Madeleine McCann: Missing Hours, Found Again And A PR Disaster
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
THE SUN front page: “MADDIE DAD AGONY. Fiend hid from Gerry. He was already in room he tells cops.”
A source close to the family says: “When Gerry went to check on Madeleine at 9.05pm he realised the bedroom door was open. Gerry is firmly of the view the abductor was already in the apartment.”
It’s another theory.
“When he went in he saw Madeleine was asleep but the bedroom door was slightly open. He thought, ‘That’s odd’ because he had left it firmly closed. But all the children were asleep. So he just went in and closed the door again and came out about 9.10pm.”
Good to hear Gerry McCann joining in the mood of speculation?
“Gerry is convinced the man must have been hiding, and once Gerry went through the patio doors the only way out was through the window. The front door was locked so the kidnapper took Madeleine and climbed out the window.”
DAILY MIRROR front page: “HOW SHE WAS TAKEN. The McCanns’ story.”
“Stolen to order after being spied on for days
Abductor hid in flat as Gerry looked in on kids
He got in through patio doors and out by window”
Gerry is a “heart specialist”.
Says a source: “When Gerry leaves, the man realises he has only a few minutes. He thinks the only way to get out without being seen is through the window.”
And: “Initially he thought Madeleine might have got up and gone to the toilet, or to get a drink or something.”
So what has changed? Why a new theory now, with a new spokesman on hand and the McCanns named as suspects?
DAILY STAR front page: “SEVEN HOURS TO KLILL MADDIE. Police probe her ‘lost’ final afternoon”
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE: THE MISSING SEVEN HOURS.”
Police sources reveal that “despite exhaustive inquiries they cannot confirm the whereabouts of part-time GP Kate, 39, and her daughter after 1.29pm on May 3”. A source said Kate’s movements were “unaccounted for until she sat down to have dinner with friends at a tapas restaurant within their holiday complex at around 8.40pm”.
The last photograph of Madeleine was said to have been taken by Kate at 2.29pm on May 3.
DAILY MAIL: “McCanns: What we really did in the missing six hours.”
“Madeleine had high tea at 5.30pm with staff at the Kids Club. She was picked up shortly before 6pm by Kate and Gerry.”
The friend insisted: “Kate was never alone with Madeleine that afternoon. There were always other witnesses present. These details were all given to detectives during police interviews, so they know what Kate and Gerry said happened that day.”
So no missing hours, then?
THE TIMES front page: “MADELEINE McCANN: Matthew Parris laments a PR disaster.
“The fatal flaw of David Cameron and Kate and Gerry McCann” - Our correspondent looks at the baleful influence of the marketing men.
“Look what they’ve done to Kate and Gerry McCann. Here were two people deserving of the most intense public sympathy. On a superficial level they got it – by the media bucketload. Yet did you not sense from an early stage an undertone of irritation at the couple? I’ve sensed it everywhere I go: not a sign of doubt about their innocence, which most of us take for granted, but a feeling, nevertheless, that they in some way invited trouble – though we banish the thought as brutal and wrong.
“Which it is. So why the ungenerosity? I believe it is because Kate and Gerry McCann have allowed an impression to arise that they and their advisers are marketing their own tragedy. Where we would have expected to see parents distracted and disorganised by grief, we have seen a professionally run campaign to find out what the media want, and give it to them.
“This has been done for a most defensible reason: to enlist the entire European public as amateur detectives in the search for Madeleine. But now her parents have ended up looking like film stars in a Hollywood weepy.”
“Put up or shut up, Madeleine McCann police told” - Friend of McCanns counters claims of ‘lost’ six hours before girl vanished
DAILY TELEGRPAH: “Madeleine McCann: Gerry certain he was in bedroom with kidnapper”
THE GUARDIAN: “From prime suspects to hounded victims - how parents turned the media tide”
Posted: 22nd, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,536) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- Julie Roach on I’m A Celebrity Watch: Katie Price Is More Hated Than Baby P’s Mum
- yampster on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- yampster on Climate Gate: Politicians Investigate CRU’s Emails And The BBC Sat On The Story
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:57 pm
TEAM McCANN WRONG TO POINT FINGER AT MURAT AGAIN
The ‘Daily Mail’ has published these three comments on its website in response to its article featuring (you guessed it!) ‘a source close to the McCanns’ saying that the suspect abductor was walking in the direction of Robert Murat’s home.
