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
October 26th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
THE RTE PROGRAMME
A few points.
I thought the references to the Cipriani case were highly loaded against the PJ. No mention of the blood of the missing girl being found in the mother’s fridge. A picture of the mother with black eyes with commentary running over it claiming the the PJ said that the mother ‘fell down the stairs’. In fact, these injuries as I understand it were caused by other prisoners, and the PJ never claimed it was the result of falling down the stairs. The programme basically suggested that she had been fitted up and a confession beaten out of her by Amaryl and brital PJ colleagues, without offering the viewers any counter-facts about the case.
In addition, viewers might well have been left with the impression that the PJ had really got virtually no solid evidence against the McCanns at all. The reporters did not for example give viewers any instances of the avalanche of ludicrous stories invented by the McCanns to cover the traces of blood, body fluids and the evidence of Eddie the cadaver sniffer dog.
I also noted a couple Clarence’s remarks - as near verbatim as I can get them:
1. ‘No, there was no evidemce of a break-in, I can’t go in to that evidence of course - although I’ll be very happy to do so off camera. The McCanns definitely believe that the abductor climbed through the window…” (*), and
2. ‘I’m not going to go into the timeline; if you try to drag me into that, then we”ll have to stop the interview’.
* He forgot to add: ‘with Madeleine tucked under his arm’.
It was the first time I’d seen Clarence speaking at any length and he came over just as yet another insincere PR man, employed to cover up the truth and gain maximum positive perception for his clients
October 26th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
This message is for the Mcanns; Please open your eyes and see,what you are doing to yourselfs, the more you will try to coverup the more cofusion you will creat, our jobs should not take over the love for our children. All I want to say you should end all this comedia and face the truth.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
543 Karen
The Macbeths …. no question about it ….
October 26th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
536 logic
I know exactly what you mean, you cannot get inside these people’s heads or mind-sets and I have a Mother-in-Law who makes your mind boggle. The most shocking thing she did was when Brother-in-Law was knocked off his bike and killed on the road not far from the house, two days before he would have been 27. She went down to see what was going on and came back because she “had to get the guest’s dinner” ( we were doing B&B at the time.) The guests incidentally, wanted to go home when they knew what had happened but she insisted they stay…they didn’t.
We normal thinking people put it down to severe shock and all that kind of thing but she has NEVER caved in, never shown any emotion, shock, trauma - call it what you may, and this is 16 years later . Kate McCrim reminds me so much of her I have to deal with it in the same way as I deal with M-in-L otherwise you’d go nuts trying to work it out.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
innocent and odd, in an odd circle - though not convinced of the swinger theory though
October 26th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Thought I’d look in and see what you have all been saying. Very interesting, if only I had the time to read it all.
About Jane Tanner - did you know that in the States there is something referred to as the Bushy Haired Stranger, the victim always describes a person who inevitably they have invented. The “stranger” always has bushy, lank, greasy hair, never clean, and they are rarely fair or red. So is Jane Tanner inventing this suspect.
I f I saw Jane on a dark night I’d hide!
October 26th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
538.
It is a fascinating case - it’s a proper old fashioned blood and thunder melodrama (I study English) but the roles of victim and villain are up for grabs.
Kate and Gerry are either innocent but odd, or guilty and monstrous. It’s the uncertainty that makes it so popular.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
520 - ??? - You say “I work with the mind firstly.”
The McCanns won’t be employing you then.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
It would seem that the PJ tactic is …softly, softly, catchee monkey.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
525 Rationalist
See the way he changed to the twins when he said he hadnt drugged Madeleine?
Looking down and confused?
He steps in and says he saw her last when she gets confused when asked who saw Maddie last?
They are lying about some aspects and thats why they are careful what they actually say - example: We want Maddie back. Of course they do, it would be wonderful, but youd say that regardless of what happened - if she was dead and you knew it, youd say that.
They are carefully controlling what they say to avoid direct lies as they arent very good at lying (ear tugging - remember?).
October 26th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
???
I said with.
Which university, which police force, how come you are the only non-forensic psychologist to work so closely with them?
