Saturday, 2 June 2012

PdL's Sudden Heat Wave

A lot of strange things did happen in PdL in late April, early May 2007 but I’m at a loss for words to define a particular phenomenon.

Ubiquity is the capability of being at two different places at the same time, but what can you say about something that is able to be two different things at the same place and time?

Duplicity seems to be the obvious choice for the word but as you’ll see, it doesn’t quite cover what I want to show.

As we’ve seen in the Maddie Affair one thing may be something at a certain moment but it may also be, at the same time, the same place and with same people involved, its opposite, or at in the very least, completely different.

We know by now that these discrepancies are ONLY due to one of two things: either it's a lie to deliberately confuse you or it's a lie because those who are lying were themselves completely confused as to what they should have said, or they thought they had to say.

One thing is to lie intentionally because you want to mislead, another, completely different thing altogether, is to lie because you just don’t know what to say and that has happened frequently in the Maddie Affair.

We’ve shown you here many times how people have been told to go off and tell misleading stories to the PJ.

In any unlived reality the gap filling, you know, all those little things that fall outside the main storyline, ends up, inevitably, on the storyteller’s lap. It’s exactly those little things that end up telling us if a story is true or not.

Those who have indeed lived the facts can detail them to the tiniest detail with the consistency and coherence that only truth can provide but that can’t be done by those who are desperately trying convince us in following a storyline.

To these, because their information has voids, they know not with what exactly are they to fill these gaps, so they invent, trying their hardest and best to stick to natural and logical “facts” that simply aren’t facts.

It’s certain that when two or more people invent, distanced from each other, about the same set of facts, each will present his/her version which will differ from everyone else’s, however slightly.

There’s one particular “witness” problem of having different people see it “do” different things at the same approximate times which is acute in the Maddie Affair.

The information about this “witness” is very much sprinkled all over the PJ Files, both explicitly and implicitly, so it’s hard not to stumble on some of it however little of them you’ve read.

Mind you, this “witness”, unlike Pimpleman, is not desperately seeking attention, but many are the people who insist on providing their opinion, either by word or action, about it.

I’m obviously speaking about what was the weather in that week of April/May 2007 in PdL.

I can tell you upfront that it was more fickle and inconsistent than Derek Flack's statement which is, in the least, an accomplishment by itself. I for one can’t make head or tail out of it.

In the referred documentation we’re told with some frequency that it was chilly, even cold, and windy, but there’s hardly any mention about it being sunny and pleasantly warm.

However, most actions that we read about are in accordance with a warmer weather rather than a chilly, as there are many reports of people enjoying themselves at the pool, going sailing as well as doing other watersports.

When reading the PJ Files we do get the feeling that the weather wasn’t up for much fun, but the "PdL tourists" simply discarded it like an old pair of sneakers and determined what it was to be so that they could enjoy themselves. No way was the weather to be in the way.

But if most see the weather as was convenient for them, there’s one particular character, Pimpleman, that has the ability, depending on who is looking at him, to make the weather change.

As you can see above, the both times JW sees Pimpleman he’s only wearing a T-shirt, a yellow one, so the weather was nice and warm.

Also above, both times that TS sees him he’s wearing a windbreaker which indicates that it was chilly.

Our “enigmatic” friend Flack, as expected, doesn’t help us tell what was the weather like although we can see from the Mockumentary that he’s wearing shorts and a short-sleeved summer shirt and Pimpleman has only a t-shirt on.

Later you’ll see why this only explains what the weather was the moment they crossed with each other but says little about what it was on that particular day.

We know that JW says she sees him on Sunday 29th, TS says on Monday 30th and on Wednesday 2nd he’s seen by both or so they say.

There’s an interesting coincidence about these two witnesses first sightings’ of Pimpleman: they happen at around the same time of day, 08.00, on consecutive days.

This tells us that it was warm on early morning of the 29th but chilly on the very next day at the same time of day. No one reports this temperature drop but apparently it happened.

On May 1st, Pimpleman is not seen.

However, one of the oddest climatic phenomenons occurs on the next day, May 2nd, in PdL: a sudden heat wave hits the little fishing town.

