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
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
- yampster on Dundee Woman Accused Of Ripping Out Lover’s Testes With Her Bare Hands
- KathyM on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Desperate Dan on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- Desperate Dan on The 14 Ten Most Offensive Google Search Results
September 10th, 2007 at 5:33 am
(1174) However, blond(e) and cute usually does equate to privilege, for both sexes and at all ages.
WHY?
May I Answer that one
It’s because……. Blondes Have More Fun!!!
Except if you’re Roger Federer, he’s not blonde but he is privileged and he sure is well endowed …tee, hee, hee…… He’s a real hottie!!!!
Good Nite to ALL fans,
-Anna xoxoxoxo
September 10th, 2007 at 5:31 am
(1174) However, blond(e) and cute usually does equate to privilege, for both sexes and at all ages.
WHY?
May I Answer that one
It’s because……. Blondes Have More Fun!!!
Except if you’re Roger Federer, he’s not blonde but he is privileged and he sure is well endowed …tee, hee, hee…… He’s a real hottie!!!!
Good Nite to ALL the fans,
-Anna xoxoxoxo
September 10th, 2007 at 5:27 am
1144 / 1159
On the subject of Gerry’s blog not being updated, I personally sent a message to him on that site stating that people didn’t really want to know how well he and Kate had exercised that day or what clothes to wear when you visit the Pope, or what fun they all had when they visited friends who have a swimming pool, but that his blog was generally expected to be an update on the progress into the search of the whereabouts of his daughter ( hullo ?? isn’t she missing or something ?? ) not some personal diary. Needless to say I heard nothing back, why would I ? I dared to criticise this self-opinionated so-and-so ….!! but I noted that a couple of postings after that mentioned more on the subject of Madeleine and the search rather than their own activities.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:10 am
1186 - Martin, where did you come from??? I’m simply smitten!!!
“Finally, putting all this together, I’m waiting impatiently for the myopic media, and all the gullible fools that projected so much onto this silly little story, to get their ‘comeuppance’, in the doubtless totally vain hope that some people will learn something from this crazy mass hysteria, and we may at some point be saved from another Iraq War or fascist dictatorship”
September 10th, 2007 at 4:59 am
(1186) - There’s the Agatha Christie / Cluedo aspect too, of course, which right now should be much more compelling to most normal people than any detective fiction or boardgame.
Hey Martin - Don’t forget about the Miss Marple/Trivia(l) Pursuit aspect too.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:18 am
I find this, Martin :
“Let the priest absolutely beware that he does not by word or sign or by any manner whatever in any way betray the sinner: but if he should happen to need wiser counsel let him cautiously seek the same without any mention of person.”
I conclude that the priest can discuss his dilemma with his superiors, without using names (which he would hardly need to). They could then disseminate instructions with regard to a named person. so long as they don’t say why.
That’s my guess. Though honestly I don’t believe it very likely in this case. Unless the heirarchy is very, very angry and sensitive. Which it might be after all the child abuse trouble recently, and their impertinence in dragging His Holiness into their filth (if of course that is what they did ).
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 am
No Blunger… it’s not SUPPOSED to be anything to do with governments - the ‘executive’ - in either country. It’s supposed to be for the courts to decide. But they have to take into account the new (2004) system of EAWs or European Arrest Warrants, that replaced formal extradition, partly in order to force EU countries to hand over their nationals to other EU countries where they’d been charged with or convicted of a serious offence.
Normally, the extradition would these days be fast and automatic. But in this particular case things are complicated by the fact that in cases of unlawful killing where the alleged victim or perpetrator is a national of an EU country other than the country where the crime was supposed to be committed, both countries have jurisdiction. Portugal has the default ‘territorial jurisdiction’, but England has ‘personal’ or ‘national’ jurisdiction.
Even then, normally England would just send the McCanns back to Portugal. But their expensive lawyers may well try and contest that, on the grounds I set out some way above. My guess is that the Portuguese will just be happy to get rid of the case, and agree to let the McCanns be tried in Ebgland, which would certainly speed things up.
But as the McCann’s lawyers know, this would make a conviction less likely which is precisely why they’re trying to get tried in England. And the Portuguese may be reluctant to risk acquittal by an English jury (they don’t have them in Portugal), which couldn’t be presented with intercept evidence.
So who knows?
But it will make an interesting twist. You read it here first.
Phew. Fascinating stuff. But I must go to bed. Goodnight all. Have Fun (but don’t sedate your kids).
September 10th, 2007 at 4:04 am
I think I did a very effective piece of psychological work on Christoph, which is healthier for us all. You should thank me. The guy was creepy…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:59 am
Well, blunger, I’ve been wondering about the confidentiality of the confessional for a while.
Imagine: country Catholic priest hears Kate’s confession - I can’t imagine she wouldn’t have confessed to a priest, though not the PJ.
Having seen his superboss looking at the photo of the murdered child and blessing the killers in front of the world’s media in St Peter’s Square, WHAT THE HELL does he do? Technically he’s not supposed to divulge what he heard in the confessional to ANYONE. Well, except God. Or… maybe, well, the Pope’s almost God isn’t he???
