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
September 8th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
I personally have arrived at the inescapable conclusion that the McCann’s ate the evidence, probably with some fava beans and a nice chianti.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
It was long, but good.
Then I hope they don’t escape Portugal, which I’m sure was the plan. I think the Portuguese are doing a fine job, the crime occurred there, and they can try it.
Hey, good news for the McCann’s! They may escape a “negligence” charge… if they killed her.
As far as the soldiers go, I’m just say, Martin, every country asserts jurisdiction over its soldiers in a war theatre and charges them through military processes.
This is so standard it’s SOP. Nothing unusual there.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
It makes sense..Hopefully we’ll get more answers tommorrow..I noticed Gerry has not updated his Blog!!
September 8th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
♦
September 8th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
Hi again.
As I said earlier, I’m not a lawyer (though I know some very senior lawyers who know things about this case I’m not allowed repeat).
I’ll go and check it on Wikipedia (as any of you guys can), but English law - like the law of most other countries, unusually extends territorial jurisdiction (which Portugal has in this case) worldwide, when the death of a British national is involved.
So the McCanns COULD in principle certainly be tried for murder or manslaughter in England.
Portugal also has jurisdiction in this case - just as England has jurisdiction over any murders or manslaughters committed in England (let’s not get into things like Scots Law).
Multiple justiciability (if that’s the right word) is very common. The US in fact claims jurisdiction over vast areas of law, even if the putative crime or tort or whatever was committed outside US territory (the interesting thing about Guantanamo Bay is that it’s supposed to fall outside any civil or criminal jurisdiction altogether). And as loads of people know, often to their cost (literally), expensive lawyers can often spend a lot of time arguing about the jurisdiction in which a particular case should be tried.
I imagine that generally speaking, EU countries would have a general rule that ‘homicide’ (or the English equivalent) should be tried in the territorial jurisdiction in which it is alleged to have been comitted, ‘everything else being equal’.
But I think that if the McCann’s were actually in the UK, and their expensive British lawyers thought they’d do better in a British than in a Portuguese court, they might well try to make an argument (there are probably several grounds on which they could do this) that they should be tried in the UK too.
Take another case: the soldiers tried by a military court in Britain for killing civilians in Basra. Here there were 3 possible jurisdictions (or 4, if you include the ICC in the Hague, but that’s complicated): Iraqi courts, a British military court, and a British criminal court.
The Attorney General ‘agreed’ with his Iraqi counterpart that the soldiers should be tried in Britain, and then decided (wonder why?) that this should be in a military rather than criminal court.
Anyway, I don’t know the details here, but I imagine it’s one consideration the McCann’s very expensive British and Portuguese lawyers and their clients are thinking about quite a lot right now.
On the business of charging in Portugal… Some of you people have said things like ‘they can’t have much, or they’d have charged them’.
The PJ doesn’t charge anyone (or do plea bargains). They present a ’suspect’ and evidence against them before a magistrate, who independently determines whether there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. If he/she thinks there is, the suspect will be charged - and it’s the judge who decides the charge, and then takes control of the investigation from there on.
The police have not yet applied to a judge for the suspects to be charged, though there IS clearly enough evidence, since the McCann’s own very expensive top Portuguese lawyer told them they might be charged on Friday night.
But the police probably want to coordinate evidence, and potential charges, against the McCanns and the ‘friends’ (haven’t checked which ones exactly, but presumably O’Brien and Tanner at least) before taking their evidence to a judge.
Which is why I said way above I expect charges to follow pretty soon.
I can even imagine (though preventing leaks would have been damned difficult) that they actually have the body already, despite asking Kate to tell them where it is.
Anyway, as I say, they want to get a coherent pile of preliminary evidence, based on a reconstruction of the events, against all those they think were involved, before taking it, and the relevant suspects down to court to be charged next week, after which, as I understand it, the judge formally takes over the investigation, and makes decisions about charges, what further evidence should be sought, and so on - and all this with formal input from a defense lawyer.
Sorry, that was way too long. Won’t happen again.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Thanks for clarifying that I’m wrong, Gabrielle. I’m glad to hear it.
And even hypothetically if you did consider the McCann’s innocent I wouldn’t hold that against you though I may hotly disagree.
I just reject any suggestion there is any reason to believe the Portuguese police are not trying to do justice by this girl. I believe they are.
You raise a good question. There are many reasons.
One of them is the McCann’s and their friends were insistent about an abduction. So naturally the police would consider that priority number one, particularly with a member of the party saying they thought they say the abductor.
But two, and I think this is more important — besides, it doesn’t exclude one — the police may have screwed up.
They should have taken better control of the scene from the get go. This is usually the case though.
