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
- 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
- yampster on Join The Campaign For Straight Gay Marriages
September 16th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
re 457 Angelo: “The Pope removed Maddie from his website the day BEFORE Kate became a suspect - so count her out”.
REPLY: Shows the Vatican still has the best intelligence system in the world. Do they still have those massive offices in the Papal palace where they process all the information that comes in from the confessionals around the globe - employing hundreds of intelligence-gathereres?
I think btw it was a vision that Gerry had at the church in Praia de Luz the second Sunday after Madeleine was killed/abducted - a vison of much light at the end of a tunnel - that ‘inspired’ him to open up a world-wide campaign for her return. There’s a bit about it in a Roman Catholic newspaper
September 16th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
438 Tuscany
Finally, some sense. Yes, it was reported in a paper that the McCanns had considered hiring a PI but hadn’t because it would have been illegal.
I find it amazing how some people can bang on about the McCanns, pontificating about their bad character then someone else will criticise them for not breaking the law - damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
Just a note to all those going on about sedatives. Before becoming a GP, Kate was specialising in anaesthetics. The suggestion she would accidentally overdose one of her own kids is bunkum. The McCanns say they didn’t have any sleeping pills - only Calpol. The PJ have never given any indication that they found a bottle of sleeping pills or anything similar.
I suspect someone expert in anaesthesia would be the last person to casually give sleeping pills and such to their own kids.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
471 - I’d like to call you insane, and I say that in a very positive way. It’s good to be insane. Apparantly one in 4 is insane, but Simon, how do you figure there was an abduction, and that the McCann’s also overdosed their kids. Methinks you want everything in the scenario
September 16th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
(475) I know you probably don’t have the answer to this.
What is the McCanns confess and get a deal? And it still falls into the misdemeanor legal zone? I have no idea of the likelyhood of that, nor do I know if they are guilty or not, but what would poor Mr. Branson do? Not only would be funding the legal proceedings of criminals, he’d also look bad! Shock, horror!
And I know, I know, taxpayers pay for public defenders, so Mr. Branson is no different, but he is using this for the publicity and is so sure he’ll come clean no matter what happens.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:31 pm
473 - Quite right! Let’s hear it for Scooby the sniffer dog. Yay.
As I told my handler, she was brought back to the flat; she was hugged (hence clothes); cuddlecat was put on her body one last time (hence cuddlecat); bible was placed on her body as a prayer was said (hence bible page); Then she was taken away and buried. Poor mite.
But Scooby is right. His nose is key to this. He doesn’t lie. And Scooby ALWAYS cracks the case…
September 16th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
I dony wish to tarnish the McCanns any further though you all know my view on this in previous posts over the weeks. But I just wanted to change tack for a moment and talk about the twins. Now I dont know if its just me but something doesnt seem right with those kids. I cant put my finger on it and I may be totally outvoted here but when I have seen them they look very lethargic and almost hypnotised with their stares. I remember one video with the boy and his eyes just looked vacant. Maybe I’m seeing something that isnt there. You’ll let me know.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
re 463 helsangel says:
September 16th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
let’s face it Angelo, even if Dickie backs the wrong horse. It won’t hurt him. He’ll just come off as a humanitarian. However, let’s see if he continues to throw money at them, after 25 days (or whenever the money runs out)
REPLY: Apparently Branson has issued a clarification saying he’ll pay the £100,000 ONLY IF Kate or Gerry are charged with an offence. So his generosity is, er, not quite unbounded
September 16th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
472 - to use Gerry’s word “craters” - giant enormous craters
September 16th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
434 - I would NOT discount the sniffer dogs “testimony” too soon Rosemary.
The two cases are vastly different. Plus, it is only one example of where the sniffer dogs testimony was discounted. And it was an American against an American. You can’t predict the outcome on this.
This is totally different circumstantial evidence. The sniffer dogs just spot and point to where the trail of the DNA is - but the key is in what is actually found there as in the 80% - 100% match to Madeleine’s DNA in this case.
The Mccanns can go out and hire whomever they want. But it sure looks mighty suspicious that these parents of a missing child are not taking the offensive but rather the defensive approach. Mark Klass said, “if that were my kid, as in his daughter Polly, I’d let them search me up and down and give the police anything they need to find her. This defensive approach by the parents reeks of a cover up”.
For all his money, Richard Branson is an idiot and a fool to be pledging more financial help for the McScamms. Maybe he’s so overwhelmed with grief and not thinking straight after his buddy Steve Fossett’s been missing for over two weeks now.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
412
That’s a bit of an old chestnut about ‘discrepancies’.
Sure, there are always discrepancies as well as different viewpoints, or ‘takes’, on the same event. People describe what they saw - or think they saw - and things like time and distance may be misjudged.
