Madeleine v CMoMM #1

I found out a short time ago that I have been banned from CMoMM (the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann) aka the Jill Havern forum.

Around the start of October 2016, I received an email from the site administrator saying my account had been deactivated. It gave no reason why. At the time, I attributed it to the fact that I had not signed in to CMoMM for something like two months.

However, this was posted today (26 Oct 2016), at 7.50am by Mr Tony Bennett “The organiser of the ‘sick ghoul tours’ was former member here ‘Elsa Craig’ whom I identified long ago as a pro-McCann. He was banned from the forum …”

So now I learned it was not account deactivation, but an actual ban. I know Mr Bennett reads this blog because of the number of quotes or entire articles he picks up from here and posts at CMoMM.

Therefore I can inform Mr Bennett, that, thinking my account as Elça Craig had timed out due to inactivity, I did indeed rejoin recently as ShiningInLuz. You might as well deactivate that one as well, as it is clear I am not permitted to make a positive contribution to CMoMM, and in that situation, read-only will do me just fine.

It would appear any input I make to CMoMM will need to be by reserving the right to reply on my blog, just as I am doing now.

Mr Bennett’s post links to another discussion of me and the Luz tours, and as per normal it contains some errors and speculation, so here is my first attempt to deploy this method.

As far as I can tell, the original Mirror story ‘broke’ on CMoMM on 2nd Oct 2016 at 12:45pm, by Verdi, who correctly identified that I was a member of CMoMM.

Mr Bennett then replied “More than once I have publicly stated on CMoMM that he is an open McCann-supporter who makes absolutely no bones about his pro-McCann stance and was chosen by the UK Justice Forum owner John Lamberton as one of his Moderators precisely because he is a McCann-supporter (as he himself also is).”

There are two errors in this. I am not a McCann-supporter (let alone an open McCann-supporter who makes no bones about it). And I was not chosen by John Lamberton, let alone chosen precisely because of my alleged views on the McCann case. The members of the UK Justice Forum were allowed a free vote to elect a new moderator, preferably pro-McCann to rebalance the moderating team. Another moderator was elected at the same time, one who is clearly pro-McCann. A major objection to my own election was that certain forum members perceive me as being anti-McCann. I am not aware of any UK Justice Forum member who perceives me as being pro-McCann, other than Mr Bennett.

Mr Bennett continued “His connections to the circle of people around Robert Murat and the McCanns may be a lot stronger than people realise.” I have no connections whatsoever to the McCanns. In fact, I have failed in multiple attempts to communicate with them. I have never met Mr Murat, and if I have ever met one of his circle, I am completely unaware of it.

Mr Bennett also stated “He has until now adopted a female persona.” The truth is I have scrupulously avoided adopting either a male gender or a female gender. All of my posts here, and on the UK Justice Forum, and on CMoMM, have been constructed to be gender-free. The Mirror correctly pointed out that I prefer to remain anonymous, as my focus is on progressing the investigation of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I am not the story, The story is Madeleine.

Verdi then attributed a quote to Gerry McCann. “”One good thing to come out of all this is that there is so much in the press, nobody knows what is true and what isn’t.” I have my doubts that this quote is accurate, but I don’t have the time to look up the truth of this right now.

Mr Bennett then demonstrates that he is a scrupulous reader of both the UK Justice Forum and my blog. First he posts an offer John Lamberton made to me, the right to reply on his forum to the Mirror article. I declined at that particular time, to get first bite of that cherry on my blog. The entire Luz tours story was later split off into a thread devoted to the topic, and it contains quite a bit of information not available elsewhere. If you visit the UK Justice Forum, the thread is as plain as your nose.

From my blog, Mr Bennett selected an obscure reference to Sergei Malinka. I have never met or communicated with Mr Malinka. A while back, upon learning that Mr Malinka was still in the area and was now working in property, I managed to find on the Internet some material about his estate agency. That is the closest I personally have got to Mr Malinka. Once posted on my blog, Mr Bennett promptly lifted it and re-posted it on CMoMM. So Mr Bennett is as close to Mr Malinka as I am.

Mr Bennett continues “Unsurprisingly, ‘Elca’s blog defends both Robert Murat and Sergei Malinka at every opportunity.” Mr Bennett, how the CMoMM is run is a matter for the forum owner. The laws in Portugal re right to a good name are considerably tougher that those of the UK. So my preferred approach is to be a stickler for accuracy. I cannot malign people with no evidence to back up my assertions. I have no evidence whatsoever against either Robert Murat or Sergei Malinka.

MayMuse chipped in with the following “What a rather odd exchange, almost as odd as the article.

