Re: The Madeleine McCann Case and Occam's Razor - Pat Brown

Guest Thu 23 Apr 2015, 11:58 am

100% agree...we only have to remember Dr David Kelly to know that people can be "offed" if necessary and with all of Kate's pushing buttons, being wiped out in a motorway crash etc, it would have been a piece of cake to facilitate her wishes..

Don't get me wrong, I have kept an open mind throughout the years, and have thought about the possibility of wider implications, but so many things just keep leading me back to the simplest theory, which is not abduction itself, as there simply is not any evidence of such. Plenty of evidence of involvement from the parents though IMO and the fact that there has not been one ridiculous sighting since the Review morphed into an Investigation, and whilst there has been a fair bit of wild goose chasing in terms of the parade of potential suspects, in my opinion that has simply been a mechanism to weed out all of the dross..and to give the MSM the opportunity to sell a few rags with some outlandish speculation..re burglary gone wrong, ex employees with grudge etc etc...every single on of them eliminated, and the introduction by Grange, that Madeleine may not have left the apartment alive, the elimination of Tannerman and the refocus on Smithman.

All heading in the right direction IMO

dogs don't lie Thu 23 Apr 2015, 12:03 pm

susible wrote:
Poe wrote:Totally agree Andrew, Candyfloss & Mo.

This could have been covered up years ago with silence. With no sightings, no cosy chats with Lorraine & no Leveson or Hacked Off, most people would have forgotten about the Madeleine by now.

Every time the McCanns speak, one or the other leaks information either by their words or actions. If they can't be convincing when it's their own necks on the line why would the security services trust them to keep something massive secret?

In her book, Kate had already mentioned suicidal thoughts and, as Benjamin Franklin said, "Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead."

The most successful cover-up would have been the tragic double suicide of the guilt-stricken parents unable to live without Madeleine.

In my opinion only.

100% agree...we only have to remember Dr David Kelly to know that people can be "offed" if necessary and with all of Kate's pushing buttons, being wiped out in a motorway crash etc, it would have been a piece of cake to facilitate her wishes..

Don't get me wrong, I have kept an open mind throughout the years, and have thought about the possibility of wider implications, but so many things just keep leading me back to the simplest theory, which is not abduction itself, as there simply is not any evidence of such. Plenty of evidence of involvement from the parents though IMO and the fact that there has not been one ridiculous sighting since the Review morphed into an Investigation, and whilst there has been a fair bit of wild goose chasing in terms of the parade of potential suspects, in my opinion that has simply been a mechanism to weed out all of the dross..and to give the MSM the opportunity to sell a few rags with some outlandish speculation..re burglary gone wrong, ex employees with grudge etc etc...every single on of them eliminated, and the introduction by Grange, that Madeleine may not have left the apartment alive, the elimination of Tannerman and the refocus on Smithman.

All heading in the right direction IMO

Agreed, thumbs up, IMO

Andrew Thu 23 Apr 2015, 12:38 pm

Great post Susible.

Guest Thu 23 Apr 2015, 12:54 pm

Andrew wrote:I see where you coming from and you could well be on the right track. Although...

As said before I think it's a lot simpler than that. Yes some influential, high powered individuals were most probably around the vicinity at the time.

Big guns panicked. Realised it was a crock. Embarrassed etc.. But by that time the Mc's were laweyed up, practically millionaires overnight and the protection in that sense began.

OG spent last few years building an absolute watertight case due to the magnitude of it all. One go at it.

PJ weren't far off watertight at the time.

Yes, some interference to save face. Agreed.

Really don't think there is some 'stand off' though.

Be a national scandal if a group of lapse daisy nobody NHS docs neglected the kids in favour of getting pissed and one died. Accident or worse.

So again, yes a bit of intervention to put a lid on things.

Lid can't stay on forever though and about to come off in spectacular fashion.

Again IMO.

I knew you had it in you, boyo! Thumbs up! It's the McCs who wouldn't let it die down. Besides, my argument has always been that with their contacts the accident/abduction need never have reached the press.
Use the contacts, child sad accident, flown home, unfortunately died, end of. No headlines, no fund, no new career in as European representative for Amber Alert.
But we wouldn't have known anything.

Andrew Thu 23 Apr 2015, 1:50 pm

Thank you Tigger.

Just purporting my beliefs and all that.

