Madeleine McCann: Suspects Kate And Gerry And The Flight Of Fancy
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
THE SUN front page: “EXCLUSIVE – ‘We’re being set up. I’ve had enough. Let’s go home.’” This is the “ANGER OF MADDIE DAD.”
Gerry and Kate McCann, “the doctors”, are back in their home town of Rothley, Leicestershire.
Pages 4, 5, 6 & 7: A statement from Gerry McCann in which he thanks one and all for the support and adds: “But we would like to ask for our privacy to be respected now that we have returned home.”
But their private grief is public spectacle. Can they be left alone with their daughter still missing and their campaign to find her in progress?
“YOU’LL LOSE THE TWINS.” Portuguese police are said to have told Kate McCann she should confess or face losing her two children.
“FACT OR FIT-UP?” The Sun considers the claims and gives each an “EXPLANATION.”
THE SUN SAYS: “McCanns’ hell”. The McCann’s “torment gets more horrendous by the day.” Where is the “kidnapper who might still have the four-year-old child in his clutches?”
THE TIMES front page: “McCanns fly home to fights their case.”
Mr McCann says the police’s focus on them is “deeply disturbing”.
Portuguese newspapers claim the McCanns failed to answer 40 questions put to them during interviews last week. “They apparently feared that they could wrongly implicate themselves if he [sic] did so.”
Pages 6 & 7: “Puzzles and mysteries at the very heart of the investigation.”
The paper tries to answer some of these questions. It tells us: “Although a small child could be killed quickly it would take time to hide the body so that it was not discovered in the biggest search in Portuguese history.”
The paper’s David Brown does not reveal how he researched this. He just knows.
The window to the McCanns apartment might have been opened from the inside. Brown of the Wapping Yard concludes: “Or was the window opened to make it appear as if an intruder had used it to enter the bedroom?”
Hmmm. What say you Mr Brown?
DAILY MAIL front page: “Police are determined to charge McCanns with killing Madeleine. HOME…FOR HOW LONG?”
Mr McCann is said to have told a friends: “We are being completely stitched up by the Portuguese police. We are completely f*****. We should have seen this coming weeks ago and gone back to Britain.”
Pages 2 and 3: “Madeleine’s parents consult Pinochet’s lawyer.” The McCanns have consulted with Michael Caplan QC, the British lawyer who represented Chilean dictator General Pinochet, who stood accused to torture and human rights abuses. Interesting?
Pages 4 & 5: “Questions the police must answer.”
The paper wonders if Robert Murat was named as a suspect in the hope his presence might “lead the couple into committing an incriminating indiscretion?” Or not.
In attempting to answer the key questions, the Mail produces more questions.
And the evidence..? The paper’s Michael Hanson wonders just how “foolproof” forensic tests are. You can’t argue with the science. Or can you?
DAILY MIRROR front page: “Kate weeps in Maddy’s room.”
The paper’s “EXCLUSIVE” is that Kate McCann sat alone in Madeleine’s “pink-painted room” and “sobbed in despair”.
How does it know this?
A friend says: “They are not running and will clear their names.”
Pages 4 & 5: Four pictures of the McCanns: arriving at Faro airport; boarding a flight,;on the plane getting ready for take off; and walking to their family home in Rothley.
Pages 6 & 7: “40 questions they both ‘refused’ to answer’.” And: “Officers say her replies left a lot to be desired, ‘it was claimed.’”
“McCANNS FACE KILLING CHARGE.”
“WHY COPS THINK SHE WAS NOT ABDUCTED.”
Page 9: Brian Reade has a daughter the same age as Madeleine McCann. Brian, who writes for the Mirror, has found it “impossible to imagine the depth of pain and guilt”. Without a body, says Brian, “They may never be able to prove their total and complete innocence.”
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE ‘WE CAN PROVE PARENTS DID IT.’ Portuguese police make dramatic new claim over evidence.”
Pages 2, 3 4, 5: The paper’s Martin Evans is on flight EZY 6552. He sees the McCanns travel home. He experiences “first hand…Kate’s pain and anguish on that most difficult of journeys”.
The seatbelts sign goes off. A note is passed to Kate. It is from another passenger. Kate reads the “simple message” of support. “A female passenger kneels by Kate and gives her a “tight hug.”
Kate sobs, “tears dripping slowly down her cheeks”.
