Madeleine McCann: The Age Of Jose Anes, Gerry McCann’s Fury And Murat’s Nannies Know Best
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
THE SUN: “No one will ever stand trial”
Because no one has been charged with any crime?
Or: “NOBODY will EVER stand trial over missing Madeleine McCann because cops made so many vital blunders,” says the Sun. And so too says Jose Anes, 62: “Mistakes in the early hours demolished the entire case”
The ex-director of Lisbon’s police lab is “Portugal’s top forensic expert”, a billing the lab’s current director may dispute
Mr Anes says: “If the scene is not preserved in the first hours, all the hours of effort that follow are useless. I am utterly convinced — unless some new, concrete evidence suddenly emerges — the case will never reach trial”
But what of the evidence gathered so far, like the DNA samples found in the McCanns’ hire car?
“Maddie sniffer dog ‘was rigged’” - Gerry McCann is “FURIOUS” – as often he is. He “believes sniffer dogs used to find Maddie clues in the family’s hire car were MANIPULATED by cops”
Says a “source close to the couple”: “Gerry says a dog went up to the Scenic, sniffed around and went to head off. He watched the dog being brought back to the vehicle. Finally, it reacts around the boot area. Gerry was open-mouthed at that, he feels the dog was manoeuvred into a position where it could react”
And smell
“Murat pals ’saw him near flat’” – “SUSPECT Robert Murat was PALS with British holiday nannies who say they saw him the night Maddie vanished, it has emerged”
Good friends? “And at least two of the girls knew him well enough to be on first name terms”
That’s close, eh
“A source confirmed yesterday that he did befriend several girls, adding: ‘A lot are attractive and he made a beeline for them. When they were asked who was near the apartment that night, several mentioned Murat”
DAILY MAIL: “Madeleine: Forensics expert says inquiry is ‘complete waste’ because of police blunders at apartment”
Says Jose Manuel Anes: “Huge amounts of money were spent but if, in the first hours, the due precautions for the preservation of the crime scene were not taken, all this hard work goes down the drain. We can spend rivers of money which will all go down the drain if the crime scene is not properly isolated”
The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell says: “It is alarming to hear that Mr Anes has this view. All we want, and have done throughout, is to ensure the operational police side of this has been done in an effective and efficient manner as possible”
And why is Mr Anes – “the 62-year-old” - speaking out now? Because he’s making his comments known in a book called The McCanns’ Guilt – not that the case will ever, come to trial, you understand
“Madeleine: Gerry’s fury at ‘bungling’ dog handlers” – More Gerry McCann fury
DAILY STAR: “MADDIE COPS HIDE WITNESS”
Says the paper: “The key witness in the Madeleine McCann inquiry was in hiding last night after fleeing Portugal” – Jane Tanner? Kate McCann? Gerry McCann? No, the unnamed Portuguese tapas waiter…
“Pals say he is terrified his identity is about to be revealed and claim he is also scared of British and Portuguese government influence in the probe…Friends add that he is worried about the private eyes hired by Gerry and Kate McCann, both 39, to help find their daughter”
One former work colleague of the waiter says: “He does not want to be involved in any of this. Through no fault of his own he finds himself at the heart of this worldwide mystery”
DAILY EXPRESS: “MADELEINE: WITNESS GOES ON THE RUN ‘TO PROTECT HIS EVIDENCE’”
“THE key witness in the missing Madeleine McCann case was in hiding last night after fleeing Portugal”
“POLICE WERE ‘SIDETRACKED’ BY MCCANNS” - Former police crime scene chief Jose Manuel Anes is “ONE of Portugal’s top forensic experts”
The WORLD’S GREATEST NEWSPAPER investigates. Mr Anes is “71”
And “last night hinted that Kate and Gerry McCann were partly to blame for the flawed investigation into their daughter’s disappearance”. Although the Sun says it was those bungling Portuguese police (see above)?
“They should not have been thinking of the poor little parents but I understand the human dimension and the pressure which immediately involved the investigators. Sometimes the police are too human. The police must be absolutely objective. Somebody’s suggestions and complaints connected to a person’s disappearance should be set aside while the evidence is being gathered. In the moments immediately following the occurrence the goal is to gather everything and preserve everything”
Not bungling, rather too caring; too human
DAILY MIRROR: “McCann DNA clue ‘useless’”
Jose Manuel Anes is 62. He is the retired head of Portugal’s police science laboratory.
He tells the Mirror, and everyone else: “I fear the case will never reach trial” - and even if it did, no jury would be able to convict anyone.
BBC: Audience for BBC News 24 peaked in 2007 at 8.2 million in the week ending 1 July for the bomb attack on Glasgow Airport and at 7.9 million for the story of the kidnapping of Madeleine McCann in the week ending 13 May
Madeleine McCann: The ratings winner
Posted: 18th, December 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (911) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on Join The Campaign For Straight Gay Marriages
- yampster on Church Gives Soul Tattoos To Worshippers
- June on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- yampster on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- Lone Pigeon on Bolivian Police And Maddie McCann Introduce The Worst Photo-Fits Ever
December 18th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Judith C
Are you the person who presented the holiday shows for the Beeb?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Remember also the story of 7 kids in one room?
What happened to that story? Why didn’t it carry on for much longer? Why did the PJ release that hypothesis?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
483 Ian
Yep indeed. The one comment that sticks in my mind is when Gerry said something about Trish and Sandy being lucky to get them in bed before (I think) 8:30pm. If they were lucky then the McCanns must have hit the lottery to get them to bed at 7pm then.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Hideki
Thanks for the support.
