Madeleine McCann: A House Of Love, Find the Body & What Kate McCann Screamed
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE. ‘FIND BODY OR McCANNS WILL ESCAPE’ – Prosecutors ultimatum to Portuguese police.”
The case against Kate and Gerry McCanns is “hanging by a thread”.
A police sources says: “There is a determination within the force to bring this investigation to a satisfactory conclusion but there is a growing fear that without a body, that goal will be impossible.”
Pages 4 and 5: “Our reputation is tarnished forever” – Each day the McCanns prepare themselves for the “worst case scenario”. No, not that they will be wrongly convicted, rather they will learn of Madeleine’s death.
Clarence Mitchell says: “In the middle of this people forget this is still a family who are potentially facing bereavement but are still in that awful limbo position of not knowing what has happened to their daughter.” Thankfully Mr Mitchell is on hand to remind people of this every day.
“Doubts on the McCanns by a lie detector expert” – THE WORLD’S GREATEST NEWSPAPER asks John Ryan, of International Truth Verification Technologies Institute, to listen to Kate McCann’s voice. Says she: “However I think there is some sort of deception when I hear the lady speaking, either over the event or in avoiding showing her true feelings”.
DAILY MIRROR front page: “MADELEINE – find a body or there is no case.”
Page 5: “Gerry and Kate have often talked about the possibility of Madeleine being found dead. That would be the worst news but it would at least give them some..CLOSURE”. So says a “source close to the legal team”.
Antonio Cluny, President of the Public Prosecution Service, says: “Without the little girl’s body, everything is complicated… In the Maddy case, there is no confession and, according to what has been made public, the evidence gathered up until now keeps all leads open – from abduction to homicide or at least to a simple accident”.
DAILY MAIL front page: “EXCLUSIVE: Eyewitness reveals Maddie’s mother DID shout: ‘They’ve taken her’ after four-year-old vanished. WHAT KATE DID SCREAM.”
Nanny Charlotte Pennington is in Praia da Luz. She hears Kate McCann scream: “They’ve taken her, they’ve taken her!” The McCanns say Kate screamed “Madeleine’s gone”.
Sensation. Front-page news.
Page 4: “Nanny Pennington, who worked at the Ocean Club, is pictured. She’s wearing a brown beret and a pink coat. Her tights are black. Her legs are crossed.
“I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone. When we were coming out we saw Kate and she was screaming: ‘They’ve taken her, they’ve taken her’… It might not have been the first thing she said. But she definitely said it.”
So…
“She also repeated Madeleine’s name and said: ‘She’s gone, she’s gone.’”
Anyone hear anything else?
THE SUN page 24: “MADDIE LAW CHIEF: NO BODY, NO CASE.” Antonio Clunes says: “There have been cases in which it was possible to obtain a conviction without a victim – but there were confessions.”
But the McCanns are innocent, says a source. And they are not confessing. They are talking through their spokesperson.
DAILY STAR front page: “COPS CLOSE IN ON MADDIE. Final pieces of tragic jigsaw falling into place.”
Pages 4 and 5: “FIND THE BODY OR THEY WALK. Law bosses tell Portuguese cops to step up hunt.”
“TWINS’ HOUSE OF LOVE” – Clarence Mitchell says the McCanns have built a “house of love” for their family. Mr Mitchell says the McCanns are living “every parent’s worst nightmare times ten”. Mr Mitchell used to work for the tabloid press.
DAILY TELEGRAPH page 13: “Case against McCanns ‘rests on finding body’.”
Clarence Mitchell says: “They did not harm, let alone kill her.”
THE TIMES page 11: “No body, no conviction says McCann police.”
THE GUARDIAN & THE INDEPENDENT: No Madeleine news.
Posted: 25th, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,296) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- June on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- June on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- Tony on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- Cheryl on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- cheekyappleblossom on I’m A Celebrity: Quitter Katie Price Wanted To Die With Jedward
September 26th, 2007 at 2:00 am
Well I am always interested to read what you posts. Most of it so far has been been circumstantial at best, but you are dedicated to the cause, which I admire.
