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
- yampster on Strictly Come Dancing’s Alesha Dixon Sparks I’m A Celebrity Race Row
- Lonnirose on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Jess on Strictly Come Dancing’s Alesha Dixon Sparks I’m A Celebrity Race Row
- Wyvern on Bolivian Police And Maddie McCann Introduce The Worst Photo-Fits Ever
- yampster on X Factor: Jedward Go GAY, Win I’m A Celebrity And Hate Susan Boyle
October 25th, 2007 at 2:31 am
wanderer: crikey, thought you were tucked up in bed!!!! Just off now, work from 1pm till around 12pm, NO i was referring to a much earlier case of a priest being party to some info. and let me tell you, it is almost impossible to find out anything about “indiscretions”!
I had a wonderful Monsioner (mon-seen-yore) can’t spell so phonetics may help, who had a particularly gruelling time with a couple and ended up witnessing the murder of the wife, being shot himself and the suicide of the partner….sometimes counciling just dosen’t work! He was a humble priest, but was sent from Rome and promoted, …..is there such a thing I ask? I think we should defo campaign for confessions to be limited to “bless me father for I have sinned….I refused to say sorry to my sister for hitting her, I forgot to go to mass last Sunday and I was rude to my mum”, hopefully then all the priest will have to do to save his own neck is ask “how rude I was ?” and I was to say 7 “Hail Mary’s” and a “Glory Be”…..I know that is how I managed my early teens! ….Begs the question, does Catholisism compromise us as functioning , human beings? Is the sense of guilt overwhelming? Is it healthy?……..
October 25th, 2007 at 2:15 am
Off to bed now….I work evenings…..my partner dosen’t…so we have a perfect balance. You know, maybe we should all stop the speculation for a time and see what happens…..possibly this is all it may take ….someone somewhere is LOVING all this chat……maybe silence will flush them out???? nite nitexxxxxxxxxx
October 25th, 2007 at 2:08 am
1532
Scottie, I don’t think I said he was asked to leave? I know his excuse for leaving was that of his sick mother and I know he probably got told off a bit for giving them the church keys (he is new at the post, isn’t he?).
I agree that if they did confess, it could still range from quite a few things (negligence to an accident, etc.).
The “sobbing” thing was clearly not a “break down” or “sobbing” but I can’t really blame them for that, as it was the reporters that titled it as such.
I don’t know if they should accept anything, nor should we, Madeleine does need to be found and unless they are involved, no one should accept anything and the police should still look at all possibilities (including the Tapas 9).
Hopefully with the Tapas 9 new interviews, things will clear up a little bit. Possibly from a crack in the case against the McCanns or a new timeline opening up pointing to someone else.
Hope you’re having a nice night/day.
October 25th, 2007 at 1:50 am
Wanderer: You are right I searched back and the priest in question was “asked to leave”!!!! But I think the loophole is wether the Priest in question can encourage the “offending” party to disclose the information to a third party…..now, I suspect that all that was said was that they felt guilty for leaving the children alone…..that does not mean that they were not guilty of a greater crime…..it could mean that they simply did not see what they may/may not have done as a crime at all. It all depends on an individuals take on acceptable social behaviour…….take Geoffrey Damer…..he could not see what was wrong with his social interaction…..yet we as senciant humans can see that chopping people into little bits and keeping parts that you desire is clearly WRONG, ….thus it begs the question do we have Sociopaths to deal with or two very contained and slightly relieved parents who had an extremely traumatic life with a difficult child???? Where are the experts??? I guess they are pouring over the interview with the “parents” where apparently Kate was “sobbing”…..mmmm…..look at her inability to shed actual tears and her darting eyes, when has she ever said ” I love my baby” or please please give her back to us????……I think it is time that they just came to terms with everything and accepted that they may well have made a fortune doing a ‘reality TV’ programme about living with a “difficult child”…..what say you and others?????
October 25th, 2007 at 12:00 am
1512 - Hideki
Why is it so hard for you to believe that there are two Brian Kennedy’s?
I know for a fact that there are two and Maria is perfectly right when she says one is the retired Headmaster and the other is a double glazing millionnaire from Cheshire.
Are you too lazy to Google it, and see for yourself? Or are you just trying to create another doubt in peoples minds, and try to muck stir? I am sure we can find two idiots posting on this forum, we’re half way there, we only have to find another one!!!
