Follow by Email

Total Pageviews

Saturday, 30 October 2010

NO Truth of the Lie in the UK.... by Spudgun

Goncalo Amaral has announced that he intends to market his book, on which the Lisbon Courts lifted a BAN recently, in the UK.

His book, ‘"Maddie - A Verdade da Mentira" - 'The Truth of the Lie", is an account of the investigation over which he presided, in the hunt for the missing girl, Madeleine McCann.
Despite the books obvious popularity, especially in Mr. Amaral’s home Country PORTUGAL,( as well as many other Countries), after a successful, contrived Court action by the McCanns, it was eventually banned in September 2009.

I, (along with many others, I am sure), wish Mr. Amaral all the luck in the world.

Sadly, however, he is going to NEED it........................

For I truly believe that this book, along with copies of the DVD Documentary which was based on the book, will NOT see the light of day here in the UK.

For if they DID, they would produce a rather unique and untenable set of circumstances, for publishers, the MEDIA, for the very laws of Libel and for the ESTABLISHMENT itself that has resolutely thus far sought to protect the McCanns at every turn.

For if we cast our minds back to MARCH of 2008, we find that the EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS dared to repeat what Goncola Amaral and the Portuguese Media had suggested: That Kate & Gerry McCann were involved in the disappearance of their daughter.

For daring to do so, it cost them £550,000 paid to the McCanns in an “out of Court settlement”(not to mention Court costs which would have been at LEAST equal to this amount).
They THEN paid a further £375,000 to the ‘Tapas 7’ for repeating SIMILAR allegations, which in turn they nicely ALSO donated to the McCanns. (SORRY, the “Find Madeleine” fund).

For those who do not KNOW anything about the owner of the Express newspaper group, they may perhaps suspect nothing untoward in this apparent climb down and substantial payment by the Newspapers the ‘Daily Express’, ‘Sunday Express’, ‘Daily Star’ and ‘Sunday Star’.

For those who DO know "Dirty Des", however, this course of action simply beggared belief!
I have never met Express Newspapers Proprietor, Richard Desmond. I know many that have and feel confident I know SOME things about him.
I know that he is extremely forthright and has a notorious temper.

His well known ‘party piece’ is an impersonation of Adolf Hitler singing a chorus of "Deutschland über Alles"

He is alleged to have once locked a senior Executive in a cupboard. He denies throwing a chair at the head of one of his own senior executives but admits, "I pushed the chair."

He also denies that he once ordered an executive to stand on the boardroom table, pull his trousers down and call himself a "cunt" because he was late for a meeting.

There are certainly many who have had dealings with him, who attest to having been on the receiving end of just that foulest of expletives.

He has accumulated quite a wealth, partly due to his publication of soft-Porn titles, starting with Penthouse. It was the beginning of a magazine empire that went on to include such salacious names as Asian Babes, Readers' Wives and Big Ones to name but a few.

Although he has since SOLD these titles, he still runs his own soft-core Pornography channel on Satellite/Cable TV, as well as now owning the ‘Channel 5’ TV channel.
He greatly enjoys his reputation of being a man who takes no prisoners, of behaving like an underworld gangster.

According to ‘Private Eye’, just within this past week, in a meeting with executives with ‘Endemol, designed to negotiate a deal to screen the now defunct ‘Big Brother’ Reality show, he offered them a “pittance” for permission to screen it on Channel 5.

He violently smashed his glass down on the table and called them “Fucking Wankers” when they refused his offer. (Funnily enough, exactly the same terms he used on Executives when trying to negotiate a purchase of the ‘Telegraph’ newspaper some years ago).

As the Eye pointed out, he notoriously exhibits “tight-fistedness” and “foul-mouthed thuggery”.
You get the picture?

Now try and align these traits and characteristics with someone who, without a single Court appearance, threw up his hands, took out his wallet and coughed up well over a MILLION Sterling for doing no more, (and in some cases, much LESS), than what many other Newspapers, magazines and media outlets had ALSO already done, which was to merely report on the allegations that were emanating out of Portugal.

I once commented, ACCURATELY I surmised, (although perhaps tastelessly), that the only way Richard Desmond would willingly part with money to the McCanns was if he were successful in persuading KATE to appear nude in one of his less than salubrious magazines!.

How can it possibly BE, that this fearless GIANT of the Media World, a man who by his own admission likes to challenge the very borders of “acceptability”, not only parted with what was for HIM, an unprecedented amount of money, but also published FRONT PAGE APOLOGIES on all publications, a move described by the Media commentator Roy Greenslade as "unprecedented".