Assuming we rule out for a moment the accident throry, could you suggest a motive?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:59 am
1209 Simon
Let’s leave it at that and move on to debate the next issue as and when.
Thanks
September 26th, 2007 at 1:57 am
well i’ll continue my gay theory on to tomorrows thread
no stone unturned and all
nite
September 26th, 2007 at 1:55 am
1213 Simon
Yes. I have been compiling analyses of lies and deceptions by Kate and Gerry McCann and of the many contradictions and shifting stories by the McCanns and some of the Tapas 9 - far too many to post here. Plus other material extracted from various forums. I’ve no inside information at all, just using techniques of research and analysis
September 26th, 2007 at 1:52 am
TonyB:
The point an awful lot of commentators have overlooked is the concurrent jurisdiction.
In principle the English and Portuguese AGs can get together and decide which of them will prosecute - it’s not a question of prosecuting in Portugal following extradition, or NOT prosecuting at all, but a question of prosecuting in Portugal or England (with a jury system, current inadmissibility of intercept evidence &c).
If the AGs go for trial in Portugal, the McCanns could get Caplan and Pinto de Abreu (interestingly, a top human rights specialist) to argue that it would (for various reasons) compromise their human rights to stand trial in Portugal (adverse media comment, errors in pretrial procedure, and so on). Also that they have to stay near their two young children, will better understand proceedings in English, and so on.
I think this scenario might be playing in the background of quite a few developments - remember the Portuguese AG’s late-night tripo to Portimao on the night of Kate’s first interrogation, to prevent arrest or charge, then the decision to let the McCanns return to England, Jacqui Smith’s request that the British media stop speculating about the case, and so on.
I think it’s conceivable that one option considered if the McCanns were to contest a EAW, is for Portugal not to fight for extradition, but pass the case on to the CPS.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:51 am
1205 miss take
“this sad and sorry tale has provoked a need for CLOSURE ”
Thats a great idea, lets pander to satisfying the expectations of psychobabble rather than something as irrelevant as justice.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:51 am
also if tanner o brien charged who will pay for them?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:49 am
1210 Murder
I didn’t pay too much attention to that at the time, except to note again that the McCanns must have been desperately worried and no doubt had been trawling the Internet and using their high-profile contacts to find an expert anywhere on the planet who could rubbish LCN DNA.
I think this assessment of yours is likely to be spot on: “I read it as the new PR team reversing a decision by the new British legal team (assembled a few days beforehand) who (reasonably) wanted to use Corrigan’s expertise in challenging LCN DNA testing”.
IMO it would be of great interest to know who holds the real power in ‘Team McCann’. It looks like this has been shifting considerably in the past month or so and may not yet have settled.
Who chairs the meetings? And keeps the minutes???
September 26th, 2007 at 1:49 am
just my opinion or wonderous thought!!!
sedated they thought they were safe
maddie hysterical
slap went wrong
absolute panic
Kate slightly paranoid all holiday
remembers man in photo with moustache after gerry decides its maddy………………
September 26th, 2007 at 1:47 am
1215
I don’t see why not.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:46 am
totally random but worth a moments thought
could Gerry be gay with O brien?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:45 am
Tony - your transparency and commitment is appreciated. I really am going to bed now but will check out the website later.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:41 am
1208
Tony, I have one question.
Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support your position that you haven’t already posted on hear at some point?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:40 am
1204 Murder
Murder says: “TonyB: England very clearly has concurrent jurisdiction in this case (Offences against the Person Act) on 2 separate grounds: the nationailty of the victim and putative perpetrators. I think one question that has been considered very carefully by Caplan is whether to apply to a British court for an exception to English compliance with a EAW, should the Portuguese decide to issue one”.
REPLY: For the uninitiated, EAW = European Arrest Warrant.
Murder, I’m sure you’re right, which may be a reason the McCanns will remain in England, though I have looked up what I think are the four main exceptions to a national government of the E.U. being required to yield up one of its citizens to another E.U. member state under a EAW and I didn’t think that the Madeleine McCann murder (if it was that) could be brought within any of them.
But then I suppose that that’s what Michael Caplan* and all the other lawyers are for.