But here we have some massive contradictions, not just minor ‘discrepancies’. And *lots* of contradictions
September 16th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
461 - Scooby.
Yep. I’ve seen it.
HIs body language is very worrying.
Just to clarify my position, I do not beleive that an accident occured. I do not beleive in the precence of seven medical folk, including a pharmacologist a GP and a cardiologist, any kids died of an accidental overdose.
That doesn’t mean I don’t beleive the McCanns had givn their children sedatves. It is entirely possible that over a period of time, they had. If Maddie was sedated, I doubt that that night was the first time it had happened.
I beleive that an abduction occured. Most likely, without prior knowledge of the McCanns. I think it is also possible that somethign was planned in advance.
This does not feel like an accident occured, between 6.30 and 10pm, for which one two or more people are complicit in a cover up and fake abduction.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
and also the notice the sudden high-pitch in his voice while he composes his answer, his lowered eye gaze, and her nervous eye movements which relax once he has answered the question
September 16th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
411 - re the unlikely looking photo of the woman with the eyes all purple, allegedly battered by Portuguese police.
I agree with your scepticism. My first thought was: ‘Two very neat black eyes, one directly in each eye?’
Unlikely.
And how soon after she was in police custody was this photograph taken?
I suggest it was a set-up by her to try and get back at the police, who had exposed her crime
September 16th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
463, let’s face it Angelo, even if Dickie backs the wrong horse. It won’t hurt him. He’ll just come off as a humanitarian. However, let’s see if he continues to throw money at them, after 25 days (or whenever the money runs out)
September 16th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
(452) m.e.- I have no idea where anyone should search, but I’m sure some seasoned professionals with fresh eyes may find some information the police overlooked. I wasn’t trying to be critical of the police or the McCanns with the statement you were responding to. It just seems like there is nowhere left to go with the “evidence” that is in the collection now.
Apparently, the McCanns aren’t allowed to use the search fund, legally, to search for their daughter at this time. I have no idea if they are guilty or not, and to be honest wasn’t paying much attention to this case when it first appeared, so I have no idea how “hands-on” they were at first, as for them searching for her, I’m frustrated that they aren’t as well, but with a legal excuse, I can’t soundly criticize them on that decision (although I’d like to, but criticizing law abiders is a bit of a dead end).
I know cops can state they believe the child is dead, but in recent years we have seen abducted children taken from their families and returned years later. So until a body shows up or an abductor/witness/the McCanns come forward saying “alright we know what happened”, I’m a bit saddened that everything seems to have just gone stale.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
scooby, watch the clip again and the nread this:
http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/06/29/the_top_seven_signs_that_someone_is_lying_to_you.htm
September 16th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Now if you don’t know how to spend your money
…A fighting fund to help to pay their legal costs is expected to be announced within the next few days. A source close to the family told The Times: “It will be getting set up and formalised as a proper fund. It has to be meticulously thought through.”
timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2469329.ece
September 16th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
re 393 (Colette): Colette Says: - September 16th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
“Could the waiter / waitress in the afternoon at tea time been playing with one of the other couple’s little girl, unknowingly?”
REPLY: Very valid point. It is all a bit vague so far as I know.
“Though they would remember a face surely? And if M is the one on the CCTV then that would put an end to that speculation about something happening earlier in the afternoon…”
REPLY: I wonder who exactly said she was seen on the CCTV, presumably someone from Mark Warner? - any further replies would be very much appreciated
September 16th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
Quote: When the McCanns said under no circumstances would they touch the Find Madeleine Fund and mentioned they would sell their house, Richard felt he had to do something. He is a father and there is a missing child out there.
Richard Branson should have studied this more carefully.
The spokesperson for the FindMaddieFund said on national TV that the funds could legally be used to pay for the McCanns legal costs.
Only - if they LOSE they will have to PAY IT ALL BACK!!!!
This is the real reason that the McCanns will not use it - they know they are going to LOSE!!!!!!
This is why they have set up a seperate fund to con stupid millionaires into paying for their fees - WITHOUT PAYING IT BACK IF THEY LOSE!!!!!!
Oh dear Richard - I thought you were a clever man! - Maybe you are…just dont want to say the truth…..Richard felt he had to do something. He is a businessman and there is a fortune to be made from the McCanns!!!!
September 16th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
446 Ian Willis “Tuscany, If private contractors are prepared to risk their lives in Iraq as bodyguards for just £10,000, I am sure there will be queues of P.I’s ready to be jailed for 6-12 months in Portugal to earn £150,000 to investigage M’s disappearance.”
Is that the jail term, 6-12 months for setting up a private investigation in Portugal? How much work could PI do before getting charged? Probably wouldn’t see ANY of the money!!
