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
- Anorak on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- June on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- eggman on Madeleine McCann: Kevin Halligen Becomes The ‘Maddie Faudster’
- Trismegistus on Madeleine McCann: Kevin Halligen Becomes The ‘Maddie Faudster’
- Bernie Morgan on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
October 26th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
762. Uta’s Analysis.
Also think there’s something behind GM’s increasing run-ins with Mitchell. Earlier, someone on this forum had opined that Mitchell was getting too close to Kate. If Kate is a loose canon, then that explains GM’s constant attempts to control her and his rejection of Mitchell’s input.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
783 Kitty
I’m a bloke but can say the other female doctors looked as attractive as Kate. Tanner is the odd one out for sure.
Go on http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk and see a photo of all the Tapas 9.
I personally think Kate is underweight and average in appearance. Certainly no more or less attractive than Fiona Payne or Rachel Oldfield.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
Ironic.
Do you know what I think? The guy who got Madeleine deserves a death penalty or even torture for months and then death!!!
Because he was too stupid. He did everything so well, he got to hide any clue, that the police even now can solve the case, he acted with exact precision and time but then walked around showing his face and his pray to everybody!!!
Too stupid and really deserves to die.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
779
Lunalunera, thanks for the clarification. I didn’t see the reporter’s comments after the video. But with Mitchell’s warning and the couple being briefed and their normal control over emotions, I just don’t see why the little bit at the end had to be added but perhaps he was really worried she’d say something about the investigation (I didn’t think she would have).
October 26th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
776 Judith C
I’ve tried to think why the politicians got involved and I have a simple answer. It’s because the McCanns were abroad. I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that. I think whenever a Brit gets in strife abroad, politicians open their mouths. I can’t remember any other similar case to this apart from perhaps the Ben Needham case but without the Internet back then I don’t know if he got much less comment from politicians or not.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
Stevo,
Do you know what the men look like?
I’ve seen GM and O’Brien, but not the others.
Also, since you think Tanner is the ugliest, do you think KM is the most attractive?.
Just trying to work out the ‘dynamic’ of the group.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
778 Pilgrim
Context is everything…you’re right: http://anorak.smugmug.com/photos/213138039-M.jpg
October 26th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
774
Sfinx: “Would any of you plan an abduction with such a perfection that you left no clues or tracks at all, and that would be so good that not for even for months later nothing could be linked to you, so good was your plan… but then at the end of your fantastic plan you just walk away calmly walking around showing your face to everybody with the “object” of your crime????”
Some claim he was quite confident.
News reporter’s view of the sketch, “it is a heartbreaking picture”. I suppose they haven’t ever closed their eyes and thought that this poor little girl may be dead? That is heartbreaking…As I said, that sketch seems to be much better for PR than for the investigation.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
762 Uta Hagen
I agree!
I have to say your closing points about protecting their image is very important. They wanted the press to blur out images of the twins AFTER they were named as suspects but not before. I was surprised that they did not blur out their car number plates. There are bound to be some people who hate them enough to want to cause damage to their vehicles if they saw them out in town.
I just wonder how long it will take for one or more of them to be arrested or detained for questioning. There must be activity behind the scenes and I thought the stories about paternity were carefully selected to force a response from the McCanns. I think there is a game of tit-for-tat going on as well as the PJ deliberately forcing the McCanns into failed PR exercises like the interview and release of that new picture.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
636 Rosemary
I watched the interview on Spanish TV and I assure you g says to K to not say anything until the microphone is taken off. I later watched it again on Sky News and that bit had been edited.
642 Wanderer
Yes, the interview almost didn’t happen as the interviewer was warned not to ask questions, just promote the new phone line, when he refused the interview was almost called off and then it went ahead because Mitchell said it would look bad to call it off, but the interviewer had to be careful in the phrasing of his questions. The interviewer who is a respected news reader for Antena 3, said all this himself on TV after the interview, also said tney are very much assessed for every thing they say and do, he said he was witness to this before and after the interview
October 26th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Hey Garthipoos: context is eveything.
http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2000968226707415637
October 26th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Canada for GM to crack at the next interogation there has to be one,it has been suggested here today,that is very unlikely in the near future at least.The PJ appear to be objecting to having to question the suspects in England rather than Portugal,also one of the first people retained by GM was a top extradition lawyer,it is believed that some in the PJ would like to request they return to Portugal for questioning and see if they concur,interesting.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
762: Uta Hagen
I hope you are right when you claim that the powerful and influential people, and those in government, who have backed the McCanns are now backing away. But what is puzzling is why they committed themselves so openly in the first place and why so much pressure has been put on the British media to present a positive image of the McCanns, because pressure there must be, even on our gutter press, to continue to churn out such outrageous propaganda for them day after day.