October 24th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
I still do not understand all the pundits out there who are so quick to blame the parents,
How righteous you seem to be, I have followed this case from the beginning and other than the children not having a sitter I just cannot find it in my heart to blame the parents. I have known children who just ” disappeared” and never found and a couple who were murdered, at least in the murdered children the parents were able to bury them. No one can criticize until you have walked a mile in their mocassins. May I also say from experience that the ripple effect for the entire family and a small community is on going until these parents have some closure and the guilt one lays on oneself for the smallest infraction will last forever.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
I suggest people look at the post and see the body language between Kate (breaking down) and Gerry (propping his face up) ……… I also suggest you read carefully !!!
Kate says makes many references to Madeleine - but in the past tense! Moreoever, she says she hasn’t seen her since she was 4 - that seems odd when Maddy was 3 when she went missing! Shorely, her mother, losing her child would know that? Or was it a Freudian slip?
October 24th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Just seen the interview…. That’s hardly “sobbing”!
And the midget is more annoying every time I see him. “We’re together in this”… give away!
October 24th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
Today the front page of the London Evening Standard had run a story of how Kate McCann broke down on TV in Spain (where are the twins again??)
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23417974-details/Kate+McCann+breaks+down+and+weeps+in+emotional+TV+tribute+to+Madeleine/article.do
October 24th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Louise don’t forget at the time she disapeared she wasn’t 4 years old - she was 3 years old!
October 24th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
1523
Remigius
Nice post!
October 24th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
1521 FTLOALG
You can’t see either ears or hands clearly in any of those pics. You can’t hear her voice, just watch her mouth making goldfish “Ohs.” The ones in which her tongue hangs out slightly could indicate autism, or some related disorder.
Because of her very young age, any developmental problems would likely be obvious only to close family members. But they would become more apparent as she grew older.
You just don’t know, without medical records, without DNA, without a body.
So you can’t rule out some kind of euthanasia as a possible motive. Sorry.
Children with Charge, autism, and other disorders demand a lot of parental attention, and not all parents are up to it. So sometimes, these children die mysteriously, or are neglected, or perhaps just institutionalized.
All I am saying is that these are things the PJ would want to investigate very carefully.
We here at Anorak can only look at what’s out there, and make our deductions. They are admittedly imperfect, but they are also only as good as whatever evidence Team McCann puts out there. We don’t have the pics, videos, etc. of Madeleine. They do, and they clearly pick and choose.
October 24th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
1296 Sylvi
There is really no similarity at all between Madeleine McCann being missing, and Elizabeth Smart’s abduction, except for the fact that in the beginning, many volunteer searchers contaminated the initial crime scene.
Elizabeth Smart was much older than Madeleine. She was 14 years old when she walked out of her bedroom (pausing long enough to put on her shoes) with Brian David Mitchell (no relative to Clarence as far as I know!). Mitchell was a homeless man who’d been hired by Elizabeth’s parents–right off the street where he was panhandling–to do carpentry work on their family home while the family, with 6 children, were still living in it.
Unlike Madeleine’s case, where there are no witnesses to her alleged “abduction,” Elizabeth’s sister, Mary Katherine, shared a bed with her, and woke up and witnessed Elizabeth leaving with Mitchell. Mary Katherine believed Mitchell used a gun to force Elizabeth, but this was later shown to be a knife.
At no point did Elizabeth scream or run away, although she apparently had opportunity to do so before they left her home. Mary K at first pretended to sleep, and then ran to wake up her parents, but had to stop because she almost ran directly into Mitchell and Elizabeth, who were still walking through the family home!
AFter hiding in a closet, she woke her parents up around 4 am and told them of the abduction. They thought she’d had a bad dream, but then ransacked the house looking for Elizabeth.
Initially, Elizabeth stayed in proximity to the family home, and could likely hear people searching for her and calling her name.
Unlike the McCanns, the Smarts fully cooperated with police, answered endless questions, and submitted to polygraphs.
Working on an “abduction by a stranger” theory, the police accused and arrested Richard Ricci, a wholly innocent man. Ricci had worked on the SMart home, and was accused of stealing some items from the home, and held on that charge, since there was no other evidence implicating him in Elizabeth’s abduction. A month later, he collapsed and died in custody from a brain hemorrhage, leaving behind a wife and child.
A few months later, Mary K said she recovered a repressed memory, and remembered who Elizabeth’s abductor was. She identified him as “Emanuel,” a homeless man begging on the street, who’d met her and some other Smart children as he panhandled. The SMarts then hired him to work on their home’s roof.
