Madeleine McCann: Amaral Policing, Secrets Out And EastEnders
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE: PORTUGUESE POLICE CHIEF IS SACKED AFTER AMAZING OUTBURST.”
Page 9: “Madeleine detective kicked off case after blasting British police” – Chief inspector Goncalo Amaral says: “The British police have only been working on what the McCann couple want them to and what suits them.”
Says Amaral: “The Ocean Club is in Praia da Luz, not in London…It won’t be an email, and an anonymous one at that, which will distract our line of investigation.”
Mr Amaral is making reference to the email sent to the official website of the Prince of Wales last week claming a vengeful nanny had abducted Madeleine.
Pages 30 and 31: “HAIR-RAISING TRUTH ABOUT THE PSYCHIC BARBER – During the day Gordon Smith cuts hair, at night he claims he communes with the spirits. So does he really think he can help the McCanns find Madeleine?”
THE WORLD’S GREATEST NEWSPAPER confirms that former EastEnders actress Michelle Collins is a “BELIEVER”.
DAILY MAIL page 7: “Off the case. Madeleine police chief demoted after amazing rant against McCanns and British detectives”
Say Amaral: “They [the English] have been investigating tip-offs and information created and worked upon by the McCanns”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE: CHIEF COP SACKED.”
Page 10: “INSPECTOR CLUELESS GETS THE BOOT”
Page 11: “If Maddie IS dead she will tell me where he body is” – Says Gordon Smith
DAILY MIRROR front page: “Maddy copper is axed”
Page 7: “OFF THE CASE – Boozy cop is demoted after furious outburst against the McCanns”
THE SUN page 7: “MADDIE COP FIRED FOR McCANNS RANT – storm as bungler says family duped Brit police”
Comments Clarence Mitchell: “I can confirm that Kate and Gerry are aware of this development but we cannot comment”
THE GUARDIAN page 7: “Detective leading hunt for Madeleine sacked after blast at UK police” – Mr Amaral is 47. He has been demoted. He is 48 in the Sun. Such are the facts
Carols Pinto de Abreu, the McCanns’ Portuguese lawyer, says: “The McCanns cannot confess to something they did not do and cannot and should not lie to please the police”
THE INDEPENDENT page 8: “Detective leading Madeleine hunt dropped from case after outburst” – Amaral is being investigated over an alleged attack on the mother of a different missing girl. Read about that here
THE TIMES front page: “Detective in charge of McCann case sacked”
Page 9: “Madeleine detective sacked after outburst”
Alipio Ribeiro, Amaral’s boss, says: “The police should be discreet and keep quiet, but there is always someone who talks” – So much for those secrecy laws
DAILY TELEGRAPH page 15: “Madeleine inquiry chief sacked after attack on British police”
A “family friend” of the McCanns says: “What he [Mr Amaral] is saying is just plain wrong. Leicestershire Police are not doing anything on Kate and Gerry’s behalf. They are simply there for liaison. There is certainly no strategy to distract form the Portuguese investigation”
What investigation?
Posted: 3rd, October 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,208) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Does anyone know the BMA’s code of conduct and if behaviour outside the context of treating patients is ever under their remit?
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:59 pm
895
I’m not going to even discuss it with you any further because I find your comments totally irrational. End of.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 pm
726 anonymous
Saw your astrology interest. This piece of software, while not intended for that purpose, could I imagine be put to such use and is otherwise a lot of fun, gorgeous to look at, and is free!
It’s called Celestia
http://shatters.net/celestia/index.html
back to the bun fight.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 pm
It appears Social Services are busy though taking children before they’re born.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=480201&in_page_id=1879
“For within 30 minutes of birth, barring any medical complications, Molly will be handed by doctors to social workers. They have instructions to take away Fran’s newborn baby and place her in foster care.”
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Boring or not, pompous or not, I don’t care who are the McCann’s. I care when corrupted a police officer is corrupted enough to break the laws of his own country. These laws have been set to prevent miscarriages of justice, to prevent from an unqualified person to judge on the basis of incomplete elements.
The von Aesch inquiry was just washed with the most absurd statements, leading to make believe a 67 years-old man has been digging a hole with his nails to burry a little girl.
- The Swiss army who has been searching every square inch had not seen her;
- The sniffer dogs have been misled by the “flooding rains” of August;
- These floods have not harmed the cigarette package of the criminal;
- The Swiss metal detectors didn’t found the gun used to try killing an innocent man walking by.
All of that was found after, and there is not the slightest suspicion the child would have been abducted by another person and her body brought back there after she was murdered?
