S. Felgueiras

Post Reply
sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:57 pm

Hiding information and filing the case. «Gonçalo Amaral lied to me»
Three months after Maddie's disappearance, two dogs came to Portugal to sniff blood and corpses. Police began an operation with the animals in the apartment where the girl has disappeared and in the car rented by the McCann family. The dogs simultaneously gave a signal in the room of the child's parents and in the luggage compartment of the car. Given this evidence, Gonçalo Amaral, the first operational coordinator of the investigation, assumes this signaling given by dogs as an "unequivocal" clue. Maddie had died behind the couch by accident and her parents had her transported in the luggage compartment of the Renault Scenic MPV.

In order for this operation performed with the assistance of dogs to be valid, it must be supported by scientific analysis. Gonçalo Amaral's thesis is not confirmed by the pending analyzes in the Birmingham laboratory. When the preliminary results arrive, the inspector informs Sandra Felgueiras that "there was correspondence to Maddie's DNA." "In 20 possible alleles, five had been detected in the apartment and 17 in the trunk of the car." The journalist confirmed, with medical examiners, if faced with this result the probability of matching Maddie was feasible. "Everyone said yes, that the probability was high."

Sandra Felgueiras advances. "Based on this information, which Gonçalo Amaral gave me, and you know I did, I trusted," he says, and broke the news

In July 2008, however, the journalist has access to the process that, until then, was a secret of Justice. "When I go to see the preliminary result, which Gonçalo Amaral told me, and that led him to constitute the McCanns as defendants, I see that the last paragraph said that, although there were 17 alleles in 20, the sample was so insignificant and small that there were several people in the lab with the same genetic identification. So this evidence could not be considered relevant, "he explains. Sandra Felgueiras feels "deeply deceived". This paragraph was decisive for shaking everything that had been done before. "Gonçalo Amaral never told me that the sample was so small and criminally irrelevant," he says.

Inquiry closed for lack of evidence
The investigation is closed for lack of evidence that the research coordinator has assured that they were safe. Sandra Felgueiras carries out a new report, where she explains the whole process and everything that happened.

"That PJ led by Gonçalo Amaral was not prepared and did not want to recognize this", affirms the RTP journalist

The arrival of the police four hours after Maddie's disappearance, which allowed dozens of people to enter the room without any restriction, and the closure of the borders only 48 hours later, after which a disappearance in Portugal was a crime, investigations. In a case of abduction, in these circumstances the police may have missed the opportunity to capture any suspect. "The PJ was immersed in a world media circus that pressed her to have an answer and the only one they could get was one that turned the crimes to their parents." Through the preliminary results, the Authorities transition from kidnapping to murder.

The 'secret' that the McCann couple carries
In the first interviews with the McCanns, Sandra Felgueiras remembers them as "a desperate couple looking for their daughter". The fact that the couple's friends do not want to talk to the journalists and that Maddie's parents only speak under certain circumstances and without being unequivocally enlightening leads the journalist to believe that the couple hides a secret. "I think the couple hides a secret. I do not know which, but they never said the whole truth. "

Sandra Felgueiras says she does not know if this truth is decisive for knowing the whereabouts of the child. But whenever the journalist asks a question, for example, she wants to know why they left the children alone, the answer is always interpreted with hostility and without objectivity. "They were actually negligent and never punished for it. This is a great guilt they carry. "From then on, Sandra realizes that the couple may be somewhat cool about answering certain questions for" feeling guilty about leaving the child alone. "

The McCanns "carry a great sense of guilt and a great secret"
"Today I look at them and I think they carry a great sense of guilt and a great secret." About the size of the secret and the impact it has on the outcome of the story, the journalist does not know. But "as a woman, mother and journalist, I liked Maddie to be alive." However, Sandra Felgueiras does not dare to "respond to what she" does not know.

Text: Jéssica dos Santos | WiN; Photos: Impala and DR

https://www.impala.pt/noticias/portugal ... ie-mccann/

sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:21 pm

https://extra.ie/2019/03/21/featured/wa ... on-planned

IRELAND-BASED INVESTIGATORS BEHIND MADELEINE MCCANN BOOK BELIEVE ‘HER ABDUCTION WAS PLANNED’

Pedro
Posts: 6383
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 2:50 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Pedro » Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:28 pm

thank you sal.

