Madeleine McCann: Kate And Gerry’s Blood, Threat And Tears
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
THE SUN front page: “KATE’S AGONY – CONFESS & YOU’RE OUT IN A YEAR.”
“Deal of blood, threat and tears.” Kate McCann is being interviewed by police. This is a “highly-charged confrontation, Portuguese officers citing forensic evidence told the GP she would receive a jail sentence of between two and three years if she signed a confession.”
Kate McCann is “horrified”. Says she: “How dare you?”
A source tells the paper: “The police were trying to get Kate to say she had amnesia or was in shock or had a breakdown. They said if she signed the confession she’d serve a year and that her husband would not be charged and could go home. It was effectively emotional blackmail.”
“SHOCKED” Gerry McCann has been named as a formal suspect.
THE SUN SAYS: “But the allegations made yesterday against Madeleine’s distraught mother Kate are astonishing and, in places, farcical. A suspicious page of the Bible left open? A call to a priest on the day of Maddie’s disappearance? Not exactly a smoking gun.”
Do all crimes involve a smoking gun?
The Sun concludes: “The Sun desperately wants justice for Maddie. But the greatest pity is that she is the one person who seems to have been forgotten in this mess of incompetence.”
And the Press continue to watch the parents.
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE: DEATH ON MUM’S BIBLE.”
THE WORLD’S GREATEST NEWSPAPER writes of “THE DAY THE JEERING STARTED”.
“Just two days ago Kate McCann, 39, was regarded almost universally as a victim who had suffered unimaginable agony. Families everywhere shared her heartbreak at losing her beautiful daughter. But it was clear yesterday, as the GP arrived to be formally named as a suspect in her daughter’s disappearance, that much of that sympathy has now gone.”
The crowd outside the police station – 400-strong – goes into a “frenzy” when Kate McCann arrives. “There were whistles, then jeers and boos before some in the crowd began to shout insults. ‘Whore… daughter of a whore,’ some yelled in Portuguese.”
The Express translates.
A local man says: “They will find this more and more because in Portugal harming a child is the worst thing…The Portuguese people took them to their hearts and now we feel cheated. It will not be nice in Portugal for them now.”
Kate is “cool and collected”.
DAILY MAIL front page: “THE ACCUSED. Portuguese police’s staggering grilling of Madeleine mother.
• Why was her blood in your car?
• Did you drug her that night?
• Confess and get just two years.”
DAILY STAR front page: “YOU KILLED MADDIE.”
DAILY MIRROR front page: “MADELEINE SENSATION. We have found her blood in the boot of your hire car.. DID YOU KILL HER BY ACCIDENT?” This is “what police asked Kate McCann during 16-hour grilling”.
THE GUARDIAN front page: “Mother, victim…suspect: police target Kate McCann.”
THE TELEGRAPH: “Kate and Gerry McCann named as suspects,” says the headline.
“Mr McCann stared straight ahead as his suspect status was announced and refused to answer questions from awaiting journalists. A crowd which had been attending a concert in the town square earlier listened to the announcement and several people gasped audibly.”
In “Villagers back Madeleine McCann’s parents”, the paper journeys to Rothey, Leicestershire, the McCanns’ home town. Michelle Canilleri, who lives in Rothley, shares with the world: “I can’t believe it. This is such a shock. They have got the wrong people. No way in the world would either Kate or Gerry harm any of their children.”
THE INDEPENDENT front page: “FROM ANGUISHED PARENT, TO GRIEVING MOTHER, TO SUSPECT.”
“Shortly before 11am, Mrs McCann’s spokeswoman, Justine McGuinness, revealed that the 39-year-old GP was being made an arguida – official suspect – in the case. And then she uttered the six short words which will be inconceivable to some who have followed this case and a confirmation of long-held suspicions to others. ‘Kate fears she will be charged,’ Ms McGuinness said.”
THE TIMES front page: A picture of the McCanns meeting the Pope.
Madeleine McCann The Public Spectacle
Posted: 8th, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,454) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Kelley Lynch on Phil Spector’s Hair Performs With Ronettes
- June on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- June on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- Tony on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- Cheryl on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
September 9th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Accused me? Why what did he do that wasn’t so bleeding obvious?
I don’t behave that way. I am not racist sexist or godlike.
I’m just an ordinary old woman in the community who is savvy at reading people.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
gecko100 … some have accused you of being Christoph …. do you have any statement to make on that?
September 9th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
To whomever it was that got rid of Christoph and his insane rambling, thank-you.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Shown above are Rothley Temple, seat of Thomas Babington (1758-1837), right, frequently visited by William Wilberforce (1759-1833), left, partners in the campaign to abolish the Atlantic Slave Trade successfully accomplished in March 1807.
