McCanns to be charged
The Portuguese newspaper 24 Hours is reporting that if the McCanns and the rest of the Tapas 9 fail to return to Portugal to take part in a reconstruction of May 3 2007, then the McCanns will be prosecuted for gross neglect for their part in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.
Story here.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
24 comments:
Finally...
Better than a manslaughter charge, from the McCann's point of view.
Barbaric pig ignorant archaic abusive blackmail - nothing less.
PJ are beneath comtempt.
They are doing it to save face with the world.
I hope they get nul points in the Eurovision Song Contest!
At last, we may see some Justice for Madeleine!
Does this justify your taking part in the defamatory leaflet you are helping prepare. Does your probation officer know about this. How will such intimidation affect your life licence?
debunker: Does what justify? You don't explain. The leaflet is not defamatory, your suggestion that it is is defamatory. My probation officers are not concerned about my internet activity. Like the majority of people, they believe the McCanns are guilty. It is not me who is being intimidatory, that is the McCanns trying to stifle opposition to their version of events.
It is possible to libel by implication. The implication of that handout is defamatory to the Mccann's reputation and hence libellous. You are party to publishing it. It might well be seen as harassment which is a criminal offence. I suspect you probation officer might not be too impressed by a lifer on licence engaging in written intimidation of two people not yet charged with any offence.
Does your probation officer know what is on the other site- would he be concerned? Perhaps we should let him have the link.
Link to the leaflet:
http://www.uploadthis.co.uk/uploads/jjpthejjp/As%20a%20Mother.pdf
Try this:
http://tinyurl.com/45kvyr
as it is not truncated.
I really do not see what is defamatory in that leaflet - all of that is well proven by the media around the world in photographs, TV footage even in the McCanns special documentaries. Libel by what implication? The McCanns did indeed
all that was written in there, all the mediatic propaganda was a transparent attempt to cover their neglect which is illegal in Portugal. They did all except physically searching for their daughter...her name was Madeleine.
Very interesting John. Probably for the first time ever you are getting posts trying to defend the McCann's.
Is it a coincidence that these posts appear at a time when the PJ are threatening charges, rather than treating them as just suspects?
Followed your links, also on my site - can't see what the fuss is about - it's what people are thinking anyway, what the eveidence seems to lead to.
Why wouldn't they go back to reconstruct? To clear their name? Clear gauntlet thrown down to them.
DEBUNKER: You really are funny. Your ignorance of the law tickles my sense of humour. Your attempts to twist words and meanings are laughable. Your pathetic attempts at intimidation are hilarious. LOL.
Well, we'll see what your probation officer thinks.
Remember as a lifer on licence you don't actually need to break the law, just act in a way that makes the judiciary think you are not in control of your emotions in the community.
Assisting in what amounts to a campaign of intimidation and harassment (yes, look up the new law on harrassment) might be enough to tip the balance.
This leaflet is definitely libellous:
http://tinyurl.com/47fy5o
debunker: Are you cyber-stalking me? I think my probation officers will be more interested in your activities.
A longer and more libellous version:
http://tinyurl.com/65ocho
I am replying to your blog in open cyberspace.
What I see you doing makes me think that you are possibly breaking the terms of your licence.
If your probation officer reads this blog and follows the links, and also looks at your posts on the3arguidos, he will be able to make up his own mind whether what you have done or assisted with is in fact a breach of your life licence.
Hello debunker,
Do you have a link to the new harrassment law please? I have gone through hell with a postman. I'm promised protection from him by Royal Mail managers, given mobile number to ring in case of problems only to find out it is false when Mr Creepy turns up on my doorstep again.
I need something to get them on something so I can get enough damages to afford a post box by my gate and keep this person off my property. You sound as though you know a bit about it anyway.
Cheers
I wouldn't say someone saying that they may point your probation officer in the direction of what you are up to is threatening, so stop bleating on the 3arguidos that it is.
You obviously still have problems recognising when you are in the wrong. The 3 arguidos is a hate site, pure and simple and if you lay down with dogs.........
Why don't you go and read what I have written about the McCanns and media censorship on the Nourishing Obscurity blog? Its in my blogroll.
Jailhouse,
You have done the crime and done the time. You claim to be a reformed character by sticking up for human rights for offenders, cf. your successful stance on voting rights for prisoners. No doubt that is the tip of the iceberg of what you have achieved for prisoners.
But surely, the first rule of ANY offender's human rights is that he is presumed to be innocent until judged before a court of law, not by mob rule or by the press or by blogrollers.
Surely, you would not have wanted people baying for your blood for a whole year whilst awaiting trial? Perhaps nobody had any emotional involvement in your case, so nobody was baying for your blood at any time. But continue with your harassment by blog and let it spill into real life and real people, then you run a very damaging risk to your liberty.
For your benefit - Anon.
To quote you:
"Is it a coincidence that these posts appear at a time when the PJ are threatening charges, rather than treating them as just suspects?"
Not in slightest. I only found this place the other week. There are some good topics. I respond to many - and in relation to what I think on each given subject. Heaven forbid, our interenet usage begins to boil down to one case:-)
As for the pamphlets, cant comment on what debunker and john are saying since i cant download/see them.
HTH
I should perhaps add, that if the pamphlets are 'antimccann' with no guilt been found - I wont agree with them.
But, then, nor for that matter will I agree with debunker hounding someone trying to make a case for himself out of something past - not present. Must be nice to be so perfect in all ways to feel right to do that i guess:-)
Post a Comment