User avatar
Winter
Posts: 3468
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Winter » Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Yes indeed Sal, thanks for pisting.
Pity Sandra hadn't brought forth this information earlier. She should be ashamed of herself IMO.
"there is a big difference between a few sordid insults, and publicly accusing someone of committing a serious crime - which is a crime in itself" AnnaEsse (Oh the irony!)

User avatar
catkins
Posts: 31538
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by catkins » Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:39 pm

Winter wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:40 pm
Yes indeed Sal, thanks for pisting.
Pity Sandra hadn't brought forth this information earlier. She should be ashamed of herself IMO.
My thoughts also :s_mad Might have shut some of those bloody trolls up!
Madeleine McCann- Abducted May 2007 from Praia Da Luz, Algarve, Portugal.
DCI Redwood of Scotland Yard - stated that Madeleine could still be found - alive.
https://www.facebook.com/Official.Find. ... ign?_rdr=p

User avatar
Winter
Posts: 3468
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Winter » Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:54 pm

Winter wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:40 pm
Yes indeed Sal, thanks for posting.
Pity Sandra hadn't brought forth this information earlier. She should be ashamed of herself IMO.
"there is a big difference between a few sordid insults, and publicly accusing someone of committing a serious crime - which is a crime in itself" AnnaEsse (Oh the irony!)

User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Mon Mar 25, 2019 12:59 pm

sal wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:57 pm
Hiding information and filing the case. «Gonçalo Amaral lied to me»
Three months after Maddie's disappearance, two dogs came to Portugal to sniff blood and corpses. Police began an operation with the animals in the apartment where the girl has disappeared and in the car rented by the McCann family. The dogs simultaneously gave a signal in the room of the child's parents and in the luggage compartment of the car. Given this evidence, Gonçalo Amaral, the first operational coordinator of the investigation, assumes this signaling given by dogs as an "unequivocal" clue. Maddie had died behind the couch by accident and her parents had her transported in the luggage compartment of the Renault Scenic MPV.

In order for this operation performed with the assistance of dogs to be valid, it must be supported by scientific analysis. Gonçalo Amaral's thesis is not confirmed by the pending analyzes in the Birmingham laboratory. When the preliminary results arrive, the inspector informs Sandra Felgueiras that "there was correspondence to Maddie's DNA." "In 20 possible alleles, five had been detected in the apartment and 17 in the trunk of the car." The journalist confirmed, with medical examiners, if faced with this result the probability of matching Maddie was feasible. "Everyone said yes, that the probability was high."

Sandra Felgueiras advances. "Based on this information, which Gonçalo Amaral gave me, and you know I did, I trusted," he says, and broke the news

In July 2008, however, the journalist has access to the process that, until then, was a secret of Justice. "When I go to see the preliminary result, which Gonçalo Amaral told me, and that led him to constitute the McCanns as defendants, I see that the last paragraph said that, although there were 17 alleles in 20, the sample was so insignificant and small that there were several people in the lab with the same genetic identification. So this evidence could not be considered relevant, "he explains. Sandra Felgueiras feels "deeply deceived". This paragraph was decisive for shaking everything that had been done before. "Gonçalo Amaral never told me that the sample was so small and criminally irrelevant," he says.

Inquiry closed for lack of evidence
The investigation is closed for lack of evidence that the research coordinator has assured that they were safe. Sandra Felgueiras carries out a new report, where she explains the whole process and everything that happened.

"That PJ led by Gonçalo Amaral was not prepared and did not want to recognize this", affirms the RTP journalist

The arrival of the police four hours after Maddie's disappearance, which allowed dozens of people to enter the room without any restriction, and the closure of the borders only 48 hours later, after which a disappearance in Portugal was a crime, investigations. In a case of abduction, in these circumstances the police may have missed the opportunity to capture any suspect. "The PJ was immersed in a world media circus that pressed her to have an answer and the only one they could get was one that turned the crimes to their parents." Through the preliminary results, the Authorities transition from kidnapping to murder.