Why is that? How silly. You should know that:
Vreny von Aesch assured that her husband was not a paedophile;
Vreny von Aesch assured the last time her husband was not in Algarve was 12 years before;
Vreny von Aesch said the computers with traces of contacts with peado website belonged to “friends”;
Vreny von Aesch thinks the press is very cruel to the memory of her lovely husband…
No one explains why Vreny von Aesch did not have to answer for the least, of being partner in fraud of weapon between the Spanish, the French and Swiss borders, what is supposed to have killed a child.
The Portuguese police never asked for a lye detector test to Vreny von Aesch, but asked one for Kate McCann.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:57 pm
The most logical explanation I have heard is that the little girl was under some form of sedation and she fell down the stairs. The parents wouldn’t be guilty of malpractice because they weren’t practicing medicine but they would have their other children taken away.
It is logical but I still think there is a lot more to what happened to little Maddie.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:55 pm
883 Garth
You say move on. Yeah right and ignore the obvious signs of something amiss.
The post you refer to by Maria was nonsense.
People like you and Maria have it in your head that the McCanns are innocent based on absolutely nothing but a trusting mindset.
I and others base our feelings on a series of obvious contradictions that are difficult for us to ignore. So we dont.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:54 pm
868 Portia
I do get the point that you are good mother, and cannot understand why they would leave thir children. That is commendable.
I do think, however, that you miss the point. There is no evidence that they are responsible for killing their child. If your point is that, by leaving their children alone, they by their actions/inactions contributed to their child being in danger, then there is case for that argument. But perhaps, for the moment, we should be content with kicking them with one foot before laying in with the other.
As for the media campaign, I still think it had/has some advantages, and could have worked/may yet still, though it seems now to have been a double edged sword. If I were in their situation, I think I might be compelled to ‘do’ somthing too, rather than sitting about becoming another statistic.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pm
I guess the European laws on criminal investigations are very different from the laws in the U.S…. It’s really very easy to get information from the police in the US on criminal investigations (usually, unless they have a DARN good reason to keep stuff secret). Although I admittedly started out thinking you guys were a bunch of scum-sucking jackals trying to convict the McCanns based on scant (and likely false) evidence, I now think the real problem is the Portugese secrecy laws. I mean, pray tell, WHAT purpose does it serve? IF you guys are correct, and the McCanns are spinning this whole thing, it’s only the Secrecy Law that allows them to do it. If the police could speak openly about the evidence in the case, the McCanns couldn’t do this. And, vice versa, if the law didn’t require this level of secrecy, and IF the McCanns are innocent, it would be much more clear that the Portugese police were grasping at straws. So really it’s the law itself that is creating this bizarre level of theorizing based on rumor and innuendo. I just don’t get what purpose this law serves. Shouldn’t this be a good moment to challenge secrecy laws?
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pm
#888 How many people does it take to get ice?
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:52 pm
885.
Unless they were poor and black or hispanic or Britney Spears.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:52 pm
870 Maria
OK. Let’s just say that I think leaving the children alone is morally indefensible, in my opinion. It matters not whether they’ll ever be charged with any offence in respect of this, nor do the inadequcies of Social Services matter. I was responding to your earlier post where you sought to minimise the role the McCann’s decision to leave the children unattended played in Madeleine’s ultimate disappearance. It’s quite simple really, had the children not been left unattended Madeleine would not have been abducted.
Your other points I have no comment on, I didn’t make any observations re these in my original post.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:51 pm
30 minute checks would not cover a three year old waking up and looking for Mummy. They would also not cover any of the common accidents that regularly occur to 2 and 3 year olds.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Regarding my post 877. Sorry, on this blog, the McCanns would still be burned at the stake for getting ice. People with children should not need ice, or shoud have ordered ice from take-out, or drank the wine warm.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Oh and that bear hunt story - that bear is highly suspicious - chasing those kids and beating down their front door.. and another thing..why does David Beckham always show up when a child disappears - QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ASKED
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 pm
816 Jolie.
You may well be right on this. I certainly did not mean that all the evidence collected so far should be jettisoned, only that fresh teams might inspire trust all round. Clearly they would need to work with the evidence, witness statements etc.
However, you my well be right that it’s better not to change horses mid-stream.
Actually, removing Amaral is a shrewd move even apart from his suspect status and indiscreet comments. People will have more trust in the investigation with a new leader. Maybe that alone is sufficient to ensure trust.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
870 Maria- Yay! My thoughts exactly. I have 2 young children (ages 3 and 4) and i”m having a hard time with this one because it’s true that I probably would not have left the children alone under those circumstances. But I say “probably” because it’s really hard to know for sure. It sounds to me like it FELT to the group like, say, summer camp, like all the kids belonged to everyone. It sounds like other members of the Group also left their children in the apartments. It sounds like everyone felt safe. Sometimes, we can get lulled into feeling safe when , in fact, we are not… I don’t mean to say that what the McCanns did, leaving their kids, was perfectly OK, but some people here want to act like they murdered their own daughter just because they left her. Negligence does not equal homicide. And, I don’t know about the UK, but here in the USA, the social services would LAUGH at the suggestion that parents shoudl be prosecuted under these circumstances.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
876 - innocent til proven incompetent
it’s true.. look
http://www.britishcouncil.org/poland-trenduk-conkers.htm
“Banned games
Conkers are banned by some schools as they fear the horse chestnuts could be used as ‘offensive weapons’. One school banned skipping after some girls fell over.
One far fetched example is preventing children from making daisy chains, in case pupils pick up germs from the flowers. “
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
865 m.e.
Did you not absorb anything that maria said? (837)
For gawds sake…………move on!
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
870..Maria
I am NOT saying they were right. I am saying that the kidnapper is the guilty one.
———————————————————————————
What evidence is there that there is a “kidnapper ” pray tell.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Maria - think about it. A three year old can, without any help at all, get up from bed and go outside to ask Mummy for whatever. In an apartment complex/resort, she would be easily disoriented. If she asked someone for help, chances are that in a foreign country, the help would not speak her language.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Krissie….869
Perfectly logical Questions———- were it not for the fact that it is a case that is under investigation, and as such we should really be knowing a damn thing from either PJ or McCann’s or their PR or the press.
We speculate because normal rules have been thrown to wolves on back of massive PR campaigns and worse taken up by UK press like a pack of slobbering dogs on a slab of raw meat.
The PJ do not “owe” you, me, or anyone else, any explanation or answers until and unless there is a court case which in this instance the Team Mc and UK press are doing their level best to see never happens. ..without even knowing if there is even a case to be answered ..yet.
Call the Met up and ask police on Rhys Jones murder to answer questions… guess what they will tell you.???????
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Talking about leaving the children alone. You know what really, really p**ses me off?
Nobody, not one of the gutless sods in the UK government or in Social Services or even the NS bloody PCC has come forward to go on record as saying that leaving children of that age alone for any f**king reason is not right. I don’t care if it isn’t against the law, it’s against common sense, and because these w**kers haven’t said DON’T DO IT YOU F**KING IDIOTS people are still doing it.
Anyway felicidads Bulldump I’m having some brandy for you. Salut.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
845 Stig
I know you’re not joking Stig - I just can’t be bothered to look at it.
841
Hold on a minute. What do you mean naive? I don’t go on holiday to break the law anyway. So what a pathetic comment that is.
And funnily enough (but not quite as funny as your remark) the only thing I’m intersted in when a go abroad is how close the beach is, where the shops are, etc etc
Naive? Oooooh I can feel some funny words coming on!
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Most here have no sense of sympathy for this disaster - I suspect perhaps you have not lived long enough to suffer mistakes and mishaps.
I only hope that each of you will one day know “Mercy” at the hand of strangers that could be callous and didn’t.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:42 pm
865 M.E. It may be obvious now but any one who went to butlins as a kid would know the parents went out when you were in bed and left you with a ‘baby listening service’ - I have no idea to this day what that consisted of.
Mind you this was in the 70’s when we all played outside from dawn til dusk, and yes a lot of bad things happened but at least kids and parents had some freedom. BTW it’s true that CONKERS ARE BANNED - how wrong is that ?
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:40 pm
I don’t believe what they did by eating and leaving the children was criminal. Stuff happens, you could be in the front yard, working on the car, going to a mailbox, chatting with a neighbor, taking a bath. Going next door for a spot of tea and the bedroom catches fire.
Stuff just happens. Unfortunate for the McCanns they were not down the hall getting ice. It would have looked better.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:39 pm
#865
I agree with you 100%.
Additionally, it was a very mean-spirited thing to do and not at all like what so many people are saying is like momentarily turning your back on an older child or children.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
PJ = useless, unprofessional, bumbling, incompetent, ramshackle f***wits!
Anyone care to defend?
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
JUDITH C!!!!!!
I am so SORRY!!! Judith was the one that mentioned the dam in Spain. And there is one. So maybe someone will check around there.