("I think this is an amazing stand-down, a U-turn, by the Express newspapers,"
) he said.)??

Like so much with the case of Madeleine McCann, perhaps we shall never know. I am certainly in no position to suggest the reasons, and like so much with anything to do with the McCanns and their missing daughter, hard EVIDENCE is a bit thin on the ground.

But there ARE a few pointers, and a few issues which bother me.

When Desmond first announced his intention to acquire the Express Newspapers group, he was ridiculed and lambasted from all sides, his critics asserting that he would never pass a “fit and proper person” test to make such an acquisition.

According to the ‘INDEPENDENT’ (amongst other newspapers), in 2000, within “minutes” of walking into the Express headquarters, Desmond received a call inviting him for a chat with Tony Blair.
Mr. Blair's Labour critics believed and commented that the meeting produced a promise that the Government would not block the acquisition.

Sure enough, in February 2001, the then trade and industry secretary, Stephen Byers, announced that he would not block the Desmond deal.

Richard Desmond promptly gave the Labour Party a £100,000 donation.

Perhaps more importantly for New Labour, Desmond, (an obviously blatant Capitalist), suddenly declared himself a ‘Socialist’, and faithfully printed Blair and Brown propaganda in his newspapers.

I guess that’s the way business and politics work.

But it has always confounded and perplexed me as to WHY, the most resilient, independent, vociferous, FEARLESS publisher, a man who has frequently been referred to as an ‘OUTSIDER’ and as a man who apparently cows down to NO-ONE, should so quietly, almost reverently, bow down under very little, if ANY tangible pressure.

For example, when Desmond was seeking to acquire a LONDON Evening Newspaper, he announced that he would call it the ‘Evening Mail’. This was a big JOKE, on Desmond’s part.
He famously LOATHES the Daily newspaper the Daily Mail, and his declaration of the intended title was merely a prank, a 'wind-up', purely designed to irritate the Daily Mail group.

It worked spectacularly. It was inevitable that Associated Newspapers, owners of the Daily Mail, would object to such a flagrant misappropriation of their trade name.
They issued a writ and TOOK DESMOND TO COURT to prevent him from using that name.

Even though it was a Joke, and no such title, (or indeed nightly NEWSPAPER), would ever have existed, Desmond went to Court and FOUGHT the case!!.
He lost, but thought the case worth it, if only to cause angst and grief for his enemies.

Because that’s exactly the kind of guy he is.
In its front page apologies to the McCanns, the Express Newspapers wrote:-

"A number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up. We acknowledge that there is no evidence whatsoever to support this theory and that Kate and Gerry are completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance."

About as Clarence Mitchell-esque as one could get. (No doubt Clarenece got to actually write it himself).

But as I pointed out in a previous Blogging, the basic, fool-proof, cast-iron defence in a Libel or other Defamation case, is where the assertions being made are TRUE.

And if the UK is to allow the publication of Goncalo’s book, based on the LISBON Court findings who,( as well as re-establishing Amaral’s right to freedom of speech), declared that as the book was based on Police records, it was essentially a TRUE account!!; then where does that leave Richard Desmond?

Surely, if Amaral’s book can be deemed to be an accurate and TRUE account, then not only is Desmond free to RE-PUBLISH his assertions and accusations relating to the McCanns, copied from the Portuguese Press, but he could technically SUE the McCanns and the Tapas group for his MONEY BACK, based on them PERJURING themselves, could he not?

After all, the News of the World are clearly rubbing their hands in expectation over Tommy Sherridan and his wife, who have GONE ON TRIAL over allegations that they LIED in their £200,000 LIBEL Victory over the Newspaper a few years ago.
However, as much as I would relish such a prospect as seeing Clarence Mitchell make pleading noises with the public for donations to help out Kate and Gerry in their legal plight, it’s never going to happen.

Because underneath all this murky subterfuge, staged propaganda and fabricated garbage put out by the so called ‘Media’, lays an unknown secret.

Or perhaps SEVERAL secrets.........

As I have been wont to say on many occasions, we may NEVER know what happened in Praia de Luz in May 2007.

But what we DO know, surely without question, is that since that fateful night when a little girl was reported missing, Madeleine McCanns parents, (who were subsequently made criminal SUSPECTS in the case), have enjoyed privileges, freedoms, rights, advantages, treatments and PROTECTIONS afforded by the British Authorities, its POLICE, its Celebrity Culture, its Press and Media and, most tellingly, its Politicians and GOVERNMENT.

And to completely usurp that state of affairs with the TRUTH, just because of a decision made by those “bungling Porto Judges” in Lisbon, would be a truth too far. Perhaps for too many people.