Page 6: “Questions for the McCanns.” The Express has a go at solving the mystery. It says “Case could hang over us for ever say parents”.
DAILY STAR front page: “Maddie’s parents surprise flight.” Flight?
Pages 6 & 7: “We’re not running away.”
Page 7: More from Martin Evans, who sees the McCanns’ “pained expressions”.
Pages 8 & 9: “Furious donors want cash back as pressure mounts on friends to reveal all. DAD: I’LL USE £1M MADDIE FUND TO CLEAR OUR NAMES.”
DAILY TELEGRAPH front page: “Year-long wait for McCanns to clear name.”
Says Kate McCann: “Portuguese law prohibits us from commenting on the police investigation. Despite their being so much we wish to say we are unable to do so except to say this: we have played no part in the disappearance of our lovely daughter Madeleine.”
Page 4: “Couple facing a ‘life sentence of grief’.”
THE GUARDIAN front page: “Exhausted and under suspicion, Madeleine’s family come home.”
Pages 2, 4 & 5: “Rothley villagers relieved to see family return.”
“Thank goodness. They’re back where they belong and it’s the best place they could possibly be,” says one young mother.
The Rev Mark Chandler adds: “My every sense tells me that Rothley is just pleased and relieved to have them back.”
THE INDEPENDENT front page: “130 days since they left for a family holiday, the McCanns return to Britain without Madeleine. This is “THE HOMECOMING”.
Pages 2 & 3: “A shattered family returns to Britain without Madeleine”. “Portugal’s media clamour for conviction”.
Says one mother holidaying in Praia da Luz: “You don’t want to believe the worst but when you read headlines like these [in Portuguese media], obviously one conclusion seems more likely than another.”
Says the Diario de Noticia: “PJ wait for final examinations to arrest Madeleine’s parents.”
Madeleine McCann: private grief as public spectacle
Posted: 10th, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,280) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- James Mcdiffett on Wikileaks Publishes 500,000 9/11 FBI And NYPD Pager Messages, Conspiracy Theorists Read On
- leesmith on Michelle Obama Is A Monkey And Other Offensive Google Images
- magnetite on Church Gives Soul Tattoos To Worshippers
- Evie Walton on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- yampster on The Chilcot Inquiry Into The Iraq War, In Pictures
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
It’s possible.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
SSS 583
Yes, my point is that maybe they did hire PD’s but did not make this public. Hard to investigate on the quiet with the press pack trailing around after you.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Thanks, Molly.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
No problem moriarty - you know me … a link for every occasion
Back to the Fund - it was denied charity status as it’s purpose was not for the ‘greater good’, which is one of the pre-requisites for a charity - it has to benefit as many people as possible.
Now - as a ‘business’, although one of the aims is to ’support the McCann family’, IF the McCanns are complicit in disposing of Madeleine’s body, then they KNEW she was dead and the basic premise of the fund (to find Madeleine) becomes ‘obtaining money by deception’ …
This means that the fund can be frozen by law until such time as the true facts are known, in order to prevent the McCanns’ potentially profiting from their own wrongdoing.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Apparently Father Seddon gives good mass.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
577 Penster
The Portuguese authorities have no authority in any country but their own. The Mc’s could have hired PD’s in Spain, France, all along North Africa….in fact, everywhere but Portugal.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Like a lot of people, I think that the McCanns are guilty: if I am honest some of it is prejudice and a lot of it is based on ‘intuition’ - the way they look and behave doesn’t send out the right vibe and I think that it’s this non-verbal stuff that a lot of people have been picking up on. But then we don’t really know how people should behave in such circumstances, so it might not be fair.
In a previous post, I commented on Gerry’s appeal to the abductor: “Sometimes people do things for reasons that even they cannot understand. An act of madness, an accident or sudden impulse can lead to consequences that people may never have imagined or intended.”
So it’s not even non-verbal stuff that sets one off - that’s an extraordinary way to word an appeal. When do you abduct by accident?
But if they are guilty, then there’s still some questions to be answered if you look at things in reverse:
How did they hide the body from the huge manhunt when, presumably, less familiar to the area? It not being found is a major bit of luck….
… so why did they move it three weeks later? And how could they not be seen - they must have been one of the most scrutinsed couples on earth (and, presumably, under police surveillance)
Why is there blood in a car from a 3-week old body (which, presumably, doesn’t bleed)?
Smell of death - this lingers for a long time. They are doctors and presumably been around a lot of it.
