Saturday, 25 April 2015

Nurse, the syringe.....

I know it's wicked to mock the afflicted.

That doesn't mean I won't.

Allow me to bring you this morsel, from a textaloon who seems to believe the entire Tapas bar was created for the sole purpose of making a more ''believable'' backstory. 

Great blog Textusa good use of graphics to illustrate your point. How anybody is expected to believe that a group of friends, let alone well off friends would sit every night at those wee brown tables in the chill of the night eating food is beyond me. It looks like the holiday from bell The statements from the waiters are more than suspicious describing deserts and after dinner drinks. The statements gave the impression of a good restaurant and then you look at the tapas tables and the cold stone floor laughable. Besides anyway did you ever try to sit at a table for 3 hours, no matter how good a restaurant it is inevitably it starts to get uncomfortable and you long to move to a less formal setting of a bar or lounge or go home. Well done on debunking these dinners you are quite right they lie at the heart of the case. When this case first broke I and I'm sure a lot of people were looking for red flags that pointed towards the parents involvement these dinners appeared to point towards them telling the truth. The nightly dinners showed that the children had been left every night and the night she went missing was not a one off (red flag) this was backed up with the fact that it was supposed that staff wouldnt back up dinners that didn't exist. I know the dinners when you desect it the way you do now seem ridiculous and laughable but in fairness to whoever came up with it they made the most of the very poor resources they had available to them. They are no doubt experts in judging peoples reaction, they new people would be looking for the red flags and the only thing they had available to them was an old pool bar with a couple of tables. You have to take your hat off to them they did a great job of creating the "tapas dinners" image a cross the world. That is until they were textused

Sweary woman of whitewash.....

Textusa gets a bit cross if people swear. Which of course makes them do it all the more.

Of course she only makes a fuss because she likes to take a big red pen to one's posts

Like this, for example, where she reacted like an outraged nun to the word 'arse'
''Load of Bullen-sh*t

Seems others are noticing that Textusa talks out of her *rse, with forums rightly pointing out that there is no evidence that the person Her Loonyness identified as the ''mystery woman'' was in fact her.

Wait until they notice that for Textusa to be right, the Bullen group would have to have spent 3 hours at dinner''

But it wasn't always like this, was it Textusa?

Textusa said...
“So I won't be fucking off just at the moment”You’re on my turf, so you play by my rules.I say when you get the fuck off this blog, your-self centered twat, not you.I will continue to publish your rubbish until such interests me, the readers of this blog, and above all the truth, as the exposure of how ridiculous the counter-argumentation is, helps solidify what has been said.That is the only reason I’ve tolerated your stupid babble up to now.
May 10, 2010 3:39:00 PM

Ooooooh - what a pottymouth :) 

A dickhead asks..........

Textusa has developed rigor mortis of the banning finger again, so let's have a little fun here instead 

  1. Even Black Hats think Tapas dinners are ridiculous. If Insane is a hired hand as I think he is whoever is paying for his services is not happy with the service provided!
Matron, more tinfoil if you please......... 
  1. Replies
    1. So insane is actually admitting in his quoted statement,"witness to a crime,""involved with the crime you witnessed" Is insane, the mystery women's partner?
      Or is he a BH or swinger BH?
Well this one seems to be hallucinating, so it's probably beyond help........ In any case, I don't speak conspiraloon, so I'd need someone to translate.  
  1. I don't like Tapas food very much. They miniscule servings are gone in a few seconds and the only way to feel satisfied is to eat a few hundred! But then you'd need 3 hours or more to accomplish that. :)
Okay. Thanks for sharing.  
  1. Hi Textusa. I have been reading your posts for several months now and they really do highlight many peculiarities in the statements and behaviour of the people involved which allow us to question the version of events we have been urged to believe about that fateful night. I have a question relating to something that I find strange about the tapas bookings. Forgive me if I have overlooked this detail when looking at the files there is obviously a lot of material now in the public domain documenting this case to read through. Is the tapas dinner supposed to have occurred on the saturday night 28th prior to the block booking of the restaurant on the sunday morning, I supposed they must have sampled the food before deciding to commit to booking there every night for the rest of their stay?
''I have been reading your post for several months.......'' Yes, she does go on a bit. Sorry about that. She has baffled the finest medical minds in Europe. The best I can offer is that we send her to Indignitas. It's a bit like Dignitas, except they push you out of a window wearing a gimp suit. 
  1. Replies
    1. Anonymous 24 Apr 2015, 12:07:00,