Although the police refused to take Mary K’s recovered memory seriously at first, the Smarts had a sketch drawn up and televised it. This caused Mitchell’s own family to call in and identify him to the police. Contemporaneous photos the family gave of Mitchell were then publicized, and shortly thereafter, a woman recognzied Mitchell and alerted police, who brought him and his two “wives” in for questioning.
In the course of the questioning, the police recognized Elizabeth, even though she’d not identified herself, and was wearing a veil.
Mitchell and his first wife are polygamists. Elizabeth was the “second” wife.
Mitchell has been considered too mentally disturbed to be tried.
In this case, the abductor was someone known to the family, although it took them a while to put it together. The abductor was actually invited in to their home to work on it.
October 24th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Andrew 1382
You are right.
There is no priest/penitent privilege in modern law that is protected in the case of murder. It used to be, back when the ecclesiastical laws carried equal force, but not now. Now, it is only a custom. A priest doesn’t have any more rights than any other citizen, although he may have special privileges, like taxation, etc. But in Portugal, the custom of the secrecy of confession is likely pretty strong because of the strong Catholic traditions there.
There IS a spousal privilege, however, in most cases.
October 24th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Nothing wrong with her ears or hands
http://www.mediaplayer.telegraph.co.uk/?item=87187e43-beac-4444-a001-6bf777e5017d
October 24th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Does anyone know how big the tapas bar is?
October 24th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
1346 Stickler and Stevo (generally)
I’ve looked at most of the pics available of Madeleine. These feature almost entirely her face, but with hair hiding her ears. There are some pics showing her left hand, which appears okay, but the one pic showing her blowing out birthday candles shows that her right hand may have some clubbed fingers. It’s difficult to tell, because these are snapshots and the resolution’s not very high. But in fact, it is noticeable that in most pics, her feet and hands are cut off, often oddly so. The one of her by the pool with Gerry and Amelie would presumably show her bare feet, but it’s cut off.
the one pic that shows her right ear has it poking out from her head almost sideways.
As a small child, these possible defects would not be immediately noticeable. But you’d notice them more as she grew.
Of course, it may all be nothing. But because any adverse genetic condition like autism, Charge, etc. might provide a motive for homicide or extreme neglect, a good detective would have to thoroughly check it out.
October 24th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
1333 Andrew
Righto! An accidental killing alone would not be enough. Just balance the risks, and it is obvious. The penalties for accidental killing and subsequently impeding the investigation by removing the corpse must be far less than whatever the body may show they might have done. This is just logic.
and since the McCanns seem overtly sane, this theory makes a great deal of sense.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
1481 Tilt
I am talking about DNA tests to determine genetic conditions like Charge or some other autism-spectrum disorder, for which you need a good, undegraded DNA sample, usually from blood or a fair amount of tissue–preferably from a person who is still alive. But an actual cadaver might do.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
1498 Kris
I am a very esteemed 14th century witch hunter from Lorraine.
And, I repeat, which McCann family/friend might you be?
October 24th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
phone line? They don’t even answer their web mail.
In my humble opinion both parents know who took the girl
they may not know where she is, only that she is safe.
Kate’s first outcry: They have taken her!
October 24th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
The parents of Madeleine McCann are to launch a 24-hour phone line staffed by private detectives in a renewed attempt to find their missing daughter.
Full coverage: The search for Madeleine McCann
Kate and Gerry McCann will make an appeal on Spanish television for people in Portugal, Spain and north Africa to call with any information on the missing four year old.
They are concentrating on these areas because that is where they believe Madeleine is most likely to be, according to Clarence Mitchell, the couple’s official spokesman.
They are setting up the phone line with the full backing of Portuguese police, Mr Mitchell said.
**Full backing of the Portuguese police? And here i thought the police had evidence that Madeleine was dead….what happen to all the other testing they were waiting on, the phone and emails and texts they had collected? They are interviewing the “friends” again. And all along Gerry tells us that he is sure Madeleine is alive and being cared for, in Spain?
This whole story has gotten stranger and stranger. I do hope Madeleine is alive and well, but i think the Mccanns know more that they want us to believe, and IMO the police have other evidence we dont know about either. I just find it odd they back this phone line, i mean yes, by all means do all that is possible…..but why wait all this time to set up a phone line for people to call?