* Oops yet again, Michael Caplan *Q.C.*
September 26th, 2007 at 1:40 am
to sleep soundly tonight i have to…….
a, hope she died peacefully and has long been chasing butterflies with jesus
b, still with time giving loving baron mother
c,died from genetic heart failure due to ver stimuli of meds and a)
After 5 months she probably has forgotten her “weekend parents” who spent half that at church and eating out or playing tennis
September 26th, 2007 at 1:39 am
TonyB - yet another question, if you’re still there:
What did you make of the official announcement that the McCanns were planning to use Peter Corrigan, which Team McCann then turned around and denied.
I read it as the new PR team reversing a decision by the new British legal team (assembled a few days beforehand) who (reasonably) wanted to use Corrigan’s expertise in challenging LCN DNA testing. Sean Hoey is awaiting a verdict on his part in the Omagh bombing, and association with one mass murderer (Pinochet) was probably considered more than enough by the PR guys.
Here’s a press report:
“Solicitors for the parents of Madeleine McCann have said they have no plans to meet lawyers who defended Omagh bomb suspect Sean Hoey.
It was earlier reported they were to have talks about DNA testing.
Belfast lawyer Kevin Winters said a meeting with solicitors Kingsley Napley would take place next week.
However, a spokesperson for the McCann family said while they had been contacted they had “no plans to meet them at the present time”.
Mr Winters had said the McCann legal team contacted his firm and a meeting with one of his staff, Peter Corrigan, the instructing solicitor in the Omagh defence team, had been scheduled for Belfast next week.
Mr Corrigan told the Irish News his work would involve “exposing the unreliability of LCN DNA”.
It followed allegations that the four-year-old’s DNA was found in the boot of Gerry and Kate McCann’s hire car weeks after their daughter disappeared.
LCN (Low Copy Number) DNA is believed to have been the test used by Portuguese police to deduce that Madeleine had been in the car after her disappearance from an apartment in the Praia da Luz resort.
It magnifies potential forensic evidence, however, it is argued that this process can result in possible distortion.
A total of 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins, lost their lives when a Real IRA bomb exploded in Omagh, County Tyrone, on 15 August 1998.
Sean Hoey, 37, from Jonesborough, County Armagh, is the only person to be charged in connection with the atrocity.
He denies a total of 56 charges, including 29 counts of murder. ”
[For an interesting parallel between 'police cock-ups' in the two cases:
http://www.nwipp-newspapers.com/UH/free/289282499264935.php ]
September 26th, 2007 at 1:33 am
1207
Tony, don’t read too much into it, seriously. On this occasion, to be fair, I was just scoring points. The key reason that the film is important is to demonstrate the Gerry lied. I just knew something else about the film which most people would realise sooner or later.
And if you really insist on a response to the implication that I knew how the film should have been cut, with respect, your logic is flawed.
The McCanns would have expected it to have been cut exactly as it was filmed while they were answering the question. It clearly wasn’t.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:31 am
1205 Miss Take,
Thank you, and please see this that I posted on yesterday’s thread:
I am happy to be contacted by anyone who shares some or all of the objectives that I and a few others have about the ”disappearance’ of Madeleine McCann (see below).
===========================
CONTACT DETAILS
===========================
I have decided to ask people to use the e-mail link that’s on the home page of this website to contact me. It’s:
———————————–——–
http://www.thelubbocktrust.org.uk
——————————————
It’s a site about the death of Stuart Lubbock at Michael Barrymore’s house on 31 March 2001. As that also is a story of an attack (of a sexual nature in that case) that went too far, and needed an alternative explanation - and was therefore covered up by the smokescreen of a ‘drowning’ - it’s more than appropriate that that is my link for contact re Madeleine McCann matters. I am currently the webmaster or ’site owner’ (not very good on these Internet terms) so it will all come to me personally. By the way, Stuart Lubbock was never even placed in the swimming pool. It was a very clever deception.