      According to the Ocean Club the Tapas bar closed on Saturdays (the strangest week day to choose to close, as it would be like having stores close for holiday in the week before Christmas), so, supposedly, didn't sample food.

      The reason given for the weekly booking was that it was too tiresome to go to the Millenium every night. Apparently the Ocean Club only had pushcar available for their guests when they went to the beach as the McCanns used one doublebuggy (or 2 singlebuggies) on their alleged trip to the beach in which dead-ends opened up to allow them to pass by.

      Scotland Yard on their October 2013 UK Crimewatch calls the McCanns liars as they put the family using a buggy right on arrival when they go to the pool (a family activity only first mentioned in 2011 in Kate's book)

      The reservation of that week is also doubtful as 2 of the Tapas, Russ and Rachael, say they are the ones who did it, which is in itself odd, and on different days of the week. One says it was on Sunday and the other on Monday.
It's not the strangest day, it's the obvious day, ie Changeover day. The new arrivals have been traveling all day and are less likely to want to go out.

Oh dear - the old ''dead ends'' routine again. Just because you decded they took a certain route does not mean they actually did.

Scotland Yard did not ''call them liars''. Do try to rein in some of your hysteria; it really is very very silly.

Why is the reservation ''doubtful''? The receptionist confirmed she took a block booking. No mystery.
  1. I believe the dinner were usually long not in Tapas but downtown... what a nights, what a feeling what a sensation, good music after dinner... hmm...?
  1. If little Johnny had written the script for the Tapas dining scene as part of his film-making course, should he be worried about his grades? I would.
At least Little Johnny would not have included a vanishing table 
  1. If Insane really wants to discredit Textusa he should start supporting her because he does one grand job in discrediting the ones he's defending.
Oh do fuck off. Moron.  
  1. We would like to remind readers of what we said in our "Luz's Secret Service" post about mystery woman being... a mystery woman:

    "But, please sit down and brace yourselves... how can a woman pick up a child from a crèche and her name not be known??

    So there's no doubt about what Jacqueline has said, this is what is in the PJ File, in Portuguese: “deslocou-se aquelas instalações um indivíduo do sexo feminino cujo nome não sabe indicar, apenas que era mãe de uma criança que ali se encontrava”.
She said she didn't know her name. Why should she? She may never have dealt with her directly. To allege, as you have done, that no checks were made and they just gave the kids to anyone is utter fucking nonsense, grossly irresponsible and a complete fabrication. 

  1. Isn't there a signing in and a signing out procedure? Didn't she have to identify herself and the child before being able to pick her son up? Or does any woman walk in, look at the available children and pointing to one just says “I'll take that one” and leave with the child?

  1. Isn't that what mystery woman basically did? Picked up a child anonymously? What kind of crèche was “night crèche”? Oh, we forgot, it wasn't.

    By May 08 2007 the Maddie case has exploded worldwide, it's its biggest and hottest issue. It's on every newspaper's front page. The whole world is looking for Maddie and, apparently, a nanny forgets to check up on her facts before going to be heard by the police about it. Not even to say “it was OB's mother”. "
Oh but according to you the tapas dinners never happened so she was never there collecting her child, was she? Did you see what I did there? 