What often happens in an investigation is you have whoever respond, they do the best they can, and if it turns out to be a big case with major unsolved immorality/crime… you bring in the A-team later, who are always in short supply, and put them on the case.
Does that make sense?
It’s not a perfect answer, but I think it’s close to the truth.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
cause we are the hyperlinked folk
September 8th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
please christoph wake up and smell the coffe
September 8th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I think I must be Elizabeth II then! I have just been searching for the Times online item that I mentioned and can’t find it!! Sorry all. I wonder why I am in blue - just so happens that it is my favourite colour. Incidentally though, Christoph and Bulldump - you are in blue on my screen - I don’t understand this.
Anyway I must say goodnight to you all and hope that tomorrow brings something positive and maybe happy news.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
well if swinging gerry aint bi-curious, he certainly will be after some time in a portugese prison
September 8th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Hardly. I will have children with a fantastic woman. Who loves children, life, and goodness all around.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
Christoph:
You are wrong..I’m not defending the Mccann’s, I do believe that they had something to do w/ this whole tragic mess. I just don’t understand why the Police didn’t investigate immediately after the incident..Instead of letting others stay in the villa after the incident..So that is why I question if Maybe/somehow they did it to cover their ends since they didn’t act fast enough..But BELIEVE me, I’ve thoght the Mccann’s behavior, especially Kates, has been ODD since day one
September 8th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
but, you dont have a child christoph, and with your criteria you unlikely to have one either
September 8th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
Kate is getting something of a ‘Skeletor’ look about her lately.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
They are 99% accurate but my point is if you where innocent you would do anything to clear your name
September 8th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
please elizabeth can you make up a website name and become one of the hyperlinked folk
September 8th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
bulldump, not me.
Seriously.
I fear such a woman would hurt my child. Because. She would. If convenient for her.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
499: Polygraphs are not reliable enough anyway….
September 8th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
I like blue, but I’ll keep myself non-hyperlinked, so that I may be distinguished from my fellow Elizabeth. Plus I don’t have a website.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
jesus wept christoph, you really are cuckoo
I’d rather rail kate than a horrifically burnt person
September 8th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
they can’t even admit that the decision not to come home is not their own.
gerry (the frikken weasel) said that they have decided to stay in portugal and clear thier name. My ass, they aint got any choice.
+ if they come back here there is a good job they gonna be lynched
September 8th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
lol The other Elizabeth may be perfectly sensible too. I’ve just had a chance to observe you and like what I see. I’m going to make a very heartfelt and sincere, and also melodratic statement. Not asking your permission. Just mentioning the fact.
Have a girlfriend. Love her to bits for real. Never going to trade her in. What I’m saying applies to me and her as much as anything.
But if I were single and you were single… two fantasy positions… and you had your mind, but were in a wheelchair or had, God forbid, suffered disfiguring burns in a fire… I would choose you over 1000 Kate McCann’s… and I would also choose you or someone like that over any shallow common girl no matter how pretty with no substance and substandard morals.
I don’t mean on a puritanical level… those can go by the wayside with me… I mean I love people who care about children and decency enough to face the hard truth.
/end melodrama — criticism can begin
September 8th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
It is true that the police are the only ones that have an indication of
the hard evidence, and indeed they have denoted the McCanns as
suspects. They’ve not been charged yet though so we shouldn’t really
be jumping to conlclusions yet.
I noticed plenty of people talking about the Daily Mail’s `British
source’ mentioning surprises to come. An unnamed source is useless! Forget it!
It could be the journalist’s colleague, friend or anyone. Really!
September 8th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
how can they volunteer to take a truth test?
they believe the lies them selves
September 8th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
is Someone is acting as your sockpuppet, or did you mean to type in another window?
————————-
Mods and Admin
Bulldump I’m sure you agree no one wants to be Christophe’s sock- puppet do they? I’m so sure you wouldn’t, would you? No!
September 8th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
I always suspected from day one that the mccanns where hiding something
if i where in their position i would of taken a polygraph test when the rumour mill started to prove my innocence.Why has this not been suggested by the media/mccanns?
September 8th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
484, Thank you, Christoph. That’s very kind.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Elizabeth without name in blue, her name would be in blue if she entered anything into the “website” feeled. This creates a link to whatever URL she enters there. Like this.
———–
Mods and Admin
One is registered , the other isn’t
September 8th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
christoph 491
you are a pervert
September 8th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
To me (and most of us I’m sure) the reward is HUGE. Unbelievably huge.
Surely, definitely, if it was a stranger abduction someone would have dobbed in another someone and tried to collect it.
Here in Autralia they offer $50000 rewards (about 20000 pounds I think judging from my GBP eBay purchases only).
Millions of pounds? We’d have people dobbing their mothers in for sure.