I’m sure that Richard Desmond is cursing the McCanns as ‘C***s’, (under his breath of course), as I write.........................


  1. Maybe a bit premature there, spudders.
    Tracy Kandohla has just claimed in the Express that "There have been numerous alleged sightings of blonde Madeleine, who has a distinctive flaw in her right eye, in different parts of Europe over the past three and a half years but all have proved false.

  2. Esperemos que Desmond se atreva de nuevo a publicar la verdad.

  3. Good insight on Desmond's Express group, though for me the secret you mention is no secret at all; it is all about making money.

    The question one as to ask is, if I were an UK media editor what would sell more, in a consistent manner, thinking in future profit terms, i.e. in selling that story to the UK public? The truth where the Portuguese Judiciary Police, the Appellate court and the former Judiciary Police Inspector are all correct about their convictions? Ending there and then any possible further interest by the UK public to buy more newspapers?

    Well, perhaps that would sell 3 or 4 more newspapers but the harsh reality that someone “white”, belonging to the “middle going to an upper class”, “doctors”, who had the very epitome of a “3 year old, white, blonde girl” someone like “us”; would most likely cause the great English public to react intuitively; protecting their self-image, thus passing a big sponge on the whole matter and moving on. That is a risk that no editor wishes to take.

    I will give a few examples, both Shannon Matthews and baby Peter Connolly's families were working class, so in the great UK collective conscience, a conscience based on a highly stratified society - everything that has happened to these two children was not only possible, acceptable due to the pejorative connotations attached to the “working class” but also immediately explained. Therefore, the subsequent “witch hunting” and “rough commentaries” were allowed, even if it served only the common purpose of social relief.

    Even in Portugal, we had a director of one of the most respected weekly newspapers stating, black in white, in an editorial that he would loose his “faith in Humanity if the McCanns were found guilty”!? As you can see the reality can be extremely painful for most, for the newspaper editors who would therefore loose an opportunity to cash in; for the UK public who would not want to see that social concept of being civilized - which in their minds unconsciously or not, is an equivalent to having money, being educated, and having a career – shattered. (….)

    Continuing with the UK media editor’s reflexion on what is more profitable – the reality or the misrepresentation of it?

    The media spin pushed so far, the sensationalist story embellished with bias, xenophobia, the “us versus them” thing, the soccer game between Portugal and England, using Madeleine's head as the soccer ball – isn’t that much more advantageous? Financially? First it allows the UK media to continue ad nauseum to sell the story to a public that still continues, to most of the editors incredulity, selling newspapers; simultaneously it silences the less powerful Portuguese media that has shown so far a huge inability to convey the facts outside of the Portuguese territory. If it silences the Portuguese media, then it also silences any possibility of the facts and above-mentioned “harsh reality” of becoming known amongst the UK public and the English-speaking world. All of this reflects one thing only, profits to be made, money and possibly, still related to money, not loosing any in a libel case against the newspapers brought by some former Portuguese cop.

    Following your own words, here is more “fabricated propaganda” to sell a Sunday newspaper: Will Germans solve Madeleine mystery?

  4. Another excellent piece Spudgun.
    You sure hit the nail firmly on the head with your insight.

  5. "For I truly believe that this book, along with copies of the DVD Documentary which was based on the book, will NOT see the light of day here in the UK.For if they DID, they would produce a rather unique and untenable set of circumstances"

    AND??? so what?

    It is simply because the english have NO balls.
    Constantly moaning and very little action if not at all.....What the UK needs is an other Gonçalo Amaral.
    Meanwhile I do not think the germans are out and about with their check book at hand...ready to fill in the mccScums begging bowl

  6. You are almost certainly right that the book will not see the light of day in Britain.

    But Dr, Amaral's book is manifestly flawed and even contains outright lies. Who would believe, for example, that Stuart Prior berated the FSS about the PJ's powers of arrest? Why does Amaral mention calpol night? Why does he misquote Kate's father as saying that the McCanns' used calpol 'as a sedative' with the children? Who told Amaral that Gordon Brown was informed before him that he was to be removed from the investigation?

    And so on. And so forth. In what sense do you believe that dissemination of half-truths and outright untruths will further the cause of truth and justice for Madeleine?

  7. To the dishonest-broking-twat above... check the MHRA - Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency safety guidelines regarding Calpol Night imposed after Maddie McCann case:

    Advertising complaint - Calpol Night, Delivery Pharmacy website - July 2008
    "Information posted on the Delivery Pharmacy website about Calpol Night and various cold and cough preparations for use in young children was brought to the attention of the MHRA. The MHRA was concerned that out of date information was provided on the website that recommended use of the products in children under 2 years. The products were no longer indicated in this age group."