Guest Thu 23 Apr 2015, 2:06 pm

http://twenth.com/8dup68

Pat Brown wrote:One of the reasons I stopped commenting on Madeleine #McCann case (along with the fact I believe that the Scotland Yard investigation is a fraud and the case is dead in the water) is because the discussion has devolved into a vicious battleground between different theories. Instead of people simply disagreeing with each other, the ad hominem attacks have become quite unpleasant. There are people I like who I believe are misinterpreting evidence but that doesn't mean I have to call them names. Likewise, just because some don't believe my analysis doesn't mean they have to attack my professionalism. I base my analysis on years of experience, and while I am not saying I am always correct, I always support my determinations with evidence, not innuendo. For example, there are many who base a particular theory of what happened to Madeleine on the Gaspar statement and while the Gaspar statement is interesting, the fact that it is one woman's questionable interpretation of one event does not qualify this as evidence that David Payne and Gerry McCann are involved in pedophilia and the sexual abuse of Madeleine. As a detective, I might well investigate this line of thought further but the statement is far too unconvincing to base any conclusion on it without further supporting evidence. Yet, when I refuse to do so (which is proper and professional), I am subjected to very vicious attacks. All of this saddens me and keeps me from commenting further on this case because once upon a time, the "antis" were about focusing on the police files and the work of Goncalo Amaral and now much of the discussion has veered away from the files and solid evidence and there is even a lot of ad hominem attacks on Goncalo as well. I attribute much of this to frustration and fear that the Scotland Yard investigation will indeed come to nothing and the case will be put to rest, leaving any discussion of this case to the bowels of the Interne

**candyfloss** Thu 23 Apr 2015, 3:08 pm

I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder.... Rolling Eyes

Mimi Thu 23 Apr 2015, 3:29 pm

candyfloss wrote:I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder....

I`m astonished at how bitchy and catty a couple of them are being - WHY ?

It`s so unnecessary - whatever has Pat ever done to them? - I`ll never understand.

**candyfloss** Thu 23 Apr 2015, 3:41 pm

Mimi wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder....

I`m astonished at how bitchy and catty a couple of them are being - WHY ?

It`s so unnecessary - whatever has Pat ever done to them? - I`ll never understand.

It is shocking really, this lady went to PDL and met PeterMac and I wonder what he makes of this, and she also met TB at the airport? (The photo I put up on another thread) in her quest to get some answers. Can't understand why are they trashing her - I am sure she knows what she is talking about..........far more than some of them. Rolling Eyes

Guest Thu 23 Apr 2015, 6:49 pm

candyfloss wrote:
Mimi wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder....

I`m astonished at how bitchy and catty a couple of them are being - WHY ?

It`s so unnecessary - whatever has Pat ever done to them? - I`ll never understand.

It is shocking really, this lady went to PDL and met PeterMac and I wonder what he makes of this, and she also met TB at the airport? (The photo I put up on another thread) in her quest to get some answers. Can't understand why are they trashing her - I am sure she knows what she is talking about..........far more than some of them.

I wholehartedly agree candyfloss, it's just not right that Pat is trashed like this. Maybe PeterMac will say something about this, after all he must have spent more time with Pat than HWMBO did?

**candyfloss** Thu 23 Apr 2015, 7:10 pm

Daisy wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Mimi wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder....

I`m astonished at how bitchy and catty a couple of them are being - WHY ?

It`s so unnecessary - whatever has Pat ever done to them? - I`ll never understand.

It is shocking really, this lady went to PDL and met PeterMac and I wonder what he makes of this, and she also met TB at the airport? (The photo I put up on another thread) in her quest to get some answers. Can't understand why are they trashing her - I am sure she knows what she is talking about..........far more than some of them.

I wholehartedly agree candyfloss, it's just not right that Pat is trashed like this. Maybe PeterMac will say something about this, after all he must have spent more time with Pat than HWMBO did?

Blacksmith's new blog talks about this, and is not favourable to TB either.

The Acid Tears of Time..

Guest Thu 23 Apr 2015, 7:13 pm

candyfloss wrote:
Daisy wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
Mimi wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I see Pat Brown is getting the treatment now over yonder....

I`m astonished at how bitchy and catty a couple of them are being - WHY ?

It`s so unnecessary - whatever has Pat ever done to them? - I`ll never understand.

