Madeleine McCann: ‘Bad Dad’ Gerry McCann, The Psychic Barber And Drugs
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “Madeleine was drugged but it was by kidnapper says her grandmother.”
Page 9: “Madeleine’s family: She was drugged…but not by parents.”
Eileen McCann, Gerry’s mother – says: “I really believe they [whoever took her] gave her a drug. There is no way they carried her out of there without her waking. If she was taken when she was sleeping by somebody she did not know, she would have screamed the place down.”
Alternatively, she was taken by someone she did know? Or Mrs McCann is just speculating.
“’BAD DAD’ GERRY” – Carlos Anjos, head of the Portuguese Police Federation, says Gerry, “a heart consultant”, is a “negligent father”. This is his “astonishing rant”.
THE SUN front page: “Mystics hunt for Maddie.”
Around 150 leads provided by mystics have been followed up.
Page 6: “ASK PSYCHIC BARBER TO HELP FIND MADDIE” – Clairvoyant Gordon Smith has been contacted by the family. Smith hosts TV’s Most Haunted show. He says he can tell if Madeleine is alive or dead. Mick is nicknamed “THE PSYCHIC BARBER”.
DAILY MIRROR front page: “McCANNS: SHE WAS DRUGGED.”
Page 5: “‘Madeleine must have been drugged..she would have screamed place down’” – GRANDMOTHER EILEEN McCANN YESTERDAY.”
“Couple call on psychic to help” – Ex-hairdresser Smith is a “wacky medium”.
Says he: “In order for it to work I need to sit with the closest relatives who would be the parents. Then I’d tune in and see what I can pick up. But I would always warn them that there’s a possibility nothing might happen.”
Best to warn them of that first…
DAILY MAIL page 5: “Now police leader mocks ‘negligent’ Gerry McCann over his fears that an abductor was in Maddie’s room.”
“Call for the ‘psychic barber’” – “Despite both being strict Roman Catholics, the couple have already made contact” with Gordon Smith.
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE I’LL FIND BODY IN DAYS. Parents call in psychic.”
Page 7: “MADDIE’S PARENTS CALL FOR PSYCHIC BARBER” – “I have offered my help for free,” says Smith. “I never charge for private readings. I have already assured them I will say nothing to the press.” Indeed, not. Best save it for the book.
DAILY TELEGRAPH page 15: “Police chief accuses McCanns of hindering inquiry” – Carlos Anjos accuses McCanns of using “diversion tactics”.
THE TIMES page 27: “McCanns ‘considering psychic help’”
THE GUARDIAN no Maddie new today.
Madeleine McCann: A Life In Headlines
Posted: 2nd, October 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,268) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- pete on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:42 pm
767 - Anonymous
I know. I can already visualise their bandwagon and the women’s magazines with articles by Kate McCann as she talks about the perils of taking kids on holiday. There’ll be the McCann Safety Monitor in High Street stores but everyone will be taking them back because they don’t work properly lol.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Let’s face it. The police in Portugal are losing credibility by the minute. This business with Amaral will be very hard to repair indeed.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:41 pm
711 Ian
The website that keeps updating with translations of the Portuguese media reports on the case seems to be down. I’ll reprint it here for those who want to try later:
http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53176&page=4
When I can get back on, Ill find the article about potential charges against the McCanns leaving their children alone in an unlocked apartment for periods of time, copy and past it here, with a more precise link.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
For centuries women have killed their children. They may once have done so out of economic necessity for in the days before reliable contraception became freely available a woman might give birth to twenty children in as many years. She simply didn’t have the money to feed, house and clothe them and would also run out of energy.
This authors great grandmother had sixteen babies and in later life wanted nothing more to do with children. But some women went further than exhausted indifference, quietly suffocating their offspring when there were no witnesses around.
Nowadays the reason for most infanticides has changed and women tend to kill their young so that they themselves can enjoy a less restricted lifestyle without risking possible public disapproval by giving their children up for adoption. These crimes are often premeditated and carefully carried out.
Susan Smith who murdered her three year old and one year old sons fits into this category. The Carolina-based mother had separated amicably from her husband and had found herself a wealthy new boyfriend. But he was honest enough to admit that he didn’t want to raise a family so broke off their relationship.
A more stable woman would have recovered from this, but Susan Smith hadn’t enjoyed a life of stability. Instead, her father had committed suicide when she was a child and her mother had remarried. Moreover, young Susan had been repeatedly sexually abused. She’d taken an overdose at thirteen and another at eighteen and spent a week after her second suicide attempt in a mental health facility. But a year after her second overdose she married and by age twenty-two she had two children, had separated from her husband and was living an increasingly small life.