    Children’s over-the-counter cough and cold medicines

    Even the pharmaceutical company, McNeil Healthcare, holder of Calpol brand products has ceased to produce Calpol Night advertising now in conformity to MHRA, a 6plus new product i.e. for children above 6 years old.

    Also read

    March 2009: Over-the-counter cough and cold medicines for children have recently been under review in the UK. New advice is that several cough and cold medicines, including this one, are no longer recommended for children under six years of age. This is because there is no evidence that they work in this age group, and they can potentially cause side effects such as allergic reactions, effects on sleep or hallucinations. The packaging and leaflets for cough and cold medicines will be updated over the next year to reflect this information. When the newly labelled products become available they will only be sold from pharmacies, where advice on using the medicines safely can be given. (...) The new recommendations are part of a long-term package of measures that are being phased in to improve the safe use of cough and cold medicines in children under 12 years of age. If you have just given this medicine to a child under six there is no need to worry, provided they were given the dose recommended on the bottle, but you shouldn't use this medicine for them in the future. Children aged 6 to 12 years can still be given this medicine, because the risk of side effects is reduced in older children as they weigh more, get fewer colds and can also tell you if the medicine is doing them any good. (...)
    Do not exceed the recommended dose.(...)
    It is important to check the ingredients of any medicines you buy without a prescription before giving them in combination with this medicine(...) An overdose of paracetamol is dangerous and capable of causing serious damage to the liver and kidneys. You should never exceed the dose stated in the information leaflet supplied with the medicine. Immediate medical advice should be sought in the event of an overdose with this medicine, even if your child seems well, because of the risk of delayed, serious liver damage.(...)
    Use with caution in
    * Decreased kidney function.
    * Decreased liver function.
    * Epilepsy.
    Not to be used in
    * Children under six years of age.
    * Closed angle glaucoma.
    * Rare hereditary problems of fructose intolerance (Calpol night contains maltitol and sorbitol).»

    Perhaps you, dishonest-broking-twat, should be better informed before making stupid comments based on empty air. Instead of misinforming, like you do, relative to Amaral's book perhaps you should simply shut up, or do you actually think that you know more than he does about the case? You simply don't. Therefore what you are doing it is simply called deliberately lying! Oh yeah, and defamation.

  8. Let me get this right Spud, you think that the Express caved for some other reason than that they had committed gross libel, were caught bang to rights and hadn't a leg to stand on?

    You think they had only printed what Amaral did, which we are supposed to believe is only what is in the process files? (it isn't, but that's another story)

    They printed total and utter rubbish, fabricated nonsense which was a disgrace to journalism. The attempt to cover that with a smoke screen of conspiratorial nonsense won't wash.
    They wrote cack to make money, got brought to book and paid out handsomely. End of.

    Where does that leave Amaral? Well with less chance of getting his book published here than if the newspapers had behaved responsibly in the first place, funnilly enough.

  9. Honestbroker,
    'Ask the dogs' (Gerry McCann)

  10. honestbroker

    Read the files and read the book.That will give you an idea.
    The book is a faithful reproduction of the investigation.
    And while you are at it,read the Lisbon Appeals Court Decision on the Injunction.
    You may learn something

  11. I have read the files and I have read the book.
    It's clear to everyone there are differences. Are you saying there aren't?

  12. Clear to whom? to child neglectors supporters ?
    Read the Lisbon Appeals Court Decision on the Injunction.
    It is very clear to THREE judges...and thats what counts: the book is based on the criminal investigation.No more no less.
    Dr.Amaral has his freedom of speech BACK,a BASIC human right in ALL european constitutions whatever the mccanns like it or not because the end of FREE speech is the end of democracy.THIS counts very much

  13. You are quite right, in my opinion, to state there is a big secret/secrets underlying this case. I have some idea what lies behind this- the people, rather than the motives. If correct, I'm not suprised even Desmond is intimidated.

  14. My sister thinks honest broker is Gerry! She has her reasons.

  15. If Mr Amaral's book will not 'see the light of day' here in the UK, then would it not be possible for his publishers to have it translated into English and then bought directly from them?

    I would have no qualms ordering directly from Portugal especially if they decide to use PayPal as their preferred method of payment - PayPal deals with the necessary monetary conversions with a click of a button. Simples ;)

  16. False flag !

    Honestbroker is ANYTHING but that, I suspect he is a throwback to one of the bankers that ran the Chaosraptor sites

  17. Read Goncalo Amaral's book in English here,