It is shocking really, this lady went to PDL and met PeterMac and I wonder what he makes of this, and she also met TB at the airport? (The photo I put up on another thread) in her quest to get some answers. Can't understand why are they trashing her - I am sure she knows what she is talking about..........far more than some of them.

I wholehartedly agree candyfloss, it's just not right that Pat is trashed like this. Maybe PeterMac will say something about this, after all he must have spent more time with Pat than HWMBO did?

Blacksmith's new blog talks about this, and is not favourable to TB either.

The Acid Tears of Time..

Blacksmith was never a fan though was he?

Guest Fri 24 Apr 2015, 2:34 pm

Another post by P Brown.
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-scotland-yard-review-and-ad-hominem.html

Pat Brown wrote:
I just wrote a set of responses to comments on my last post and I thought I should copy and paste them in a new post because I think they are important enough to restate in a place where more might see them. The comments I received where on my belief that the Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case is a whitewash and the recent ad hominem attacks on me that been quite vicious, mostly attacking my professionalism or the fact I am getting my information secondhand from the Internet (which is pretty much true for everyone commenting on this case except that I have been to Praia da Luz and investigated on the ground and I have met withGonçalo Amaral). Here are my responses below:

I did not have faith in the Scotland Yard review from Day One. Why? Because they were not invited in by the Portuguese police nor were they looking for an abductor where the local police search for an abductor had failed. These are the only two reasons a foreign police entity normally involves themselves in a case. So what was Scotland Yard doing there? Only two possibilities: they are truly searching for an abductor in which case the antis including myself are completely off the mark or they are there to "find" an abductor which would put this is under a political corruption label. Since I do believe evidence points to the McCanns involvement and no abduction, this forces me into the second camp. I still have no clue as to why Scotland Yard would be brought in to cleanse the McCann name, but I can see no other reason for this bizarre investigation.

The second reason I have no faith in the Scotland Yard investigation is how inappropriately it has been handled. I have seen reviews before and they don't require this much time and money. Even if the detectives of Scotland Yard, including Andy Redwood, were sent in with the remit that the McCanns were off limits and the Yard was to focus on the abduction theory, it is hard to believe they would spend so many years and millions on the review without at some point, realizing that no evidence of an abduction occurred and the Tapas 9 behaviors and statements along with the cadaver and blood dog hits just might be where they should be looking. Since so much time has passed and so many abductors looked at, so much ground has been dug up that clearly was linked to the abduction theory, one can only surmise, at least I can, that the remit stands regardless of what anyone thinks. Who knows? Maybe Andy Redwood was only trying to do the job he was required to do and, maybe, he knows that it is hogwash and has tried to leave a few hints to the truth along the way. Maybe this was what getting rid of Tannerman and focusing on Smithman was about. However, since Tannerman must have been fabricated, this certainly can't be any kind of clever ruse to use against the McCanns because in court, the defense would shred the police for misconduct. The prosecution in this case had been dead in the water prior to the arrival of Scotland Yard and they have only made matters worse, if something can be deader than dead. ONLY if they find REAL evidence of someone having abducted Maddie (like her body being found buried under someone's cement porch or enclosed in the brick wall of their home) or Maddie's body being found in such a place and with such evidence to link to the McCanns, is a prosecution in Portugal going to happen.
As to the other cases of similarity, there are many cases of parents with children who have gone missing but no bodies. And, all most all of those have gone unsolved. JonBenet was unique because the body was still there but what happened in that cases was a horrible early investigation which compromised the evidence and the integrity of the department, leaving the case as a bunch of rubble
As to the other cases of similarity, I can tell you along with those you have named, there are many more, cases of parents with children who have gone missing but no bodies. And, all most all of those have gone unsolved. JonBenet was unique because the body was still there but what happened in that cases was a horrible early investigation which compromised the evidence and the integrity of the department, leaving the case as a bunch of rubble.
So, the McCann case is really not alone in going unsolved. What really made it become so big was McCanns own use of publicity and the fund which is unprecedented in missing children's cases. Outside of the McCanns wanting money and fame, their attempts to "locate their child" or "clear their name" have failed dismally.