    1. Prior to the dogs being deployed, Portugal believed the answer must lie elsewhere; they should have stuck to their guns.
Name - Anonymous. Chosen specialist subject - the bleeding obvious.  
  1. Censored comment received from Insane:

    "Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post "3 hours? For Tapas????":

    What a load of (censored)

    She said she didn't know the name of the woman - that was at the time she was interviewed and gave her statement. There is no indication whatsoever that the child was released without proper checks being made or proper records kept, like you claimed in your last post, and to allege such is extremely defamatory.

    Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 24 Apr 2015, 16:49:00"
I think the censored word was ''Bollocks''. Or it might have been ''Cobblers''. Possibly ''Bullshit''

Did you know that Textusa has a dog?  Yes, lovely thing, it's a cross between a Pitbull and a 
Shih Tzu. Affectionately known as  Bullshit Terrier. 
  1. Replies
    1. Insane,

      We were being ironic when suggesting children were collected by strangers 
Ironic, eh? That will be why you have made the same unfounded allegation in your last two posts, then? 
    1. Of course they would know who took the children out.

      The nanny knew she was going to be interviewed about that night. She should at least remember the name of the child she cared for.
Why? She was being interviewed about the disappearance of Madeleine. Clearly the police did not regard it as important or they would have sourced the information. That's because it wasn't important. Of course they were not to know that in 8 years time a paranoid simpleton would poke her warty nose in and demand to be told. 

    1. She could have checked the register for the surname of the woman who raised the alarm. Then the woman could have been interviewed. Why didn't she come forward anyway?
Why the fuck should she? Why would the woman need to be interviewed? If she was a British tourist she almost certainly has been in any case. Phew, you can sleep at night. Especially if we nail the lid down.  

    1. The point is that the name of the woman seems to have been withheld.
    1. Insane,

      From your corner of the internet about Dawn Bullen:

      "Nope. Nowhere does it say that is the case. In fact some of the witnesses say it quickly became pandemonium, with people running about all over the place, and by the time the 'Lost Child' procedure was put in place a number of guests had already turned up to help. So basically you were just winging it with your claims that you ''identified'' Ms Bullen. It could have been any of the dozen or so families with a child at the night creche and you have no way or means of identifying who. "

      Are you saying the T9 are lying when they say Kate leaves table around 22:00? Because it seems physically impossible to at 22:05/22:15 the scenario to be anywhere near what you describe.
Did I mention anything about Kate? No? Did I mention anything about the time? No? Then you have answered your own question, Einstein.  

    1. If the "Missing Person Procedure" was already in place, why only through this woman do the nannies learn that Maddie was missing. Who were they looking for before she arrived to inform Maddie was missing and her parents needed help from the nannies?
Who said it was already in place? They put it in place, which you would know if you were as familiar with the files as you like to think. Of course we know you are not very familiar, hence the spectacle of you wetting your knickers over what you said was a doctored code on a piece of paperwork, when in fact the codes were all listed at the foot of the page. Hint: Always scroll down before wanking yourself into a coma over your ''discovery'' 
    1. Insane is more deluded than previously thought, does he seriously think that none of us (individuals) have spoken to anyone related to the pact in all these years? Maybe he should let some light in, or better still, install some skylights or something.
Oh god, who rattled this one's cage? What are you on about, dear? 

    1. Far more illuminating than challenging someone who lives and sleeps permanently in the knife drawer. Thank you for your ocular sharpness and crisp analyses,Textusa.
      You have a way of bringing out the unravelling best in Insane.
Uh huh. I'd try taking more water with it, sweetheart. That might help.  
  1. Insane, can we have a response to 3 hours being a ridiculous amount of time to spend at the tapas?
This is my favourite, tbh. Er, I was the one who raised the question, numb nuts. I can see you didn't ever read the post. Or Textusa's reply, for that matter.

Any more?  

Friday, 24 April 2015

Just take a little time.....

It seems Textusa is a little unsettled. (I was going to put 'disturbed' but you already knew that, right?)

So it looks like I shall have to wade through 15ft of concentrated effluent, trying to work out what the fuck she is on about in that crazed little head of hers

Flippers on............

3 hours? For Tapas????

Textusa proving that she should stick to looning and not attempt humour 
1. Introduction

We didn’t have any intention of publishing this week.

This was for two reasons, one was we thought that last week’s post – it was one of our most read weeks ever – was too important not to have an extra week on the front page of the blog and the other is that the post did give us a lot of work so we thought we deserved a rest. And intended giving ourselves one.
That translates into - ''Last week's post was so full of glaring errors that I have been disappearing up my own jacksie trying to keep up with the negative press'' 

But as Santa Claus has elves we have our Textusa’s Little Helper, better known as Insane. The same person who almost 4 years ago pointed us, correctly we must add, in the direction of what would be last week's post “Irrefutable proof”.
Irrefutable proof my arse. Champion tinhattery with a side order of cobblers, served on a bed of fragrant bullshit, with a fucktard jus.  

This week, more precisely on Monday, Insane decided again to give us reason to blog.
Sorry, everyone. My bad.  

So just to acknowledge his efforts in the discovery of the truth as to what happened to Madeleine McCann we gave up the rest which we were lazily enjoying and came back here to write this post.
Oh get the fuck on with it, you lying twat.  

In his playground in his corner of the internet – where he’s sworn to show things yet to be shown – this is what he wrote on a post (the asterisks are ours):

“Monday, 20 April 2015

Load of Bullen-sh*t

Seems others are noticing that Textusa talks out of her *rse, with forums rightly pointing out that there is no evidence that the person Her Loonyness identified as the ''mystery woman'' was in fact her.

Wait until they notice that for Textusa to be right, the Bullen group would have to have spent 3 hours at dinner.

3 hours? For Tapas????

Posted by Not Textusa at 11:35 No comments”

2. Mystery Woman

First, Insane, we have never said that Dawn Bullen spent 3 hours at Tapas.
No, you didn't. But unless she spent 2 hours powdering her nose, one assumes the bulk of time she spent in a tapas restaurant was actually devoted to shovelling  albóndigas down her gullet

As we don’t think the Tapas dinners ever existed as described, we could hardly state that a person was, for whatever period of time, somewhere we didn’t think she was.
Oh fuck, here we go again. So no dinners were served to anyone at the Tapas? In fact, it's a figment of their collective imagination - is that your new version of events? 

We have only shown what others say about where and when Bullen was on that evening of May 3 2007.
The only fucker saying anything about it is you. Oh - and some of your textaloon readers of course, but they barely qualify as sentient

They being the Ocean Club and Jacqueline Williams, a Mark Warner nanny.

The Ocean Club alleges, via the May 3 Tapas reservation sheet it handed over to the PJ, that the Bullens (misspelled Buller) reserved a table at 07.00 pm for 4 adults. The same time as Edmonds, Carpenter and Mann.
The Ocean Club does not ''allege'' anything, so you can cut the bullshit with the emotive language. There was a booking for dinner in her name. That's not disputed.
According to that sheet, they were allocated table #201 and their presence was checked.

You, Insane, are assuming they were punctual and arrived at 19:00.
I'm assuming no such thing. I'm guessing you, however, are about to take massive liberties with the truth  

We have no way of knowing that but have no problem in also taking it as correct that it was around that time the Bullen group allegedly arrived at Tapas. We agree on arrival time.
So what the fuck was the last bit about then? 
Jacqueline Williams, about Dawn Bullen that night, says the following:

“That on last May 3 2007, at 22.05, being the deponent performing her functions at the Mini Club, in the service called “dinner period" (sic), together with her colleagues Charlotte and Amy, an individual of the female gender whose name she cannot indicate, only that she was the mother of a child who was there (belonging to the Toddlers2 group), being a tourist lodged in the resort in question and who ended her stay last week, went to those facilities saying she had been informed that a child with the name “Maddie” had disappeared, so the parents of that child needed the help of the nannies in order to try and find her.”

She does not refer to Bullen’s name, that’s true.

But does say two things about this mystery woman that allows us to make a positive identification of her as Dawn Bullen:
No she doesn't 

- at around 22:00 (22:05 according to Jacqueline or 22:15 according to Charlotte Pennington) she knew Maddie had disappeared;

- she was the mother of a child who attended the Toddlers 2 club.
So that's the only identification given 

That mystery woman had to be at Tapas that night unless anyone can come up with an alternative scenario, for someone to have known at that time Maddie had disappeared  According to various statements the alarm took place at the Tapas – nobody else heard it apart from those at the Tapas.

To spread that alarm so quickly, only a diner could have told reception in that timescale.
Nope. Nowhere does it say that is the case. In fact some of the witnesses say it quickly became pandemonium, with people running about all over the place, and by the time the 'Lost Child' procedure was put in place a number of guests had already turned up to help. So basically you were just winging it with your claims that you ''identified'' Ms Bullen. It could have been any of the dozen or so families with a child at the night creche and you have no way or means of identifying who.  
Having a child at Toddlers 2 club and also in the alleged night crèche that night,  rules out the Tapas staff, which means mystery woman had to be a guest.
It was clearly stated that she was a guest, that was never in doubt. So you are stating the bleeding obvious. 
The Bullens, as we showed in our “Luz's secret service” post, were the only guests dining  at Tapas who didn’t have their child, who attended Toddlers 2 club, with them during that alleged dinner.

Mystery woman can only have been Dawn Bullen.
No, you have made an assumption that only someone who had been dining in the Tapas could be aware there was a missing child. Yet some of the Tapas staff themselves only became aware there was a missing child when they witnessed guests searching.

The woman who called at the creche may have been Dawn Bullen. And it may not. The point is you do not have sufficient evidence to say it was because your entire argument is based on the premise that the only people who knew at that stage that a child was missing were the diners from the Tapas, and that's total cobblers. What is even more hilarious is that you are claiming the woman who dined at the tapas and then alerted the creche could only have been Ms Bullen - and in the same breath claiming that the dinners in the Tapas never happened in the first place so she couldn't have been there! I'll assume that when you were going up the stair you met a man that wasn't there, shall I ?

Insane, if you – or anyone else – can demonstrate that mystery woman was any other than Dawn Bullen we will gladly correct ourselves. We must warn you that saying simply “it wasn't her” does not constitute enough information to make us change our minds. 
I don't give a shit who it was and god knows why you do. 

3. 3 hours? For Tapas????

Stampede at the DFS sale, where Big Round Tables are on special offer.

We were surprised by the disdain you, Insane, have shown concerning Tapas.
No dear, I am showing disdain for you. 

Wasn’t it supposed to be such a quality restaurant that people rushed and queued up to get one of the only 20 covers available there? 15 if one is to take Kate McCann’s word in her book. That particular week, there were only available 11 covers (or 6, again according to Kate) as the T9 had taken 9 covers off the market, so to speak.
And your point is? If you have one.... 

A 3 hour dinner is not unusual for a restaurant that seems to have a much greater demand than its offer. The harder it is to get a reservation the more one tends to savour the moment and prolong the pleasure.

But your 4 question marks make it clear that you think an absurdity for anyone to have spent 3 hours at a place like Tapas:
Do they, indeed? 

That conclusion can only come from the fact that you agree with us that Tapas had no further added value than any second-rate fast food restaurant and one does not spend 3 hours in one of those unless one really has to.
Nope. And don't do that ''this means you agree with us'' bullshit because it's possibly the most annoying thing on God's earth 
Add the fact of eating outside in an esplanade that tunnels the breeze of a chilly evening (for some reason Jane Tanner borrowed Russ' fleece, allegedly) and we totally subscribe to your 4 question marks in your“3 hours? For Tapas???”.
So what the fuck are you arguing for then, you stupid great tart?