The 'secret' that the McCann couple carries
In the first interviews with the McCanns, Sandra Felgueiras remembers them as "a desperate couple looking for their daughter". The fact that the couple's friends do not want to talk to the journalists and that Maddie's parents only speak under certain circumstances and without being unequivocally enlightening leads the journalist to believe that the couple hides a secret. "I think the couple hides a secret. I do not know which, but they never said the whole truth. "

Sandra Felgueiras says she does not know if this truth is decisive for knowing the whereabouts of the child. But whenever the journalist asks a question, for example, she wants to know why they left the children alone, the answer is always interpreted with hostility and without objectivity. "They were actually negligent and never punished for it. This is a great guilt they carry. "From then on, Sandra realizes that the couple may be somewhat cool about answering certain questions for" feeling guilty about leaving the child alone. "

The McCanns "carry a great sense of guilt and a great secret"
"Today I look at them and I think they carry a great sense of guilt and a great secret." About the size of the secret and the impact it has on the outcome of the story, the journalist does not know. But "as a woman, mother and journalist, I liked Maddie to be alive." However, Sandra Felgueiras does not dare to "respond to what she" does not know.

Text: Jéssica dos Santos | WiN; Photos: Impala and DR

https://www.impala.pt/noticias/portugal ... ie-mccann/
Thanks, Sal.


IMO, she, like some others, were led up the garden path. I don't think she's dishonest, but simply believed what she was told off-record by officers who didn't know what they were talking about, or had other reasons to mislead reporters.

She was apparently on a PT panel chat-show back in 2008 (?) when the files were released in which she said - on air - roughly what she said above. However, the ultra-busy PT translators somehow never 'found time' to translate what she said. As several people on the Joana Morais blog were interested, someone posted a brief summary at the time.

On other points: there weren't 17, but 15 alleles that were compatible with hers in the soup of 37 from between 3-5 contributors.

At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

Not sure where she got this "17 alleles" idea from, unless she was counting in the amelogenesis (s-e-x) marker, which is as comptaible with her profile as it is with half of the world's population.
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:02 pm

Winter wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:40 pm
Yes indeed Sal, thanks for pisting.
Pity Sandra hadn't brought forth this information earlier. She should be ashamed of herself IMO.

She did, way back when the files first came out. Joana and Astro igored it.
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:16 pm


User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:14 pm

sal wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:16 pm
Here carana

viewtopic.php?f=115&t=12474&start=75
Thanks, Sal. :s_thumbsup

That was the summary I had in mind.
Last edited by Carana on Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Sun Mar 31, 2019 1:09 pm

From Textusa blog

The “5 Para a Meia-Noite” (5 to Midnight) program on RTP1 is a late-night talk-show similar to so many worldwide. Last Thursday, Marc 28, Sandra Felgueiras was one of the guests.


Filomena Cautela (FC): Sandra Felgueiras, I must say, I had to do a lot of work for you to come here and it was not only out of the great admiration for you but because I did binge-watching, which is called kind of, 2 days in a row to see the damn documentary of Maddie McCann's documentary and I got sick with it, that’s it. And I think everyone who saw the documentary, I don’t know if anyone here in the audience has seen, but .... the documentary is big, it's 8 episodes, and you ... it's extraordinary, because you appear very, very much in the documentary, and you talk a lot in the documentary. Did you have the notion that they were going to put so much of your interview?

Sandra Felgueiras (SF): No, I had no idea.

FC: Because in truth that is going to be there for everyone to see forever and it's an international documentary, it's worldwide, people can see it worldwide, you had no idea you are, you're not, you're not one of the documentary’s biggest protagonists, but they used your testimony a lot ...

SF: They used, they needed to ... to ... they built that narrative of let’s discredit everything that was done in Portugal ...

FC: ... exactly ...

SF: ... and let's explain that Madeleine is alive and effectively what I was telling them corresponded to the intention they had and they ended up pouring it into eight episodes, and I tell you frankly that the first time I saw it, because I’ve already seen it twice ...

FC: … Yes

SF: ... I did not see them fully ...

FC: ... you didn’t see?

SF: ... the episodes twice but I've seen it once, one and a half ...
FC: ... ok ...

SF: ... because I appear up to the fifth, I went to see several times, why? Because the first time I was uncomfortable, the second one I understood better, and the third I took it all in ...

FC: ... ok ...

SF: ... and why did I become uncomfortable? Because I do not know if for those who did not follow like I who lived that with intensity, the Madeleine McCann case, did effectively understand what I meant to say. Because I wanted to say something very simple: a journalist does not reveal her sources, the journalist only needs to talk to them and need to talk to Gonçalo Amaral because of a very concrete question and ... and dangerous one, that's how I was deceived. And I was deceived in what?

FC: Exactly ...

SF: I was told that the blood sample found in the car and in the McCanns' bedroom, or rather the McCanns’ living room, belonged without a margin of doubt to Madd ... Madeleine McCann ...