On that day, TS, around 12.30, sees a “freezing” Pimpleman, windbreaker all zipped up while just two and a half hours later he’s seen by JW comfortably wearing just a t-shirt:

The way JW is dressed confirms the warmness of the weather, when she says she sees the man:

As we all know the most unlikely time for the weather to change during a day is between 12.00 and 16.00. The temperature during a normal day rises until around 11.00/11.30, then basically remains the same for the next 4/5 hours, and around 17.00/17.30 starts to drop as the evening approaches.

But not on May 2nd, 2007, oh no. That day was cold and windy at noon, and sunny and warm at 15.00.

But if you bring in Flack’s statement, then you don’t have crazy weather but one that just can’t be qualified.

Remember that you have two sets of variables to work with on what Flack can’t be precise: May 2nd or May 3rd and late morning or early afternoon.

On Thursday May 3rd it’s irrelevant at what time of the day he saw Pimpleman. He’s wearing summer clothes so the weather wasn't anywhere near cold. If this was the case, it would mean that the weather on that week would have been: warm on the 29th, chilly on the 30th, COLD/WARM on the 2nd and warm on the 3rd. Fickle weather, I tell you!

Mind you, it would be irrelevant the time of day he did see but would be very relevant the day it was. If it was on the 3rd that Flack sees him then that means he was seen on different days by different people in the same place doing the same thing

If Flack sees Pimpleman early afternoon of the 2nd, it would mean that the weather on that week would have been: warm on the 29th, chilly on the 30th, COLD/WARM/WARM on the 2nd. I say the word “WARM” twice because then means that Flack would have seen him before JW, which shortens the time interval with which the weather changed suddenly. What a strong heat wave, I tell you!

In the Mockumentary Flack let’s “early afternoon” drop, as we’ve seen, so it was late morning that he says he saw Pimpleman. More precisely at around 11.30.

This being true, Flack seeing Pimpleman at that time on the 2nd, it would mean that the weather on that week would have been: warm on the 29th, chilly on the 30th and WARM/COLD/WARM on the 2nd. I don't know what to tell you, I tell you!

It seems to me that the easiest way to help Flack refresh his memory would be to ask him if he saw Pimpleman on the day the weather went crazy or on the day after that.

But let’s not forget that it's not only Flack's statement that makes the whole thing to be nonsensical but also TS’s and JW’s inconsistent testimonies for the exact same day. They each created a separate character in each of their minds and these simply didn’t match.

One has to ask two questions.

The first and most obvious is what did Pimpleman do with his windbreaker between the time he was seen by TS and JW?

Did he put it in a car? If so, why was he standing uncomfortably outside on a cold and windy day when he could be sitting inside his vehicle?

Did he leave it in a house? That would means that he would be a local, or connected with someone living in PdL, wouldn't it?

Between 12.30 and 15.00, there isn’t much time to go much far, leave your jacket there and come back without it, is there?

And what if Flack saw Pimpleman on Wednesday? That would have Pimpleman without, then with and then without the windbreaker, all in the space of 3 and half hours! Where is the windbreaker? Maybe he left it at the Tapas Pool Entrance where the "reservation book" was supposedly open right on the page where was specifically written that children were left alone in the apartments. No, I'm NOT making this up. Someone else has though.

The second question goes directly to Edgar. Have you read the PJ Files? With all your explanations to the child who played TS why did you "forget" to tell her that she shouldn't be dressed like that?

After all it is TS that says she sees Pimpleman around 12.30 that day that “he was wearing the same windbreaker, this time zipped up as the day was colder than the first, with wind.”

Isn’t the character too scantily dressed for someone with an ear infection on that cold and windy day?

By the way… above, on the first sighting there seems to be also a slight “misunderstanding” about what she should be wearing, isn’t there? Two adults with long sleeved clothing, one of them with a windbreaker and the child with a short-sleeved t-shirt? In the footage above, was it cold, as per the man playing Pimpleman, mild, as per the woman playing TS's mom or hot as per the child playing TS?

If one looks at it with the proper eyes, there isn’t any discrepancy whatsoever in TS’s dress code or between what she has said against with what JW has: they’re all as consistently inconsistent as one would expect from people who just aren’t telling the truth.