What a contrast to less than a week ago, when they published 20 pro-McCann comments without a single McCann-sceptic being allowed to post. Surely we have reached a watershed in this case with the McCann-sceptics now beginning to push aside the McCann-worshippers:
=======================================
(1) Well, what a surprise! Yet another version of this tangled web pours forth from the McCann PR machine.
- Richard, North Yorkshire
(2) So if they saw a something like a child being carried late at night in that direction why did they not stop that person and ask if everything is okay, as they seem to think it was so suspicious yet they did nothing about it. The fact is they left the children alone, many children go missing all the time but why do these seem to have precedence above everyone else.
- H Wilson, Durham
(3) Another disgraceful attempt by Team McCann to smear Robert Murat. No mention of course of the witness who spoke to Gerry McCann on the same path that night and who gave a statement to police insisting that he had seen no mysterious man with a child and who also claimed that Jane Tanner was not on the path as she had claimed. Important also to mention that Murat’s DNA was not found in the McCann appartment nor was Madeleine’s DNA found in his cars or his home. The McCanns should be ashamed of themselves.
- P Robinson, London, UK
=======================================
If the press turn against them, what are the odds on Gerry McCann checking in to an expensive private clinic (remember, the Madeleine Fund is to ‘help the family with expenses’) for stress, or a nervous breakdown, or similar? Might make it more difficult for him to be charged - or to face a trial in Portugal.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:57 pm
682 Stevo
It was in the last thread 690 I think
Not O’Brien - it was Matthew Oldfield I mixed ‘em up
http://boards.courttv.com/showthread.php?threadid=308909
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:57 pm
691 - lunalunera
I know. But even someone who is trying to keep it together and hold their composure would have some detectable signs of that. Remember Diana’s brother reading out aloud at her funeral? He was trying to keep it together. He did a great job and a better job than I could but even his voice faltered a bit. Kate McCann is a robot and shows zero emotion.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:56 pm
I don’t really give high probability to the “Maddy disposed of as a disappointment” theory, though she may have been less well loved than the twins, perhaps, particularly if they were from Gerry’s sperm, and she was not. Which we cannot know.
But I fear it is probably true that while maddy’s eye looks ok from a distance, it might look a but disturbing and unpleasant close up.
But as a parent I don’t think it would in anyway reduce my love - maybe even increase it in the sense I would feel even more protective.
Haven’t been there, though, all mine were more or less ok, thank the lord.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:55 pm
Anagram [of LNSU] “No, not on! - U seen an evil drug” -first post
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:55 pm
684 - Simon
I’m in my mid-40s and have 3 kids. I know how I’d react to having one of my kids abducted. I think my reaction is typical. I think my interpretation of body language is based on what I’ve seen and witnessed with my own eyes. Perhaps if you don’t have kids, you won’t understand it properly. But, any loving, caring parent knows the devastation and emotional turmoil you’d have if this all really happened like the McCanns say. However, they are not reacting to it like that. They act like they are spokespeople or solicitors describing something that has happened to someone else. Note how I said “act”. That’s the problem with their stories…they are acting and not living it out for real.
Remember Jessica and Holly in Soham? Their parents were too crushed to make TV appearances. Remember Sarah Payne? The list goes on and on. The McCanns lack credibility because of their emotionless demeanor.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:55 pm
666 stevo
Agree with you completely on their body language.
I’ve said it before, we’re all different and I don’t expect them to be tearing their hair out, beating their chests, wailing or any preconceived ideas of how a bereft parent should act. I wholly appreciate that someone can hold their composure in public and then crumble in private, or even hold their composure..period, but what we are talking about here is not about what we see but about what we perceive, and there is something very contradictory in what they’re saying and what they’re transmitting
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:50 pm
687 - Ade
Hear, hear! The parents are already 100% guilty of negligence of the highest order. Everything else is secondary to that.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:50 pm
(677) FeketeP:
Hello! Happy to see you sharing your views here!
(679) Fiona:
Same thing as above. Along with that, I don’t think we’re really nasty people though, really nasty people are among the kind who take or hurt children!
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Pixie - it is possible that the McCanns were disappointed with Madeleine after the IVF treatment because she may have had some kind of genetic disorder. I always find it weird how women are offered a test during pregnancy to see if their baby has Downs Syndrome. I always ask myself what’s the point of that? I mean, it’s like a customised abortion test isn’t it? If they eventually develop tests for every known disorder during pregnancy, then people would only let the “good” babies go full term.
