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
- Anorak on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- June on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- eggman on Madeleine McCann: Kevin Halligen Becomes The ‘Maddie Faudster’
- Trismegistus on Madeleine McCann: Kevin Halligen Becomes The ‘Maddie Faudster’
- Bernie Morgan on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
July 13th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Another thought has just struck - what if Murat was forced to abduct Madeleine and hand her over because of someone threatening to snatch Murat’s own child if he didn’t? Which could shed light on why he phoned home in a distraught demanding to speak to his daughter shortly after Madeleine’s disappearance - ie to make sure she hadn’t been snatched?
July 13th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
There is one thing though - the husband of Murat’s girlfriend (Luis Antonio) has long hair at the back - it’s quite noticeable in a picture on this page:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=454881&in_page_id=1811
July 13th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
It does seem odd that the only people claiming to have seen Murat there that night are the McCanns’ friends. For their testimony to have any credibility there would need to be coroboration from at least one other witness unconnected to the family, surely?
Also, surely the number of times Murat’s picture has appeared in the papers over the weeks would muddy the waters here? How can they be expected to identify him reliably if he already looks so familiar to them from press images? Peter Hain was wrongly accused of a bank robbery in Putney back in the 70’s; his face was already well known so the testimony of witnesses meant little; in the end he was acquitted in spite of all the so-called positive identification.
To my mind the only suspicious thing about Murat is the mystery around the phone calls to Malinka and why they both denied them, when phone records revealed that they had communicated that night. Why would they both forget? It seems unlikely.
So what now? Will the PJ charge Murat with Madeleine’s kidnap without Madeleine being found? It seems unlikely in the absence of any forensic evidence linking him to her; as yet the results of the second forensic test hasn’t been made public - surely it would have been through by now?
I would hazard a guess that the PJ have their doubts about the McCann friends’ evidence but in actuality have so little to go on.
July 13th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Give it a break Janet because we’re onto you? HAH
July 13th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
It seems to me that Anorak are more obsessed with the search for Madeleine than any other media outlet. Maybe you could give it a break now?
July 13th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
I must say that I do like the Portuguese approach to conflicting statements… put them all together in a room and let them argue it out.
I always used to do that with my kids when they were young - it makes it so much easier to spot who is lying, and so much harder for anyone to directly accuse someone else when that person is right in front of them.
It does seem very strange that Gerry McCann and three of the evasive 9 are so confident that they can identify Robert Murat (whom they do not know) as being in the vicinity of the Ocean Club on the night that Madeleine went missing… whilst local officials and police (GRN), who presumably DO know him by sight claim that he wasn’t.
Molly
July 13th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
The McCannclan are quieter now that it is clear some of their party lied to the police and gave conflicting evidence.
Not so saintly after all. The trolls will have to find another deity to slaver after.
July 13th, 2007 at 10:15 am
On http://www.policia judiciária algarve.pt you can read an official declaration of the Poruguese police(pessoas desaparecidas- missing persons) where they say that Madeleine was missed at 10.40 hs pm (22.40 hs).
July 13th, 2007 at 8:09 am
Don’t feed the trolls.
e-mail their drivel to Anorak at once. They will be deleted.
They are now at SPAM status.
July 13th, 2007 at 7:41 am
I’ve just come across a SOL article (published on Wednesday) and thought you might all find it to be interesting reading …
Nope Anna … the Trolls will go hungry today
(7/11/2007) SOL
http://sol.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Sociedade/Interior.aspx?content_id=44677
Murat and three McCann Friends Confronted
The police will confront three elements of the group that holidayed with Madeleine’s parents in PDL with their testimony against the lone arguido’s in this case regarding the disappearance of the little British girl.
—
Robert Murat and three friends of Kate and Gerry McCann will be heard by the PJ of Portimão, still this Wednesday.
The four questioned will be confronted with their original testimony, in order to glean the truth regarding what happened the night of the abduction, seeing as their original accounts contradict each other.
Between the Brits who holidayed with Madeleine’s parents in the Ocean Club and that will be heard today, from what SOL has learnt, is the couple Russell O’Brien and Jane Tanner.
Remember that in an investigation SOL revealed that Russell was the element of the group of friends that was absent the most from dinner the night Madeleine McCann disappeared.
The testimony of a worker in the resort confirms that days before Russell was also absent during the group’s dinner.
Jane Tanner is one of the key witnesses of the process that has already affirmed to have seen – in a trip made to the apartments to check that the children were okay – a man carrying a child in his lap (colo in Portuguese=lap).