  1. Well, PDL must be a case study for many phenomen:
    - a girl that disappear from a bed where she left no traces.
    - an abductor that manage to get in to the flat by a door but left it trough a window, holding a child on his hands and leaving no evidences.
    - two toddlers who, under a very crazy , busy and noisy night, manage to sleep like angels and never wake up.
    - a pimple man who, no matter how was the weather, manage to spend hours, days watching a wall.
    - a weather that went crazy and manage to change suddenly. Whow... Very tropical. The only things missing, are the coconuts and the seafood served on the beach by beautiful waiters when the sun rised. What a 5 star holidays for a cheap April 2007.
    - a crèche program that included sailing in a catamaran, when the weather tells any responsible person to stay away from the sea.

    Well done Textusa. As always... Your eye is brilliant to spot details that are telling more then the main tales.

  2. Obrigada por nos dar a conhecer mais uma das suas análises.

    Eles não gostam do dia 1 de Maio. Mundialmente comemora-se o dia do trabalhador.

    Mas se o Pimple era uma estátua , o seu dono foi coloca-lo no armazém para não apanhar frio ou calor.

    Ou o Pimple era catatónico?

    O D.F. pelos vistos até estava enfadado em participar no filme pois perdia tempo em vez de ir até ao pub beber umas cervejas.

    A JW, como artista e adulta, vê as coisas de um modo " artístico" : cria .

    A pobre miúda, a T.S. , foi manipulada pelos adultos.

    O realizador e escritor do guião foi despedido.

    O que escrevi foi com bastante ironia e espero que me desculpem se não gostam.

    Agora, ficarei à espera do artigo sobre aquele dia particular

    Thank you for giving us to know more of your analysis.

    They do not like the 1st of May. World commemorates the day of the worker.

    But if the Pimple was a statue, his owner was getting it in the store not to catch cold or heat.

    Or Pimple was catatonic?

    The DF was apparently bored up to participate in the film because it was wasting time instead of going to the pub to drink a few beers.

    JW, adult and as artist, sees things in a way "art": it creates.

    The poor girl, the T.S. Was manipulated by adults.

    The director and script writer was fired.

    What I wrote was with great irony and hope that I'm sorry if you do not like.

    Now, I'll be waiting for the article on that particular day

    First May (2007) was an holiday so the "witnesses" were to live and walk on break from filming

  3. Piece by piece you're debunking the whole abductor version from Kate's book. I'm with you!


    Reason for jubilation: let the death of a little BRITISH girl remain cloaked up in deceit and lies, humiliating another Nation in the process.

    Well done UK!

    How can you look at yourself in a mirror?

  5. I would like to request all of you to write Leveson Inquiry in case Gordon Brown will be interrogated.
    Asking Mr. Jay to interrogate Brown about his role in the Madeleine case and if he phoned the PJ asking if Amaral was already dismissed.

  6. A mim ninguem me convence que este caso das 'Secretas' em Portugal, tambem nao tocou o caso Madeleine. De certeza que os servicos secretos e os espioes sem escrupulos acederam a informacao importante sobre o caso para terem politicos, advogados e o PGR na mao. Quando e que um verdadeiro jornalista de investigacao entra nesta teia para contar aos portugueses porque nao Podemos saber o que aconteceu a Maddie e porque e que temos de engolir as maiores idiotices de que ha memoria. O que e que se negociou por tras do Tratado de Lisboa? O afastamento de GA, de certeza. Mas que mais?

  7. I think the work developed in this blog deserved a lot more comments but I'll speak for myself and say that I feel intimidated and I think many readers do so too. I can just say congratulations and ask for you to keep up the good work!

  8. I got this image of a group of women sitting in front of a fire and bringing to light their most brilliant insights.

    I am in awe of your ability to examine, dissect and announce. It is done with the utmost clarity embraced by simplicity.

    I see many other blogs carrying such misinformation and yet here we just learn the undeniable truth about the pimpleman statue and the weather, and the general lies of the community of Prai de Luz.

    There we have the Phillipots being detained in order not to interfere with witnesses.
    How would the case have unfolded without all these sightings.
    How indeed?

    So as you take them away one by one we are left with an almost blank slate.
    There can be no shadows and deception there - the truth will shine out.

  9. I do mine, the words of anon Jun 3, 2012 11:19:00 AM.

    Por favor, continuem! Devem ter imensas visitas mas é como anon diz, eu também me sinto intimidade com os brilhantes raciocínios que demonstram uma inteligência enorme.

    Boa tarde.