I don’t know the McCanns mentality on this but perhaps they were disappointed - IF it is shown that Madeleine does have some kind of medical problem.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
679 Fiona (McCann ?)
Sorry dear you are too late: through their negligence she’s dead and their love for her as demonstrated by their shabby cover up doesn’t wash with me. May they rot in hell…
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
679 - Fiona, welcome!
What do you beleive happened?
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
679:
Fiona – I’m not a nasty person, honest.
I come to this site because people express their opinion here freely – sometimes I agree, sometimes I don’t. But it’s very refreshing to see that not everybody has been brainwashed by the media.
You have never doubted the McCanns – WHY? Were you there when it happened? If not, then the fact that you have never doubted them says more about you than it says about them. I personally think that discussing things with people who have no doubts is a waste of time.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:46 pm
676 - Stevo, on body language, I think in the clips we have seen in the last few months, Gerry has lied, but I have no problem with Kate’s behaviour.
Body language is one of few thing I know a little about.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:46 pm
622 Vera
Me again on this article. What a hoot that Castle Craig is the top place for alcoholic addiction therapy. Do the tapas 7 get special rates? Creche and kid’s club attendance optional of course…
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:44 pm
678 - Ade
Where is the info about O’Brien already being investigated for something else? I hadn’t heard that so am interested to read about it. Do you have a link?
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:44 pm
yep - that works
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Hmmm - the coloboma picture link I gave doesn’t work from Anorak.
Strange.
Try
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://namiet.iespana.es/index_archivos/a/i_archivos/coloboma%2520iris.jpg&imgrefurl=http://namiet.iespana.es/index_archivos/a/i.htm&h=442&w=669&sz=76&hl=en&start=60&sig2=NnLkmRZBpZYpzKHdE0iEIA&um=1&tbnid=-UxD9E9jChD8yM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=138&ei=NHv1RrrhCoSmxAG3mrngDA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcoloboma%26start%3D40%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN
And then click on “see full size image” at the top.
For heaven sake don’t scroll down - the rest of the page is full of frightful monstrosities, and you won’t sleep.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
675 - Pixie
The trouble with genetic disorders is that there are so many of them. 10% of the population has a genetic disorder. CHARGE does look like a candidate but because there’s so many others it could be then it is hard to speculate without knowing more about Madeleine.
And isn’t that the real problem here? We know more about the parents than we do of the missing child? We know her height, age etc. but very little else. I find that strange in itself. Why are the family reluctant to share more about their little girl?
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:42 pm
You are all really nasty people. All the commentators seem to wallow in negative and critical thoughts about others. ‘Judge not, lest ye be judged’.
Have some compassion and love in your hearts. There is a child missing and a family in agony. I cannot believe how cruel and twisted so many people are.
I have never doubted the McCanns and never will. We can only pray for Madeleine and them.
Love each other.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 pm
622 vera
Just another thought having read the background about gerrykins’ family. He’s got a lot to lose by an accidental overdose but O’Brien has even more to lose, being already under investigation for negligence. Maybe O’Brien is behind all the cover-up stuff and not gerrykins, who would probably be ably to ride the storm of accidental death on holiday. For O’Brien (especially if he administered the sedative and it was a “special” of his) the situation would be a disaster. A second patient death through negligence while still under investigation for death number one. I’t like getting two speeding tickets on a 1 mile stretch of the M1.
Gerrykins probably went along with it because he was pissed as a fart and is naturally arrogant - but now regrets it all. that’s why he’s so pissed off now.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Hi everyone. I’ve only just found this website and it quite a relief to see people expressing things I have been thinking myself!
It’s a fascinating puzzle and I don’t know quite who or what to believe. I agree there is something profoundly fishy about the way the McCann’s have been behaving. Their responses to direct substances don’t have the ring of truth to them: Someone put up a YouTube where Gerry denies giving sedatives, why doesn’t he answer more directly? If he’d said calmly and firmly: “I’m a qualified doctor and it would be a professional breach of ethics if I were to do that - of COURSE we didn’t administer them..” I’d believe him. Instead we get a very mealy mouthed and ineffective evasion. There was a doping scandal in cycling in 2004 when a rider, Tyler Hamilton, was accused of taking an illegal blood transfusion. No one could believe he was guilty (he enjoyed a good reputation as a competitor but was proven beyond reasonable doubt to have been as guilty as hell) and yet his evasive denials are horribly reminiscent of the McCanns.