Belwo I declare my interest in this case - and the interest of others who have made contact with me so far - so that there is no room for doubt:
a) We all believe that both Gerry and Kate McCann were involved in Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’. As more and more information comes to light, we are increasingly persuaded that she was accidentally killed or as the result of a deliberate, probably NOT premeditated, act by one or other parent.
b) It follows from (a) that we believe one of the most eleborate hoaxes of this kind ever perpetrated was begun by the McCanns at 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May and is continuing.
c) It follows from (a) and (b) that the ‘Find Madeleine Fund’ was also a hoax from the start and that this involved a gigantic fraud on willing and genuinely concerned members of the public, and may amount to a criminal offence e.g. obtaining money by deception/false pretences. We want to ask the police and any other relevant authorities to investigate this fund.
d) It follows from (a), (b) and (c) that the Trustees of the Find Madeleine Fund should return any donations made to them on request, should carefully consider their legal position in case they are guilty of continuing the fraud, and should at a very minimum give the public who gave the cash so generously - to help to find Madeleine - that they should provide a regular account of where that money is going. We see no reason why the income and outgoings of that fund, raised by public subscription, should be kept secret. There is no knowing how much is in it and how much is being spent.
e) We want to help anybody who wants their money back. We will advise if necessary on how to take legal steps to recover those donations.
f) We want to help Madeleine Mccann to find justice. We assume she is dead and we want to assist in bringing those responsible for her death to justice. If the McCanns have nothing to hide, they should tell everything they know. Because - without doubt - they have something to hide, they are keeping silent, and they and their associates that night are coming up with further and more impossible smokescreens to try to mask what really happened. We want to collobarate with other agencies and individuals to bring the truth about Madeleine’s death to light.
g) We will work with other McCann-sceptic groups, petition sites and forums that have been set up to question the McCanns’ account of their daughter’s disappearance.
(h) We believe that since Gerry and Kate McCann have both acknowledged publicly that they left three children under four alone for hours in the evening - for several nights in a row - whilst they went out to eat and drink, that they should be prosecuted, either by the relevant authorities, or - if they duck the issue - by a private prosecution.
i) We want all those involved in Madeleine’s disappearance to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We are sick of the lies, deceit and manipulations being poured forth regularly by ‘McCann sources’, their spin doctor Clarence Mitchell and ’sources close to the McCanns’ legal team’ etc. etc.
j) We want to set up a campaign committee, and/or a legal trust, to pursue these objectives - and set up a wesbsite ASAP.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:22 am
Simon 1177
(and 1192 Jolie)
First I thank you for the courtesy of a prompt and reasonably informative response to my four questions, especially at this time of night.
I accept you have the correct wording of the question; I can’t recall Gerry McCann’s precise answer, but as I recollect I think it was something like: ‘There is no way on earth that we would ever do anything like that’.
As you say, it matters not, as we both agree (as do 99% on this Forum) that he was lying about this.
But I don’t think you’ve fully cleared up for us all the basis for you making this statement: “…the film was cut differently to the way the McCanns expected it to be”. This manifestly implies that you knew from either a first-hand or second-hand source how the McCanns ‘expected it to be cut’.
And I agree with Jolie’s reservations on what you say (post 1192).
September 26th, 2007 at 1:22 am
Although mc canns look dodgy their choice of wording, to me, suggests another did it . sedate i mean
“We” have never sedated
again in the interveiw ” we have nothing to do with her abduction!”
All may be true if they let obrien do it
September 26th, 2007 at 1:22 am
Tony - thanks. If Team McCann can raise zillions for their defence, I see no reason why it wouldn’t be possible to raise enough for a private prosecution. A la Diana, this sad and sorry tale has provoked a need for CLOSURE (just following the Daily Mail) for many of us Joe Public. Spudgun and the Smell of Death and Moriarty (and Wanderer) have disappeared but if anyone has the energy to wade back through their posts on previous twitterings they can see what they have to say and form their own views. This post is more than cathartic; if you wade through the nonsense an awful lot of information is being dumped here. Equally, if you follow media timelines, you will see that the same information (plus some of the speculation) is being extracted and subsequently appears in the press. I don’t object to any of that, I just wish that the process could somehow be harnessed, in order to find the truth.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:22 am
TonyB:
England very clearly has concurrent jurisdiction in this case (Offences against the Person Act) on 2 separate grounds: the nationailty of the victim and putative perpetrators.