  10. This pathetic group ( the Mccann's & Tapas7) and their pathetic supporters (the BHs ) soon will be exposed.
    The politics and journalists they claim, helped them are falling like olives. The police officers who protect them and the lawyers who played dirty games with public, will be next.
    This year, Kate, Gerry and Mitchell realized the case did never go away unsolved. Not even with help of Redwood. The case is surviving, against their wishes. Revitalized each time with more revelations to hunt them. The evidences?.... Their sepulchral silence.
    Where is the new chap to update the book "Madeleine"? The size of the actual silence overtake the noise of the collegial advertisement of the update. On that naif exercise, they didn't realize how precious was the information they were delivering... Remember them saying the update will be based on the SY review? How? How can they have access to information kept under secrecy, if they are one of the parts under investigation in the original process? A vicissitude from the pass showing us how the British side of the investigation corrupted and ruined the case. The Mccann's got used with leaks coming from the process to help them manage the case with help of some Media. Now, trough their mouths, we know from where came that leaks....this guys will be exposed because you cannot open a can of worms and wait for them to stay in and quiet. The Mccann's and their Pierrot, know the can is open. Worried with behavior of the worms.
    People should not be intimidated because in September they will lost their next battle with Amaral and MAC will lost as well. The Minister of Justice already advised the judges about the witnesses that should be heard in Court. Witnesses that don't actually saw the facts, should be considered irrelevant and not be enrolled to appear in court. Under that circumstances, I don't know what is the use of M Pinto for that case. Without that convenient parrots, the Mccann's will be reduced to the only facts/ evidences that remain in the process.... And those, all point in their direction with some covering their backs.

  11. The ' Blacksmith bureau' has a new post that summarizes the all saga showing how worried the Mccann's should be. John Blacksmith just forgot one point- the contribution of some expats living in or around PDL for the cover up and the confusion. On that matter I'm not very sure about Murat being clean.


    How can the UK citizens watch that without being revolted? Today the papers are reporting the death of another teenager ( 15 years old) after a night out in a pub. The cause of the death is unknown but there is suspicions that her drink could be poisoned with pink ecstasy. How much money the Home office allocate to protect teenagers, children, people in general, from the danger that is growing in the streets?
    The safety on the streets is being decreased to save money, but there is money to be wasted in a case which solution is so simple as packing the all Tapas 9 back to PDL and make them to play what they have done on May 3 2007, in a reconstruction. That is the only way they have to clean their names if they are innocent and make the police look in another direction. Much, much cheap then feeding a bunch of useless polices who help the Mccann's feed the Murdoch papers and their narcissism.

  13. I agree that Textusa is almost certainly the most insightful and incisive commenter on this case, and I sincerely hope the Met is reading her contributions to the debate with the greatest possible attention. I feel that the non-appearance of the epilogue to the bewk is a most significant sign of progress - the silence is deafening after the great fanfare in April announcing it. Anon at 4.47 is spot on - how disgusting is it that millions of pounds are being blatantly wasted "investigating" this case and "bringing closure" to the family when they haven't even tried to produce evidence that would convince anyone with an IQ in double figures, while dreadful things are happening in Britain to children and other vulnerable people due to funding cuts. The McCanns are utterly shameless and so are their hangers on, whatever their motives might be - time to come clean and stop this nonsense right now.

  14. Thank you all for such encouraging comments!

    Su, your image of us three in front of a warm fire is completely precise. A fire made out of friendship, complicity, diversity and the utmost mutual respect.

  15. Longer ago the Yard had a special Madeleine site, which we could use to write them.
    It disappeared and I believe the reasons were Redwood interviews, saying he believes Madeleine is still alive.
    The Yard must have been bombed with protests from all over the world.

  16. I'm sure Murat is innocent.He has nothing to do with this case. He was the scapegoat.You can see how calm he is when he talks. Besides no traces of Madeleine in his home nor garden, no necessity to call the media, no book about his story.

  17. Anon 12:50
    If calmness was an indication of innocence then the world has condmened many innocent people, serial killers amomg them. Murat's guilt is shown by his silence because no innocent man would remain silent after having suffered such an injustice. He got paid to reamin silent? Why? That alnoe shows that the whole McCann story is false and that RM is included in it.

  18. Su,

    I think we could all help get Textusa's word out there by FB and twittering it!

