
Madeleine McCann: Blonde Child Seen In Morocco
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY MAIL front page: “Could this be Maddie?”
Readers see a picture of a child being carried on a woman’s back - “The intriguing picture being probed by Interpol.”
Pages 10 and 11: “Could this really be Maddie?”
This is the picture of a girl “in the clutches of a group of Moroccans”. The picture was taken four weeks ago near Tangiers by Spaniard Clara Torres.
DAILY MIRROR front page: “MADDY IN MOROCCO?”
Readers see the same picture. The Full “astonishing story” is on pages 4 and 5.
Pages 4 and 5: “COULD IT BE?” Less the full story than another question.
“GERRY: I KNOW WE WILL BE CLEARED” – Gerry McCann says he and his wife “wanted to be eliminated from the enquiry as quickly as possible”. Some news.
THE SUN front page: “MOROCCO PHOTO SENSATION. IS THIS MADDIE?”
The picture is “sensational”. It has been described as “convincing”, but by whom is not said.
Pages 4 and 5: “GERRY & KATE: IT COULD BE HER – MADDIE PARENTS HOPE AT SIGHTING SENSATION.”
Clara Torres is talking on Spanish radio. She looks at the photo. Says she: “It sent shivers down my spine.”
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “NOW A ‘PHOTO’ OF MADELEINE IN MOROCCO.”
‘Photo’ is placed in quotes lest readers mistake the picture for a ‘SNAP’ or a ‘SHOT’.
Spanish Government official Jose Herrero Arcas says: “The National Police received a photograph by email taken by a young Spanish couple who believe it shows Madeleine McCann. The quality of the photograph is not very clear and it was taken from around 200 metres away. However, the National Police are taking the claim seriously enough to have sent it on to their colleagues at Interpol. I cannot give any more information than that.”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE – AMAZING PHOTO IN MOROCCO.”
Pages 4 and 5: “MADDIE SEEN IN MOROCCO – Bombshell new photo is probed by Interpol.”
THE TIMES front page: “Police start investigation into ‘picture in Morocco of Madeleine McCann’.”
Page 5: “New photograph shows child like Madeleine on African woman’s back.”
A source close to the McCanns tells one and all: “The McCanns are not going to get their hopes up until the photograph has been sent for forensic examination.” And, dare it be said, a DNA test.
DAILY TELEGRAPH front page: “Is this Madeleine in Morocco?” The search for the missing child has taken a “dramatic turn”.
Page 9: “Gerry McCann is “confident” he and his wife will be cleared. A source tells us: “It is very unlikely that British police would question the McCanns on behalf of the Portuguese now.”
Robert Murat responds to claims by nanny Charlotte Pennington that on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance he was by the McCann family apartment: “I certainly was not there that night. At no point was I there.”
THE GUARDIAN & THE INDEPENDENT no Maddy news today.
Posted: 26th, September 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,153) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments





September 26th, 2007 at 11:57 am
277
because, as kate told us, ‘they’ve taken her’
obviously she knew who ‘they’ were.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:56 am
As a child, my mother would leave me and my sister - I would be around two, my sister four, sleeping in the tents at evening whilst she, my father and their friends would have food at the club house which would have been about a five minute walk.
Does that make my parents guilty of negligence? I’m the child in question, and I’d say a firm no. My parents are the most caring, kind, considerate and brilliant people you could ever come across. We cannot know for sure how K and G left the kids that night - how often they checked on them, how much of the apartment they could see, because there are so many conflicting reports in the media. K and G ran a risk check - something we all do every day, and against all the odds they were caught in this nightmare.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:55 am
of course, theres sourceclosetothemccanns.com i suppose.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:55 am
spindoctors
‘ if she was alive it would be because the parents gave her to someone else!!!!!
and this gem comes from ….where…?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:54 am
275
we’re waiting.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:54 am
267-
what you mean all the paper links-
that must be real hard for you to source!
ill post one shortley to join the gang-
get real here we are not swapping marbles!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:54 am
F*** the photo, where’s the lie detector test?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:53 am
SSS what is wrong with you???
‘Quite obviously, you are some one who likes to hide behind the computer as you are too lily livered, pathetic and weak to stand up and be counted in real life. Your defence of KNOWN child abusers (neglect is a form of abuse) does little to enhance you.’
I did not ‘attack’ you I merely responded as fully as I could. As far as I can see it is you who is offensive here and have resorted to some barrage of unnecceary name calling and apparently emotive crazy fit of some sort e.g:-
‘Quite obviously, you are some one who likes to hide behind the computer as you are too lily livered, pathetic and weak to stand up and be counted in real life. Your defence of KNOWN child abusers (neglect is a form of abuse) does little to enhance you.’
Unfortunately I have a very extensive knowledge of what child abusers are capable of. I realise you have worked with abused children but this does not give you a monopoly on the subject.
