Madeleine McCann: Jane Tanner’s eFit, A Spanish Angel And Wearing Pink Pyjamas
MADDY WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE – 70% DON’T BELIEVE McCANNS”
The McCanns are on the TV in Spain. The show is followed by a phone vote. The people vote, at least some of them do; how many, we are not told. One, two, three..? Gerry is a “cardiologist”
Pages 4 and 5: “Police: Parents are hampering probe.” Angel Galan, head of the Spanish National Police’s kidnap, extortion and murder squad says: “There is no real information to indicate that Madeleine could be in Spain although Mr and Mrs McCann might think so. I think the question is why couldn’t she be in France or in the UK? Why does it have to be Spain, Portugal or Morocco?”
“Drawing that could catch her abductor” – an artist’s impression of a man carrying a child in the vicinity of the McCanns holiday complex on May 3. The man is of average height, of average build, with dark hair and with his facial features not filled in. Do you know him?
The artist was commissioned by the McCanns in light of a person their friend Jane Tanner said she saw on the night Madeleine disappeared
THE SUN front page: “PICTURE SENSATION. He took Maddie – MAN SEEN BY McCANNS’ PAL ON FATEFUL NIGHT”
A drawing of a man. The caption: “Hunted…a drawing of man with child in his arms as seen by Jane Tanner”
Page 13: “MADDIE IN ARMS OF SNATCHER. Pyjamas ‘prove it is her’” – The man is 5ft 6. He is 5ft 10 in the Express. He is “slim”. The girl is wearing pink and white pyjamas. The man is in a maroon shirt, camel coloured trousers and black or brown shoes
Says Clarence Mitchell: “We hope this will go a long was to proving the independent eyewitness account that she was taken by someone and the police’s focus on Kate and Gerry as potential suspects is wrong”. See drawing of a man seen by McCanns’ friend
And: “We believe it does show Madeleine in his arms. The description of the pyjamas is accurate enough to believe that is the case.” The McCanns’ friend sees the girl wearing pyjamas like those worn by Madeleine, whom she knows
“GERRY BACK AT WORK” – Gerry McCann is a “cardiologist” – lest we ever forget
DAILY MIRROR front page: “This is the man who took our Madeleine. PARENTS RELEASE SKETCH”
Page 11: “’He was slim with untidy black hair, plastered back. He was hurrying with a child in pink pyjajmaas’” (No songs please)
“’KIDNAPPER’ SEEN BY KATE’S PAL”
Paul Routledge: “All I want to do is put my arms around her and say: ‘there, there’ while she sobs out her grief on my shoulder”
DAILY MAIL front page: “Friends’ fears for ‘increasingly fragile’ Kate”
Pages 8 and 9: “Is Kate at breaking point?” – If she cracks up will the papers like her better? “Friends fear for Maddie’s mother after TV ordeal”
“SPANISH EYES” – The McCanns have launched a private “proxy investigation” in Spain. Under Portuguese law it is illegal to use private detectives while an investigation is ongoing
The mystery man who may have taken her” – Mrs Tanner sees the man. She is later “racked with guilt”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE PARENTS ‘HIDING TRUTH’ – 70 per cent of TV viewers thinks McCanns are lying”
Pages 4 and 5: “BODY LANGUAGE SPECIALIST GIVES HIS VERDICT ON KATE – ‘MUM WOULD BE VERY GOOD POKER PLAYER’.” Robert Phipps watches the interview with Kate McCann on Spanish TV. She is frowning, and expert Phipps says this is indicative of “pain” and stress. Who knew? We do not know if he then voted in the subsequent poll
THE TIMES front page: “Madeleine ‘abductor’” – The white man is of “medium build”
Page 9: “’This is the man who took Madeleine away’” – The Times says the new picture bears “no resemblance to Robert Murat”. The picture has been handed to the McCanns’ detectives who are operating across Europe and North Africa
DAILY TELEGRAPH front page: “Madeleine ‘abductor’” – This is the man Jane Tanner says she saw at 9:15pm on May 3
THE INDEPENDENT and THE GUARDIAN: No Madeleine news today
Posted: 26th, October 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,749) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on X Factor: Jedward Go GAY, Win I’m A Celebrity And Hate Susan Boyle
- Nomadic View on Bolivian Police Release Video Of World’s Worst Photo-Fit Killers’ Capture
- June on The Chilcot Inquiry Into The Iraq War, In Pictures
- Katie Norman on X Factor: Jedward Go GAY, Win I’m A Celebrity And Hate Susan Boyle
- THENTHEREWERE4 on Madeleine McCann: Kevin Halligen Becomes The ‘Maddie Faudster’
October 26th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Will
If you were on the jury, I pity the acussed you would judge! Humanity is what keeps us from destroying one another. It is not wishy washy. If you don’t believe in this, fine. but then how could you be concerned about Madeleine?