Not related I know, but here in the US the news is full of OJ Simpson being arrested in Las Vegas for robbery. He could get 10-20 yrs. I would love him to finally see some jail time!!!!!
September 16th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
429 - Have you watched the clip referenced in 391 ? Have a gander and then say whether you still think old Ger is telling the truth about ‘no sedatives’…
September 16th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
445 - Anna
Virtually everyone on this sight and elsewhere have been disgusted by the way the McCanns left their children to the mercy of predators. The natural resonse, to sympathise with parents losing their child has been tainted by the fact that it could have been avioded and would have been avaoided by most parents.
This example of terrible parenting is in our minds whatever the McCanns do. That they chose to mount a media campaign or were just swept up in a media campaign is for me, a separate issue. The media blitz feels like a great thinng to happen, but why there weren’t seen to be on the ground, i Portugal, day after day searching for Maddie feels wrong.
I don’t buy the narcisism argument. I think they missed a huge opportunity to appear to be doing the right thing. As a result, we doubt them.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
454 Wanderer: “Also, if they really believe that money isn’t going to be used in the near future, for whatever reason. Wouldn’t it be best to make good on the clause that says that some of the money would/could go to help other searches for missing children or their families? There are a few around the world, and I’m sure something as low as 5k could make a big difference for them.”
Point well taken, thank you.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
We can only speculate on the leaks and so forth, but FACT is on day 135 or whatever yesterday was the McCanns spent a measly 80k looking for Madeleine. Has Gerry’s arrogance allowed him to think that we haven’t noticed that the charity he started on May 4th (say), that he applied to have incorporated on May 18th, has done nothing to help find a little girl whose fate, by now must surely be determined in the grimmest of fashions. Gerry McCann is up there with Bundy and Dahmer - a raging sociopath (psycopath - all the same)
Definitely dead in my bed by morning - the pro McCann camp will have me abducted
September 16th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
Kate and Gerry McCann send to US for help against evidence of sniffer dogs
timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2469329.ece
Sorry about not writing the whole URL – somehow I cannot post links
September 16th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Unless the Freemasons are backing the McCanns I doubt if the goverment or church will still be behind them Ian 450.
The Pope removed Maddie from his website the day BEFORE Kate became a suspect - so count her out.
2 millionaires have also backed out.
It will be a profitable deal for Branson - if they win or lose - but contacts with influencial people is not something he needs - he already has it.
More is the point - if he wants to keep influencial people on side he may be making a BIG mistake on this one!
September 16th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
392 (pixie) and 403 (helsangel):
Putting your hand or finger to your head - ears, nose, side of head etc. is a well-known tell-tale sign of lying. Gerry McCann clearly does this in the clip. Here’s one extract on tell-tale non-verbal signs of lying from the Net. We’e probably all done it from time to time:
Unusual body language.
If a person taps their foot a lot, fidgets with their hands, raises their shoulders, turns away from you or brings their hand to their face (to touch their chin or nose, etc.) - in other words, if they act nervous or uncomfortable - it could mean they’re telling a lie. Also watch out for blushing (or becoming pale) and increased blinking.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
(437) Tuscany:
“On a previous thread, someone posted a link to an article which described how the Portuguese police were ready to charge PIs from the Netherlands, who were independently investigating the case. I believe there was a reference to mediums being involved too. So, apparently it is illegal to use PIs in Portugal, could that be why the McCanns have been unable to use the fund for anything other than posters and armbands? And even if the McCanns want to flout the law, would they be able to find a PI who was willing to do the same? I doubt it.”
That is a bit of contradiction, as your post spoke of independent investigators in the Netherlands. I’m sure it isn’t best to go against the law, but at the same time, were they not aware of that law when they set up the fund? Surely they looked into it, what else did they think they were going to do with all the money, other than hire people more people/possibly provide tools for a massive search group. Surely this wasn’t all raised just for advertising but some practical things as well? (other than providing for the family while they wait)
Also, if they really believe that money isn’t going to be used in the near future, for whatever reason. Wouldn’t it be best to make good on the clause that says that some of the money would/could go to help other searches for missing children or their families? There are a few around the world, and I’m sure something as low as 5k could make a big difference for them.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
441:
Yes - I understand what you mean.
This is quite interesting:
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.”
timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2461258.ece
From the same article:
The family-loving Portuguese find it hard to understand that working parents who see little of their children at home would come on holiday then send their children to the Ocean Club crèche every day.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
444 wanderer
where are we supposed to search??? We are led to believe that she is dead aren’t we? Its only the McCanns who stress the need to search still so why havent they spent the whole of the fund on SEARCHING for her?