FC: ... exactly ...

SF: ... and that created in me the conviction, because I truly believed in Gonçalo Amaral, and with him I had a relationship started as source-journalist ...

FC: What surprises me is that all the people who are here believed this, I think that all the people in Portugal believed that the parents had something to do with that and nowadays if I ask this audience, which I won’t do, but if I ask this audience what do you think, Madeleine McCann's parents have to do with that or not, I'm sure a lot of people will say yes, and I thought so too ... I then saw the documentary!

SF: But notice, the public opinion thought so, because for several months, they heard it said with a lot of intensity the parents are suspects, and this created in everyone the conviction that this was true and raised doubts in journalists, until that in July 2008, a year later ...

FC: ... yes ...

SF: ... finally come the secret files that have become public and we can read because the process has been in secrecy of justice, what the results of the laboratory of Birmingham actually said that confirmed the analysis of blood, the biological sample, wasn’t even blood…

FC: ... they were not from Maddie?

SF: No, the report was frightening because the report said this, and I remember perfectly, the blood sample has 5 alleles in 20 possible, in the bedroom, and in the car 17 in 20. The sample ...

FC: What does that mean?

SF: It means that a blood sample, a biological sample ... for example, yours, your alleles, your genetic makeup corresponds to 20 alleles, if they find 17 out of 20, it means it's very probable ...

FC: ... that it’s mine.

SF: ... that it is yours, now the problem is that the last paragraph of this report from the experts said: however the sample is so insignificant and so tiny that here in the laboratory where we are, there are more than a hundred people who have an identical sample, and that makes this sample criminally irrelevant.

FC: So it's a lie.

SF: Hey, man, when I read that, I called Goncalo Amaral and I'm sorry, you're playing in the mayonnaise, here is ... what has happened here? “Oh, no, they did not translate the last paragraph here and then I was convinced it was ... but look, the dogs sniffed, the dogs smelled, one sniffed cadaver and the other sniffed blood and they alerted ...”, effectively they alerted, only the dogs do not go to court, do they? Dogs ... they are, they are dogs!

FC: The dogs, they are dogs!

SF: They are dogs, that's it, it’s... and so the dogs also did not find Madeleine, and until there’s proof to the contrary, if you have the probability, even if it's minimal, tiny that the child is alive, you’re not going to embark on the thesis the parents killed her and now let’s forget it, we’re not going to look for her.

FC: Exactly.

SF: And this left me deeply angry.

FC: Me too! I'm still not well, after what you are telling me!

SF: No, but notice, no, just to explain because this point is quite important to me. I was first uncomfortable because I thought, people will see this and they will think: "Sandra Felgueiras is a total fool who reveals sources." No, point number one, I am not a total fool, and second, I do not reveal my sources, but I have a very, very clear principle in my head forever, there is an article in the journalists’ code of ethics which says we can, I say we should, tell the truth whenever we feel deceived by a source, and that's what happened. So, I would not be correct with myself and let alone with the viewers who heard me and ...

FC: ... you did not say they lied to you ..

SF: Look, I felt that I lied to you because I was lied to ...

FC: ... so it is.

SF: ... and if I did not say this, probably it would be more comfortable for my career, for my good name, for a lot of things...

FC: ... yes ...

SF: ... but it would not be comfortable for what is my motto that is the truth, and tell the truth, no matter what the costs, hurts who has hurt, even if in this case it hurts me. I have to ask something that is not exactly common among journalists.

FC: So it is.

(Applause)

FC: Oh Sandra, let me just say, thank you very much for what you have just told me, I do not know if the people there at home understood exactly, I think so, what we are talking about, but in fact the courage that you had to come and say, look, I've given this news and the news you gave spread all over the world, and the whole world starts to have a completely different opinion of Maddie's parents, and you had the courage of when you knew the truth to say, I now know this, you, as you just said you could have said nothing and you said it. The problem is that I think then the whole world was no longer listening, and I think the problem is that the whole world only maintained in their head that, ah, they're guilty ... We'll continue to talk with Sandra ...

SF: And here is ... and that is the biggest problem of all, you know?

FC: So it is, so it is, that's why I really liked for you to have come here, thank you very much!

User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Tue Apr 02, 2019 9:16 am

Thanks Sal.

At least she has the integrity to admit she was taken in hook, line and sinker.