October 24th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Too many “what ifs” “don’t thinks” and dangerous / harmful speculation to merit space anywhere,let alone in a situation where a lovely four year old child is MISSING.!!!!!!!!!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Maria wrote in 697; “There are TWO Brian Kennedys, as explained in my earlier post.”
556
Maria Says:
“There definitely two men called Brian Kennedy. One is K’s uncle, the retired head teacher who often spoke for the family in the early days. He is catholic.The other is the Jehovah witness who is backing them financially by paying Mitchell’s salary.”
I appreciate this information, but why is it not possible for you to provide reliable references? Why has no one made absolutely and unequivocally clear that these two men are not the same?
Sorry, but I am not convinced by undefined sources. No one should be.
You say their ages differ? Can’t you prove this with reliable documentation?
“There is no doubt of that. We’ve seen photos of each one. Brian Kennedy, uncle, could not pay Mitchell’s salary! Retired head. The other one is a glass magnate or double glazing or something of the sort and well into his millions! ”
One person can change occupations and religions over a lifetime. What photos are you taking about? Why no links and no sources? I’m really surprised you think such information is definitive.
“There were a lot of interviews with the second one, Jehovah witness, when he offered to help fund them by paying Mitchell’s salary. No secrecy about it at all. One of them may have a middle initial I suppose. No idea.”
No idea? As far as I’m concerned , you have proved nothing other than that these two people are being presented to the public as different individuals. Where is the proof that they indeed ARE different individuals?
627
coolandcalm Says:
“completely different people in age appearance and nationality. Just google under images! For info google also.
Brian Kennedy+Kate mcCanns Uncle
Brian Kennedy+Owner of Sale rugby club (or similar)”
Why is it too difficult to provide the necessary documentation of differing age and nationality in a post?
Amazing that no one can provide simple proof that the 2 Brian Kennedy’s are different people. If it is THAT obvious, why is it not THAT easy to prove? Telling people to Google images and look at pictures is NOT proof.
And… even if they are different indiduals, are they related or not?
October 24th, 2007 at 9:30 am
it occured to me why would you take a table at the tapas bar within sight of your appartment..so that you could see if anyone was going in ? if you had even a hint that someone could try to get in then you would not sit in a restraunt and leave your kids there … you would bring them with you or stay with them..Its bizarre and irrational to think that if it had crossed your mind about an intruder you would then leave your kids alone.
on the other hand if it never crossed your mind then of course why not leave them because they sleep and you are checking them every 30 minutes…but sit anywhere you don’t need to ber in sight of your appartment…were they in sight of the other appartments where the other children were? or is it true they were all in the one appartment and then if they were, is it really feasible that someone would go in to a room full of kids and oick one without the others wakening?
Maybe they reckoned if Madeleine needed them she could wave over to the Tapas bar…
she was one of the oldest children and probably capable of raising an alarm if someone was sick, fell, wanted Mummy, a fire had started, they were scared, wanted a drink,..I mean if you can’t go out and leave your 4 year old in charge then what sort of holiday is it?
October 24th, 2007 at 9:03 am
correction
New scenario, what if Gerry is not the real father (anyone know?)
He (real dad) takes the girl and parks her in another country till the heat is off?
October 24th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Hi, new here
love your compassion
New scenario, what if Gerry is not the real father (anyone know?)
He takes the girl and parks her in another country till the heat is off?
October 24th, 2007 at 7:47 am
1488 susannah:
I’m also getting McCann fatigue.
Even if the available evidence suggests they are more likely to be guilty than not, I’ve not gone out of my way to throw moral stones about parenting as we all live in glass houses to a lesser or greater degree. The cries of “lynch mob” from the “pros” are also false, it’s cold logic that’s brought me to this position … I’m not “happy” to find myself there, nor baying for blood …. the entire affair is simply tragic, even if jutice must be applied.
Regarding the case itself I think it’s all been said, and new posters come on with old questions and we say it all over again. We’ve picked over the bones a thousand times and the theories (some more likely than others) have all been thrashed out.
I feel “Wish you were here” by Pink Floyd coming on……
I’m therefore going to reduce my dependence on this site at least until there is a concrete development… i.e. confession or arrest.
I will pass by but not camp out here anymore.
Peace … to “Pros” and “Antis” alike……
October 24th, 2007 at 7:45 am
Mitchells back with a phoneline idea.
Backed by the PJ’s? At least that is according to Clarence.
October 24th, 2007 at 7:31 am
I would just like to say right now that I don’t think
Judity 1369 is boring at all.