The government involvement is the aspect I really don’t understand - first Blair, then Brown. I can’t help thinking that they formed a protective barrier round the McCanns in order to protect themselves in some way or some other people in high places, perhaps involved in deviant practices. Otherwise why hand all this high level help to the McCanns on a plate in the first place and by making them celebrities endorsed by the rich and powerful pack, try to put them beyond the reach of the law?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Ahh, it wasn’t Spudgun’s blog (wasn’t bulldump’s either, but thanks Stevo). So Tanner thought she saw someone in the alley/road between the pool wall and the back of the villas, where Gerry and Wilkins stopped to talk. I don’t see how that can be, Wilkins claims he didn’t even see Tanner or any man, and if he was walking away (turning his back) you could still hear someone on a street when you were all alone. (as he still had a little bit to walk before reaching his villa)
I suppose her timing could easily be confirmed right or wrong (and even if it was wrong it didn’t mean she didn’t see someone), by asking the other Tapas members. The only way I can see this being more messed up (and lacking confirmations), would be if she was actually coming back from her apartment? And not going to it?
Guilty or not, this timeline is quite messed up. Shame they don’t seem to have any video evidence of anyone’s (including a possible abductor’s) movements.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
Oi… come on. Are we all stupid or what?
Would any of you plan an abduction with such a perfection that you left no clues or tracks at all, and that would be so good that not for even for months later nothing could be linked to you, so good was your plan… but then at the end of your fantastic plan you just walk away calmly walking around showing your face to everybody with the “object” of your crime????
My God. Please. Where is the commom sense? What are we like!!! Has the human being turned to a blind uncapable of thinking animal?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
734 — Agendawilde, what’s the address of your website?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
767 matty
Not sure of her profession but she’s the ugliest of the group.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
762 Uta Hagan.
Well said. Out for the evening now, so happy sleuthing all!!
October 26th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
768 Letsee
I’m sure the numbers are in the phone book! Thanks for the link.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Real Stig
I know! I do remember the nurse in there asked my son if he wanted some food while we were waiting on the daughter’s op. The nurse said “do you want McDonalds?” Of course, my son aged about 7 said he did. When it came, it wasn’t McDonalds at all. It was those awful hospital flavoured cardboardy chips and a hospital cafeteria’s feeble attempt at a burger with dried up rigid bread. I remember having a go at the nurse for trying to trick him like that. We really did assume she meant they’d bring in food from McDonalds.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Stevo 759
I copied from Mike Hitchens Blog
His decision to withold numbers etc
http://ionglobaltrends.blogspot.com/2007/10/mccanns-faceless-as-seen-by-spineless.html
October 26th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
If Tanner were telling a pork pie she wouldn’t think of details about which way a child would lie, the lie would just trip off her tongue with no thought to the future analysis of what she saw. As I have said before if she saw a man carrying a small girl in this manner why not say”Hi, is everything ok?”. She knew Gerry and Wilkins were close by should he be dodgy.
What is Tanners profession does anyone know?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
746 Karen
Did she still have the “Purdey” hairdo on Sapphire and Steele? I never saw the latter but remember she set the trend with that hairdo off of The New Avengers.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
759 Stevo
Perhaps Kate was the anaesthetist.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
213
The Real Stig Says:
October 26th, 2007 at 11:40 am
107 soothsayer
“In that RTE program, there is footage of Kate meeting the pope and presenting him with Madeleines photo. To me, she does not look like someone in the process of conning someone.”