She's a bit muddled over the DNA details, but she got the gist right.
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

User avatar
catkins
Posts: 31538
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by catkins » Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:17 am

‘Deeply hurt’.....she may well have felt like that....but in my opinion she could have been more vocal about it when she found out she had been lied to / misled.

Guess she was protecting herself career wise etc..... :rolleyes:


Strange that the trolls haven’t mentioned Sandra’s part in the Netflix series......but then they never could handle the truth.
Madeleine McCann- Abducted May 2007 from Praia Da Luz, Algarve, Portugal.
DCI Redwood of Scotland Yard - stated that Madeleine could still be found - alive.
https://www.facebook.com/Official.Find. ... ign?_rdr=p

sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:34 pm

Journo at RTP
Carlos Pinota
23 hrs ·
Listen to gonçalo amaral say in the Netflix documentary that never revealed to Sandra Felgueiras, details of the investigation is pure and simply lie!!!!
Well, I watched dozens of phone calls from gonçalo amaral and I answered him several times, when Sandra was not available and I wrote the information of the investigation that gonçalo amaral was revealing.
Sources can't lie to journalists, under the penalty of the journalist fulfilling his code ethics can reveal the source.
Very well Sandra Felgueiras.

User avatar
urcrazy
Posts: 15284
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by urcrazy » Tue Apr 02, 2019 7:55 pm

Well Sandra and her colleague just went up in my estimation.
I saw this on twitter and was intrigued, despite not having watched the docu.

I don't expect any movement from the true haters, but would it be right to think it may have had an impact on public opinion, particularly in Portugal?
Scotland Yard detectives believe Madeleine was abducted in "a criminal act by a stranger"

No Janine you poor deluded muppet, I am NOT John Lowe.
And neither, thankfully, are you.

User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Tue Apr 02, 2019 8:08 pm

urcrazy wrote:
Tue Apr 02, 2019 7:55 pm
Well Sandra and her colleague just went up in my estimation.
I saw this on twitter and was intrigued, despite not having watched the docu.

I don't expect any movement from the true haters, but would it be right to think it may have had an impact on public opinion, particularly in Portugal?

What I found interesting is one of the links to a CdM article that Sal posted... quite a turnaround.
Twelve years on, I expect many people following the case in the beginninng have moved on.
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

sal
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by sal » Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:51 pm

Oldie from SF..Panorama


RB: One big problem is only the Portuguese authorities can re-open the case. Sandra Felgueiras is one of Portugal’s leading TV presenters and has covered the McCann story from the start. With her own nightly news show she’s watched Portuguese public support shift away from the McCanns.

SANDRA FELGUEIRAS: They were following the case as it was a big movie. So if you start saying three months later from her disappearance that maybe the McCanns are involved people start thinking, “Oh my God, those guys, the same that were asking for help, I gave them money. I tried to help them and now they must be involved. The police is saying that.” And peoples minds changed and I never felt really that the Portuguese were likely to give a chance to the McCanns again.

User avatar
Carana
Posts: 20068
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:42 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by Carana » Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:11 pm

sal wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:51 pm
Oldie from SF..Panorama


RB: One big problem is only the Portuguese authorities can re-open the case. Sandra Felgueiras is one of Portugal’s leading TV presenters and has covered the McCann story from the start. With her own nightly news show she’s watched Portuguese public support shift away from the McCanns.

SANDRA FELGUEIRAS: They were following the case as it was a big movie. So if you start saying three months later from her disappearance that maybe the McCanns are involved people start thinking, “Oh my God, those guys, the same that were asking for help, I gave them money. I tried to help them and now they must be involved. The police is saying that.” And peoples minds changed and I never felt really that the Portuguese were likely to give a chance to the McCanns again.
Sandra was hardly the worst, IMO.

Anyone remember Dear Julia's daytime pink couch? :rolleyes:
"A professor of mine used to say 'I have as a pet a coprophagic beetle, who eats only dung. His antennae quiver when he detects the presence of his food.'" - Edison, English-language Wikipedia Admin

User avatar
honestbroker1
Posts: 7729
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: S. Felgueiras

Post by honestbroker1 » Tue Apr 16, 2019 9:42 am

In more-or-less ignoring Harrison, Grime used PdL as a playground to experiment for the modus operandi he would, again, use in Detroit and the Bianca Jones case.

When those facts are hoisted on board, so much else simply falls into place.

Post Reply