Madeleine McCann: Gerry On The Telly And It Could Be U
“MADELEINE: It’s not too late says mum.”
The front page of the Express contains a “Dramatic Plea”.
But it’s not dramatic so much as it is desperate. “It’s not too late, please give her back,” says Kate McCann.
As ever the Express tells readers that Mrs McCann is a GP. Gerry McCann, we learn is a “consultant cardiologist”.
Says she: “Every day is hard. Every day is very difficult… The important thing is getting Madeleine back and we hope that what we are doing increases the chance of that.”
What’s The Story?
Indeed, that is the important thing. It is the only thing. But the press want more.
Says Gerry McCann: “We have a mix of very positive days, when we have done big things and achieved things or big events with the campaign, but we are aware these things are secondary.”
He’s right. Of course he is. But the press have been pointing fingers at the police, gawping at “creepy” men, listening to anyone with a paedophile story, looking for bodies and signs. They have not been on the trail of Madeleine. They follow the McCanns around, first Spain, then Germany, then the UK, the Vatican and Morocco. They are watching the parents. The parents are the story. And we are invited to look on like voyeurs.
We can wear braclets. Find Madeleine is this year’s Make Poverty History campaign.
Infotainment
The Sun says Gerry McCann is to appear at the Edinburgh TV Festival. No, not because he’s given us hours of great telly. Although he is taking the slot once occupied by Simon Cowell and Michael Barrymore. Gerry will be “quizzed” by Newsnight presenter Kirsty Walk on the media campaign to find Madeleine McCann.
Peter Barron, organiser of the event, rated the Find Madeleine campaign a “new and moving phenomenon”. What was that about good telly?
But it’s scaring the children. The Star says an appeal to find Madeleine is being screened before cinema showings of U-rated Shrek The Third.
Children with faces full of popcorn and crisps hear that Madeleine was “snatched” from her bed. “Madeleine’s parents are devastated, but they haven’t given up hope.”
A mum says it’s “unfair” to show this to children. “It makes them fear that they too could be abducted.”
It spreads the fear. It creates anxiety. And it shows no sign whatsoever of finding Madeleine nor the person or persons who might have taken her…
Posted: 4th, July 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (669) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
July 10th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Hi Coffee, Molly, Anna
It would seem probable that without finding Madeleine they haven’t got a case, but Coffee is right in that charges can be laid without finding the missing person. Habeas Corpus does not apply any more does it?
The PJ seem certain they don’t have to look any further though.
July 10th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Well they only interviewed him for 3 hours and then released him, so we will just have to wait and see who else they pull in over the next few days… and what happens then.
I’m not holding my breath though - the PJ have cancelled all summer vacation time, which doesn’t indicate to me that they are expecting to wrap this up in the next week or so.
July 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Some brands of coffee are very bitter and distasteful - they leave a nasty aftertaste, which lingers long and is hard to get rid of.
July 10th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Why do you say they can’t bring a convincing end to the investigation without finding Madeleine ?
They jailed the Moors murderers in the absence of a number of the victims’ bodies. Some of those children’s remains weren’t retrieved for many years and some have never been discovered.
Additionally, should they eventually discover Maddy’s remains, it doesn’t necessarily follow that this will provide them conclusive proof re: the identity of the killer/s.
In any case, they can manufacture whatever ‘proof’ they choose and that ‘proof’ may be utilized in any way they choose.
For example, you cite a ‘mystery witness’ who allegedly claims Murat had been in the apartment. See ? You’re buying it.
They can manufacture ‘confessions’ and evidence to order: to fit whatever scenario they’ve decided upon.
They can invent whatever they like.
The public is on the receiving end. The media feeds the public and the media reports whatever it’s instructed to report. At the top of the chain are those who decide what will be revealed and what not: what is politically and otherwise advantageous.
Do you imagine that journalists, ethical journalists, are there in the interrogation room with the police when suspects are being questioned ?