  19. 12:50,
    The absence of evidences in Murat's house or cars doesn't prove his innocence. Only mean's the body was not carried to there. None of the Tapas 9 was stupid enough to carry and hide the body to a place so close to the crime scene and then involve the owner of the place.
    But on the other hand, involving so openly and so strongly a guy that is largely known in the place and has good connections with all expat and local comunnity, if he was totally innocent, was too risky. Again, the Tapas 9 were not stupid to take that risk.
    When the Tapas 9 and specially Jane Tanner brought Murat to the story, they were absolutely sure about where the body was stored and up to each degree, Murat was involved. I look at that, as a way to frame Murat and make him to resist to the pressures coming from the police and the portuguese journalists, forcing him to keep his mouth close.
    From what is available on the files, something is certain: Who enter the flat and took the girl from there, use to easily access the flat and was known by the childs. Was not a stranger. To move the body and store it, that guy had the help of somebody knowing well the location, the properties and the communnity. Could not be a tourist or a local portuguese.
    Was it a coincidence that all Mccann's witnesses, live near the crime scene and share the same nationality? No there is no coincidences on that matter. There was a Pierrot who connect all that people and decide to help, knowing or not the consequences of this actions.
    Murat silence speaks volumes and his 'no action' regarding Jane Tanner, could be a sign of guilt. Now, he has enough money to frame Jane Tanner and the Tapa 7, who put him in such situation. Why is he not acting? Because he is innocent or because he is not confident about his innocence?

  20. cont:
    The story he delivered to the police regarding the calls he exchanged with Malinka are not convincent. His mother having a stall to grab information in parallel but aside of the police work, is also very strange. One could say, was a naif attitude from an old lady with a good heart... but Murat use to help the British police in UK with translations in cases involving the portuguese community in UK, then... he was not a beginner on criminal cases. He must know the procedures and the implications of some attitudes, to stop the good heart of his mother before interfering with police work. That is just a small detail to not go further with 'how much time the lady had to plan her stall', no matter how small and amateur it was. Even if was only a bench and a placcard asking for information, she need/had time to plan it and to choose the place where to instal it. Was it planned during the night when she did not know that a girl went missing near by? Murat was not seen by GNR in the OC on the night of May 3 and he claims he just got to know what happen on the next morning. Then, when the lady planned the stall? On top of that, a guest of the OC ( Known by the Mccann's and sharing with them the same creche facilities) made his way to the police to tell how he meet Murat in the morning somewhere between Murat's house and the OC. His intention was to clear Murat and to say that Murat was not aware of what happen in the OC, that's why he ask many questions that he answered with Madeleine been missing last night. From the files, that guest appears to be more close to the Mccann's, then what the police believed at the beguinning. Again, a small detail regarding that statement. The statement of the guest is in PJ files and when we compare it with Murat's statement, there is nothing matching. Murat said to the police that he got to know about Madeleine trough his cousin who phone him in the morning asking if he was aware of the case that was in all news. Murat says nothing about meeting that guest on the way to the OC. Off course, when they all delivered stories to the police, they were not predicting that one day the police will release all that information and make it available for all the public to read and take some conclusions.
    Lies on top of lies, came from many sources... all related with Mccann's or who help them with cover up. There is no coincidences on that story. BUT THERE IS A LOT OF SMALL DETAILS THAT BECOME VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE ALL CASE. Redwood, if he is a competent investigator and not trapped by the Mccann's side, has many details, many fuel, to easily solve the case and bring the criminals to court. Let's see where goes all the millions allocated to that case and how long he takes to see what anonymous people and blogs like this one spotted so quickly.

  21. Anon Jun 5, 2012 10:27:00 AM & Jun 5, 2012 10:30:00 AM,

    The absence of evidence in Murat's house or cars doesn't indeed prove his innocence but neither proves his guilt.

    It proves simply one thing: there was no evidence.

    Does the fact that there isn’t evidence prove that a person hasn’t done something? No it doesn't.

    If I steal a cookie from a jar and am careful enough not to leave any evidence that I did it, it doesn’t mean that I didn’t do it, it just means, in this case as I did do it, that I was really careful in doing it without getting caught.

    However other evidence, put together, may prove that it was me who stole the cookie, which indeed I did.

    Please do be careful with the use of the word “stupid” because then I’m stupid enough to think that Murat’s house was exactly the place where Maddie’s body was first moved.

    It was far enough not to be involved in the first searches as the nearby apartments, but close enough to be got to and be moved to a safer place when things subsided.