The Briton affirmed having seen a man between the ages of 35 and 40, dark-skinned or tanned, wearing beige slacks, a dark coat and classical black shoes, with a girl in his lap (colo) wearing pajamas and barefoot.
With everything, this picture does not match completely the profile of Murat, in that he – contrary to the man Jane described –never had long hair in the back.
In spite of the detailed description provided by Jane, Jeremy Wilkins – another witness who found himself at the exact moment on the street where Jane says to have seen the man with the child – told the SUN that he did not see anything, adding that if there was someone there, it would have been practically impossible to not have seen anything.
Other points the police will be clarifying is the presence of Robert Murat in the OC on the night of Maddie’s disappearance.
The friends of the McCann’s confirm having seen the arguido in the resort in PDL, but officials and elements of the GNR counter this version of events.
Molly
July 13th, 2007 at 12:28 am
Where was it reported that Kate McCann shouted “They have taken her.” I also didn’t know until now that Maddie was known to sleepwalk, which makes it all the more difficult to understand why she was left.
July 13th, 2007 at 12:09 am
SNAKES AND TAILS what are you on
July 13th, 2007 at 12:07 am
anna (UK) you probably got MUTE button pressed
July 12th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
oh dear I fink i come to wong prace you silly billies MOLLY please be nice to me i no like nastyness. I was wunderin do you know has a snake got a tail? I also got job lot of yelllo wibbon enyone want to by sum it for funnd
July 12th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
Don’t feed the trolls.
Anyway, anybody noticed how the news has suddenly gone quiet? Just like it did before they first took Murat in for questioning? I reckon there’s going to be an arrest and charges by the end of the week, and Murat will probably be in the frame. It won’t make a lot of sense unless Madeleine is found though, will it?
July 12th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
[...] post by business travel - Google News and software by Elliott [...]
July 12th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
[...] post by Yahoo! News Search Results for news terrorism security and software by Elliott [...]
July 12th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Good point, Coffee, but on the other hand, if they’d had the slightest inclination anyone was planning to snatch Madeleine, wouldn’t they have been extra careful re her security? Unless they had no idea these people knew they were in Portugal?
Another thing has occurred - the Amsterdam connection. They lived there for a while when Madeleine was small, and when Kate McCann was pregnant with the twins. It seems as if they got the IVF treatment for Sean and Amelie in Amsterdam, though Madeleine was conceived in Leicester.
Could this mean anything? Probably not, but it’s unusual at the very least.
July 12th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
There’s a vaguely plausible feel to the IVF theory.
But if the McCanns were involved in dispute concerning Madeleine prior to the time she was allegedly ’snatched’ (dispute with Murat for example) and/or if they suspected someone (again, Murat or whomever) intended to take her, then this would constitute ‘prior knowledge’ on the McCann’s part.
One of the first things the PJ would have asked them is: ” Are you aware of anyone who might have taken your daughter? Did you have any suspicions beforehand that anyone — anyone at all — might believe they had reason to take her? ” Etc.
If they answered ‘No’ on each occasion such questions were asked, only for it to be later discovered that they had lied …. well, the charges against them would be severe.
In addition, they (McCanns and any accomplices) would be charged with fraud/fraudulently obtaining monies (through their seeking, accepting and depositing fund monies in their Ltd. company account).
They (and anyone who had assisted them in such subterfuge) would also be charged with deliberately providing false information to police etc. of numerous nations, also with ‘wasting police time’, etc. Graver offences than they sound, in these circumstances.
They’d be taking a huge risk.
Yet, worth remembering that one of the first things they did (in addition to setting up the Ltd. company) was hire solicitors.
July 12th, 2007 at 8:40 am
Hi Anna (UK)
Just read that theory of yours regarding the IVF idea, It would explain the “They’ve taken her” reaction. Wouldn’t it?
Instead of “Maddie’s not there” “Maddie’s gone”?????
Good idea.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:10 am
The media has a lot to answer for in the McCann mystery so I hope they’re preparing some grand plot to redeem themselves. And it better be based on truth. I’ve never seen such bias reporting in my entire life and hope I never do again. Where are the investigative reporters anyway? (hiding under their desks?)
But I must give credit to this news site. At least it doesn’t appear they’re trying to stifle public opinions.