Are ethical journalists and representatives of the public there with forensic experts as they analyse microscopic samples provided as evidence ?
Ever heard of samples being switched ? Or of ‘evidence’ being planted ? Or of ‘confessions’ being force-signed ? Or of deals being struck ?
Do you believe that everyone sitting in a prison right now is indisputably guilty ?
Do you believe they’ve never hung an innocent person ?
Do you believe that every murderer, kidnapper, paedophile guilty of a reported and investigated crime, was captured, tried and sentenced ?
July 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
In other words they can’t bring a convincing end to this invesigation without finding Madeleine. And if they find Madeleine then presumably they find the guilty person/people. How could you then knit a state-sponsored conspiracy into that?
July 10th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Well hang on a minute, they can hardly produce a convincing end to this story without hard evidence of Madeleine, can they? Aren’t you taking this conspiracy thing a bit too far? I’m as much a conspiracy theorist as the next person when it comes to politics but with this I think it’s a matter of desperate but materialistic parents plus a damage-limitation exercise, plus a probable case of kidnapping with which Robert Murat may or may not turn out to have been involved.
I certainly think the fact he and Malinka originally lied about talking to each other on the phone that night is very odd - two people don’t both ‘forget’ talking on the phone, especially that late at night. Does anyone forget who they talked to on the phone just a few days earlier? (Murat said he’d had no contact with Malinka for ages before mobile phone records showed he and Malinka had spoken on the night of the disappearance.)
Murat also denied he’d ever been in the apartment but a witness apparently insists he saw him there - these are some of the anomalies the police are apparently trying to get him to explain today. And perhaps the second DNA test results on him have finally come through? Anyway, I haven’t a clue how tangled a web you think has been woven involving the McCanns but I very much doubt their guilt goes any further than that of leaving the three children alone - which is bad enough in itself without having to look for evidence of anything more heinous.
July 10th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
Well hang on a minute, they can hardly produce a convincing end to this story without hard evidence of Madeleine, can they? Aren’t you taking this conspiracy thing a bit too far? I’m as much a conspiracy theorist as the next person when it comes to politics but with this I think it’s a matter of desperate but materialistic parents plus a damage-limitation exercise, plus a probable case of kidnapping with which Robert Murat may or may not turn out to have been involved.
I certainly think the fact he and Malinka originally lied about talking to each other on the phone that night is very odd - you don’t both ‘forget’ talking on the phone, especially that late at night. Does anyone forget who they talked to on the phone just a few days earlier? (Murat said he’d had no contact with Malinka for ages before mobile phone records showed he and Malinka had spoken on the night of the disappearance.)
Murat also denied he’d ever been in the apartment but a witness apparently insists he saw him there - these are some of the anomalies the police are apparently trying to get him to explain today. And perhaps the second DNA test results on him have finally come through? Anyway, I haven’t a clue how tangled a web you think has been woven involving the McCanns but I very much doubt their guilt goes any further than that of leaving the three children alone - which is bad enough in itself without having to look for evidence of anything more heinous.
July 10th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
.
The pressure’s really on now. They have to be seen to ’solve the case’.
The public’s patience is worn thin.
The contributions are nigh to drying up.
It’s flogging a dead horse from this point.
Most worrying of course is the fact the public is suspicious of quite a bit of this tale and is beginning to voice its suspicions ever more loudly.
So, no point prolonging it, from their point of view.
It’s been milked for all it’s worth.
Now someone has to take the fall.
I think we can be reasonably confident that whomever they decide to ‘blame’ will be simply a matter of expediency and may not necessarily be even remotely involved in Madeleine’s disappearance.
It will just be a case of tying up loose ends and putting this story to bed.
Naturally, they’ll be able to come up with whatever evidence (forensic and other) and mysterious ‘informants’ and ‘confessions’ they need.
Just like a stage production.
They just start at the end (which they wrote in any case) and work backwards from there to the alleged beginning, to come up with a convincing story.