Answers on a postcard (from Portugal?) please…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Oh come on Christoph… Its a joke
September 10th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Moriarty, what’s this about father Sedon?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
574 Moriarity.
Taking that point up for one moment. I myself, if one of my children had gone missing, I WOULD have used the money IMMEDIATELY to pay for private detectives in EVERY COUNTRY to search for my child.
Indeed, without the money, I would have sold my house if need be.
But that’s just me
September 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
(570) Molly
Also spotted this…
“Father Paul Seddon married the McCanns….”
So the swinging rumours may be true
September 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I read that the portugese authorities prohibited private detectives to be used. they may well have hired them, but on the quiet.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
SSS, your 572 does answer my questions and was also what I expected.
I think everyone should read your comment with great care. It says a lot.
I’m not, “at a loss,” to understand why they set it up this way. I believe I explained why in 561!
And I doubt you disagree.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
571 Teddy Boy
I believe it was the brother of GM who set up the fund.
Also, as far as feeding off other people’s misery go, in the Georgian times, doctors were known as “leeches”!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
(570) Molly
Thanks for that link. I noticed this line
“Mr McCann said the arrival of lawyers from the firm in Praia da Luz had meant ‘a burden being lifted from our shoulders’ and the law group says members of the public will soon be able to make their own financial contribution to a ‘fighting fund’ for the search, which could pay for private detectives across Europe”
Well it didn’t did it
September 10th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Thanks for the insight and education, SSS. I am definitely not accusing everyone around the McCann’s and the other “friends” of not being above board. I’m sure all of them are horrified Madeleine went missing and are trying to help.
But the fact remains there is no legal impediment to them spending the money on their defence.
If they do the honorable thing and choose not to; instead, continuing to use that fund to find their beloved missing daughter and setting up a separate fund for their supporters to voluntarily donate to them that would be the right thing.
If they do that.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
567 Moriarity, many thanks!
Christoph, had the fund have been set up as a charity, there would been better tax implications, and as such a fund takes about the same amount of time be it charity or business, I am at a loss to understand why it was set up as a business fund.
Of course, as a charity, every penny would have to accounted for, and the public have every right to scrutinise the books (so to speak)!
Hope that answers your questions.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
So less than two weeks then. Seems to me it would take normal people longer than that to come to terms with what had happened.
Obscene haste is an expression that springs to mind - more interested in getting the money in than deciding what to do with it.
I thought it was only drug dealers that preyed on other peoples misery.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
And here is an article from the Daily Mail of 15 May which confirms that they had already got a Barrister on board
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=454949&in_page_id=1770
September 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Of course they could put Auntie Phil (Mark F) in charge of the fund but there would be a genuine fear that she would spend the money on Cream Cakes, Doner Kebabs and flame grilled Whoppers
September 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
555, Teddy, websites can be set up as fast as you can type, almost, likewise a Paypal account. No news or blog updates on the website since 6th September…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
(566) SSS
It’s Esther McVey
September 10th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
557 Christoph - As that fund was set up as a business fund NOT a charity fund, it is up to the administrator of the fund to say yea or nay to requests for money. When requesting the money, you have to state your reason for wanting it.
So far, the fund administrator (I forget her name but she’s an ex newsreader) has stated in the press that she will NOT okay funds to be used for any legal defence that may be required as that is NOT why the fund was set up.
Of course, they can get rid of her if they wish, by board vote.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
16th May Ted …http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6662723.stm
September 10th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
just wondered thought you might have had a bad weekend, see both teams won in the rugby
Kate burley gets around hey, and does anyone know if Martin Brunt has bought a comb for his hair that he has finally cut.
Oh I love this show, but I have to go now, Monday and Tuesday very busy
see you tomorrow lekker slaap
September 10th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Thing is Moriaty, whatever happens, the CEOP is still a child protection agency - whether that be protecting them from strangers or parents - so their involvement is still pertenent.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
(559) penster
Like a helicopter?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
I just can’t imagine it takes a long time to set up a business if there’s an urgent need to do so. Maybe this is one of the reasons it was set up as such?
Although — had it been set up better it could have given its’ contributors tax deductions. So I think it more likely it was set up this way so the McCann’s could benefit from it as necessary.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
(554) Molly
Yes very clever and cunning. My, these people are sneaky
September 10th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Molly is it not possible that he’s bidding for a lot of stuff on e-bay?