Madeleine McCann: Torture, A Witness, Robert Murat’s Innocence And Richard Branson Investigates
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
SUNDAY MAIL front page: “MADDIE POLICE TORTURE TRIAL.”
As reported by Anorak on June 11 (see Madeleine McCann And Amaral Policing): “Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral has been accused of concealing evidence that the mother of eight-year-old Joana Cipriano, who disappeared in the Algarve three years ago, was tortured by police into confessing she had killed her daughter, whose body was never found.”
Is this the British Press discrediting the Portuguese police? Should they leave our Kate and Gerry alone? (Do the Portuguese police have a PR?)
“Lies, beatings, secret trials: the dark side of police handling Madeleine case” – If the Portuguese police do have a PR, they should get a new one.
“Madeleine: Hair in McCann Renault: ‘It could be anyone’s’” - British forensic experts have concluded the fragments said to be Madeleine’s could belong to any number of people who had come into contact with the silver Renault Scenic.
THE OBSERVER: “Maddy police: we blundered.” Remember Robert Murat?
Says a source said to be from within the Portuguese police force: “British police and crime experts also suggested that Murat fitted the profile to have been behind a kidnapping. But the Lisbon investigators were from the start unsettled about the lack of any motive. Months later, there is nothing to suggest he was involved.”
But, er, Robert Murat remains a suspect.
SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: “Hope for McCanns as law on secrecy is eased.”
Plans are afoot to change the rules in Portugal. The “new law means that all suspects and third parties, including the media, will have access to police documents in any investigation - unless the public prosecutor decides that secrecy will benefit the inquiry or protect the rights of the accused.”
And the police can make their views known to the public, too.
And: the McCanns have announced an £80,000 advertising campaign to help find Madeleine.
SUNDAY EXPRESS: “MADELEINE MYSTERY - POLICE TO ACT OUT MADDIE TRAGEDY”.
No longer a criminal case. It is now a tragedy. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says a tragedy is a “branch of drama that treats in a serious and dignified style the sorrowful or terrible events encountered or caused by a heroic individual.”
Yes, dignified. Who knew?
DAILY STAR ON SUNDAY front page: “MADDIE. The missing journey.”
Where did she go?
SUNDAY TIMES front page: “Branson gives cash to defend McCanns.”
Sir Richard Branson is giving £100,000 to create a “fighting fund” to help the parents of Madeleine McCann to clear their names.
A source close to Branson says: “Sir Richard wants to ensure the McCanns get access to the best legal advice. He has a good instinct on these things.”
The Virgin Sniffer will crack the case. Or will his PR and marketing departments get there first.
But is Branson right? Let’s take a look at the survey…
“According to a YouGov poll for The Sunday Times, only 20% of respondents believe that the McCanns are completely innocent. Nearly half (48%) believe that they could have been responsible for their daughter’s death, even if it was an accident; 32% were unsure. A total of 40% said that the McCanns’ high-profile campaign had made them suspicious, but 50% said that it had not.”
Tasteful stuff. But we need another poll to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann.
Times Columnist India Knight is a McCann junkie. “I want to stop reading, listening, watching, Googling, amateur sleuthing; I nauseate myself with my own prurience. My appetite for commentary – which is all that’s left, in the absence of hard facts – has been sated many times over. But I can’t stop.”
She craves information. But there isn’t any. Unless you listen to sources”…
“Police leaks, gossip and a clash of cultures close in on McCanns” - Yesterday the police spokesman Olegario de Sousa quit “in dismay” at the daily leaks to the press.
Those Portuguese police leaks only add to the speculation and the pain. Thanks goodness for the clarity and sensitivity provided by the Times.
As the Times notes: “Maria do Sameiro Oliveira, a psychologist who does criminal profiling for the police, said she found it strange ‘how they function so much as a unit, always holding hands rigidly’ and pointed out that normally in cases of child disappearances, ‘the mother and father start to diverge, one wants to continue the search, the other not’. She added: “They show little evidence of suffering. They are very formal.”