The media will play it for all it’s worth, interspersed with commercials, and people will nod their heads wisely and accept every word.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Murat’s being interrogated again right now. At the end of this (they have the right to hold him for 48 hours), they will have to decide whether or not he remains officially a suspect or not. Crikey - perhaps this is it, and there’s about to be a breakthrough?
July 10th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
The McCanns have got as much money now as they could possibly need. Do people appeal to the nation for funds to help them get through the grieving process when they lose a child to illness, or stillbirth? Of course not. From now on they should be asking people to donate to lost children’s charities, not just their own. I know they’re obsessed with getting their child back - so would any parent be in their situation, but the vast majority of parents wouldn’t dream of expecting the world to donate continually to their own personal cause, however desperate.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Disgusting parents. Their actions reek of suspicion.. The grandmother says it was a ‘mistake’ not ‘child neglect’. If leaving 3 toddlers alone in a hotel room in a foreign country with the door unsecured, is not neglect, then what is it??? Mrs Healy, look up the Oxford dictionary for the meaning of neglect!
The McCaans have gone to every length to highlight their missing daughter. Even to the length of having a titanic inflatable billboard of Maddie on a beach in Portugal. So why all this fuss about her being shown before the movie Shrek? This is just another way of keeping Maddie in the limelight . What double standards these McCaans have. They are horrible parents and deserve what they are getting. For their sake, a poor girl is suffering.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
What’s that expression about “when thieves fall out?”. Please could someone explain to me what a “chav” is? I am not familiar with the term.
Thank you for maintaining the posts despite the abuse, don’t throw peanuts to the trolls.
The admin staff are banning the trolls. I had a lovely e-mail today from one of the website administrators.
The McScams certainly have left no stone unturned if we are to believe the story of the plastic collection boxes outside hotels, buildings etc. For people to put their “spare change” How utterly awful.
Our sympathy for Madeleine only increases with the behaviours of these parents.
July 10th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Thanks Anna - I’ll have a look at that report and see what else I can find elsewhere as well
One possibly interesting point about the above Company is that one of the Directors (un-named) resigned on 31 May
July 10th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
The information is also posted on their website at http://www.findmadeleine.com/fund/
July 10th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
The McCanns company details are shown on http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk
Name & Registered Office:
MADELEINE’S FUND: LEAVING NO STONE UNTURNED LIMITED
2/6 CANNON STREET
LONDON
EC4M 6YH
Company No. 06248215
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 15/05/2007
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: PRI/LTD BY GUAR/NSC (Private, limited by guarantee, no share capital)
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
None Supplied
Accounting Reference Date: 31/03
Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due: 31/01/2009
Last Return Made Up To:
Next Return Due: 12/06/2008
July 10th, 2007 at 11:08 am
Molly, it was in the Daily Express:
‘According to the Daily Express, detectives expect a major breakthrough this week in the hunt for the individual or individuals responsible.
The net is finally tightening on those responsible for abducting Madeleine McCann. A source close to the Portuguese team said yesterday that the reason given for the vacation cancellations is that police fear the search will suffer if they leave the case for several weeks.
According to broadcast reports, detectives believe a group of people were involved in the abduction and arrests may be imminent. Officers are keeping Kate & Gerry McCann up-to-date with each development.’ You can’t help worrying, if true, it gives the kidnappers too much information. After all, what would you do if you were as depraved as anyone who could have kidnapped her in the first place?
Watch this space I guess, and lets just keep praying she’ll be found alive.
July 10th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Coffee Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
“The reason they’re abusive is because they are NOT pro-McCann.
They are PAID disrupters.
Their only intention is to divert attention from the issue.
They will use provocation — personal attack — diversion — mass gang postings — abuse — diversion — diversion — etc. etc.
It’s a worn-to-death online technique which is actually laid out in print in some filthy attic in New York.
These goons are actually *tutored* in this type of topic-disruption, believe it or not.
As a rule, it’s primarily used as a weapon in forums and message boards, to combat conspiracy theorists re: 9-11, Bush and Cheyney’s latest racket, etc., when the conspiracists get too close to the bone for comfort.