October 26th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
525 - that is why i am fascinated with this case, none of it really makes any sense at all, yet there does seem to be an underlying weirdness to the whole situation, from the massive PR campaign to what the possible motive could be.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
529. Logic.
The police have said that they don’t have confirmation of death. Sounds to me like they are getting second opinions. This is their pattern. Every test that was done in the Portugal lab was repeated in the Birmingham lab.
Time will tell.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Ann 530
The “anxious” remark lends weight to my belief that this couple do not think like normal people. Likewise “life is not as happy as it was”!!!!!
We are all trying to put ourselves in their positions - how would we behave etc? But it’s futile because they are on a different mental plane.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
That’s correct. The McCann’s have threatened to sue the UK media. In reporting, an editorial has to make sure its “in the public interest” and that it’s not “malicious” indeed for them to be free of liability if they publish something already published, they can speak of this much easier especially in that context. Analysis of other’s works
October 26th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
502 - Anonymousthe1st
That was a mighty long post just to call Michael an out of work sponger.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
I work with the police not for them
October 26th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
It’s all classic display of lies. Any Psychologist would see it
October 26th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
522 Ann
I believe the 70% was a Spanish audience reaction.
As usual all critical reporting by the British press is the reporting of a foreign critical report.
In fact when I think about it I’m starting to wonder if the press are not allowed to do the former (report negative news directly), so they have to wait for the latter (foreign media to do it first)….
October 26th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Kate McCrim said she felt “anxious Madeleine is not with them ” …!! what an utterly peculiar thing to say !! “…. devastated” ….”totally distraught” or something of that ilk maybe but “anxious” ???
October 26th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Why do some posters think that Madeleine has been snatched to frighten Gerry? Of course, anything’s possible in this case. However, if Gerry was a member of the Underworld or similar, would he leave his children alone, even if the door was locked? Please enlighten me - what is it that Gerry might know that could be a threat to someone such that they would snatch his daughter. That scenario would mean that the dead body DNA “evidence” didn’t exist (as it might well not).
October 26th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
…actually it is demeanour, sorry and all that !!
October 26th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
522…Ann
Apparently 80% in Spain don’t believe them either…..the Spanish…God bless them…seem to be less gullible than our 30%.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Any opinion will be subject to logical analysis and even ridicule if it does not stand scrutiny. To be convincing you must display signs of logic and intelligence
October 26th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
I don’t think they ARE acting. Gerry McCann looks controlled and confident, until he’s asked a question about sedating the children. I agree that some of his statements about Madeleine, seem too contrived, ‘our lovely daughter’, ‘how lucky I feel to be the father of 3 beautiful children’. It may be how he genuinely feels, but it’s put in a way that appears artificial. Their composure is what makes people suspicious. It appears unnatural. If they had been consciously ’staging’, I doubt that they would have played tennis, gone jogging, been too composed at the interviews. They would’ve been playing the ‘parts’ of bereaved parents. They seen to behave like people who ‘know’ something, but cannot say. I find it hard to believe that a group of 9 people can be involved in an alleged cover-up, without someone wanting to save their own ass. That would mean that they are ALL acting. Why? What’s the motive? To protect their reputations? It doesn’t make sense. It’s all about the evidence…so far we are speculating on leaks. The whole story is weird..which is why we’re so curious.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
???
What university offers a course in criminal psychology that isn’t called forensic psychology?
How did you get to work with the police and not be called a forensic psychologist?
I don’t want to labour the point, but if you know who you are how come you can’t say one credible thing to support it?
October 26th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Is one not allowed to lazy-type and have typing errors on this site? I missed off the ur. I’m a science master not english! Sorry English.
See all an attack on me. nothing to do with my ideas. I guess you have to be a regular on here to be able to have an opinion at all!
October 26th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
….so, the “Daily Express” poll showed that 70% of us don’t believe the McCanns ….and that is a surprise ???
October 26th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
It’s demenour not demeno. And names have capital letters. Work that through your mind ???<< whoever you are
October 26th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
I know who I am, and where the letters came from. Criminal Psychology is what I studied. I work with the mind firstly. I have theories that this is very close to home but the mccanns have nothing to do with it, though I can sense by gerrys anger and demeano that he may have some idea of ‘who dunnit’ This is probably why they ‘know’ she is still alive. Someone is doing this to scare gerry.