I think one question that has been considered very carefully by Caplan is whether to apply to a British court for an exception to English compliance with a EAW, should the Portuguese decide to issue one.
There would be various fairly straightforward grounds, and this is easily allowed for in the Framework Convention.
Whether a private prosecution for unlawful killing would be allowed is one question. Another is whether the DPP would consider prosecuting in England if the Portuguese don’t charge the McCanns within the next year. After all, he’s assigned his best specialist to the case already.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:21 am
1163 - I think he meant that she (Madeleine) may have got out of bed and then got back in - leaving the door open afterwards.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:20 am
1201, Good night, Simon. Trying to keep an open mind is best, as at this point, anything is possible.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:17 am
1192 - Hi Jolie!
There was no translation. The interviewer spoke English.
I’m not even sure that the news station were intentionally trying to trip them up. I just know as confidantly as I can, without actually being there, that it was cut differently to the way they expected.
I tend to agree with you. From the first time I saw this film some time ago, I was pretty sure that Gerry was lying.
Jolie, I feel the trick to understanding and interpreting evidence, real or anecdotal is to keep an open mind and think about it. Too many people on here want the McCanns swinging at the end of a rope and as new information becomes available as part of the case, they cannot assimilate it because their pre-concieved ideas won’t let them.
Some of these people have been active today.
I am just trying to keep an open mind, treat everything I learn about on its merits and rule things out where I can.
Night!
September 26th, 2007 at 1:16 am
TonyB - thanks for that…
If we believe Mrs Fenn’s first deposition, Madeleine had been crying for her Daddy (NOT mummuy) from about 10pm to 11:45pm on May 1.
She clearly didn’t cry on May 2.
The O’Briens and McCanns were the only couples not to use either babysitters (like the Paynes) or (free!!) baby monitors like the Oldfiels. O’Brien is a clinical pharmacologist - and someone says he sp[ecializes in opiates, but I don’t know if that’s true.
Why would Madeleine, if she was really around at 6pm (leaving the kids’ club) or even 7 (Payne’s visit on the way back from Tennis), not have been asleep again on thMay 3 as on May 2?
Maybe she was even more uncontrollable and hyperactive (I see a real ‘wicked’ gleam in her eye in the ‘last photo’) and wasn’t responding to sedation, and Kate hit her or threw her onto the floor in frustration, causing extensive bleeding, enough to cause dripping blood as she was handed through the window.
But that could probably be passed off as a tragic accident - and why would the O’Briens get so heavily involved (unless they feared an autopsy wuld reveal the unnecessary and perhaps illegal sedation)?
I still suspect that Murat might have been the person to whom a body was passed through the window, but there the question of motivation is more difficult, and probably requires Murat to have met O’Brien in Exeter, and probably requires premeditated ‘disappearance’ of a dud IVF product, rather than manslaughter.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:14 am
nite miss take
me too
September 26th, 2007 at 1:13 am
Here’s what was said in post 1148:
“JuneJohnson Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 12:20 am
Mods and Admin
To all users
The petty name calling/ hair pulling and eye gouging and then whinging at us will stop.
The whole point of debate and discussion is that there will be disagreement, its a measure of maturity how you cope or deal with it, if you cannot take the heat….
Please do not forward your emotions or opinions as fact , they are not. Speculation is not fact either, but most people who are speculating say so, and don’t present it as fact, those who are emoting do not.
Any further posts containing derogatory personal remarks/insults about other users will have that part edited out.”
———–
She is just stating we should state our opinions are opinions, which is a good reminder for all of us, instead of presenting them as factual. And the last part I’m certain was directed to Krissie (and possibly others).
I’d like to see more about the case and less personality clashes–there are enough posts made each day here without having to sift through numerous personal insults.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:13 am
1191
I wonder if any of the docs took a rap for another previously
i.e lied that they were driving when under age when it was mc cann ?
must check ages
or drugs ?
or ?
September 26th, 2007 at 1:12 am
806 stevo
“Anyone got ideas as to what happened to “smell of death” who posted in here regularly”
One of those oh so clever cadaver dogs fingered, I mean clawed him and he was promptly arrested for impersonating a live person.