That’s when they send in the goon squad.
Many of them are elderly and live in retirement homes, or describe themselves as ’students’ and believe they’re ’sharpening their debating skills’.
Whatever their excuse, they generally receive some form of reward — a few credit points for their latest essay in the case of the ’students’, or possibly food stamps for the elderly ones.
So yes, they’re abusive. They’re deliberately abusive. And when they gain attention and/or disrupt a discussion, they consider themselves ‘Winners for the Cause’. Like prostitutes, they lie down for any ’cause’ that will pay them.
The fact they’re coming out in droves, posing as McCann supporters is PROOF POSITIVE that our suspicions generally about the entire Maddy saga and all those involved — are right on target.
Anyway, now we know who they are and what they’re about and what they hope to achieve.
I vote we dont’ refer to them again, or allow them to disrupt future discussions.”
Just had to put this one up again Coffee in case anyone missed it first time round!! A script laid out in print in a filthy attic in New York? Paid elderly posters living in retirement homes? Like prostitutes who lie down for any cause that will pay them?
LOL !!! LOL !!! LOL !!!
July 10th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Coffee - I have made it known on these opinion pages that I believe there are many questions that need answering, and that the McCanns should be facing rigorous questioning from the authorities and the media. They are not being subjected to this, and people are suspicious. So I have many doubts, and I have argued forcefully with some of the McCann supporters.
But you mate - well you’re something different entirely, and I would not want to be associated in any way with your wild ravings.
We all know about conspiracy theorists, but you take conspiracy theorism to new levels.
People, please read again Coffee’s post of July 9th, 2007 at 5:55 pm to see an example of Coffee’s over-active imagination and conspiracy theorism running wild. And he has the nerve to talk about other people confusing movies with reality!!
You are a complete and utter fantasist, and it is so obvious to anybody who cares to read between the lines of your heavy breathing posts that you are really getting off on all of this. Gives you a hard on does it?
July 10th, 2007 at 8:25 am
It’s obvious that they have closely watched Britains decline into a mawkish, celebrity obsessed society which can’t wait to throw it’s money at anything it thinks may make some of the celebrity brush of on them, so they made their move, tapping into the chav in us all, they have leeched nearly a million pounds from the public, and to what end? Bracelets, cinema adverts, yellow ribbons - surprised we haven’t seen Madeleine blimps flying overhead. I suppose a concert at Wembley isn’t out of the question. Look around you - there are children starving out there - not something the McCanns are likely to do judging by his blog - guy’s turning into Michael fucking Winner. If you want to give your money to somebody give it to Oxfam, give it to Children in Need, but please don’t give it to these awful people.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:10 am
Good Morning Coffee
That’s very true - I remember that the Lawyers were already on board by the time the ‘Fund’ was announced, as was a top PR consultant (from whom they should probably claim a refund lol).
I’m not entirely convinced that it was the McCann parents who initiated the ‘Fund’ though (although Gerry in particular seemed to embrace the business aspect with almost indecent alacrity). Uncle John McCann has a quasi PR background and was extremely quick to give up his full time employment in order to orchestrate the business side of things - as he has a family to house and feed I would assume that his efforts have not gone unrewarded.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Why would the PJ suddenly say they were going to “pounce later on in the week”? Isn’t it a contradiction in terms?
I see about the lawyers, Coffee, Oh dear. So they’re not just bad parents. They were really quick off the mark to turn this into big bucks.
July 10th, 2007 at 7:44 am
.Re-posted. Last attempt to submit resulted in only half my post appearing for some reason
[quote] ” ….Brian Kennedy, Madeleine’s great-uncle, told the Mercury: “The fund has gone up quite a bit in recent days.
“We are now beginning to pay out and there are some fairly large bills for expenses, such as legal fees for the lawyers who have been involved since the beginning.” [end quote]
Within 15 days of Maddy’s disappearance, according to various sources, the McCann’s established a Ltd. company, ‘Madeleine McCann Industries’ someone said is the title.