Now Susan looked for a way to get her attractive boyfriend back. She could have given the children to their father who loved them dearly. But that would have gone against what society expects of women and she was desperate for societal consent. To the outside world she was a devoted mother and she wanted to appear like a devoted mother to the end. So she decided to kill the babies and make up a story which would win her endless sympathy.
On 25th October 1994 she strapped the babies into her car and drove the vehicle into a lake. She jumped out at the last minute and went to the authorities, claiming that a black man had stolen her car and driven off with the babies in tow. For nine days America hoped that the children would be returned safely. Susan was a religious women so she even asked the nation to pray for them. Luckily the authorities were more realistic and asked her to take a lie detector test which she failed, showing especial guilt when asked if she knew where the babies were. Her story didn’t add up and eventually she confessed and the car with its tiny drowned occupants was recovered from the lake.
Another young woman who committed a very similar crime was the Oregon-based Diane Downs who became infatuated with a married man. He too made it clear that he didn’t want children. Diane, who had previously been regarded as the ideal mother, now saw her three youngsters in a whole new light. She put them in her car and shot all three with a pistol then pretended that a man had attacked them. Unfortunately for her, one of the children survived, albeit with severe long term injuries, and told the authorities the truth.
Diane Downs then did what many mothers who’ve killed do - she got pregnant again for the trial. This often wins these women sympathy as naive members of the public don’t believe that a woman who could kill children would choose to get pregnant again.
Diane Downs and Susan Smith killed all of their children at once - but many mothers kill one child then give birth to another only to kill it too. Often these acts are preceded by a period of deep depression or alcoholism. Sometimes the mother will even admit that she hasn’t bonded with the baby, that she requires help. Unfortunately society’s need to believe in the perfect mother is so strong that friends or neighbours will tell the woman not to worry, that she’s doing just fine. Even when the woman goes on to sequentially murder her children, many of her acquaintances will continue to insist that she’s simply had two or three cot deaths in a row, that she’s innocent
Paula Sims of Illinois initially fit into this category. She killed her first baby in June 1986 then attempted to knock herself out and said she and the baby had been attacked in their home by a masked kidnapper. Everyone who knew her was supportive and sympathetic. The police were more suspicious but couldn’t prove maternal or paternal violence so had to let her and her husband go.
The couple moved states and within three years Paula had given birth to another daughter who she also murdered, again telling the authorities that the baby had been kidnapped. In truth, she put the little corpse in a freezer for several days before dumping it in a trash can in order to give the impression that the baby was alive for some time in the kidnapper’s care.
Years later, whilst still in jail for the murders, she admitted that she’d been suffering from depression throughout her months of motherhood and often took tranquilizers. She said that she also felt very isolated in her rural home.
Again, more stable women find ways to end their isolation that doesn’t involve killing their young. But these infant killers tend to fit into the borderline psychological category. They haven’t received enough love during their childhoods and are desperate to latch on to other people - or create babies - for whom they declare undying love. Unfortunately their early experiences haven’t involved long-term affection so that love can quickly transmogrify into an equally intense hate.
Borderline individuals tend to overdramatise situations and act impulsively. They can superficially look like loving mothers but they save most of their true feelings for themselves. The mother sees the child as a commodity, like a doll that she can dress up for society to admire. But like a doll that is tired of, the baby is ultimately expendable especially if a new boyfriend, new career or potential new lifestyle is the reward.
If we are to lessen the infanticide figures, we have to stop romanticising motherhood and give out the message that having babies simply isn’t right for everyone. And we have to start listening to women who do give birth and then admit that they cannot cope. We also have to accept that one child a week dies in Britain at its parents hands - and that the vast majority of preschool children who are murdered are killed by their mothers. The hand that rocks the cradle isn’t always fit to rule the world.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
wheres krissie?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
771 Anonymous
Exactly - but it has been used to rubbish possible scenarios of Madeleine going out of the apartment by herself.
An unlocked patio door is a better possible alibi if you want to make the case appear to be an abduction. No need to simulate a break in - even though you may point out initially that the shutter was jemmied to confuse investigation within the first few hours.
If someone was watching and had planned an abduction why wait until someone was liable to come back?
All speculation I know.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
780. Wendy,
It is not a crime to observe and wonder. If it was then everyone in the world would have a key to their local prison.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:38 pm
777. Personally I don’t believe they will because their secret strategy has always been to be tried in the public rather than in a court of law. I believe this is so they can firther deflect accusations and criticisms in a court of justice with continual whining cries of not recieving fair treatment. Does that make sense or are all the pro-McCanners going to try and kick me in the balls?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:37 pm
769
My point:
Why discuss something that proves nothing?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 pm
776. sorry mean initials TBS (The Big Stig)
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 pm
770 - Stig
It was beyond “utterly terrible” - a 4 year old girl is probably gone forever because of it.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 pm
767 - Anonymous. Didn’t see your similar musings in the earlier posts. What do you think? Will they be able to give up their celebrity status and step out of the spotlight?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 pm
770. TRS,
I don’t know if the are guilty of murder or simply neglect. I also have no idea what they are experiencing. Life seems to be going on as usual for them except they no longer have to work and they’ve attracted a lot of publicity to themselves (which they can pretty much diminish if they wanted to). The press and UK government seem to love them and believe them as do a large segment of the world’s population.