    Also I’m stupid enough to think they would involve “so openly and so strongly a guy that is largely known in the place and has good connections with all expat and local communnity”. As you say “if he was totally innocent, was too risky” as he wasn’t, there was no risk at all, which explains his “silence” and fits your description of “somebody knowing well the location, the properties and the communnity. Could not be a tourist or a local Portuguese”.

    I also disagree with you when you say “Who enter the flat and took the girl from there, use to easily access the flat and was known by the childs. Was not a stranger”, as nobody entered the apartment to get Maddie’s body. The body exited the apartment with someone inside the house very much familiar with the children: their father. However, when the body was taken out of the apartment only another child was there, and it wasn’t any of Maddie’s siblings, but rather a “Maddie lookalike” (already explained in the blog) that was to be taken on a stroll around town.

    The rest of your comment raises very valid points. Thank you

  22. Thank you Textusa for your reply to my comment. At the end, I think we share the same point of view. Maybe my english was not good enough to pass the idea I wanted to. In fact, I tried to use the word 'stupid' on the sense of cleverness and not stupidity. From my point of view, they brought Murat to the stage because they know he was involved together with them at certain degree. Enough to frame him and keep him quiet and they know that by framing him, all the others will be automatically framed.
    I too, I'm stupid enough to believe his house or his garden was the first destination of the body ( early reports from Portuguese papers reported that the dogs signalized Madeleine around the swimming pool. Was it a myth? Was it the sign of an alive or a death Madeleine, if true? I don't know, since this reports are no more available and the files say nothing about. But the fact that the available files said nothing about, doesn't mean that the information is not stored on the closed files. Something, we know... PJ searched his house in a manner that makes me believe that they went there based on more evidences then the words of Jane Tanner or Lori Campbell. To enter a property, PJ needs the permission of a prosecutor who base his decision in some evidences. ) content.

  23. Sorry, was not ' content' at the end of my last post. Should be ' cont.'
    After being exposed to the world in such form, with all TVs showing alive the search of his house.... Digging machines and even the house project exposed in all news, IF HE WAS SURE ABOUT HIS INNOCENCE, HE WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUE PJ AND WIN A JACKPOT, and his lawyer knows that. Why, he have never done that step, specially after GA left? Another amazing decision that speaks so louder as his silence or the absence of any action against JT. And I can go further, with more critical decisions made by such person after Madeleine being missing and his arguido status been lift. Recent reports on Portuguese papers, said that his house had a huge maintenance work. Strange, if we compare with way, his garden was badly maintained when Maddie disappeared and with his actual condition of being married the german lady and not living in Casa Liliana anymore. "Normally" we do maintenance to improve the house where we live, or to rent it. This one is again, one more subject out of the normality.
    When I used the expression " who enter the flat" I was trying to use Mccann's lovely expression to support the abductor entering trough a door and leaving trough a window, in a sarcastic way. Because, in fact, who enter the flat had easy access to it trough a door and enter there much early then the time they raised the alarm or they reported the missing happened. Why? Because GNR reported a small and important detail... The keys of the flat were found on the flat by GNR. That means, none of the Mccann's had the keys with them ( they don't need it because they were inside the flat and not on the Tapas, like they wanted the police to believe). If we put together that with the statements of the cleaners... No any cleaner or OC worker mention that each family had a set of 2 keys from the same flat. Then, the Mccann's, like all other families, must had only one set of keys. Another set was stored in the laundry, from where the cleaners picked them and return them after their duties. Knowing that, Kate tried to play a dirty game on her book while insinuating that a worker could be involved in the abduction and entering the flat using a key.
    CM, who reported the exercise done by Paulo Rebelo, while playing the abductor holding a child and passing trough the window, reported that PR was convinced that the children where all on the same flat that night and the flat was not the 5A. Since, the dogs searched other flats and find no evidences of Madeleine on them, we can conclude she was not there. She was inside the 5a. On the other hand, the position of the cots on the room and the absence of any bed clothes on them ( for a cold night) shows that the cots were not settled for the twins to sleep on them. The twins were brought there as part of the game to set the crime scene before calling the police and after being drugged to be sure that they did not wake up and ruin all the plan.
    The Smiths sight and your brilliant work Textusa clearly shows that only a fake Madeleine could be carried on the streets by Gerry to play his abductor momentum in order to be seen by a potential witness that could support their fairy tale.


Comments are moderated.