It’s probable that this was on the drawing-board within days of the first announcement that Maddy had disappeared. So someone was definitely thinking ‘business’ almost from the word go.
It’s not illogical to assume that the lawyers handled the Ltd. company details.
Wouldn’t they also have handled the large contributions that poured in, some publicised, others maybe not ? Maybe they were also engaged to approach various organisations and individuals, re; contributions ?
Then travel arrangements: wouldn’t lawyers be working energetically behind-scenes, wheeling and dealing re: group-travel and accomodation deals for the McCanns and their entourage ?
Film, movie, story and interview rights, etc. ? Lawyers again.
Did the McCann’s purchase property outside the UK recently? If so, more work for the lawyers.
July 10th, 2007 at 7:41 am
.
[quote] ” ….Brian Kennedy, Madeleine’s great-uncle, told the Mercury: “The fund has gone up quite a bit in recent days.
“We are now beginning to pay out and there are some fairly large bills for expenses, such as legal fees for the lawyers who have been involved since the beginning.” [end quote]
Within 15 days of Maddy’s disappearance, according to various sources, the McCann’s established a Ltd. company, ‘Madeleine McCann Industries’ someone said is the title.
It’s probable that this was on the drawing-board within days of the first announcement that Maddy had disappeared. So someone was definitely thinking ‘business’ almost from the word go.
It’s not illogical to assume that the lawyers handled the Ltd. company details.
Wouldn’t they also have handled the large contributions that poured in, some publicised, others maybe not ?
July 10th, 2007 at 7:25 am
You have made a very valid point Anna. The whole case broke at a very sensitive time for Gordon Brown and Labour - a change in Leader can make or break a party in power and, aside from any distanced personal connection, a golden opportunity to be seen to ‘tune into the people’ is something that no politician would be able to ignore.
Like you I have always believed that the Lawyers were pulled swiftly on board in relation to child neglect charges. It should be pointed out though, that any charges of child neglect would only be relevant under Portuguese Law (where it is actually illegal to leave children under 8 alone like this). They cannot possibly be charged under UK Law as the offence didn’t happen here.
Which begs the question of just how useful British Lawyers would be? They cannot practice in Portugal and would presumably be unfamiliar with Portuguese Law and Legal Systems (as compared to native Portuguese Lawyers). Presumably they would only be liasing with local Lawyers.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:52 am
Be honost, The sad individual who try’s to pretend to be everyone else and doesn’t have the balls to be open and freewith what they want to say must be in the pay of some one who could it be and what does that say about them?
July 10th, 2007 at 1:49 am
As i say who is trying to be me
July 10th, 2007 at 12:22 am
Hey not posted for a while as some nice person liked being me, so i see no good news yet i have hope for someone to give her back everyday this case seems to have hit so many hearts, i really hope she is safe and returned asap.
July 9th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Why would they need a lawyer? Because they fear being charged with child neglect once it gets out they left a sleep-walking prone 4-year-old child alone with two younger siblings in a bedroom with the doors open. If it gets out that she wandered, rather than being snatched, they could easily be charged with child neglect. Leaving them alone with the doors open was bad enough, but if she actually got up and wandered off into the night, it kind of becomes even worse.
July 9th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
Call me naive but I find it unlikely that Gordon’s a Freemason. Far more likely Gerry McCann used his geographical connection with GB’s brother to get the best help he could possibly get in their search for Madeleine. Wouldn’t anyone, if they had the connections and the wherewithal? I’d use every trick in the book if it was available to me. You know a politician or someone who knows a politician? You’d ask them for help. Plus, GB would want to get involved on a human level because apart from anything else there’s something in it for him too - good publicity at a time Labour needs every boost they can get to relegate Cameron back to the sidelines.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
Why have the McCann’s needed a Government Media Spokesperson and a battery of Lawyers from the OUTSET though?