ROTHLEY AND THE ABOLITION OF THE SLAVE TRADE
http://www.leicestershirevillages.com/rothley/rothleyandtheabolitionoftheslave.html
September 9th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
1018:
I wouldn’t go so far as calling Justine “experienced” - her handling of the Portuguese Press has been mediocre at best. Recent examples:
1. Yesterday’s “secret” meeting in a hotel with the British Media and her refusal to tell Portuguese reporters (who were waiting outside, in the street) what it was about.
2. Her leaks to the British Media about today’s plane trip (allowing British reporters to book seats on the same flight), while maintaining to the Portuguese Press that the McCanns would stay in Portugal at least until Tuesday, to wait for their alleged “presentation” before a Judge.
There’s no real wonder the Portuguese Press aren’t jumping in on the sympathy bandwagon.
The McCanns (extended family) have been extraordinarily inapt when dealing with Portuguese public opinion, ever since Philomena called the Portuguese police “incompetent” on May 5th and culminating in the recent accusations that the police broke into the apartment to plant evidence.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
If the statement has been written by someone else, why should we accept it as sincere?
September 9th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
To end this crap about Gerrys speech.
Can someone who knows him or of him an ex patient or whatever please tell us that gerry is verbose.
Then you might get off his case. You know the big one on film outside the car, with Ms body inside.
Gerry however didnt do it.
Hes told you that, or was that Kate didnt do it?
Its obvious Russell did it. Jane said she saw a man carrying M in her jim jams. Or was that Gerry.
But Russells got the dirt on Gerry for something else.
Has any thought of bringing in Inspector Rex? Hes got a good nose.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
Somehow I think that their intended defamation suit against that particular Portuguese tabloid will not go ahead. I mean if reports that I’ve read are correct, then they were made arguido’s so that the PJ could ask them the exact question that they are wanting to sue the newspaper for. I note that no further references are being made by them or their spokesperson with reference to this.
Although I am dead-set against the McCann’s, I really don’t think its fair for people to dissect every single little sentence they are saying. I also think (as Moderation said) that someone else is writing their statements for them. So you’re in effect judging someone else’s words.
Oh, how I’d love to be a little fly on the wall in their home for the next couple of days …. I wonder if their home has been bugged?
September 9th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Whether guilty or not, I don’t think the McCanns have been entirely truthful.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
1018 You’re right of course, Mod.
Intuition is a dangerous game. It will be interesting to see if it is right. Certainly my prediction (and that of many many others) weeks ago that they were hiding something have received support now from the PJ. But it could still prove otherwise.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Chritoph: You wacko. Have you not been to bed yet?
September 9th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Realistically I think all it means is that Justine McGuiness, an experienced PR person and a would-be politician, has written it for him.
I thinkit is wrong to try and analyse every little thing in an attempt to prove guilt. why not analyse to prove innocence instead? None of us KNOW anything.
All that matters is the truth and it will be found eventually.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Right..he didn’t live there, but apparently “is thought to have drafted his ‘Treaty for the Abolition of Slavery’ while staying there”.
I just mentioned it as his name came up earlier, when the British were accused of inventing slavery.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
McCann uses extra and uneccessary adjectives in most of his speech.
Note sure if that is a consultant’s thing, to make him sound more precise.
To me it is like the ‘good’ liar adding detail to increase plausibility.
In his recent quote: “We want the twins, as much as is reasonably possible, to live an ordinary life in their home country”
why not just say ‘possible’ and ‘home’.
This is something I’ve noticed all the way through..sentence padding.
Don’t know what it could mean though.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
1011 William Wilberforce did not live in Rothay he lived in Clapham South London. In fact less than a mile from my home.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
As a trained scientist, I am disgusted by “pyschic detection” as mere charlatanry, and I am reluctant even to give too much weight to “intuition” including my own.
In this situation, I wish I had training in the analysis of speech patterns and body language, which might make it possible to quantify what feels so wrong about the McCanns.
But I think that experience of life, and dealing over 50 years with endless people who prove trustworthy and untrustworthy, teaches us something. We learn things about speech patterns and body language, even though we are not formally taught, or able to demonstrate any formal analysis.
I think the results of this life-long learning are made available to our consciousness in the form of intuition. We feel something is wrong, but can’t quite prove it or say why.
Everything about the McCanns rings false to my intuition. Just like the jar I get every time he adds admiring words about his daughter in inappropriate places. Every time he speaks, subtle little anomalies. None significant on their own. But in aggregate, and in the context of all the body language, overwhelmingly convincing.