I’m not pro-Gerry & Kate McCann. The media can blast us non-stop with their propaganda but I’ll never believe Madeleine’s parents ‘campaign’ was, or is now, anything but a moneymaking scam.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
Make a million in under 70 days !! I cant think of any way to make that through property or any other way - especially without lifting a finger in hard graft. The appeal for money was launched by Jolly Gerry within hours of announcing that she was missing - and a quick jaunt back to the UK to set it all up in HIS name for his use. If the response had not been so manic - then she could have been “discovered”. The parents appealed to the abductor to “leave her in a Church” just before a service so that she will be quickly found. They made it very clear and specific which church they were strolling to on a regular basis - so that took care of Portugul - they also “announced” that the Church in their own hometown village was being attended by their family etc.etc. and the TV publicised where this place was. The “Gerry Blog” specifically asked for the abductor to leave her in a Church somewhere -SO - had the fund not been so rapidly climbing up to a million plus, maybe the “abductors” would have read the Gerry blog and done exactly as he asked. The child would have been found and the scam would not have been as lucrative as hoped. BUT - it is proving lucrative - so why stop. If the child is back here in the UK she is probably with someone who she knows enough to feel safe with but not well enough to name them. Even doctors can live beyond their means and try to keep up with the neighbours - admiting it can be difficult and maybe this is the very way to wipe the debt slate clean
July 11th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
who can tell me the truth about this:
was the window shut, open or forced?
were the doors shut, open or forced?
What did the Polícia Judiciária say?
Who confirms the
fact that Madeleine is a sleep walker? Is that the reason why the police spent the first 48 hours searching around in the resort?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
But how nuts would you have to be to try and pull off something like that? Unless Madeleine is carefully planted somewhere to be ‘found’, with no evidence anywhere leading to the person who planted her there…
Surely the fund would be checked after she was found, and the monies promised to charity would have to do just that? Go to charity? But then the fund isn’t a charity is it? And they can do whatever they like with the money..
But do you think two doctors could be that corrupt - to send their daughter away for two months or more so their parents can pocket a million or so? How could they have known the case would attract such attention and the fund so much money? Something major could have happened in the news and pushed the story right off the agenda, like another war starting, or a terrorist attack…
Surely there are easier ways of making a million? Like property dealing, or running a business on the side?
July 11th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
I hope and feel that the whole damn lot is a money making scam - and I really feel in my heart that the little girl is here safe and well and being looked after in the UK - I also think that if this is the case she was shipped out of the appartment long before the McCanns went to the restaurant. The timescale was such that security cameras were only checked after the McCanns said that they had left the appartment - why would the police need to check footage before that time? So eventually the footage is lost from the cameras and are assumed to be not relevant as the time of abduction (according to the parents) was between 9 and 10 pm. The kid could have been back in the UK by the following morning - and now here’s a theory - getting through on a passport maybe borrowed from Murats daughter - outstanding similarities and the dozy night time border checks wouldnt notice the difference - All just a thought!!
July 11th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Well one thing definitely STINKS - why have the McCanns acted to stop any of their friends speaking to the press? Why would any family in this situation want to do that if they had nothing to hide??? I can’t think of a single reason.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
OK a new theory - Murat has been a ‘fixer’ for them on several counts. They met him through property deals in Leicester, or perhaps before that through a Fazakerley/Malinka connection.
The McCanns couldn’t have children; Murat said he could help (for a fee?) through a European connection, namely Danilo Chemello and Aurora Pereira Vaz who sell eggs and gametes. IVF was arranged for the McCanns on a financial basis but perhaps more cheaply than they could have done it in England.
Murat stays in touch with them and through him they get to hear about the Warner holiday block in Praia de Luz. Then what? Chemelli and Pereira Vaz decide to snatch her because the egg was originally Vaz’s, and she feels the child is really hers? Or she wants to sell her on, god forbid?
God I don’t know - I’m probably barking mad with all this but it does seem odd that Chemelli and Vaz deal in fertility, and the McCanns needed treatment… but then this wouldn’t explain why the McCanns seem relatively cool in the face of such terrible trauma.
I’m just trying (and not succeeding) to find a way to link it all up.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Murat and his associates, apparently - from reports I have read - have contacts in Leicestershire - connected with property deals - were the friends of the McCanns which have been called also from Leicestershire?
Maybe the whole party of McCannites knew Murat? if anything iffy is going on there has to be a lot of shut mouths with so many folk connected. Even more than the crazy scam which conned the world into believing that in 1969 they landed on the moon - lol
July 11th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
dodgier by the minute, I reckon. Some of those friends must know something, or else the police wouldn’t have dragged them back from the UK.
July 11th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
In answer to Clare, I’ve just seen this:
A police source said yesterday: “It was not a case of the McCann´s friends simply going over their statements. There was a reason why they were present in the station at the same time as Murat.”