You should not be influence by Ms Oliveria’s words. When responding to the Times’ survey, make your judgement. Make up your own survey.
THE INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY: “The McCanns: Unbelievable truth or unimaginable nightmare?”
The human interest angle and a time to look back over week of speculation.
NEWS OF THE WORLD: “MADDIE: THE SECRET WITNESS – TV boss holds vital clue to mystery.”
Jeremy Wilkins is the man whose “bombshell testimony could clear the McCanns”.
And: “Jeremy Wilkins’ evidence blows holes in the police theory that Gerry and Kate killed four-year-old Madeleine.”
Wilkins is said to be the man who spoke to Gerry McCann for up to 15 minutes outside the holiday apartments — “moments after checking on his children for the last time.”
A pal says: “He is entirely convinced of Kate and Gerry’s innocence. He believes they are a decent family caught up in an unimaginable nightmare.”
With Wilkin’s certainly and Richard Branson’s sense of smell, the McCanns may be placed once more above suspicion.
All the Madeleine McCann Faction Here…
Posted: 16th, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (655) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
September 16th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
The reason that a parent does not wash a favourite toy when a child dies is simple. Given the fact that small children dribble when teething, to do so washes away the last physical remains of the child.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
360 - Jim
Parents with Munchausens Syndrome have no problem making their child sick (Munchausens by Proxy). People with mental illness do all kinds of crazy things. If Kate and/or Gerry have some kind of mental disorder then washing Cuddle Cat may be some kind of cover up as if washing away the sin? Who knows? I’d hate to speculate or Real Stig might come back and give me more stick!
September 16th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
The views of the “childhood” friends doesnt mean anything. Did the 7/7 bombers wife even know what he was going to do or be capable of? No. Nor did their parents or other family members or friends.
Did David Kelly’s wife know he was going to kill himself? of course not.
Every human being as the capacity to commit evil, act out of character or accidentally do something bad - for people who were not there to claim they did not or could not have done it is nonsense.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
354 Kate supposedly washed Cuddle Cat because it smelt of sun tan lotion. Can you imagine washing your missing child’s favourite toy? Washing that child’s touch away forever?
Also Stevo, you are right, not a single pic of Maddie and Cuddle Cat, but look at the pic of Maddie in the red dress with the bags under her eyes. That’s a little one who had a very heavy sleep
September 16th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
357 - Judge Dread
Interesting. But where is the story that staff saw them? Like I say, I find nothing on this when I look. It’s like you remember hearing that but can’t actually find it when you trawl the Internet for it.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Does anyone have a good McCann response for the repeated question:
Why did Kate wash the cuddle cat?
September 16th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
332 - a) 1 to 2 minutes is about right to walk 120 meters at 10pm when it is pretty dark. It is pretty dark outside right now. Why don’t you go out and give it a try.
b) There are two extremes positions in terms of the amount of alcohol drunk by 9 people between approximately 8.30 and 10pm. The police say they have a receipt showing 14 bottles had been bought (there is a difference between bought and drunk) The McCanns suggested approximately 4 bottles had been drunk by the group. We cannot be sure which is right but in 90 minutes, and assuming that some people may have been drinking other drinks, I think the lower number is probably closer to the truth. And where do you get your information? You state an individual walked the 120 meters after drinking 4 bottles. Which individual? Where have you read that? I would find it hard to stand up after 4 bottles. You are clearly making this up as you go along.
336 - Can you tell me where is it claimed that Gerry was on the phone for 15 minutes to a newspaper prior to checking on his daugher? At what time was this? There is a recurring story that they called Sky news after finging Maddie gone and prior to calling the police, but I would like to learn more about this call to a newspaper prior to checking on his daughter. I must have missed that
Please supply your source. Please stop spinning a story.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
354 Ian Willis
I know. You hear of bereaved parents leaving their kids’ rooms exactly as they were if they lose a child. Washing Cuddle Cat makes no sense at all.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
351 The CCTV at the cafe was not working if I remember rightly. However staff confirmed that Madeleine was with her parents at the cafe at 6.30pm. The twins were not with them, and I have seen nothing that suggests Madeleine was with the Mccanns when they collected the twins from kiddiecare shortly after. This seems very strange.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
325 ~ Wanderer [tks]
And for all those out there spending the rest of the night theorising on what happened here’s my last word for today.
todays http://www.bbc.co.uk
The support from Sir Richard also coincides with the decision by life-long friends of Kate McCann to publicly defend her reputation as a mother.