As to the public view of this case and the guilt of the McCanns, they only matter so much in the eyes of people who control things. Outrage is only so good if it has some kind of true power. The outrage against the McCanns is pretty much just on the Internet and in comments. This is not real power., When people take to the street in droves, then you have something, but even with the horrible waste of taxpayer money by Scotland Yard on a case that isn't even British or likely prosecutable, where is the real protest? There isn't one and that is why when Scotland Yard closes this case down with some dead creepy guy or a "we tried our best" the whole case will go quietly away except on the Internet where people who have websites and FB pages and tweet will believe still that the whole world is watching and not just some very tiny segment of it. That Sonia can make a difference with her documentary is questionable, although I appreciate her doing it. Unless she is really on a major MSM channel (which I find unlikely), I think her documentary will be much like Halls; very useful to posterity but not so much still enough to turn public protest around and expose enough of the corruption to turn this case around.

As far as the ad hominem attacks on me for not buying into certain theories my frustration is mostly at seeing things devolve from a clear focus on this case of the McCanns' involvement in the death of their daughter and a subsequent hurried coverup and support of Gonçalo Amaral and his fight for justice, to a dozen very convoluted theories that I believe only serve to damage the antis message that the McCanns are not innocent and the fund has been stealing money for years from unsuspecting people. In becoming so obsessed with creating alternative scenarios to the one Amaral had forwarded, the label of nutters and conspiracy theorists is going to cause the message to be killed. While I take issue with many of these theories, I have never made a personal attack on other antis because I don't want others to think ill of them and, quite frankly, I don't think ill of them for thinking differently than me, so I see no reason to not still be friendly and polite. I don't want to cause the antis to disband into camps that attack each other (which is what I am seeing happening) and give fodder for the pros to abuse us.

I feel bad for all because I know they mean well, but, sadly, along with what I believe will be closing of this case by Scotland Yard without any prosecution of the McCanns, the message going into the future which should be one of simple concern of mishandling of missing children's cases, abuse of the media, misappropriation of public monies, and political protection will be lost in all the ad hominem attacks and complicated, bizarre theories. The gleeful personal attacks on me add to this destruction because I am one of the few professional voices on this case and if the antis call me incompetent, then that is one less professional voice. Recently, some have even trashed Gonçalo Amaral which pretty much is just knocking the legs from under us all. I wish people would understand that you don't have to agree with everything someone says in order to appreciate their efforts and be civil.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

April 24, 2015

TheTruthWillOut Fri 24 Apr 2015, 3:14 pm

Pat Brown wrote:I did not have faith in the Scotland Yard review from Day One. Why? Because they were not invited in by the Portuguese police

Is that fact? If it is, doesn't it indicate aiding and abetting by the PT authorities. I doubt this, personally.

Pat Brown wrote:nor were they looking for an abductor where the local police search for an abductor had failed

Isn't this a good thing? Maybe they weren't looking for an abductor....

It comes down to whether you're a glass half full or half empty person, I guess!

Guest Fri 24 Apr 2015, 4:02 pm

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Pat Brown wrote:I did not have faith in the Scotland Yard review from Day One. Why? Because they were not invited in by the Portuguese police

Is that fact? If it is, doesn't it indicate aiding and abetting by the PT authorities. I doubt this, personally.

It comes down to whether you're a glass half full or half empty person, I guess!

Is that why the Portuguese reopened,SY would have been stuck with out them,like you say half full or half empty.

Chop Suey on Toast Fri 24 Apr 2015, 4:11 pm

Message to PB - GA's theory doesn't stand up to scrutiny, so it's hardly the domain of nutters and conspiracy theorists to point this out and seek an alternative explanation

Guest Fri 24 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm

caricature wrote:Another post by P Brown.
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/the-scotland-yard-review-and-ad-hominem.html
Pat Brown wrote:
I just wrote a set of responses to comments on my last post and I thought I should copy and paste them in a new post because I think they are important enough to restate in a place where more might see them. The comments I received where on my belief that the Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann case is a whitewash and the recent ad hominem attacks on me that been quite vicious, mostly attacking my professionalism or the fact I am getting my information secondhand from the Internet (which is pretty much true for everyone commenting on this case except that I have been to Praia da Luz and investigated on the ground and I have met withGonçalo Amaral). Here are my responses below:

I did not have faith in the Scotland Yard review from Day One. Why? Because they were not invited in by the Portuguese police nor were they looking for an abductor where the local police search for an abductor had failed. These are the only two reasons a foreign police entity normally involves themselves in a case. So what was Scotland Yard doing there? Only two possibilities: they are truly searching for an abductor in which case the antis including myself are completely off the mark or they are there to "find" an abductor which would put this is under a political corruption label. Since I do believe evidence points to the McCanns involvement and no abduction, this forces me into the second camp. I still have no clue as to why Scotland Yard would be brought in to cleanse the McCann name, but I can see no other reason for this bizarre investigation.