I know you said I am worse than an autisitc person and cannot feel compassion. But I do feel a lot of compassion for Madeleine and for other missing and exploited children. I also have a lot of compassion for all the other parents of missing children who cannot get the attention they need because of the McCann Media shark.
If I offer compassion for the McCanns it is only by way of my feeling really sorry for them that they don’t or didn’t have basic child rearing skills. If they deserve more than this I don’t know because I don’t personally know them.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:34 pm
Another example.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1913175.ece
Although people might be interested to read this from the end of the article;
“Madeleine’s family reacted with disbelief to the claims against Mr Amaral. The missing girl’s aunt Philomena said: “Just about every country in the world is watching this. What do you think the [Portuguese] government would do? Would they have some kind of rogue policeman there? I doubt it. I find it highly unlikely. No way would they have him on such a high-profile case.”.”
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:33 pm
772 - Batman
Same here…
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:32 pm
746 - K-9
Well researched. Is there a two-camp split on Amaral’s guilt? I don’t know much about the case but that’s interesting if the woman had the black eyes as a result of being in jail. Like I said before, the McCanns must be rubbing their hands or fund bank account with that news.
749 - Sunny
You’re just downright obnoxious.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Time will tell a great deal. If nothing is found of Madeleine in say 12 months time and her parents have not been charged but instead returned to work - any work, then maybe I might feel that possibly, just possibly my gut instincts have been wrong and they had nothing to do with her disappearance after all.
But if they continue with their publicity stunts and move onto profiting from Madeleine - book deals, endless interviews etc. - then I think they will remain ’suspects’ for a large section of the population for ever.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
768. John,
Why would an allegedly healthy child going on 4 years old not be able to open an unlocked door?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:30 pm
612 Anymous
I think they should have taken the kids to the restaurant with them. That is what I would have done. Leaving them in the apartment was not what they should have done but it was not an utterly terrible thing in my opinion.
Even if I did think it was outright neglect and criminal - I would be of the opinion that they have received the worst and most awful punishment you could possibly imagine. No legal system could meet out worse than they are experiencing. If Madeline is not found alive, it will be a life sentence for them. Punishing the parents at this point would be tantamount to punishing the twins also, and as I abhore child abuse I think it should not be done for their sake.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:30 pm
765. Yes Wendy I agreed with you it doesn’t prove anything. What is your point?
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:29 pm
I have read that Madeleine would not have been able to open the patio door by herself. If that was the case locking the door would have been as safe an option as not locking it as she would have been unable to get out of the apartment in any event.
The McCanns gave free access to anyone wanting to enter the apartment. If the door had been locked a potential abductor would have had more difficulty taking a child in a purported short time-frame. Leaving the door unlocked is an alibi for abduction; people hiding behind doors etc with no visible sign of forced entry.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
733. Stevo,
I think it was Ian who gave a conservative estimate on the amount the fund is raking in on interest alone which was about £2,000/month. I think they are doing really well. Interviews they gave in the States would have generated money because the US media pays their guests. Not a lot but around $1,000 for each guest and for each interview. They could have made more because it’s such a high profile case. I don’t know ifthe European shows pay their guests?
There stay in Europe was paid for and not taken from the fund. Their extended stay in Praia de Luz was mostly paid for by Mark Warner Resorts who paid for their lodging and maybe more.
Of course this cannot be proven but I’ve read that their home mortgage is being taken care of by British billionaire business man of the last name Kennedy, I think Brian Kennedy. (Any relation Bernadine?)
Next will be Gerry’s child monitor hawking; Kate and Gerry’s home protection services; the books and the lectures on child safety and the dangers of countries where the citizens drink wine in the afternoon and of course the movies!
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Another example of the “excellent” UK press.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=461111&in_page_id=1770
The Headline;
“Chief Madeleine detective charged over ‘beating’ of suspect in another missing girl case”
–
Note the word “charged”. Now read the rest of the article until you come to this
“Now Mr Amaral has himself become an “arguido” - Portuguese for suspect.”
–
So Mr Amaral is a “suspect” just like the McCanns and any case against him is still proceeding but of course this isn’t important to the paper as it is only usually headlines that are remembered, headlines that say “charged”.
I don’t recall this same paper saying the McCanns had been “charged” when they were named as suspects.
