Madeleine McCann: When Waiters Attack, Kate McCann Childcare Inc. And Feudal Powers
MADDY WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE – ‘McCANNS OR A FRIEND MUST BE TO BLAME’. Tapas bar waiter’s astonishing attack”
Jose Batista served the McCanns and party on that night Madeleine disappeared. “I did not think she had been taken by an abductor,” says he. “I told them [the police] it had to be one of the family or a friend. It had to be someone close”
Mr Batista is a “crucial eyewitness”
Page 4: “Nanny would have cost just £10” – Batista is standing with his “partner” Maria Fernandes, who also works at the Ocean Club complex. She does not speak. She smiles for the camera. Why is she there? They are holding hands. He says the Tapas 9 did check on their children regularly: “I know that because I often took food to the table and found one of them not there. I would take it back to the table to heat it up. But it was always the men who went to check never the women.” Apart from the time Kate McCann went to check. So not always the men. Jose thought that strange. Why?
Says he: “They left heir children alone. If I had been in that position I certainly wouldn’t have done that.” Maria smiles
“Kate may be a child carer after ruling out GP work” – But would she make living at it?
THE SUN front page: “MADDIE EXCLUSIVE: WHAT WAITERS SAW. Kate left kids alone 3 hours a night”
It’s Jose Baptista, not to be confused with the Express’s Jose Batista, even if this waiter does look very similar and is seen holding hands with his “wife”, also called Maria
Pages 4 and 5: “The men normally checked on kids..Kate only went that one night”
Kate and Gerry are “doctors”. Says Jose: “They left their children alone for up to three hours every night.” Apart from when they all went out as family, with the “cranky” children
Maria speaks: “I definitely remember Madeleine. She was like a little angel, very quiet and good as gold. Just a lovely little blonde girl.” Blonde, you say?
“CAREER PLANS STILL ON HOLD”
DAILY STAR page 7: “holiday waiter describes horror night girl vanished – MADDIE: ‘ONLY PARENTS OR PALS COULD HAVE DONE IT’” – Jose Batista says…
“Kate wants job in child care”
DAILY MAIL front page: “I want to work in child care says Maddie’s mother”
Page 7: “Kate McCann ‘wants a job in child welfare’” – So it is “claimed”. So she ahs “told friends”
“FRIENDS ‘SHARED EIGHT BOTTLES OF WINE A NIGHT’” – Says Jose Baptista. Yes, eight bottles between nine Britons. On holiday. In the sun. Indeed, is that all?
DAILY TELEGRAPH page 9: “Madeleine’s mother ‘to as GP for a child welfare job’”
“One possibility is that she will set up a charity to raise awareness of the extent of child abductions across Europe, and help parents and children who suffer such an ordeal”
Fernando Jose Pinto Montiero, Portugal’s attorney general, says the country’s Ministerio Publico, likened to the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service, is a “feudal power”
THE INDEPENDENT, THE GUARDIAN, THE TIMES and DAILY MIRROR: No Madeleine news today
Posted: 23rd, October 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,637) | 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
October 24th, 2007 at 3:14 am
testing
October 24th, 2007 at 3:13 am
Maybe Gerry had Murat stage the abduction to get back at Kate for cheating on him.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:12 am
Cheated with O’Brien of course. or Murat?
October 24th, 2007 at 3:08 am
and they never learn
typical npd
October 24th, 2007 at 3:05 am
The McCann’s say too much weird shit that doesnt make any sense apart from saying”guilty”
October 24th, 2007 at 3:04 am
Kris
I think she cheated and he holds it against her forever
unfortunately this happened
October 24th, 2007 at 3:02 am
Actually I think Kate is a victim of her nasty, controlling, NPD husband.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:01 am
Uta wins the Prize of the Day for level-headed sense-making!!
My thoughts exactly, on the priest, Uta.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:01 am
bob do you think shes a scaredy cat controlled child?
or a scheming manipulative bitch with NPD?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:58 am
Was she not sighing the right way?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:56 am
From The TimesMay 26, 2007
The guilt we feel will never leave us
Mr McCann said: “Many people have said to us that this is a parent’s worst nightmare and it is, truly is, and it’s as bad as you can possibly imagine but, you know, if all three of the children had been taken it could have been even worse, and we’ve got to be strong for them.”
Both parents insisted that they had no plans to return home without Madeleine.
“We have grieved. We need to grieve. But we have to be controlled,” he said, adding his belief that, if the worst had happened to Madeleine, they would have known by now.
