27 Comments

Paiva Steps in on Facebook

Well you can make of this what you want. Because I am at a loss here as to why a PJ Officer would even request to join Facebook groups, especially those that are anti-McCann. But by all accounts Ricardo Paiva has joined and posted on one (screenshots below) and posted on the other only to be deleted.

As this group is open on Facebook and any member of Facebook can view it, I have no problems highlighting what Ricardo Paiva posted on the Justice4Maddie Page.

And David Bret posts this on his Facebook page Maddie – In search of the truth.

Now why is a PJ Inspector, involved in this case, getting involved in disputes between people who support the McCann family and those who don’t.

Could it simply be, that the anti-McCanns and their actions are not boding favourably in Portugal?

Could it be that Goncalo Amaral has asked him to intervene, remember Goncalo Amaral is up against the PJ Disciplinary Board along with his friend Paulo Cristóvão, and the behaviour of his supporters is not doing him any favours now, is it?

One more thing I noticed even Paiva admits there is going to be a Court case on the 9th and 10th February, so why did Joana Morais tell people she can’t find it listed on the Court listings and it was McCann spin, when in it was originally reported on her own blog?

Or could this be damage limitation, the last thing that Goncalo Amaral needs is for the antics of his supporters being highlighted in a Court of Law and Isabel Duarte explaining to the Court this behaviour is all because of his flawed thesis and book?

Curiouser and curiouser.

Addendum

The more I think about this the more concerned I am becoming.  You see if that Facebook account is genuine and that is indeed Inspector Paiva of the PJ, why the hell is he posting on Facebook pages that are connected to a case that he is supposed to be involved in?

Irrespective of whether or not he agrees with the behaviour, then surely as a serving Police Officer if he thinks a crime has been committed, then he should do the right thing and report this to his superiors for them to investigate, am I correct or not?

I notice from his remarks, that he is a keen supporter of free speech on the internet, perhaps he will clarify whether he approves of the libellous and defamatory comments written about the parents, friends and family of a missing child?

Message for Kitti on Missing Madeleine Forum

As you have started your accusations (screenshot) that MuratFan has something to do with this blog, I will put you firmly in your place by proving your accusations are false .  MuratFan doesn’t contribute to any blog posts and neither do they play any role other than possibly being a commentator under another alias which is unknown to myself.

This blog post was made at 17.07pm on January 10th 2012 (screenshot) by myself, after I found the comment on that Facebook page.

Richard Paiva posted on Justice4Maddie Facebook page at 14.47pm (screenshot), which is far earlier than it was posted on this blog.   I will also provide you with a clear list of revisions, which prove (via wordpress) that this post was started well after Ricardo Paiva posted on Facebook (screenshot).

Now you know the facts, perhaps you will research more thoroughly in future, before you accuse people on forums of  actions that are totally false.  And you wonder why people change their minds about things and people.

You have failed miserably in trying to cause trouble for this blog and myself, because I have proven you to be nothing but a stirrer and liar.

Just one more thing, whatever is happening between Ricardo Paiva, Justine Spencer, David Bret and Thornton, is absolutely nothing to do with me, and I will NOT become involved in it, whatsoever, so you can all stop trying to drag me into it.  I posted what Paiva said and remain by my firm opinion that if this was the real Ricardo Paiva it really does go to show what he thinks of the anti agenda when he refers to it as a witchhunt.

Advertisements

27 comments on “Paiva Steps in on Facebook

  1. There is much being said about this not being Paiva and he never posted that on Facebook.  Like anything time will tell.   But one thing I will say if it turns out to be Paiva, he should not be posting about any of the cases, where he is a witness, and telling people that he is reading sites etc.  

    And if it is not Paiva, whoever it is, I hope Facebook track them and pass all information over to the Police for impersonating an Officer.

    One thing I do know, if it turns out to be an anti or pro McCann supporter, it will not look favourable for either side.  If it is an anti-McCann supporter their actions will by a nail in the defence of Goncalo Amaral and if it is a pro it will definitely not help find Madeleine McCann or help the McCanns in their Libel case.

    As I said time will tell….  

  2. bren, i can assure you that it is indeed the REAL Paiva and NOT a fake imposter.

  3. Hi Justine sending you a message on Facebook.  Can you reply on Facebook please?

  4. I’m totally bewildered. 

    On the one hand, in a private capacity, I guess it’s a point in his favour to calm down personal attacks.

    On the other hand, what’s the desk officer in this case doing on that FB group in the first place? While he’s there, can’t he point out a few basic misconceptions that the posters in that group keep bringing up and which are in the files? Such as the fact that the PT police dog handlers took the pink blanket? 

    If he’s there in a professional capacity, what might the reason be?

  5. I am bewildered if it was him, which Justine has assured this blog it was.  What the heck is someone still involved in the case doing on any Facebook pages to do with Madeleine.  

