8 Comments

Why would…

Kate-2

Someone who has committed a heinous crime beg and pray for the Police, both in Portugal and UK to re-open the case?

Why would someone who has committed a crime, take the risk that their deeds would be uncovered by asking for the re-opening of the case?

Why would someone put themselves in the media spotlight and keep their profile high if they had committed a criminal act?  Surely they would want to fade into the background and pray nobody uncovers the truth wouldn’t they?

Why would someone endorse and promote a petition, with the help of the media, to have the authorities review the evidence in the case regarding their missing daughter, if they played a part in her disappearance?

Why would someone who is guilty write to the Prime Minister and beg for help?

Why would someone apply to be a core participant in an inquiry into press ethics, namely the Leveson Inquiry, and make a statement and give testimony, under oath, if they were guilty of such heinous crimes?

From November 201o when Kate and Gerry McCann appeared in this video, they have campaigned tirelessly for the Portuguese Police to re-open the case into their daughters disappearance.

And from their comments in that video you learn that  they have begged the UK Home Office for a review way before that video was made.

They even wrote to the Prime Minister in May 2011 begging for his help and said:

To this end, we are seeking a joint INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information held in relation to Madeleine’s disappearance. Thus far, there has been NO formal review of the material held by the police authorities – which is routine practice in most major unsolved crimes.

I know I don’t go much on old dishface, but at least he had a heart and wrote back and helped the McCanns in their campaign to get a review into their daughter’s disappearance

A review which was finally granted to them in May 2011, under the remit of a task force from Scotland Yard, called Operation Grange, 7 months after that video was made.

Yesterday Kate said on This Morning:

We’re at the stage really that we’re hoping for the case to be re-opened.

She told the Sun Newspaper:

“But what we need is for the Portuguese police to reopen the case. That is crucial.”

Think about it, why would someone who is guilty of a crime risk being sent to prison for a very long time – because I can assure you they would have the book thrown at them after all their campaigning –  along with the distinct possibility of losing custody of their two other children and have their dastardly deeds found out for the whole world to know, keep appealing for the case to be re-opened?

It is simple really isn’t it?… They wouldn’t

Advertisements

8 comments on “Why would…

  1. Why would Kate not answer 48 questions…

    • Simple really, she took her lawyers advice, simply because he knew how the system worked and he knew those questions were designed to incriminate her. 

      And I think you and I, if in her shoes, would have done the same.

      • Kate had answered questions for 11 hours the day before plus all of the questions during he previous four months.

        If they were guilty of any crime they could have left Portugal in May and kept their heads down.

        If you are in a foreign country with different laws and language and you are paying a lawyer to advise you, you take their advice. Gerry was given the same advice and was supposed o do likewise, but he got hot under the collar at the ridiculous line of questioning and couldn’t keep his mouth shut!

      • Spot on Jayelles… and it has been proven those  questions were designed to incriminate, all based on forensic reports that we now know to be inconclusive.

        Everyone jumps up and down and says about the question where they asked if they intended to hand Madeleine over to a  member of their family.

        Have they thought the reason that question might have been there because Madeleine had been made a ward of court and the Portuguese Police assumed that Madeleine was going to be put in the guardianship of another family member.

        There were legal reasons for Madeleine to become a WOC and that process started in May 2007 but typical, Gonc et al put 2 and 2 together yet again and got 5

  2. Basic common sense Bren and it is what normal human being understand. Fortunately, the police, government and (most of the) media are in that category.

    Jayelles

  3. “It is simple really isn’t it?… They wouldn’t”They would, if they knew the review was going to happen sooner or later anyway.

  4. shut your lying fucking cake hole bitch, she did not do it,,,john mark karr gave a map to where she was kidnapped then was seen with a three year old girl in 2007///so stop spreading your horrible rumors

    • Oh my God, Thetruthmaker! You couldn’t be further from the truth. Karr was brought back from Thailand and he lied. His DNA was no where near the Ramsey house. Some truth maker you are. Typical pitchforker lying to support their ridiculous theory.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: