The Madeleine McCann Disappearance

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
38,617
Location
HM The Tower of London
Yes, there's a hundred reasons for and against. I've just got a feeling. But then, I've got a feeling that I need to eat cake all day too, and we know where that leads.
To be fair nearly bloody anything could have happened to a lively almost 5 year-old left alone in an unlocked holiday apartment.
It's a wonder she didn't try to cook some tea and burn the whole block down. There was nobody there to stop her.
 

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
38,617
Location
HM The Tower of London

ramonmercado

CyberPunk
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
54,458
Location
Eblana
ECHR rules against McCanns.

The parents of Madeleine McCann have lost the latest stage of a legal battle over how judges handled claims made by a Portuguese police detective.

Kate and Gerry McCann appealed to the European Court of Human Rights over the way Portugal handled their libel challenge over Goncalo Amaral's claims. He alleged in a book that they were involved in their daughter's disappearance.

The couple has three months to appeal against the decision.

Three-year-old Madeleine disappeared from a holiday apartment in the Portuguese holiday resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Mr Amaral was originally the lead detective on the case, but he was removed after criticising British police.

The McCanns were initially placed under investigation by Portuguese police, but were removed as suspects in the case in July 2008.

The couple sued Mr Amaral for libel and were awarded £358,000 in damages by a Portuguese court, but an appeal against the decision was later upheld by the country's Supreme Court.

In their case at the European Court, the couple said the Portuguese courts had failed to uphold their right to a private life and their presumption of innocence.

In a judgement on Tuesday, however, the court said that the couple were already public figures before Mr Amaral's book was published and that any damage to their reputation had been caused by the fact they had been declared suspects, not Mr Amaral's claims.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62967119
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
956
Location
Arizona, USA
Personally I'd be much more worried about what the FCUK had happened to my daughter than my public image.

? Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
? Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?
Well, they obviously are worried about it because they are spending money on it, which presumably could be used to help find out what happened. Or on almost anything but lawyers. it's not as if, all this time later, they are going to change anyone's mind one way or the other, unless someone finds some new evidence.

I seriously doubt the loathsome bloke currently arrested in Germany for raping a 72-year-old has anything to do with it - sexual predators who would cover the range from an infant to a granny are incredibly rare, but I suppose nothing's impossible.
 

Coal

The Ultimate Skepticus
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
9,352
Well, they obviously are worried about it because they are spending money on it, which presumably could be used to help find out what happened. Or on almost anything but lawyers. it's not as if, all this time later, they are going to change anyone's mind one way or the other, unless someone finds some new evidence.
I concur - their reaction to the entire event has appeared self-interested to me - if they came under suspicion, I suspect this seeming self interest was a factor. Taking the broad view that 'they didn't do it' it's easy to imagine a measure of guilt in the mix, manifesting as a tendency to lash out at all and any other parties who might share some 'blame' - essentially deflecting attention away from themselves.

I suspect we'll never know the truth, although I did think that Rory Sutherland had a point when he said that it's really far more probable that Madelaine wandered off and was hit by a drunk driver who then panicked and took the body away.
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
32,469
...

I suspect we'll never know the truth, although I did think that Rory Sutherland had a point when he said that it's really far more probable that Madelaine wandered off and was hit by a drunk driver who then panicked and took the body away.
I'd never even considered that possibility .. that's a good point ..
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
956
Location
Arizona, USA
Well, they obviously are worried about it because they are spending money on it, which presumably could be used to help find out what happened. Or on almost anything but lawyers. it's not as if, all this time later, they are going to change anyone's mind one way or the other, unless someone finds some new evidence.

I seriously doubt the loathsome bloke currently arrested in Germany for raping a 72-year-old has anything to do with it - sexual predators who would cover the range from an infant to a granny are incredibly rare, but I suppose nothing's impossible.
No. Your interpretation is that they are "worried" about it. My question was "Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?" Cochise, I actually am interested in your response.

I don't know everything about this case, but it seems to me that they have spent vast resources, both financially and emotionally, trying to find out what happened to their daughter for 15 years. What do you suggest they could do which they haven't already done - over and over?

They have been accused, both by the police as well as the courts of media and public opinion, of being involved somehow. I don't interpret their responses as being worried, but rather being fed-up and furious.

If I was in their position (and assuming they are innocent), I would be very angry at this point at anyone trying to accuse them or making money off their family tragedy by writing books. I would also, as they are, defend myself legally. None of these actions detract in any way from the efforts they have taken to find out what happened. I have great sympathy for them, and hope that they can find some measure of peace in some way. Unless the perp actually confesses, and this confession can be verified by the police, I think they will continue to have a very rough time in life. What utter hell to lose a loved child and never know what happened.
 
Last edited:

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
No. Your interpretation is that they are "worried" about it. My question was "Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?" Cochise, I actually am interested in your response.

I don't know everything about this case, but it seems to me that they have spent vast resources, both financially and emotionally, trying to find out what happened to their daughter for 15 years. What do you suggest they could do which they haven't already done - over and over?

They have been accused, both by the police as well as the courts of media and public opinion, of being involved somehow. I don't interpret their responses as being worried, but rather being fed-up and furious.

If I was in their position (and assuming they are innocent), I would be very angry at this point at anyone trying to accuse them or making money off their family tragedy by writing books. I would also, as they are, defend myself legally. None of these actions detract in any way from the efforts they have taken to find out what happened. I have great sympathy for them, and hope that they can find some measure of peace in some way. Unless the perp actually confesses, and this confession can be verified by the police, I think they will continue to have a very rough time in life. What utter hell to lose a loved child and never know what happened.
Or, of course, if they are actually to blame. Which can't be ruled out.

Whatever you think, their public face has been awful, and seems to be far more centered on protecting their credibility than finding their child. Given their behaviour on the night in question - for which the average one parent or dysfunctional family would have their child taken away - they would be far better off being a bit humble, but that's evidently not in their nature.
 

maximus otter

Recovering policeman
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
10,911
...they have spent vast resources, both financially and emotionally, trying to find out what happened to their daughter for 15 years.

They have spent bugger all.

The police - i.e. the UK taxpayer - have paid north of £12 million for the investigation.

The UK public - i.e. the UK taxpayer - has also paid over £1 million into the McCanns' fund which, in April 2022, had a balance of £931,500. (And that's after paying their mortgage out of it; also numerous international trips to "keep the investigation in the public eye", hiring staff etc.)

maximus otter
 

Tunn11

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
941
Location
Under the highest tree top in Kent
Or, of course, if they are actually to blame. Which can't be ruled out.

Whatever you think, their public face has been awful, and seems to be far more centered on protecting their credibility than finding their child. Given their behaviour on the night in question - for which the average one parent or dysfunctional family would have their child taken away - they would be far better off being a bit humble, but that's evidently not in their nature.
For me it's the fact that they've never AFAIK shown any remorse or accepted any responsibility for their actions that night. Watching various interviews with other parents who've had children abducted or who have gone missing there is always an element, even if unjustified, of "I should have been watching them more closely."

I can't recall much detail but there was one poor woman who had allowed her child to walk to the corner shop for an ice cream, a few hundred feet, middle of the afternoon. The child was about seven or eight and had gone missing and was never found. Many years later she was blaming herself for what was IMHO a perfectly normal part of allowing a child to have some independence. (I'm not a parent, so others may disagree) She wasn't blaming the police for interviewing her, asking for money or bemoaning the fact that she was briefly a suspect. I felt sympathy for that woman that I can't feel for the McCanns.
 

catseye

Old lady trouser-smell with yesterday's knickers
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
5,441
Location
York
I still think Madeleine woke up, let herself out and wandered off, then hid herself somewhere (maybe a cave) where she either drowned or died. I have no real idea as to why I think this, I just do.
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
956
Location
Arizona, USA
They have spent bugger all.

The police - i.e. the UK taxpayer - have paid north of £12 million for the investigation.

The UK public - i.e. the UK taxpayer - has also paid over £1 million into the McCanns' fund which, in April 2022, had a balance of £931,500. (And that's after paying their mortgage out of it; also numerous international trips to "keep the investigation in the public eye", hiring staff etc.)

maximus otter

Thanks for the additional information. You are better informed on this than I am. I had read about this, casually, over the years. It seemed to me that the parents' reactions over time became more defensive and hostile to the press.

I doubt whether the truth will ever be known. Of course, the parents should not have left their children alone: a very poor decision for the ages of the children, the ground floor apartment, foreign country, at night, etc. However, I view this as a mistake, and not as a deliberate decision on the parents' part to expose their children to harm, assuming of course that the parents were innocent.

MO, in reading through the links you provided, it seems that only two mortgage payments were made from the fund, and not the entire mortgage or even most of it. Also, £980,000 were paid into the fund from legal settlements from the UK press who were libeling the parents.

@Cochise, thank you for your more detailed explanation. I am uncomfortable with the apparent response of condemning someone because that person has not acted perfectly in some public situation. If you have information that, since the beginning, the parents have been more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter, please post it so we may all learn. My impression is that their public response has changed over time, as they dealt with the multiple libels written about them.

Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?
What do you suggest they could do which they haven't already done - over and over?
 

Spookdaddy

Cuckoo
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
7,168
Location
Midwich
...Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?
What do you suggest they could do which they haven't already done - over and over?

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that many of those who are suspicious of the McCanns for entering into the supposedly callous and irrelevant distraction of defending their reputations would also see unmistakeable signs of guilt if they didn’t.

The couple now occupy a kind of guilt event horizon – a not uncommon state for people in such circumstances – a boundary beyond which no act can be innocent; where, even if the natures of act X and act Y are diametrically opposed to each other, the exercise of either by the party in question will indicate precisely the same level of guilt.

In the context of another missing persons case I read about recently (I’ll have to rattle the memory banks to recall exactly which one) Diana Lamplugh's* then advice to the parents of the missing individual was to push the story into the headlines as often as possible, by any means possible, and to keep it there for as long as possible. To me, this seems obvious - it almost goes without saying – and as this thread now itself attests, dual purpose it may be, the court case is achieving precisely what that advice suggested.

*For those in the US and elsewhere, who may not be familiar with the case: mother of Suzy Lamplugh (focus of a very well-known missing persons case in the UK) and co-founder of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that many of those who are suspicious of the McCanns for entering into the supposedly callous and irrelevant distraction of defending their reputations would also see unmistakeable signs of guilt if they didn’t.

The couple now occupy a kind of guilt event horizon – a not uncommon state for people in such circumstances – a boundary beyond which no act can be innocent; where, even if the natures of act X and act Y are diametrically opposed to each other, the exercise of either by the party in question will indicate precisely the same level of guilt.

In the context of another missing persons case I read about recently (I’ll have to rattle the memory banks to recall exactly which one) Diana Lamplugh's* then advice to the parents of the missing individual was to push the story into the headlines as often as possible, by any means possible, and to keep it there for as long as possible. To me, this seems obvious - it almost goes without saying – and as this thread now itself attests, dual purpose it may be, the court case is achieving precisely what that advice suggested.

*For those in the US and elsewhere, who may not be familiar with the case: mother of Suzy Lamplugh (focus of a very well-known missing persons case in the UK) and co-founder of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust.
I think that confuses two separate things.

1) guilt over being actively involved in their daughters' death.
2) guilt over behaving in a way that endangered their children that by the standards of the social services in the UK would be considered highly irresponsible.

Suzy Lamplugh's parents were in no way involved in her disappearance or death so the cases are not comparable.

The McCanns ARE involved, either by omission or commission, so different circumstances. And I'm not saying they shouldn't try and keep the case alive, but the way they appear in media seems to be determined to deny they had any responsibility at all. They did. It's true many millions of other parents have probably done similar with no dire result, but they were unlucky. They took what seemed to them to be a small risk when better options were available, and they were caught out.
 

Spookdaddy

Cuckoo
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
7,168
Location
Midwich
Suzy Lamplugh's parents were in no way involved in her disappearance or death so the cases are not comparable.

The two cases are not comparable in detail and circumstance - but then that's an Aunt Sally, because no-ones suggesting any comparison of either.

The purely abstract context of how you move a missing persons case forward in relation to keeping it in the public eye can easily be applied to both. Detail and circumstance are irrelevant.
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
956
Location
Arizona, USA
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that many of those who are suspicious of the McCanns for entering into the supposedly callous and irrelevant distraction of defending their reputations would also see unmistakeable signs of guilt if they didn’t.

The couple now occupy a kind of guilt event horizon – a not uncommon state for people in such circumstances – a boundary beyond which no act can be innocent; where, even if the natures of act X and act Y are diametrically opposed to each other, the exercise of either by the party in question will indicate precisely the same level of guilt.

In the context of another missing persons case I read about recently (I’ll have to rattle the memory banks to recall exactly which one) Diana Lamplugh's* then advice to the parents of the missing individual was to push the story into the headlines as often as possible, by any means possible, and to keep it there for as long as possible. To me, this seems obvious - it almost goes without saying – and as this thread now itself attests, dual purpose it may be, the court case is achieving precisely what that advice suggested.

*For those in the US and elsewhere, who may not be familiar with the case: mother of Suzy Lamplugh (focus of a very well-known missing persons case in the UK) and co-founder of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust.
@Spookdaddy, you have articulated perfectly the words I would have written, but lack the skill – or perspective – to do so.

I have been wondering to myself why I so dislike public accusations of persons involved in distressful, unclear, and unresolvable situations. I think it is unfair, but my annoyance goes beyond that. I have known innocent people accused in the public court of opinion of actions in situations which remained unresolved.

It is a horrible situation, made worse by uninformed accusations. Because of this close-up view, I have great empathy for the people involved. I don’t know what happened to the McCann girl, but feel this empathy for the parents, even if their decisions contributed to the situation.

@Cochise:
Do you think that the parents are more worried about their public image than what happened to their daughter?
What do you suggest they could do which they haven't already done - over and over?
 

brownmane

off kilter
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
2,431
Location
Ontario, Canada

Madeleine McCann suspect has ‘number of alibis’ for day she vanished​


https://metro.co.uk/2022/01/26/made...mber-of-alibis-for-day-she-vanished-15994584/
I haven't been following this thread from the beginning, but did read one link that said this person had priors for b&e and sexual assault to children and that he was living in the area at the time.

The idea that he has people who'll provide him alibis for 15 or so years ago for that specific time frame seems unreal. I couldn't suddenly alibi even one of my family or good friends for where they where or what they were doing 15 years ago. I could say it would be out of character, but could not alibi them.
 

Tunn11

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 23, 2005
Messages
941
Location
Under the highest tree top in Kent
If I'm being charitable (doesn't happen often) I'd guess the parents knew that they could be prosecuted for child abandonment which carried a possible jail term. IIRC the Police in Portugal said they hadn't prosecuted out of sympathy and their view that Brits felt this sort of thing acceptable!

The McCanns then decided never to admit that they had done anything wrong with the result that they appeared unsympathetic. It must be a terrible situation and I don't like judgement by the media but IMHO they would have been better showing some remorse for what was at best poor decision. Did the local police not brief them about press conferences, talking to the media, media appeals, etc.?

I can't remember them ever publicly agonising over Maddie's fate either, only stating their belief that she was/is still alive. Maybe they felt a "stiff upper lip" response was best. Most parents I've spoken to said they would be in agonies over what their child had or was suffering and couldn't have reacted as the McCanns did. They also both seem to behave and react in the same way, which to me appears odd.

I'm afraid I'm also very wary of anyone whose first response to criticism is hostility and threats of legal action.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
The two cases are not comparable in detail and circumstance - but then that's an Aunt Sally, because no-ones suggesting any comparison of either.

The purely abstract context of how you move a missing persons case forward in relation to keeping it in the public eye can easily be applied to both. Detail and circumstance are irrelevant.
But excuse me, it was you that drew a comparison between the parents in the two cases, not me. And yes, the detail, which you say is irrelevant, is in fact highly relevant.

I have no clue what has happened to the poor child. What is obvious to most people is that the behaviour of the parents is a form of denial that they could be in any way responsible, when, to some degree, they are. Very few other parents will be happy with that attitude to that particular 'detail'.
 

Spookdaddy

Cuckoo
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
7,168
Location
Midwich
But excuse me, it was you that drew a comparison between the parents in the two cases...

I stated that the advice given seemed kind of logical to me in a missing persons case; that would be any missing persons case - it's a general statement related to a general subject, not fixed to or implying one precise set of circumstances, and the fact that the perceived status of the two parties involved may be different does not materially affect the relevance of the statement itself. The example of a statement shared between two parties does not imply comparison of those two parties, beyond the fact that they may be connected by a certain set of general circumstances. Which they are.

...What is obvious to most people is that the behaviour of the parents is a form of denial that they could be in any way responsible, when, to some degree, they are. Very few other parents will be happy with that attitude to that particular 'detail'.

I've never denied that the McCanns have done themselves few favours over the years - and in fact, I've clearly stated that they will inevitably bear some form of guilt. But really, how relevant is this to moving the case forward?

Over time the subject has effectively split into two parallel narratives:

1: A Missing child

2: That child’s parents - and whether they are: a) Culpable through neglect; b) Directly responsible through purposeful action.

So, is this about a missing child - or that child's parents? Should the search for a child really be influenced by how much we empathise with those parents, how 'deserving' they are of support - or how bad they are at being parent? And if you really don't believe those parents deserve the support they seek - where does that leave the case? Posh kid, or working class, bad parents, or good; when do you stop trying, as a parent, as the authorities, as a society?

(And the argument shouldn't be about why this case gets so much attention, but why others get less; the former fact should be used to question the latter, not the latter to undermine the former).

For many, the subject of the elder McCanns has clearly become a thing in and of itself, and it seems to me that for many of those it has now almost completely eclipsed the memory of their missing child. As even a cursory reading of this thread will tell you, in a very significant proportion of the published posts Madeleine McCann herself barely gets a mention – and sometimes, not even that.
 
Last edited:

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
I stated that the advice given seemed kind of logical to me in a missing persons case; that would be any missing persons case - it's a general statement related to a general subject, not fixed to or implying one precise set of circumstances, and the fact that the perceived status of the two parties involved may be different does not materially affect the relevance of the statement itself. The example of a statement shared between two parties does not imply comparison of those two parties, beyond the fact that they may be connected by a certain set of general circumstances. Which they are.



I've never actually denied that the McCann's have done themselves few favours over the years - and in fact, I've clearly stated that they will inevitably bear some form of guilt. But really, how relevant is this to moving the case forward?

Over time the subject has effectively split into two parallel narratives:

1: A Missing child

2: That child’s parents - and whether they are: a) Culpable through neglect; b) Directly responsible through purposeful action.

So, is this about a missing child - or that child's parents? Should the search for a child really be influenced by how much we empathise with those parents, how 'deserving' they are of support - or how bad they are at being parent? And if you really don't believe those parents deserve the support they seek - where does that leave the case? Posh kid, or working class, bad parents, or good - when do you stop trying, as a parent, as the authorities, as a society?

(And the argument shouldn't be about why this case gets so much attention, but why others get less; the former fact should be used to question the latter, not the latter to undermine the former).

For many, the subject of the elder McCanns has clearly become a thing in and of itself, and it seems to me that for many of those it has now completely eclipsed the memory of their missing child. As even a cursory reading of this thread will tell you, in a very significant proportion of the published posts Madeleine McCann herself barely gets a mention – and sometimes, not even that.
No, I'm sorry, I still don't agree with you. I personally had a tumultuous first marriage and difficulties with the social services. If the McCann's had left their very young children in that way (and were poor) they would have been placed under surveillance. at the very least and had their children taken away in most circumstances. i don't believe money should be allowed to protect you from normal responsible behaviour - and neither, interestingly, did the Portuguese.

They are negligent parents. As probably we all have been at some time or another. Pretending they aren't at minimum makes them self centered. At worst makes them sociopaths.
 

Spookdaddy

Cuckoo
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
7,168
Location
Midwich
No, I'm sorry, I still don't agree with you. I personally had a tumultuous first marriage and difficulties with the social services. If the McCann's had left their very young children in that way (and were poor) they would have been placed under surveillance. at the very least and had their children taken away in most circumstances. i don't believe money should be allowed to protect you from normal responsible behaviour - and neither, interestingly, did the Portuguese.

They are negligent parents. As probably we all have been at some time or another. Pretending they aren't at minimum makes them self centered. At worst makes them sociopaths.

I'm sorry Cochise, you've completely lost me now. The above seems another non-sequitur in regard to anything I've actually written - in which I honestly don't see anything that would necessarily contradict that statement, so I don't really understand what the purported disagreement is.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,862
Well, I think what I have written is very clear. I don't believe myself that McCanns had any active involvement in the loss of their child.

But I can't rule it out.

I do believe they have done themselves a great disservice - or maybe some idiot who has been advising them - by not admitting, as any parent could see, that they gambled that their children would be safe.

And I stress this is not unusual, that it happens, but by pretending they have no responsibility whatsoever they lose the public, and cause suspicion to be reflected on themselves. I do not believe they have ever been entirely honest about that evening - remember I said above I don't believe they have any direct connection with poor Maddie's fate - but they are - to me - desperate to avoid ANY blame at all. And that doesn't wash. You left your infants to go out on a night on the booze without making adequate protections.
 

Cloudbusting

Abominable Salem
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
552
I can't remember them ever publicly agonising over Maddie's fate either, only stating their belief that she was/is still alive. Maybe they felt a "stiff upper lip" response was best. Most parents I've spoken to said they would be in agonies over what their child had or was suffering and couldn't have reacted as the McCanns did. They also both seem to behave and react in the same way, which to me appears odd.

Interesting that you say this. One of my friends once attended a work conference where the father was one of the speakers giving some sort of talk. Apparently he straight up said yes you know who I am, Maddie is my daughter etc. as if to almost get that initial awkwardness(?) out of the way... We've speculated whether it was stiff upper lip or whether he'd decided it was the best approach when meeting new people. Nevertheless, my friend said that she found him and his general manner very odd.
 

queenofwands

Junior Acolyte
Joined
Jan 24, 2022
Messages
88
Interesting that you say this. One of my friends once attended a work conference where the father was one of the speakers giving some sort of talk. Apparently he straight up said yes you know who I am, Maddie is my daughter etc. as if to almost get that initial awkwardness(?) out of the way... We've speculated whether it was stiff upper lip or whether he'd decided it was the best approach when meeting new people. Nevertheless, my friend said that she found him and his general manner very odd.
He is very odd , they both are. I remember seeing him being asked , in an interview , how he felt when he realised Maddy was missing. He compared it to his student days , when he discovered he had gone over his overdraft limit , with his bank! WTF???
 
Top