    I applaud him for saying stop the personal attacks, but then to say he looks forward to seeing these people in Lisbon at the Court hearing is beyond belief.

  6. Thinking a bit further…I’m aware that quite a few police officers (often from the UK, but not only) have their own blogs, or twitter accounts, etc., and post on a variety of issues, some of which are in a personal capacity. Within limits, I don’t have a problem with that – when they post on general policing issues I find it quite interesting.

    However, is it normal for the inspector supposedly acting as the desk on this case to be a member of such groups?

    To be fair, he says he can’t comment on the case due to secrecy laws, but then he is a member of a group that still goes on about the pink blanket (and the fact that it was given to the dog handlers is in the public files, as we know). If he can’t correct that because he’s not supposed to talk about the case, ok, but at the same time by being a member, he’s giving credence to the nonsense on that group.

    Where’s the limit? And what’s the purpose?

  7. Excellent observations Carna, the pink blanket, lichen, six dead bodies, and god knows how many more myths that are floating around.  Myths and untruths he could dispel.

    But the primary question is what is any serving Police Officer involved in a case doing joining a group that persecutes the McCanns?
    Or was Paiva trying to stop as he already knew that things were not going Goncalo’s way and his lawyer has abandoned him according to Correia.

    • No idea, Bren. He might have a legitimate reason that we don’t know about. If so, I do hope he can clarify the issue.

    • So, Brenda are you saying Marcos Aragao Correia is spreading information about Amaral in an attempt to discredit him, just before the trial for libel against ‘Leonor lawyer’? Like that illegal tape that ended up in some forums? Interesting…

      • Guest, whoever you are, I don’t know to be honest what is going on.  I just copied the stuff over and if you read the post, properly, I have said it is NOT officially confirmed. 

        Time will tell, and no I have NOT said Correia is spreading information about Amaral to discredit him, so stop twisting what I am posting.And if Amaral’s lawyer has decided to renounce before a judge and waiver his Power of Attorney, to me that means he doesn’t approve of something.

  8. If it is NOT him… then someone has taken a big risk in impersonating an acting police inspector. I really don’t know that much about how FB works, but unless someone has been impersonating him for quite some time, his FB list of anti-McCann friends is fairly impressive. As a bright young PJ inspector, if that account was fake, he would have noticed way before now, wouldn’t he?

  9. Exactly… it would have been noticed a lot sooner.  Now unless they are going to proclaim that his Facebook account was compromised I really don’t know how they are going to explain this away.

  10. More importantly, is he really still hoping to find this child? Or is it about defending the honour of the first PJ team?

  11. Now that is a valid question.  Especially after this was posted on MM today

      Keela Today at 1:36 pm
    I personally think that Ricardo Paiva has a lot of information which hasn’t been disclosed. He is still in contact and friendly with Goncalo Amaral and regularly socialises with him and my friend’s husband. I think he would be able to set a lot of cats amongst a lot of pigeons
    http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t18605p45-facebook-ricardo-paiva#364618

    • With all this fraternising going on… how many of the posters on the early blogs/forums were actually objective in their views? And how much influence did they have?

  12. He may have intervened in a private capacity as a gentleman… but I don’t find the general situation very clear.

  13. One thing I will say about this, if an officer from Scotland Yard Review Team (Operation Grange) or an officer from Leicestershire Constabulary had decided to step in and posted on any Facebook page of one of the supporters of the McCanns, straight away, there would be letters going off to his superior, demands from him to be sacked or removed from the case, as he was not being being impartial.

    That is what gets me in all of this, the bloody double standards shown.  Just like press articles, they are to be believed if they condemn the McCanns and to be ignored if they support.

    Some of these people really do need to make up their minds as to what is right and what is wrong and forget which side of the argument they come from.

    • “Letter”? 

      There would have been at least a 20-page summary of every tabloid myth in support of a demand, in the “public interest”, as to the colour of his socks as the colour may be of huge symbolic significance to ongoing research… 

      • Yes along with dodgy dossiers and photo-shoots of them delivering their demands to Scotland Yard.

      • And 2,000 pages of “analysis” to determine whether he was actually wearing socks at all, or whether he’d coloured his ankles. And if they WERE socks, were they really his or had they been flown in by the KGB/FBI/CIA to deter attention from his sunglasses. 

      • And then the photos of him cutting up his works, on the pavement when they put a stop to his distribution of literature.

  14. Well it seems someone has now removed themselves from that group and Facebook as well.  

    • Ricardo has been forced to deactivate his FB account now on account of the invasive behaviour of the anti s who have been inundating him with unwanted messages and in fact hounding his entire friends list with unsolicited messages following his post.

  15. […] Now this is where things really do get interesting, remember back in January this year, I posted about a PJ Officer getting involved in a Facebook argument, Paiva Steps in on Facebook? […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: