in the week is supported.
No, there is ample proof she was seen 

It also stands true for the alternative beliefs of anyone that believes something didn't happen until Thursday. 

Its NOT a theory, it is the basis for whether anyone's theory stands up.
Bullshit. And meaningless bullshit at that 

As mentioned, if Fatima had claimed she saw her Wednesday for example and the details weather times etc fitted, then THAT would be sufficient for me to claim there was proof she was seen Wednesday and I would look for alternative explanations as to why the discrepancies started Tuesday morning.
But the fact that three independent witnesses saw her on Thursday - people who saw her every day - you dismiss out of hand. 

We don't have PROOF of some of the evidence, but by EXCLUSION we know it could be possible.
That's not how evidence works 

No evidence to EXCLUDE something happening to Maddie before Tuesday
No, there is plenty of evidence that she was alive and present on Thursday 

No evidence to EXCLUDE Maddie's blood being in the car.
Her blood was not found in the car 

No evidence to EXCLUDE the parents from being complicit in their daughter's disappearance

That was a genuine finding by someone else, not you. They have no specific witness evidence which alibis them, so the statement is true. Claiming that no-one saw Madeleine on Thursday is not true, as there is evidence to the contrary  

Try and understand this, you dozy, duplicitous cow.
There are at least three completely independent people who all knew Madeleine by sight or better, who can all testify to her being alive and present on Thursday. What is more, their evidence corroborates. You cannot, therefore, simply dismiss it as ''they might have been mistaken'' when they clearly weren't. Most ludicrous of all is the suggestion that a girl who had looked after both children all week would be unable to tell the difference between Madeleine and her friend.

All your claims are fraudulent nonsense, and you are frankly an embarrassment. 

1 comment:

Please leave a message. I will reply as soon as possible, with a selection of articles taken from 2007, cut and pasted together. Or maybe one of my smashing videos.

For a landscape gardening quote, please leave a daytime number and state preferred shade of Ronseal.