I am not whinning in the least - weary yes but whinning no.
and your experience of babies is just that yours.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:52 am
265
and these people take all their families, furiture etc when they travel?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:52 am
259 -jon - duh! read the whole thing i wrote - don’t just quote one part - if she was alive it would be because the parents gave her to someone else!!!!! No people are not ruling out that possibility but it isn’t the most obvious one- the most obvious one is that she is dead!!!!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Didnt the lady who took the photo say it was after that they noticed it could be madeleine. If so why would you therefore take such a photo merely of people walking in the first place?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:50 am
in the old movies, the robber says to the cop:
“he went that-a-way!”
September 26th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Come on then jon what is your theory of events that night?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:48 am
255
excuses and speculation are different.
we have been supplying links and sources.
where are yours?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:48 am
256 bulldump her dress as full light exposure because its not uinder her hat.
the light is hitting of her dress due to the legs wrapping around causing it to tilt up to the light at more of an angle
September 26th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Firestar… there are many Moroccans who commute back and forth to Portugal as market traders selling carvings and jewellery in the tourist markets.
There are also many who commute back and forth purely to rob! They especially target holiday apartments when the visitors have just arrived.
Big problem in Portugal and Spain. I had everything taken….
And of course the drug mules……
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
#259 I can take it that Nil aon gailge agat!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
254
probably the assumption that the parent’s aren’t dining 5 miles away
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
jon 254 - Since you are only going on the photo to suggest the people in it are paedeophiles - what part of the image gives you this reasoning????
I can see a mother carrying a child on her back - a caring act of a responsible parent!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
249
I have only “attacked” you, and then I didn’t “attack”, I merely asked for your age and pointed out that you were naive in thinking that parents don’t harm children.
You CHOSE to view this as an “attack” and used this opportunity to attack ME, and still didn’t answer the question!
Quite obviously, you are some one who likes to hide behind the computer as you are too lily livered, pathetic and weak to stand up and be counted in real life. Your defence of KNOWN child abusers (neglect is a form of abuse) does little to enhance you.
Now the tables are actually turned on you, it is in fact you who whines and whinges.
I take offence to you saying whinges like babies as in my opinion babies ONLY cry when they are in need of something…..attention, feeding, nappy change. Contented babies rarely cry!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
255 - Ben. I’m listening.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:45 am
‘As for searching for Madeleine - even if everyone assumed she was dead the story would still be in peoples minds for a very long time and if anyone happened upon a child with the same eye mark I am certain that they would report it to the police.’
eerrrrrrh yes….. but look what they would be told….
“But she says when she reported the sighting, Portuguese police told her: “It wasn’t her - Madeleine’s dead.”
I wonder why???
September 26th, 2007 at 11:45 am
231 milisoreja
You’re Portuguese? Or do you just know the language. I’d like to make some money, too, but instead I’ve been mopping floors and cleaning toilets at home and I hate it, but I can’t work here because I suck so badly at the language. Hubby travels to another city to work, leaves home before 7 home at 8pm, so, my job is to be a domestica.
Yesterday people were complaining about how Anorak has slowed. I don’t see that. I got “bandwidth exceeded” this morning, saw over 1000 posts on the yesterday’s and in the time it took to clean one bathroom this morn there were over 100 posts.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:45 am
who says these travellers are nomads, the luggage looks like what you buy at M & S could they be in disguise too, on convoy to deliver the package to whoever is behind this, or maybe they have been paid to be the go between kind of unsuspecting, hey anything is possible
September 26th, 2007 at 11:44 am
ben, you are wrong her skirt has full light exposure, look at that link and you will see
September 26th, 2007 at 11:44 am
249 jon
i agree
it may as well be called- anti mccann anorak forum
i listen to all these people with their own speculations but they are unable to listen to mine.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:43 am
spindoctor
‘That person carrying the baby in the photo is a caring, responsible parent ‘
what piece of logical assumption did you base this deduction on?
September 26th, 2007 at 11:43 am
In light of this ‘picture’, where the hell has journalism gone to in all this. Yet again sky and bbc focus solely on whether its her or not but no mention of how this may contradict with the rumours or ‘evidence’ that we are being told she is dead. Nobody knows what the f*** is going on anymore do they?
And whether this photo is Madeleine or not, the timing is just too convenient for the McCcanns wouldnt you say???
September 26th, 2007 at 11:41 am
What part of the PJ are not looking for a living person don’y any of you understand,they have stated it often enough lately.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:41 am
As for searching for Madeleine - even if everyone assumed she was dead the story would still be in peoples minds for a very long time and if anyone happened upon a child with the same eye mark I am certain that they would report it to the police.
What is ridiculous is to take photos and report anyone carrying a blonde child.
I should hope that if someone acts suspiciously toward ANY child it would be reported to the police anyway - regardless of hair colour - but to pick on people who have done nothing wrong is STUPID!!!!!
There may well be a chance she is still alive - but there is no need to do an active search or go up to every child with blonde hair on the street - it is annoying and abusive - it happens to me a lot and I am sick and tired of it!
If she is alive it will be at the parents consent and the friends knowledge so for goodness sake stop moralising at us jon!