4. The Bullens' Tapas dinner

Textusa didn't know it yet, but Fred and Simon were having a 'thing'
If the Bullens came in at 19:00 and stayed up until 22:00 – the group had to have stayed until that time otherwise Dawn couldn’t have possibly known that Maddie had disappeared – then, yes their dinner at the Tapas esplanade would have taken 3 hours.
Thank you, Professor Stephen Hawking. 

We agree with you that time to have dinner outside in an esplanade like Tapas is absurd, laughable and ludicrous.
Why do I feel you are about to declare ''therefore the dinners never happened''? 

5. The Carpenters' Tapas dinner

Angela sighed. Textusa's posts took forever to read and her husband and kids were starving 
Using the same reasoning then Insane must agree with us that the Carpenter family Tapas dinner of May 3 is equally nonsensical, outrageous and preposterous as the Bullens’.

The Carpenters also arrive at 19:00 and say they leave at 21:30.
Well no actually. Mr Carpenter mentions that other diners with a booking for 7 were already there and seated when they arrived, indicating that the Carpenter party may have been slightly late arriving, and he states they left between 9.15 and 9.30. Plus, eating with children can often take longer, as I am sure you are aware *pauses to contemplate the horror of Textusa reproducing*

If a 3 hour meal at the Tapas esplanade for 4 adults is risible, what can one say about one that lasts 2.5 hours of a family of 4 with a toddler and an infant?
About right? 

Unbelievable? Yes, we would agree with you on that too, Insane.
Ah yes, I see what you did there. Amusing.

6. The Tapas 9 Tapas dinner

I know you think you see a big round table, but be warned, it never existed. Matron, can I have my tablets please? 
This group is said to arrive every night at 20:30, as per Tapas reservation sheets.
Oh god help us, here we go again 

Jeronimo Salcedas on May 6 2007, says:

“When asked, he said that they would normally stay at the restaurant until 23.30 - 24.00, although some of them would leave earlier, at about 23.00. They were people who showed their satisfaction with the food and would consume on average 8 bottles of wine (4 red, 4 white) between the nine of them, which he considered to be normal consumption for a group of such a number.”

The same Salcedas on April 23 2008, confirms the group usually left after 23:30 and speaks of one particular night in which it left after midnight

“Generally, they left the Tapas at 23h30/midnight, at times together and at other times in small groups. On the night in which they drank more than usual, they left a bit later, perhaps towards 00h30-01h00. I remember this detail because I was supposed to finish work at 00H00 and I wanted to go home. They always left on good terms and always wished the staff good night.”

Ricardo Oliveira confirms that night to have been on Wednesday:

“It was also normal for certain members of the group to order dessert. After this, they would normally stay at the table until after 24H00 but would always leave before 00H00, the time when the bar closed. One or more of them, on another night, asked for an after-dinner drink. He remembers this clearly because they asked for Amareto and the bar did not stock it.

The witness served almond bitters to all. He remembers that this happened on Wednesday. He does not remember if they had more after-dinner drinks. He does remember that on Wednesday, certain elements of the group got up, with their after-dinner drinks, and headed to the bar and stayed there until about 00H00/00H10. This was the only night where the group elements were in the bar after closing. He also remembers that they would normally be the last clients to leave. Wednesday was the last night they were at the bar after dinner.”

From these statements, the T9 dinner went from 20:30 to 23:30 or later as the T9 group “would normally be the last clients to leave”.

3 or more hours at Tapas????
It's such a shame you don't put your picture up so we can see if you look as stupid as you sound. 

We have to agree with you Insane, the T9 dinners are indeed comical, farcical and hilarious. The only reason they wouldn't be bored to death would be because the group spent their 3 ot more hours every night behaving like Jacks in the box!
Oh no they didn't. Because according to you, the dinners never took place and all those waiters are lying.

So you can't have it both ways. You say they are lying, then try to use their statements to prove a point. I mean, I always knew you were a bit thick, but really.........

7. Insane

Textusa working undercover

To new readers, Insane is not just any detractor.