October 26th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Anna Says
I agree Anna, we are able to say ridiculous things when we are angry…the difference is, this headline statement came about carefully approved by the McCanns and their PR team. They would have had time to think it over before agreeing to publish it. That is the way I personally see it, and I have read an article as well on how the British and Portuguese police found this statement bizarre as well.
The only other option could be that they have the worst PR team in the world, and are total idiots by issuing a statement such as that challenge, and making them look worse then they are.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
1105. To err is human!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
1099. Stig yes it is possible that someone at the MW resort is an informant for paedo but you are not answering my original question. If a paedo or paedo informant was either living in PdL or frequently visiting PdL wouldn’t more children be missing or wouldn’t children have come foward with stories of having been molested just like we have seen in the case with the descrambled face of the recently apprehended Canadian paedo in Asia?
October 26th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Rock on 1083 puts Pat on the spot that one does,do you still wear the jumpsuits.My dad called me after one of your hits.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
1101 Anna
Load of wishy washy bollox. There is truth and there is lies. There is guilt, there is innocence. There is insight, there is ignorance.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
1104
Well said Pat!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
If the abductor had been watching their routine why did he choose to be in the apartment when McCann was ready to come back? He could have been in and out of the apartment right after the Mccanns left it. If it was random why take a great risk of leaving with the child who could have cried out when there were people outside the apartment? I would say that to get a child out through the window (the man is not that tall with long legs) without the child waking would be impossible.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
1083 Marc
There is no evidence the McCanns have committed a crime. Being a suspect should not permit social services to removes one’s children unless there is something more that leads one to believe the children are in immediate danger.
By the same token, Murat shouldn’t lose visitation rights with his daughter because he is a suspect. Now, if he really has child porn on his computer….another story.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
1085 Canada,
For as much as I would love to hear Gerry say this in his quaint accent we really have no idea what he said to PJ or what PJ asked him.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
1098 garthy
sorry mate you cant have the points unless you answer the question.
however i’ll give you 1 point for a response so you’re ahead of stiggy.
have another go why dont you. I know its a difficult question for someone of such narrow mind but you could try!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Am sure Garth
There are just many sides to every argument. SOmetimes the more obvious ones, the human reactions, seem to be overlooked.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
1099. Good going!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
1042 thea
This is not definitive re time lines etc, just how one might do it in terms of methodology.
Observe the McCanns during their stay and note the evening habits - OR - MW staff member kindly tips you off, for suitable remuneration, of course.
You observe the McCanns routine that night, and wait for the kids to be well asleep and the parents to have a drink or two. You put your gloves on. After one of the checks, you let yourself into the apartment with the key you handily have, or via the Patio entrance if the door really was unlocked and you don’t have a key.
You open the kids bedroom door when there is an urgent sequence of taps on the shutter from your blonde haired accomplice outside. This is a pre-arranged signal that someone is coming. You hide yourself (bathroom?). Gerry enters, pausing in puzzlement at the open bedroom door you forgot to close, checks in on the kids and leaves.
A couple more taps on the shutter and you open the window and the shutter so you can have a quick word with your lookout, and to let some light in and to leave a false trail concerning how you got in.
You gently pick up cuddlecat, placing it on a shelf or wherever, then gently pick up Madeline and quickly whisper to your accomplice asking if the coast is clear - no, hang on a moment, a car is going past - ok, clear now, you exit to the car park at the back where your car is, get in the back, still holding Madeline so she doesn’t wake, and your accomplice drives you all away into the night.