Elca Craig should be ashamed of his/herself as this does not help Madeleine’s cause, it is making a mockery IMO. “ When the Mirror publishes utter tripe I reserve the right to set the story straight. A number of tabloids copying this article made fundamental, and I do mean fundamental, errors in their ‘journalism’. I happen to think the truth helps Madeleine’s cause.

Verdi’s next comment was “Elca/Olga ‘shining in Luz’ Craig is a journalist of sorts is s/he not? The Sunday Mirror – ‘the intelligent tabloid’ tracking a blog such as that? Pull the other one – there are fairies at the bottom of my garden..”

I am not Olga Craig and I have never met him or her, nor communicated with him or her. Elça Craig simply happens to be a double joke that I explain to visitors, but I do not wish to explain on-line. It is a fake, just as if someone gets hold of the email I use to register for forums etc. that too is a fake. And I have never worked in journalism. Never.

Is the Mirror tracking my blog? I am 100% certain of it. The Mirror correctly stated that I do not charge for tours, a rather important fact, and one that appears only on my blog. There are other pieces of information that appear only on my blog. Every “quote” attributed to me is a copy and paste job from my blog. I have never been in communication with anyone from the Mirror. My blog has undoubtedly been used as a source.

I am surprised that this surprises Verdi. I know for a fact that Mr Bennett reads my blog. See the earlier quotes. There are several members of the UK Justice Forum who read my blog. Textusa definitely reads my blog. Why shouldn’t the tabloid press use my blog as a cheap source of story fodder, given that they so clearly have?

Tony Bennett copied and pasted my response (sorry, my long rant) to the Mirror article. “I stated earlier (as I have done before here) that Elca Craig is basically a pro-McCann who believes that Madeleine was abducted. He is also convinced that the Smith sighting is crucial and states that ‘it happened,’ despite all the evidence to the contrary on CMOMM. He adds a dig at Goncalo Amaral. I’ve highlighted these relevant parts of ‘Elca’s article in red:”

As I stated earlier, I am not pro-McCann irrespective of Mr Bennett’s views on the matter. Equally, we will have to disagree as to whether the Smith sighting took place or not. I would suppose the ‘dig at Amaral’ is a reference to the body-in-cremated-coffin. That was actually a dig at Selby and Cardy for mixing it in with the article to make it look like I took people inside the church to see the gruesomeness of the coffin scene. I have never been inside the church.

Verdi linked to an April 2008 Telegraph article about bus-loads of visitors coming in to gawp. The people I have interacted with are extremely knowledgeable about the case, and there is no gawping involved. The tours are one visitor and me i.e. two people. And I repeat, I have nothing at all to do with Olga Craig.

Aquila pondered “Oh Lordy, Lordy, do you think Elca Craig (the male/female) has met up with TaninaR, who dropped onto this forum to show a few photographs of herself and sibling as children semi-naked on the beach of PdL in the 70’s, was invited for coffee and a ghoul tour and went off to sell ponies to the elite? Or do you think this is absolute balderdash?”

I have never met TaninaR. My offer to meet up with this person had nothing to do with the Madeleine McCann case. I was interested in the development of Luz over the last 50 years or so.

Verdi’s next input was “What a windbag – why not sue the Mirror and have done with.” followed by “even if I couldn’t afford to sue (where is Carter Ruck when needed most) I would at least demand an apology from the Mirror.” May I ask Verdi over what you think the Mirror can be sued? Incorrect factual content? Or perhaps salacious reporting? And do you really think I stand a snowball’s chance in Hades of getting an apology?

It will be interesting to see if Mr Bennett copies and pastes this reply into the relevant thread on CMoMM. To be fair to CMoMM, the timing appears to be that the Mirror article appeared roughly 24hrs before I got banned. Therefore I assume CMoMM chose not to be associated with someone organising the Luz Tours, rather than a simple (mistaken) perception that I am pro-McCann. Perhaps Mr Bennett will have the decency to clarify this.

This leaves just one important point, which is my stance on the case. I am not a McCann supporter. I am not a McCann critic. I simply would like to see justice for Madeleine. I am pro-Madeleine.


3 thoughts on “Madeleine v CMoMM #1

  1. My apologies Anne, I have been a bit busy over the last week for multiple reasons, each of which takes a higher priority in my life than the Madeleine McCann case.

    I shall inform the relevant authority of what I think was going on. But it will be OG, not PJ, for specific reasons.

    I won’t document those reasons on-line, but I am sure you have your sources, and will hear of this from them.

  2. Good luck in informing OG then, many tried before you without much success it seems. Let’s hope that their last lead and yours are one and the same. My experience with OG, when they called me on the phone, is that they’re only interested by what could feed their ready made perspective.
    Imo what happened to this little girl is a drama, but much simpler than you seem to believe. The amazing issue is all that was built around, something that likely wouldn’t have been possible in the UK.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.