The fact that he has dedicated a significant amount of time of his life to, exclusively, try to discredit us bothers us little. In fact he’s quite versatile in the use of insult which is puerile, at times provides a distraction and in rare moments amusing.
Oh believe me, it's not significant. It's also a pleasure. You're welcome. 

The peculiarity about Insane is what he alleges.

He acknowledges contacts with Mark Warner. In a comment in the post “Truth as Clue”:

“As for your remarks about childcare and Mark Warner - well, as you know, I have a Mark Warner contact. I feel it's only right that they should know about the malicious falsehoods you are spreading.”

Confirms these contacts in 2 other comments, one in Nov 14 2012 11:37:00 PM:

“Oh look here - amazing what one can find out by means of a couple of emails to Mark Warner.

You are toast, lady. Finished.

I am going to enjoy this more than is actually decent.”

The other on Nov 15, 2012 10:47:00 PM:

“One thing I really like about Mark Warner is how helpful their staff are. Really go the extra mile for someone needing information. IYKWIM [If You Know What I Mean]


The seriousness of these comments are not their threatening nature but their content.

What was in question was a mail sent by one of our readers to the Ocean Club inquiring as a potential customer for details about the Tapas bar and what sort of food they served.

This mail was written after Maddie's disappearance.  

She received a reply from the Ocean Club that Tapas only served snacks and pizza upon request, if memory serves us right.

The mail was addressed to the Ocean Club and the answer came from Silvia Baptista (do note it was Ocean Club's maintenance manager answering on a customer related subject).

What Insane implied was that Ocean Club revealed the content of this mail to Mark Warner (simply a tourist operator) and Mark Warner, in turn, did the same to a completely different person.
Like you did, publishing the reply, you mean?
I seem to remember that what had escaped the attention of yourself and the Loonettes was the fact that the Tapas restaurant had closed and been replaced with a ......Pizza restaurant! Serving Pizza! Well, bugger me......... 
Nice for Ocean Club and Mark Warner customers to know that whatever they may inquire about Ocean Club, the resort will keep it for themselves and share it only with their 10, or maybe 20, best friends.
Don't even think of going there after your false allegations about a 12 year old girl and her family.

The people they “go an extra mile” for. According to Insane, that is.
No, they went the extra mile for me, dingbat. 
Please note that Insane has also put in the following very interesting comments (asterisks and underlining are ours):

Aug 28, 2011 9:27:00 AM:

“…How would any of you idiots like it if your name came into the public domain because you werewitness to a crime, and some mad b*tch set up a site in which she called you a liar, and claimed you were actually involved in the crime you witnessed? Just ponder on that for a moment”
Ah yes, I remember this. This was the one where you couldn't tell the difference between ''witness'' and ''eyewitness'', wasn't it? 

Aug 28, 2011 1:09:00 PM:

“…Where is your sense of shame or decency in accusing innocent witnesses of being involved in covering up the death of a child?

Yes - you accused them of being involved in just that. If you claim a child is dead, and that someone is involved, then you are asked why you are accusing an innocent person of being involved in the death of a child, the correct response is not ''So you admit she is dead, then?''
But I wouldn't expect you to understand that because you're a bit simple. 
I see no shame or decency on here - just an utter indifference to the rights or feelings of others.

I notice no-one had the b*lls to answer my question about how you would feel if this was done to you - if you were a witness to a crime and some deranged cow on the internet accused you of being involved. You are all a complete disgrace.”
Ah yes, the ''witness'' thing again. Still not got your head around it........ 
Lastly, Insane, we hope the Bullens are pleased with the insensitive, distasteful, rude and immature word play you made up with their name.
I'm absolutely positive they will be thrilled with your allegation that their '' “known” participation is highly questionable and should be questioned''

An allegation you made on a blog with no justification whatsoever

With friends like you, who needs enemies?

Just looking out for the innocent. They shouldn't have to suffer because of your forked tongue, you deranged harpie. 

Now fuck off.