Linda McQueen and Nicky Gill, who have known Kate McCann since childhood, gave an interview saying Kate and her husband Gerry were “the most loving, family-oriented couple”.
So there you have it……they’re innocent case closed…… except of course 3 year child is still missing. If Kate and Gerry were to put as much effort in to leaving no stone unturned to find the child instead of leaving no stone unturned to manipulate the public then perhaps the out come would be different.
The truth will out…. Good night and god bless [in the words of the great dave allen ~ whoever your god may be]
September 16th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
When my son was a toddler, he had a favourite teddy bear. We had to buy a duplicate so we could wash his favourite one and exchange it without him knowing. He grew up with two teddies - “old teddy” and “new teddy”, because one was cleaner looking than the other. I don’t believe Kate McCann when she says Cuddle Cat was Madeleine’s favourite toy or you’d see her with it in more photos. Parents will know what I mean about this…
September 16th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Does anyone know if Kate Mccan has explained why (wtf!) did she wash Cuddle Cat, with the potential DNA evidence there could have been on it?
Most experts say that genuinely distressed parents leave everything as it was of their missing child, including their room and toys.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
348 Gerry hasn’t played tennis, so he can’t put it on the blog. The blog’s about the tennis, man!
September 16th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
On Cuddle Cat - if this was Madeleine’s favourite toy then how come there’s not a single photo of Madeleine with this toy?
September 16th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
347 - Tony Bennett
I keep hearing the story that they were seen on CCTV around 5pm-6pm but can’t find anything on the Internet to support it other than “sources said they saw…”
For now I’m dismissing that CCTV thing as another misnomer in the story.
I genuinely don’t think we’ve got a coherent timeline for May 3. It would be nice to have a timeline for the entire day and not just the time from 6pm onwards.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
346 No Ian, You wouldn’t. More telling, when your baby has supposedly been snatched you wouldn’t let the other two out of your sight. You’d be paranoid. Not K & G, they were everywhere on the news, but Cuddle Cat was with them, you hardly saw Sean and Amelie. You’d think that one of the parents would have stayed with the twins.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
How can Gerry have time to update his blog when he’s busy negotiating his book deal…
September 16th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
and hey…what’s happened to Gerry’s blog? Only 1 blog on the 10th since they were announced as arguidos.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
re (Stevo - 280) who said: “Stevo Says:
September 16th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
274 - Wanderer
“I think Madeleine came to her demise earlier on that day/afternoon. They could have been out someplace and she came to some mishap and the parents would have had longer time to come up with the abduction story. I just don’t see how they could have concocted an abduction story in half an hour or so. Either she was abducted or else I think she disappeared a long time before they went out that evening. After all, the parents are the last ones to have seen her alive. The whole story revolves around what they say happened…not the others in the Tapas Bar - because they didn’t actually see Madeleine that evening according to all the reported stories”.
REPLY: Many of the known facts about this case do indeed point to the possibility of Madeleine’s demise during the afternoon.
The two things that seem to destroy this theory, though, are:
1) them being seen on CCTV walking to the beach, apparently with Madeleine - around 5pm - 6pm?
2) a waiter/waitress saying s/he was playing with Madeleine in a cafe somewhere at around 6pm to 6.30pm (I think).
Someone else has posted here stating that these two instances of her being seen with one or both parne are fact.
If so, then the only window of time for Madeleine to have met her demise (if that is what happened) was between around 6.30pm to 8.30pmat the very latest. If that happened, it would certainly have required very rapid thinking by the McCanns.
P.S. A few days ago, on an earlier thread, someone spoke negatively about people trying to ’solve’ this case on the Net. Well, there was a famous murder case, a long time ago, solved purely by someone with a keen mind reading newspaper reports and nothing else - long before the days of the Net and in fact before TV.