You wore gloves, so no fingerprints. Maybe Tanner saw you briefly, but other than that, there is no trace left behind that the ensuing shambles won’t eradicate.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
1091- Anna
Don’t waste your time. Canadas probably on his/her third joint.
Brian
I’ll take the points now matey!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
I think that if we know and believe that K. may have been ill for some time, perhaps stress, and that the pair are rather narcissistic and G. writes such crap in his diary, and they smile at odd times, and K. is so flinchy that I expect her to fly any moment right off the screen -
it seems that we can say they aren’t acting like us, and K. is medicated and having a breakdown, but does that make them guilty of harming Maddie or of disposing or planning to dispose of M’s little frail body?
I admit sometimes I think their squirrelly ways worry me a bit - but that does not make them guilty of a conspiracy to do harm to their children.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
1093. Garth that was his point? I never said the abductor had to be FROM PdL. I imagine though that they either visit there frequently or live there now to be so familiar with not only the layout of the MW resort but to have known the day to day operations of McCanns and friends? Or you and Stig sharing the same brain?
October 26th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
Will,
that is what you think. We all think different things and Gerry may think differently to both you and me.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
1085
i think this ones for you garthy boy or maybe stiggy wig
10 bonus points for the best answer boys
October 26th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
1081
Thea I’ll help you.
Stig was merely saying that the Paedo doesn’t have to come from Praia De Luz. It could of been a Brit, a Spaniard, a Brit and a Spaniard.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
1091 Anna
Bollox - sounds like someone who knows a body can’t be produced imo.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
Canada
Have you never flown into a rage? We all say ridiculous things when we are angry. “@#$% off and find the body may be something anybody would say if pushed to the limit by arguments which you didn’t think worth validating but which arose day after day. I don’t think he was talking about Madeleine, as much as the dead dehumanised figure the press refer to all the time.
This doesn’t mean that I agree with everything the McCanns do or say, jsut that there may be another argument.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Julie
*******************************************************
“Assume for the moment that Madeleine was abducted. That being the case, then I believe her parents are complicit in that outcome since they helped create the circumstances that made the abduction possible.”
——————————————————————-
I agree with that statement. Its a fact I know……….but Julie……..I also agree with this
I doubt anyone in here who doesn’t have some inside track to either those involved in whatever crime(s) may have been committed, or the police doing the investigation, has any real proof of whether Madeleine was abducted or not. Lots of us have opinions/positions on the matter, just no proof either way
———————————————–
So what I’m trying to get across to you Julie and to some of the Morons on here ( not you Julie - I like women lots) is that you need to keep and open mind and not discredit everthing you hear or read cos you dont like it. I believe she was abducted. I’ m not saying the McCanns definately didn’t have anything to do with. But I do struggle with some of the wayward theories on here purely because they hate the McCanns.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
1087 John
Just not ‘Tapas People’ with children
October 26th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Judith C,
This has happened with one of my posts today too but I don’t believe it’s censorship by Anorak I just think there are server problems. The host is in southern California and they are having incredible wildfires.
Did you see my message to you? I wanted to know if I could email you offlist? I recall you listing a book you’d written and thought maybe your email address is listed on Amazon? If you’d rather not it’s okay but your earlier post 926, after reading it a couple of times made me think something I had never thought of before as the main reason for the coverup. I don’t know why I never saw it before.
Anyway, please let me know either way.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Jeremy Wilkins had his baby child with him when he was talking to McCann. Seems that at that time of the evening it is not unusual to see fathers with children
October 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
I believe Madeleine died the day K & M announced her eye flaw. NO one would be able to hid Maddie, not with the intense media coverage and the eye anomaly.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
1082 Anna
Quote
I also prefer to think of Madeleine as alive.
Unquote
What even if she were in the hands of peadophiles?
October 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
“Find the body and prove we killed her”
Does nobody find that challenge from parents of an abducted child suspicious?
How are they so sure that the body cannot be found?
Why refer to your daughter as “the body”
I thought that they believed Maddy alive?
Just looking through incriminating statements from the past.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
garthy boy, i was just wondering seen as you spout so much crap on here in the defence of the mcmonsters, are you big enough to stand up and say “ok i was wrong and i am a fool” when the mcmonsters finally get charged?