===================
How would she look,in your opinion, if she was ‘conning’ someone? Would she cover her mouth with her hand, leer, wink at her husband? Has she done this in any of her TV interviews? No! The give-away signs are much more subtle. When she met the Pope she and her husband had reconciled things in their minds - Mr. McScam even said as much in an interview to which I have a link. Therefore the meeting with the Pope, to them, imo, was a kind of confessional without words. It was reported at the time that Mrs. McSc was ‘trembling like a leaf’ as anyone with a guilty conscience meeting his Holiness would be. But from the McScs’ point of view they did the best they could for Madeleine (and themselves) in the circumstances - they were all blessed by the Pope. The fact that the Pope then shortly afterwards took them all off his website is…neither here or there?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Stevo… 749.
I agree with you about the people and that is one aspect that I really don’t understand. It MUST be to do with the Portugese secrecy laws that affect residents more than holidaymakers.
I know May wasn’t high season but its still reasonably busy with residents who wouldn’t have decamped for the summer to somewhere cooler.
I’d have expected dozens of ‘witnesses’ (for both sides) to have sold their stories by now.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Stevo, batman, soothsayer, et al — I think many posters are too pessemistic about the chances that the McCanns will be arrested. (As far as I’m concerned, their being arrested would be such a good start that I’m not even going to worry about the chances of convictions at this point.) I know there have been powerful people helping the McCanns, behind and in front of the scenes. However, the more the public becomes skeptical about the McCanns, the less powerful people will want to work on their behalf. There are very few people in any person’s life who will take risks and sacrifices solely for the sake of that person. You are fortunate if your family and a few very close friends care that much about you. Beyond that group, much of peoples’ interest in your welfare is actually self-interest. (This is not necessarily a bad thing. On a practical level, how could any person be genuinely self-sacrificing for the sake of more than just a few people?) For example, Gordon Brown interceded on the McCanns’ behalf, but distanced himself as soon as McCann was arrested, whereas Philomena McCann has loyally stood by her brother (GM). Many posters seem to think Gordon Brown is still working — albeit, behind the scenes — to help the McCanns escape justice. I do not believe this is the case. I have no idea how ethical Gordon Brown is, but I can see that he is a rational person. Why would a rational person who does not love — as family members would love — Gerry or Kate McCann work on their behalf as the public increasingly turns against the McCanns? If Brown backs away from the McCanns and is accused of being inconsistent, he can say, credibly, that he at first assumed the McCanns were innocent, but that evidence has come out that has made him doubt them. After all, Gerry McCann is blowing himself up with his constant talking, and, especially, with this release of the sketch of a suspect. (I do not believe for a second Clarence Mitchell thought that was a good idea.) By acting like such an egotisical fool, GM is giving people who backed him an out: they can explain that it was reasonable at first to think the respectably middle class McCanns were victims, but now it is obvious they were lying to the world. I would bet at this point Clarence Mitchell doesn’t even care if the McCanns are charged, because GM’s behavior is so obviously self-destructive that sensible people will intuit that Mitchell would not have encouraged it.
So…be of good cheer, all ye here who think the McCanns are guilty. All we really need is for one of them to be arrested, and I don’t believe anymore that powerful people are trying to prevent that from happening. Even if true justice is never served, even if there end up being no convictions, an arrest would go a long way towards retribution. Street thugs may care only about whether they are actually sent to jail, but people like the McCanns care very much about public opinion, which would turn against them even more if one of them is arrested. In fact, the McCanns seems to value public opinion more than their own daughter, given that they (in my view) preferred to destroy their little girl’s body rather than deal with the consequences of a legal investigation into why she died accidentally.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
734 AgendaWide
Thx for reassuring words. All afternoon have been thinking about why the media and big boys are protecting the Tapas9. Definitely a wider agenda, definitely more than just protecting a couple of Brits who got into a spot of bother ‘out foreign’.
The cover-up and smokescreens are so plain to see that I then realised that there are going to be quite a few savvy journalists out there who are doubtless following all this very closely and who may start to speak out once the McCanns think they are home and dry.
I love your website and check it daily. Please keep up your wonderful insightful work!!
October 26th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
750 Canada
Wish your prediction was true but we’ve been hoping for this for weeks. What makes you change and think it’s imminent?
October 26th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
751 Letsee
That scares me. My daughter had an operation at the BUPA Hospital in Leicester in the late 90s!
Why did you leave the meaty bits out - the phone and email info? Surely you got this info from the public domain?