There is no reason in principle why a person or persons armed with relevant facts and a keen mind should not be able to ’solve’ this case - or get close to doing so.
And it does not breach libel laws or interfere with the course of justice to speculate on what might have happened unless and until someone is charged with an offence.
Then, we will all have to shut up. Until then, there is freedom of speech
September 16th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
I have no idea over what happened to the missing girl and will not speculate, but will comment on the following.
1 New Media Campaign
The McCann camp are now launching a fresh media campaign, targeting Spain, Portugal and some other countries on the Continent. This is because, obviously, this is where they think their daughter and her abductor(s) may be.
Okay, so why the film in UK cinemas shown before a children’s film – if it wasn’t a cynical attempt at fundraising?
2. Richard Branson
We are now told that this respected businessman is setting up a new fund to fight the legal costs of the McCanns. Is this, by any chance, the same Richard Branson who was investigated over fiddling VAT (admitted) and drugs offences many years back?
Is his airline the same one that colluded with BA over price fixing, but then ran to the authorities (when it became too hot) and escaped prosecution by snitching against a competitor?
3. Briefings
The Portuguese Police appear to be leaking information, and the McCann camp are briefing against them and also against Robert Murat. They are, in my view, all as bad as each other in respect of their cynical use of media, who lap it all up and print page after page of crap.
End.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Simon you say “Very easy to get the the apartment, grab a child and make a quick getaway. Maddie never stood a chance.”
So then why come running back (as reported) to the bar and leave the other 2 babies behind?
If your house was burgled and some of your valuables taken but some left behind, would you wander off down the road to the phonebox leaving the house empty and unlocked again?
September 16th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
It’s quite easy for Kate McCann to still have post natal depression. For some women, that can last up to 2-3 years after birth. There’s no doubt Madeleine is a gorgeous toddler but we know nothing about her behaviour. Does anyone have any links to stories about her behaviour? I can’t find any.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
337, and anyone who has seen some of those real crime shows will have seen just how callous humans can be. The nicest people have turned out to be evil killers. Ted Bundy was on a help liner at the Samaratins for goodness sake
September 16th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
297 - “that’s unbelieveably cruel. He was three years old, you have to teach you children to walk alone at some point.”
NOT AT THREE - and he wasn’t walking he was in a crowded shop. When my children were young and I was at a counter they were in front of me where I could see them, and on reigns.
I bet his mother wished he had been.
You are proof of how as a society, have become to tolerent of those who neglect their children.
I see little difference in having a child behind you in a crowded shop where you cannot protect him, and leaving children in an apartment with an unlocked door where you also cannot protect them.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
338 - very plausible
September 16th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
337 or is it 339?
Thank gawd for that!
September 16th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
331 - and Stig…you may drive a car and be a potential killer but you’re not an arguido are you? These parents are suspects in the disappearance of their daughter.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
313
Julie is absolutely correct of course. The PJ have leaked a few minor titbits to build up pressure and prepare the ground in peoples’ minds (or the press have concocted it in some cases) - the main course is yet to come, very hard to digest for some!
Hence some very desparate spinning.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
327 I think and it’s just an opinion, that Kate gave Maddie too much sedative, and Gerry couldn’t stand the thought of them being struck off, AND that the rest of the Tapas 9 were of the same practice. If they get found out it’s the end of all their careers, so this would be a motive, and a reason for the strange contradictory witness statements for the evening of May 3rd
September 16th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Anyone who has seen a police movie, or the Discovery channel murder cases, knows the good cop bad cop approach and other various forms (fair and unfair) for the police to achieve a confession.
Portoguese police probably did something along those lines…It is not strange to imply that a criminal may get a better deal if he/she confesses.
This has happened in millions of interogations in the US, the UK and other advanced countries..
The McCanns are taking advantage of Portugal’s southern European, EU laggard image to diffuse the real issues.
It is yet another insulting argument by the McCann’s team of highly paid consultants…