The Sky News interviewer put it to them: “That was a period after a week or so where you looked as if you were almost broken, and who could not understand that? And then there seemed to be a sort of strength come from somewhere.”
Mrs McCann looked at her husband and sighed. “I think that’s definitely true, isn’t it?”
Mr McCann drew the smile of a student having an overdraft, but then getting gradually back into the black. The couple’s emotional bank account was briefly frozen for the cameras yesterday; only they know how much is left in it.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:55 am
lol?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:53 am
bob which bit lol?
I have missed my calling in politics
October 24th, 2007 at 2:52 am
bob dee and dee dee dee are i do believe not the same
but do hold similar beliefs and sense of humours
ones in scotland
but they may be loads!!
both great gals though
October 24th, 2007 at 2:50 am
its not the time space thingymejigy continuim?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:49 am
Hey Brandon
Just wanted to say that I agreed with something you said earlier!
October 24th, 2007 at 2:49 am
Is dee 300 the same as DeeDeeDee?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:47 am
no bob we’re listening
October 24th, 2007 at 2:46 am
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=22798&highlight=anorak
October 24th, 2007 at 2:44 am
1386 Scottie. My understanding is that Cuddle Cat was washed in August after it had been carried around for 3 months. The police did test Cuddle cat– or at least, they had it in their possession– BEFORE she washed it. This was confirmed by the PJ. Apparently the CC no longer smelled like Madeleine (if it ever did) but instead like cold clammy sweat and suntan lotion.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:44 am
Does this close in an hour?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:41 am
1396 and 1401
Just noticed my typing error in Uta’s quote of my post. I meant it to read:
“The McCanns confessed to nothing of the sort but pleaded their innocence, he heard a confession from someone else involved which implicates them, and he felt deceived.”
Instead of: “The McCanns confessed to nothing of the sort but pleaded their innocence, he heard a confession from someone else involved which implicates him, and he felt deceived.”
And I included the point of other possibilities and ways in 1396, just correcting this bit as I just noticed it.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:38 am
1401
Uta: “The fact that the priest is talking to the media now about anything to do with the McCann case indicates he heard nothing about the case in confession from anyone.”
I would agree, but as with everything else in this case, there are different possibilities for everything. If he already went ahead and broke the seal of confession (which by implicating he felt deceived, if they did infact confess to anything, this would be a form of breaking it), well, if he already spoke with the police and broke the seal of confession, he wouldn’t be guilty of doing it twice really. Just another way to look at it, as I said, I have no idea if he heard confessions from anyone involved or not.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:37 am
Justine McGuinness left because she wasn’t convinced of their innocence in my opinion. Anyone with any morals and scruples would do the same
October 24th, 2007 at 2:36 am
so has clarence not commented since gerrys correction?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:32 am
1300 Judith C
I did go back to 1300 as you asked me to. I really don’t know anything about this except that they had legal costs from the start, I suppose. They employed a lawyer very early on, as soon as they realised there was going to be a lot of money involved. I think they were surprised at everyone’s reaction, the collections etc. They were organised by their family and friends back home. She may have used the term loosely, even including people like Justine McGuinness, their spokesperson.
I’d be surprised if anyone close to them thought in terms of any other legal costs at that time but I can’t really say. Just don’t know. I would never claim to have the answers to all the questions in this very strange case. By no means.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:32 am
1370 was your post uta?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:32 am
gerrys come of peachy on here of late
October 24th, 2007 at 2:30 am
1370 — Goodnight, Philomena McCann.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:28 am
“The McCanns confessed to nothing of the sort but pleaded their innocence, he heard a confession from someone else involved which implicates him, and he felt deceived.” I think this is what happened, but with one difference: the priest did not learn the truth about the McCanns from someone else’s confession; he figured out the way many of us did: by reading and watching. The fact that the priest is talking to the media now about anything to do with the McCann case indicates he heard nothing about the case in confession from anyone. If the priest got in trouble with his bishop for giving the McCann the keys to the church, you have no idea what kind of trouble he’d get in for talking to anyone about what someone told him confession. My hunch is the priest assured his bishop that he had not heard the McCanns’ confession(s) — I believe a priest is allowed to tell a bishop that he did NOT hear someone’s confession — and I think the priest was telling the truth. The McCanns duped the priest, as they duped many others. Even if KM and GM wanted to confess to anything, they wouldn’t confess to the priest they were planning on using for public realtions purposes.