In a word - the whole thing stinks.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
967, K-9, sorry, I’ve been away and am trying to catch up. So who did hire the car with the cadaver scent over the period Madeleine went missing, I’ve always wondered? Is it someone whose name we’re unfamiliar with?
September 9th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
1009.
I give up…..
September 9th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Wierdly enough, I’ve just read that Rothley is where William Wilberforce onced lived.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
for 1008 see 1007
September 9th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Why would you lug 3 kids under 4 half way across the world to play adult games.
Surely get the nanny at home in leics to look after them for 2 days.
Were going on a conference.
Go to a hotel in London or wherever for a couple of nights and do the orgy there.
Any way why would you go out half the night to a tapas bar if the main “thrust”
of the evening was rumpy pumpy.
Mate id be in the buff by 5.30 ready for clams.
Why pick on the words they are using M does look lovely, my kids are lovely but I wouldnt say “my ugly madeleine” my daughters also called madeleine. Thats how I can spell it.
If shes been abducted they know shes dead but part of them will have to keep going.
Look you might be 6-0 down with 5 mins to go but you keep going.
Youve got 6 weeks to live but you keep going.
Can anyone get hair samples from the other 2 mccanns children. Would they like to supply their hairs to help prove their innocence?
Refusal would look bad.
A body with no sedative and signs of sexual abuse found 75klms away, close to an area of known paedophiles is going to shut a lot of you up isnt it. Or a lead that suggests abduction would be good for Mccann business maybe nows the time to get a few narks talking.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Of course, they will tel you that personally. But to insist again and again in applying admiring adjectives in the middle of serious statements where such things are irrelevant ?
To me it jars as inappropriate. It seems one more tiny clue to a midset which is aimed at using every single opportunity to influence public opinion in their favour. Which suggests fear and guilt to me.
Take their behavious and utterances as a whole, the endless emphasis on M’s loveliness fits a picture. On its own, I agree, not significant. It grates every time they do it because of this bigger picture. They are desperate to convince us - have been from the beginning. Too desperate.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Blunger..
Agreed. After 4 months the parents are over emphasising the point. Its NOT normal.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
I take it there were no traces of vomit found in either the McCanns or the O’Brien apartment? Was the O’Brien apartment even searched?
September 9th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Snap Angry. we don’t often agree!
September 9th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Oh come on Blunger…. everyone thinks their own child is the most beautiful / gorgeous / intelligent in the world. Its human nature for all of us.
Fairs fair! You can’t criticise anyone for that view.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
1001 - Sheese what rubbish. Any parent will tell you their child is lovely irrespective of what another person thinks. The parent does not compare the child to any other, because the others are not theirs.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
You lot are pretty hot on the ’sedation’ theory. If sedation was involved (for sleep purposes) why was Madeleine supposedly ‘crying out’ late the night before? Was a complaint received which prompted them to sedate early before going out? Possible but I dont buy it. Arent we led to believe that the child was dead between 5-8? In which case, if true, going out for the evening is a red herring to allow for the ‘abduction’. Sedation between 5-8 for adult games? Possibly. But why so early for such games? So yes sedation may be involved or not. I cant be certain. What we can be certain of though is that these people wanted no outsiders around whatever they were up to. And the only reason you dispose of a body in such circumstances is to prevent an autopsy’s findings. Let’s pray that sedation for sleep purposes is all it is but you would have to be very selfish, callous and evil (maybe they are) not to accept the wrap as a ‘normal’ parent. And just maybe they all hide something far, far worse…..
September 9th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Angry (988):
We heard about it. But only on the Portuguese press. Two months ago.
Now we’re hearing about it extensively in the British Press, but the focus is always on the “RENTED 25 DAYS LATER” bit - hinting at a Portuguese police that is *so* daft that they plant evidence (see: Kate’s mother) in a car that hadn’t even been there!
One can’t forget that this info was provided by the McCanns’ relatives. They also disclosed information about a “sordid” and “sick” “blood deal” (all quotes) which was actually nothing more than the statement of the simple fact that the charge of child-neglect that the police is considering comes with a 2 year sentence.
September 9th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Again and again the McCanns keep emphasizing Madeleines appearance.
Once again today, in the middle of a serious statement, the jarring word “lovely”.
“Our lovely daughter”
This is arrogance and self congratulation, and it is repeated as nauseam. Are the daughters of other people, who may not seem to the McCanns physically quite so “lovely”, somehow less worthy of attention ?
Who are they seeking subconsciously to contrast their child with ? Would a disabled child be less important ? One with visible deformities making her painful to look upon ? What the hell has “loveliness” or otherwise to do with this, that the parents refer to it again and again. Are other children “unlovely”.
So many tiny word choices and phrasing add up. There is something wrong in these people’s mindset. Has been right from the beginning.