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
- 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 23rd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
907 Garth.
No abduction mate, that theory has NO evidence, but there is plenty to create skeletal scenarios involving the Mccann party - and I mean PLENTY!
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
910 Mike Hondemburst
Nothing makes it ok to have killed her. It would be nice to establish a motive for why she may have been killed though. Behaviour can be a big issue in any killing.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
913
Kris Says:
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:29 pm
910 Mike, who said that would make it OK?
—————————————————————
No one, I think. Just asking.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:29 pm
908 Kris
The features may not all be present but the condition is:
MOST have hearing loss, vision loss, and balance problems which delay their development and communication. ALL are likely to require medical and educational intervention for many years.
(My capitalisation)
I don’t see any evidence of this relating to Madeleine in the public domain. The only thing out of CHARGE that she has is the “C” for Coloboma.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:29 pm
910 Mike, who said that would make it OK?
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Kris -
“I rather enjoy the theorizing about conspiracies, secret societies, swingers, etc, but nine times of ten, the simplest theory is the right one, and that is the simplest answer for what happened to Madeleine. They were drinking, Madeleine died, they decided to cover it up, and once they did, it was too late to back down.”
——–
Have you crossed over to the dark side????
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Hey, did anyone think of looking at early on photos of Madeleine to see if the eye condition or colomba was there previously? This would tell if it’s a birth defect or an injury.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
So if she did suffer from Charge/Turners/Autism, Does that make it ok to kill her? What about Downs syndrome, or if she was just plain ugly?
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
903 Real Stig
What’s the deal Stig…are you not speaking?
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
Stevo, kids with Charge syndrome have a hugely varying level of disability/issues. Not all of them have all of these things.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:25 pm
865- PinkPanther
She is not our child. We can have a “romantic” attraction for her plight, but we have never held her hand or kissed her cheek. And the point is, that crucifying her parents on this blog based upon half-truths and trumped up news articles is not helpful and in no way helps preserve Madeleine’s memory. If anything, it makes a mockery of the time she shared and her life with her family - the only life she knew.
——————————————————————————————————————————
A good point and a bit more polite than what I would say.
Anyway, aside the McCann conspiracy theories, I think one thing for sure is that whoever took Madeleine had been watching her for a couple of days. And that person was hell bent on getting what he wanted.
What I want to know is………..did every person in that complex (staff included) get interviewed and DNA samples taken?
For my money, with the half an hour or so it took to take Madeleine, someone knew the complex, inside the rooms and more importantly her evening routine in that she was left unattended every night.
My gut feeling is whoever is responsible for her disappearance was privvy to the facilities at the MWV complex and would either be a member of staff or possibly someone living or holidaying there.
Anybody else thought the same?
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:25 pm
901 Wendy Nilsson
Here’s a growth chart for girls aged 2-20:
http://pediatrics.about.com/cs/growthcharts2/l/blgirlstwo.htm
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:24 pm
900-Uta. Really, your theory is the most reasonable of all those proposed, and probably the most likely. I rather enjoy the theorizing about conspiracies, secret societies, swingers, etc, but nine times of ten, the simplest theory is the right one, and that is the simplest answer for what happened to Madeleine. They were drinking, Madeleine died, they decided to cover it up, and once they did, it was too late to back down. O’Brien is obviously the one who probably helped, Tanner knows about it, and I’d bet the rest of them are innocent. What a waste!! As you say, if they had fessed up right away, it’s doubtful there would have been much of a sentence. Of course, thousands of us would have been bereft, without a crime mystery to solve via The Google.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:24 pm
898 momo
But children with CHARGE are heavily disabled and they have major physical signs - cleft palate etc. That’s why I was curious where the link ever came from. It seems to me that the tenuous link was that some people with CHARGE have an eye coloboma.
I think that’s reverse logic gone wrong and sadly this case is full of that kind of erroneous deduction.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:21 pm
893 Kris
The full article I find very interesting. Ribiero is a sharp operator.
http://tinyurl.com/33bjcy
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Hey guys have to walk the dog. back soon.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:20 pm
According to the BBC the average height for a girl of four is 99 cm.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:20 pm
891 — I think that makes sense. I think it was stupid and reckless for these people to leave their kids alone, but I don’t think there was any kind of direct abuse of the kids going on. I find the more sinister theories about the Tapas Nine far-fetched, just as I found the Madeleine-was-snatched-to-be-child-labor explanations for her abduction silly. I think Madeleine died accidentally — perhaps through no real fault of anyone’s; accidents do happen — and Gerry McCann persuaded Kate McCann to cover it up. It seems at least one of their friends was involved. Was it possible that that friend had had a few drinks when the McCanns asked him to help them? Alcohol can blur peoples’ judgment, and, if someone did agree to help the McCanns, there would be no going back from that once the booze wore off. If one of the Tapas Nine is arrested, I could envision a full confession, with a lawyer bargaining for reduced sentence on account of diminished capacity.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:19 pm
896 Avisitor
That’s the whole point about the McCanns…none of it adds up does it?
Why take kids to a family/child friendly resort but leave them at night on their own when in the daytime you spend money on a creche?
It wasn’t due to lack of money was it? What was the reason? I don’t think any of us will be able to fathom out why.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:18 pm
882 Stevo
I can’t remember, but I have posted this CHARGE-link also. I only thought it was plausible.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:17 pm
886 Kris
I would bet my mortgage that Madeleine doesn’t have CHARGE Syndrome. This is such a terrible condition with so many visible clues and Madeleine has nothing to link her to CHARGE: http://www.chargesyndrome.org/
The eye coloboma is present in 1 in 10,000 births and isn’t confined to any particular syndrome. I was just curious why several posters made this erroneous connection.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Stevo 873 All children push buttons. It comes with the job description. However if K and G were not coping with Madeleine why did they add to their family so soon? Kate even spoke of wanting more children, if you remember. Also why would they bring their children on holiday. It doesn’t add up, with all due respect.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:15 pm
please can someone give me the link to the mystery man photo
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:15 pm
559 Stevo Says:
423 mar
Madeleine was a week off 4 so I’d say you can accept an age of 4 and height of 90cm. Edit….
+++++++++++
Surely, by that logic you could also argue that a child who was a week or two off 5 was still technically 4? (I KNOW I’m stretching the point!) A year is a long time in the development of a 3-5 year old child.
Could you indulge me and compare Madeleine’s height to that of your average/percentile 3 year old? (or whatever the correct technical term is.)
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:14 pm
891- Yes. One would assume that is the simplest answer.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:14 pm
881 Thank you, Stig. I was wondering why everyone keeps saying the PJ are so sure of this. I think they are not.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
884 and 869
Why not just assume that because the men had been playing tennis all afternoon they thought their wives should have a break in the evening? (I do not condone their actions in any way at all. On the contrary).
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:12 pm
So are they really going over this Garrod guy’s car again? Or was that old news? And where did the “new suspect Wednesday” rumor come from? anyone?
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Ive got 5 years experience in the waste inductry, i owned my own waste co. and have seen the police excavate landfill looking for a weapon… they found it. McCann’s watch out!
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:11 pm
And slyfox…even if there was a man in there taking pictures, he’d be seen by that guy in sunglasses and he’s been with the PJ anyway. He’s in photos with Murat and the PJ. From where he’s watching the castle, he’d see anyone in there. There’s a slide on his side of it so it’s obviously open to an onlooker…