September 10th, 2007 at 3:58 am
No Chrstoph is not me.
I’m pleased he’s gone tho’.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 am
Are you sure, Martin that the question of where the trial is held is a matter for legal decision, involving the DPP ?
Surely if both jurisdictions are legally able and willing to accept it, its a matter for the two governments to agree between them which it should be.
If the law allows either equally, the decision becomes poltical, no ?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:50 am
Did anyone else notice how the anglican priest was interviewed about their attendance picked his words with extreme care. Though trying to sound supportive he actually said that Mrs McCann “seemed”…… rather than “was”….
You’re right Martin - why didn’t they go to a Catholic chuch as usual - has the Vatican put the word out ?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:48 am
Er… blunger 1343, I suggested that here ages ago. A leading QC disagreed with me, but I hope he’s now accepted he’s wrong.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:46 am
Well, technically blunger, the initial decision is for the DPP consulting with the Portuguese Federal Prosecutor, and the DPP has threatened to resign in the past if he’s subject to any political interference. But any decision can I think be challenged in courts, and, like the Pinochet case, would probably go all the way to the House of Lords, if the McCanns had the money.
This could in principle take a few years.
More likely that the Portuguese will be happy to hand the case over to England (probably why they let them leave without any enforceable conditions - I’m sure that decision was taken at the highest level).
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 am
As I predicted before - if they are guilty they will fight to the death to be tried in the UK, because that will wipe out the phone/email intercept evidence which, without a body, may prove crucial.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 am
Guilty as f****ng sin. Yes, Sin, that’s a special word for devout Catholics.
No wonder the bible was one of the three personal items contaminated with the scent of death. Kate probably had a few niggling doubts about what she was doing.
When I saw the picture (repeated Times Saturday) of Kate & Gerry showing the Pope the photo of Madeleine, I wondered whether:
[1] they were asking: ‘Have you seen this girl by any chance’
[2] they were trying to force a breakdown and confession… ‘Oh so that’s her’; ‘Come on you old pervert, don’t pretend you don’t recognize her, we know it was you’ (like those awful brutal PJ interrogations).
Funny how the Vatican was a week ahead of the pack removing the link to the MaddyFund. Whatever happened to the sanctity of the confessional?
And talking of that… why did the McCanns start hanging out at the Anglican Church all of a sudden? Maybe something to do with not having to confess and get absolution before taking the sacrament.
Guess there’s no absolution then.
Will Papa Dominic be excommunicating next week?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:34 am
It’s almost painful to be proved so right, isn’t it ? That’s how its going.
My guess is - the actual decision on their return will privately go to Gordon Brown. And he will wisely ditch them, through his home secretary. Once Gordon sees a bit more of the media about-face, that is.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:30 am
Um…. if they’d promised to return to be charged, and this was then reconfirmed by another member of Team McCann, why were the consulting the country’s most expensive extradition lawyer last night?
Yet another of those niggling little inconsistencies.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:28 am
Just noticed they said Chile rather than Spain for the Pinochet extradition - but then that was the Daily Mail
September 10th, 2007 at 3:24 am
Yup…
“Last night it was revealed that they have consulted the British lawyer who represented Chilean dictator General Pinochet in his battle to avoid extradition to Chile on charges of torture and human rights abuses.
“Michael Caplan, QC, is a partner at Kingsley Napley, one of the country’s foremost law firms for international cases. “
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 am
This is like a re-run of “Diana the People’s Whore”, except this time the calm sane rational people may actually win !
September 10th, 2007 at 3:19 am
No buldump, that is NOT why wikipedia is considering for deletion. The argument there is raging and excited, just like here, but it is about different issues.
What’s more, you can read it live for yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kate_McCann
September 10th, 2007 at 3:19 am
yup, i’m working and have duel display
lol
September 10th, 2007 at 3:17 am
OMG bulldump..You are still here…LOL..
September 10th, 2007 at 3:13 am
i guess the pj will need to search extra terrestrially for an impartial jury
September 10th, 2007 at 3:11 am
Won’t anyone help the McCann’s now please !?
For Heaven’s sake they are totally innocent of any crime.
They met The Holy Father fer gawds sake !
Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp !
Donate to their fund so they can hire the most expensive lawyers.
Remember that’s how OJ beat the chair, not because he was innocent of a double homicide, but because he had a magnificent legal team.
The McCann’s deserve the same leniency !
( ;-P )
September 10th, 2007 at 3:08 am
it is under decision for deleting since it may represent untruths or may contain speculation, that could be predjudicial to a case
September 10th, 2007 at 3:07 am
Wow… even the Express… and so soon. The Heavens are about to crack open…
but BD, what was the point of the Wikipedia link?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:03 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_McCann
September 10th, 2007 at 2:59 am
Good grief - the Express has turned too. Semi hostile article, with every single comment against the McCanns.
Talk about a sinking ship.