The second reason I have no faith in the Scotland Yard investigation is how inappropriately it has been handled. I have seen reviews before and they don't require this much time and money. Even if the detectives of Scotland Yard, including Andy Redwood, were sent in with the remit that the McCanns were off limits and the Yard was to focus on the abduction theory, it is hard to believe they would spend so many years and millions on the review without at some point, realizing that no evidence of an abduction occurred and the Tapas 9 behaviors and statements along with the cadaver and blood dog hits just might be where they should be looking. Since so much time has passed and so many abductors looked at, so much ground has been dug up that clearly was linked to the abduction theory, one can only surmise, at least I can, that the remit stands regardless of what anyone thinks. Who knows? Maybe Andy Redwood was only trying to do the job he was required to do and, maybe, he knows that it is hogwash and has tried to leave a few hints to the truth along the way. Maybe this was what getting rid of Tannerman and focusing on Smithman was about. However, since Tannerman must have been fabricated, this certainly can't be any kind of clever ruse to use against the McCanns because in court, the defense would shred the police for misconduct. The prosecution in this case had been dead in the water prior to the arrival of Scotland Yard and they have only made matters worse, if something can be deader than dead. ONLY if they find REAL evidence of someone having abducted Maddie (like her body being found buried under someone's cement porch or enclosed in the brick wall of their home) or Maddie's body being found in such a place and with such evidence to link to the McCanns, is a prosecution in Portugal going to happen.
As to the other cases of similarity, there are many cases of parents with children who have gone missing but no bodies. And, all most all of those have gone unsolved. JonBenet was unique because the body was still there but what happened in that cases was a horrible early investigation which compromised the evidence and the integrity of the department, leaving the case as a bunch of rubble
As to the other cases of similarity, I can tell you along with those you have named, there are many more, cases of parents with children who have gone missing but no bodies. And, all most all of those have gone unsolved. JonBenet was unique because the body was still there but what happened in that cases was a horrible early investigation which compromised the evidence and the integrity of the department, leaving the case as a bunch of rubble.
So, the McCann case is really not alone in going unsolved. What really made it become so big was McCanns own use of publicity and the fund which is unprecedented in missing children's cases. Outside of the McCanns wanting money and fame, their attempts to "locate their child" or "clear their name" have failed dismally.

As to the public view of this case and the guilt of the McCanns, they only matter so much in the eyes of people who control things. Outrage is only so good if it has some kind of true power. The outrage against the McCanns is pretty much just on the Internet and in comments. This is not real power., When people take to the street in droves, then you have something, but even with the horrible waste of taxpayer money by Scotland Yard on a case that isn't even British or likely prosecutable, where is the real protest? There isn't one and that is why when Scotland Yard closes this case down with some dead creepy guy or a "we tried our best" the whole case will go quietly away except on the Internet where people who have websites and FB pages and tweet will believe still that the whole world is watching and not just some very tiny segment of it. That Sonia can make a difference with her documentary is questionable, although I appreciate her doing it. Unless she is really on a major MSM channel (which I find unlikely), I think her documentary will be much like Halls; very useful to posterity but not so much still enough to turn public protest around and expose enough of the corruption to turn this case around.

As far as the ad hominem attacks on me for not buying into certain theories my frustration is mostly at seeing things devolve from a clear focus on this case of the McCanns' involvement in the death of their daughter and a subsequent hurried coverup and support of Gonçalo Amaral and his fight for justice, to a dozen very convoluted theories that I believe only serve to damage the antis message that the McCanns are not innocent and the fund has been stealing money for years from unsuspecting people. In becoming so obsessed with creating alternative scenarios to the one Amaral had forwarded, the label of nutters and conspiracy theorists is going to cause the message to be killed. While I take issue with many of these theories, I have never made a personal attack on other antis because I don't want others to think ill of them and, quite frankly, I don't think ill of them for thinking differently than me, so I see no reason to not still be friendly and polite. I don't want to cause the antis to disband into camps that attack each other (which is what I am seeing happening) and give fodder for the pros to abuse us.