Having said that, I’m not sure I believe they killed them. I wonder if perhaps the truth is that they didn’t bother to check the kids, got pissed, and that a lot of this evasive lying is to cover up their negligence (perhaps they left the kids at 6 rather than 8.30 and did something crude and biological with another couple.)
I’m very sceptical about the sedation overdose. Both parents are highly trained doctors. Surely they’d be the last people to mess up a dose. And if Madelaine had entered anaphylactic shock, they’d have known when to call for external help (you need to get a kid to hospital and fast, the McCann’s would know that.) And if they’d beaten her to death, is it really realistic that they could have persuaded friends to cover up her death? If I look into my soul, I can imagine myself lying had I accidentally killed a child with an overdose, but there is no way would I casually cover up my best friend if I found he’d killed his child. This to me is not realistic. Even less so when they had so little time to do it.
So basically, nothing makes sense! But I shall be following what you other bright sparks have to say.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:40 pm
667 - Simon
We all have our opinions on this but I still lay down a challenge for anyone who doubts their body language is a factor to show us a link to a photo or video of either McCann shedding a tear or “losing it”.
I’ve said it many times and some in here have given links to Kate showing a scrunched up face. That’s not my point. It’s easy to fake that kind of thing. Show us REAL tears. I don’t expect them to lose control but a tear or two behind a quivering chin or lip would be quite within reason given what’s happened. Tears are a dead giveaway by either a tissue or a hand wiping away the tear from the face. I’ve seen many fakers and it’s easy to tell the difference between acting out emotion and real emotion. The two are like chalk and cheese.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:40 pm
672 - I totally agree with you Stevo.
I have mentioned this before – both the coloboma of the eye and the fact that Madeleine was fairly small might suggest she suffered from CHARGE syndrome:
CHARGE SYNDROME:
The following are the signs that were originally identified in children with this syndrome (not all children have or display all signs)
C - Coloboma of the eye, central nervous system anomalies
H - Heart defects
A - Atresia of the choanae
R - Retardation of growth and/or development
G - Genital and/or urinary defects (Hypogonadism)
E - Ear anomalies and/or deafness
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
Wonder if this is the same elusive David Payne?
http://www.leicestersecularsociety.org.uk/diary.htm
Sunday 22 April
REGULAR PROGRAMME: 7:00pm. — David Payne: More of David’s Good Drinking Wines. Last year David Payne, secretary of The Grand Union Wine Society, came to us with a selection of his favourite tipples. It was such a good evening we’ve asked him back. Members free - others £10.00. Numbers limited to 30. [I presume this went of as planned?]
–
Not managed to find a picture of him yet.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:37 pm
622 Thank you for your concern. I have however reread what I posted and stand by it.
My position, which I have stated regualrly on this forum is abduction.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:35 pm
664 - Pixie
I know - I’ve seen that article many times. But I’m skeptical of it because how would they have got such controversial and private information? How can they know she was autistic? That is unlikely to be in the public domain. If Madeleine was at school, there’d be more chance of that info being known but she was only 3 remember. At that age, it’s harder to diagnose and you can come up with a multitude of behavioural disorders that resemble autism without it actually being autism. I doubt that story because it doesn’t cite any references.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:35 pm
666 Stevo. Couldn’t agree with you more. Suggested (on yesterday’s thread) that an expert on body language study all their interviews etc. It was their body language and choice of words which did not ring true from Day 1.
Must go now. Goodnight all.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Cuddle Cat, Cuddle Cat, where have you been?
‘To Praia da Luz, with Mad-e-leine’.
Cuddle Cat, Cuddle Cat, what did you there?
‘Ended up on a ledge; someone put me there’.
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:34 pm
“I have a friend, with brown eyes, who has one normal eye, and the other one is partially orange in color. she has no other conditions related to this, just two eyes that are not identical and don’t match. That’s not unusual.”
You misunderstand. The black streak on Maddy’s Iris is not a miscoloured part of her iris. It is a hole in her iris, showing the black interior of her eye. In effect a huge, elongated pupil which will render her unable to see properly, and is caused by genetic damage. Sometimes related to IVF. Often associated with more subtle internal problems. It is called Coloboma.
Medline : “Coloboma of the iris is a congenital (present since birth) defect of the iris of the eye. It is visible as a hole, split, or cleft in the iris.”
Here is picture of one slightly worse tham Maddy’s, which makes it clear that it is not just a coured iris.
http://namiet.iespana.es/index_archivos/a/i_archivos/coloboma%20iris.jpg
You can google images for more, but be warned, many are worse than this, and they are not at all pretty.