Still the papers write what sells and they know their audience and with comments like these, from people who “despise” others jumping to conclusions or making judgements based on appearance or status or lack of evidence, it’s no wonder the papers continue to get away with it;
“Harry Hind Sight Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Anyway, I am clocking off.
I expect that the circus will be leaving town shortly so make the most of it while it is here.
Plod demoted and taken off the case. Not really playing a great long game was he. Oh, I forgot, he was about to prove a case against the McCanns, so international rescue had to step in and silient him
Still, hope he does not go home and take it out on the Mrs, after all, she is not a suspect”
“Stevo Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:46 pm
734 - Chloe Spain
I know. Employers who are deliberating over how to fire someone do that all the time.
But like all police - they always take care of their own don’t they? The headline says “sacked” but of course he’s only been demoted. Considering the charges against him I’d say he thinks he’s got a result.
I wouldn’t put it past him beating someone up though. He reminds me of Jack Regan in the Sweeney….only the Portuguese equivalent.”
“Krissie Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:46 pm
720 anonymous. Nice one! I completely agree.
The (anglo version) of Americans would hate him too. He’s too , I dunno, SWEATY. He’s not sterile enough for our liking. I bet he NEVER uses anti-bacterial hand wash.”
“Sunny Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Ha Ha Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral gets the sack, and what a sack of shit he was.”
–
So perhaps people could tell me why it is ok to be personal about Mr Amaral but not about the McCanns.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:22 pm
759
You said it yourself. I quote Anonymous:
“I have no idea why Kate AND Gerry never seem upset about Madeleine being gone”.
I have no idea either.
It proves nothing.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:19 pm
754 Anonymous
I thought you were referring to me (only one John this evening).
I am not surprised that Amaral has been moved off the case as he has become an easy target for the British media, especially if the PJ want to move forward successfully with the investigation.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:15 pm
755. Krissie,
I joke about Anglos and Brits. I love them and actually love England and British culture and tried to convince my husband for us to move to a farm in northern England but he’s a British subject by way of Hong Kong and has a lot of criticisms of their government and was subjected to some pretty nasty racism in the states and feels it would be worse in England. So we opted for Italy.
I love Germany and German people too. I especially admire Chancellor Merkel. The world is a beautiful place. Too bad our governments fuck everything up. I am concerned for Madeleine and all neglected ans exploited children but also see this case as disturbing evidence that facsism has returned under a velvet cloak (or hoooooood) calling itself democracy.
I know you think the McCanns innocent of any wrong doing and you might be right but the press and the UK government have been complicit in something atrocious - that I am certain of.
Ciao!
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
711 Ian
If many British parents agree that leaving young tots alone unsupervised on holiday like the McCanns did (and say they do so themselves), then it looks like some public education service announcements are needed in the UK. Even if they do no jail time, the McCanns should be charged with neglect. I’ll post a link to a translation in press article from the Portuguese media which quotes someone in authority who states the legal facts as regards to this behavior in Portugal.
I didn’t leave my son alone by himself in a LOCKED house until he was 10 years old and understood what to do in emergencies and had the proper phone numbers to call if something came up and he needed help, and only because I felt that he was emotionally mature enough to be trusted not to get in trouble. Even then, I was a little nervous and uncomfortable and only left him for a short time to do an errand and come right back home.
When my kids were very small, when they were sleeping, and I went in the backyard while they were in the locked house, I would keep a baby monitor with me to keep tabs on them and to be able to respond immediately if they woke up.
Parenting young children is a full-time job. When you’re not available to supervise, you must ensure that there is someone else responsible standing in for you.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 pm
(737) Stevo
It says “dismissed” (”despedido”) in the Spanish press. I imagined it wasn’t to be taken literally. I think though, even if he was only the boss of those who supposedly beat someone up, it’s not a bad idea to remove him from the case. There’s no point in actually provoking criticism.
Back to work.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:08 pm
610 Stevo
Thanks for that…nice one!
Better read the small print though, in order to process your claim please submit
the following:
1. Bin bag containing said kids soiled nappies.
2. The remains of last nights dinner.
3. A written report signed by Keela or Eddie to certify that they have personally sniffed out the smell of death in at least three different locations.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:06 pm
738. Wendy,
I was merely responding to other people’s comments and having an UNEMOTIONAL conversation. I have no idea why Kate AND Gerry never seem upset about Madeleine being gone. I do know that when I have watched news stories of other missing children the parents cry or cannot continue with the interview and ask for the cameras to stop.
When my cat was missing I cried. When my cat died I cried. I still cry now when I think about her sweet face.
I would think that a child either deceased or in terrible danger would be powerful enough to elicit tears from her own parents? If not tears in public then surely they wish to leave the public eye so they can have privacy and “focus on finding Madeleine” and not capitalising any futher on her image and name? Or is the Maddie Fund a long term investment?