I feel bad for all because I know they mean well, but, sadly, along with what I believe will be closing of this case by Scotland Yard without any prosecution of the McCanns, the message going into the future which should be one of simple concern of mishandling of missing children's cases, abuse of the media, misappropriation of public monies, and political protection will be lost in all the ad hominem attacks and complicated, bizarre theories. The gleeful personal attacks on me add to this destruction because I am one of the few professional voices on this case and if the antis call me incompetent, then that is one less professional voice. Recently, some have even trashed Gonçalo Amaral which pretty much is just knocking the legs from under us all. I wish people would understand that you don't have to agree with everything someone says in order to appreciate their efforts and be civil.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

April 24, 2015

For someone supposed to be so "high up" in her profession, Pat Brown seems to have completely forgotten about the "Fund". Has she not been reading these blogs for some time?

I doubt any police force can bring any prosecution against anyone in the disappearance of Madeleine until all the ends are tied up in regard to the "Fund" (it all seems to be linked), who were the driving forces behind it, who suggested where the money went, who "stashed" away any money that may have have been stashed away, were the accounts which were printed since 2008 legal and above board. So many questions, not one which PB has talked about.

It could take many years to unravel the "Fund", which may be the downfall of the McCanns, as so many other people have mentioned in other places on the internet, but surprisingly enough not PB, not as far as I can remember anyway.

Scrants Fri 24 Apr 2015, 6:03 pm

Blacksmith is taking no prisoners in his piece today!

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/selective-whining.html?m=1

Guest Fri 24 Apr 2015, 8:57 pm

Chop Suey on Toast wrote:Message to PB - GA's theory doesn't stand up to scrutiny, so it's hardly the domain of nutters and conspiracy theorists to point this out and seek an alternative explanation

Besides that, more has come to light since the date of publication.
GA could only go with the official facts and only those which were made public.

Chop Suey on Toast Fri 24 Apr 2015, 9:38 pm

The basic problems with GA's theory have never been satisfactorily cleared up:

Could a body have been behind the sofa long enough to produce the Eddie alert?
What happened to the body?
Why raise the alarm at 10 when it would have made more sense to spend the night making plans?
Until Pat Brown can explain these three things, I'm not prepared to accept that only nutters and conspiracy theorists disagree with GA's version of events

Her claim that there are instances of children going missing but no body found relates to cases where there was an undisclosed timescale - ie the body could have been removed long before the alarm was raised. In contrast, regarding M, if GA is correct, there was only a short window of opportunity to make the body disappear (successfully, for eight years). But trying to explain where it went makes no sense, and involving Smithman only confuses the issue because of the direction he was heading in - ie into danger rather than away from it

Bampots Fri 24 Apr 2015, 10:02 pm

Here we go again with the ' show ' deference to professionals,ie Pat. Respect is earned and where we have it we give it,to expect it is pompous. It is professionals who on a regular basis be they bankers, politicians,doctors,social workers or policemen let us down. Yes we should perhaps pause and reflect over what they say in light of the expeirience they bring but they are all equally open to error,corruption and sometimes downright stupidity. If we stick to the files we must be on the right path.

**candyfloss** Sat 25 Apr 2015, 2:12 pm

And another one

"A Final Word on the True Damage of Ad Hominem attacks in the Madeleine McCann Case."

PAT BROWN ‏@ProfilerPatB · 18 mins18 minutes ago
"A Final Word on the True Damage of Ad Hominem attacks in the Madeleine McCann Case." #The Daily Profiler #McCann http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2015/04/a-final-word-on-true-damage-of-ad.html …

**candyfloss** Sat 25 Apr 2015, 2:25 pm

Saturday, April 25, 2015

A Final Word on the True Damage of Ad Hominem Attacks in the Madeleine McCann Case

The Madeleine McCann Case and Occam's Razor - Pat Brown - Page 2 Pat%2Band%2BTony%2BBennett

I want to write a final statement on the subject of ad hominem attacks in the Madeleine McCann case and hope it has some effect on what I see happening across the net. Although I did write a "final post" on the case way back and stopped providing a running commentary, I have come back a number of times to make specific comments on very troubling issues. This is one of the concerning issues and applies not only to the Madeleine McCann case but the problem of ad hominem attacks in general. Whatever issue the ad hominem attacks occur within they cause nothing but destruction which often is the entire point of those dishing them out. Ad hominem attacks destroy civil conversation and often shut down any unwanted viewpoint. There is a great difference between debating a topic and attacking the debater. One furthers analysis and the other shuts it down. And that is what is happening in the McCann case.

I am not the only one being verbally attacked; there are others who have suffered really vicious slurs, some have dealt with far worse than I. Sadly, some of those who have been attacked are attacking others themselves; hence, the antis are factionalizing while the pros are pretty much just one group. We have lost the point of what we set out to do which was bring attention to the miscarriage of justice, open the public's eyes to the police files that contain evidence that should allow the public to question the McCann's innocence, to bring attention to the fraudulent fund, and to support Gonçalo Amaral in his fight to present the case to the public.

I think everyone was one pretty much the same page until Scotland Yard stepped in. In doing so, the Yard gave legitimacy to the McCanns and the pros' standpoint. Scotland Yard's search for an abductor pretty much labeled the antis as nutters. Now, at that point, we all had two choices: convince ourselves that Scotland Yard really was on our side and it is just a matter of time before they bring down the McCanns and we all are vindicated or accept that no such thing is going to happen and we are all pretty much just going to have to live with never seeing justice and being labeled conspiracy theorists and idiots.

I chose the latter because that is reality to me. It is sad and frustrating and certainly not ego-enhancing but it is the way things work. My hope is simply that enough people will eventually recognize that Scotland Yard had a remit that was political in nature and, in the future, we need to work to separate justice from political manipulation. I want to highlight that the McCann case was a gross perversion of how missing children's cases should be handled and publicized, how private funds in such cases should be questioned and vetted before money simply handed over to be abused. I want the case to be understood because I believe that early proper analysis can prevent homicides and missing persons' cases from going unsolved and unprosecuted.

Others choose to believe the former, that Scotland Yard will come through. And, some, I believe, have gone further and further into complicated scenarios because they doubt that this is really going to happen and the more complicated the crime and the deeper the corruption, the easier it is to eventually live with the closing of this case as an abduction. I believe that when this happens, we will see years and years of continued obsession with these complex theories because many will need to keep doing so in order to counter the claim that the antis were dead wrong in their assessment of the McCanns. And I am not saying people don't have a right to delve into what ever they want, a speculate in any way they wish, I am not calling these people names and libeling them with all sorts of false claims; I am just pointing out that as a profiler I have seen excessive spinning of theories whenever a case doesn't see justice and, such theories rarely benefit the understanding of the case and the lack of justice served.

Nothing sucks like having the world label you as a moron or lunatic for spending years fighting for something that wasn't even true. I know because I have had that label put on me and there is no way to fight back because the truth is buried and likely will remain so. Watch the Jack Nickolson movie, The Pledge for a great example of this. I saw that movie years ago and I remember telling people that when I fight for justice in certain cases, if I don't win, this is exactly what will happen to me. And it has. And it isn't pleasant.

I don't believe that all that has been done in the McCann case has been for nothing even if the legal state of the case goes south. I believe it is always important that people speak out and question. And, when Scotland Yard shuts this case down, I do appreciate that the work of many people (even my detractors) will remain in public view.

The only thing I wish people would understand is that if we tear each other to shreds, the legacy left won't be a very good one and this can destroy all the good work done until now. Everyone who is now attacking me for my stance on Scotland Yard and my theory of the crime occurring on May 3rd is essentially is telling the public who reads of the case in the future that they can discount everything I said. Because there are attacks on Amaral, we can also discount everything he said. Because there are attacks on Joana Morais, we can discount everything she said. Because there are attacks on Tony Bennett, we can discount everything he said, because there are attacks on Sonia Poulton, we can discount everything she said, because there are attacks on Hideho, we can discount everything she said, and on and on.

Who will then be left to consider credible? I guess no one but the pros.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

April 25, 2015

Guest Sat 25 Apr 2015, 3:04 pm

Strange how Pat Brown has only now mentioned the McCanns' "Fund", I can't remember her mentioning it before.

As a profiler, she doesn't even mention about how difficult it must be for any police force to investigate a "fund" that has been shrouded in secrecy for the past 8 years and not "transparent" as the McCanns promised it would be from the start.

Maybe that's why SY was brought into the investigation as the PJ would have had no jurisdiction in being able to investigate the "Fund" alongside any other investigation that may be taking place.

Guest Sat 25 Apr 2015, 4:25 pm

Are they investigating it though,surely to do that then a visit will have to be made to Rothley towers for paper work etc,I'm sure we'd have heard about it.

Sponsored content