The Paynes were in the apartment above the McAlledgedInfanticides.
I looked at the OceanClub website, most apartments have 2 bedrooms but it is also possible to rent a larger one. Maybe the Paynes had a bigger apartment to accomodate Dianne Webster OR Dianne Webster stayed at Tapas 10’s apartment.
Thinking about it, why did the Drinkers of the Year not hire a larger apartment?
Putting 3 small children in 1 room is asking for trouble as most parents know.
IMO they REQUESTED a ground floor apartment for the “abduction” to succeed.
The bigger apartments are all on the second floor.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
TB, I was disappointed that that clerk refused to issue your summon
You really should have JRed him/her. The Admin Court, like nothing more than to rap the knuckles of a jumped up little clerk when the occassion demands it.
The senior judiciary’s views tend to align with those of old Harry Hind Sight
Speak to a half decent public lawyer
December 18th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
482…Châtelaine
Can we call you Chatelaine ?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
473 Matt. Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
470…Tinsel
Don’t overlook the presence of Jon Corner.
______________________________
And I also have some reservations about the pro-McCann technical IT specialist at Strathclyde University as well. The one who wrote email abuse to me until I pointed out he worked with a McCann. He denied it so I emailed him a work’s photo of him and the McCann in question. I’m sure a friend of that calibre could manipulate images.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
481 Did Harry finally agree that point? Excellent! We’ll persuade him in the end!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
478 Stevo…and Gerry even made a point of saying the children must have preferred another apartment as they had gone to bed without any trouble, remember that statement?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Pfew, have been trying very hard to catch up with today’s posts and didn’t get past nr. 279 yet. It would be faster and more pleasant reading with less squabble and calling each other names
December 18th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
467 Harry Hind Sight
I don’t think there was anything wrong in a show time of 10.00 from the McCann’s point of view.
It was Jane Tanner not changing her 09.15 sighting time that has screwed them up.
469 pat
I’m happy to give you credit for thinking it up before me if this explanation turns out to be true.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
440
Tony Bennett Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
MARIA and
383 Murder
Yes, I am all for precision, so let Maria answer this question, using your words again:
“Have you ever met or communicated directly with Kate or Gerry McCann, or with anyone that you know to have met or spoken directly to the McCann parents?”
Maria?
—————————————————————————
Your a laugh a minute Tony Birdbrain!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
470 Tinsel
You missed the point!
I said ‘pixels’ within a picture, not the whole picture - in other words bits and bytes. Also you dont have to change the format at all, it depends on the sophistication of the software you have - ask Stevo, he’s an expert!
Clocks on cameras can easily be changed, so the date doesnt need to be an issue (which was something that was odd, why did they go on about that time difference instead of eradicating it?). Also a picture can be copied back to a camera card (unless you left the card in your wallet, which was then ’stolen’).
December 18th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
This story on May 20 recounts how the McCanns spend their day without Madeleine:
http://www.24dash.com/communities/20784.htm
Notice how it says they put the twins to bed at 20:00hrs. This is in common with Gerry’s blogs that allude to the fact that they never go to bed much before that time. Why then on May 3 were the kids all sleepy and ready for bed at 7pm?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
471…Ann
But why did you presume that particular “explanation” ?
Fit’s in with an “Abductors” theory….but that presumption
could also be misleading.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Family starving, got to go do the cooking bit ……
December 18th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
458 Harry Hind Sight says (December 18th, 2007 at 5:26 pm):
“…there is liberation struggles and the fight from freedom from injustice on the one hand, and plain envy of a successful doctor and his attractive wife (also a doctor in her own right) on the other hand”.
REPLY: I wish you could read some of the hundreds of e-mail letters of support I got after I
applied for a summons against the McCanns.
I didn’t see envy in any of them.
I saw concern. Concern about:
* what really happened to Madeleine
* any children left in the care of people who thought it was ’so right’, or ‘at worst naive’ to leave three children all aged under 4 on their own whilst out boozing
* enormous government and official backing for criminal suspects
* hagiographic newspaper and media coverage of the McCanns, but above all
* justice to be done for Madeleine so that we remember her for the ‘right’ reasons - and, finally,
* a wish that the parents and the ‘Tapas 9′ ‘Pact of Silence’ group would stop hiding behind their Iron Curtain of deceptions, half-truths, omissions and secrets and lift that curtain of silence and tell us all the truth.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
467 Harry - maybe they needed people around for the show to play to? Whats a show without an audience?
Maybe every additional minute was a greater risk of discovery or error. Maybe ‘theyve taken her’ was caused by a change in script, ill thought out? Ad libbing under pressure?
There are lots of possibilities and dont forget, it wasnt 5 minutes at first…it was longer, but as more information has emerged - especially the possibly un-authorised Tanner cut off - they have lost control and struggled to adjust.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
470…Tinsel
Don’t overlook the presence of Jon Corner.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
459
Ian
That’s ok - I was going from memory and said 40-50 mins if you took Jes out the equation. But like Batman said - the skill of a good magician is misdirection.
I like Salomon ES’ idea of the hoax backfiring.
Let’s just think about if the hoax carried through without the media attention it’s had.
1. It would be pre-planned with lots of premeditation.
2. There would be several people in on it to work properly.
3. The financial gain is there to be seen…(say no more).
4. A hoax readily explains the photos and other evidence.
5. It EASILY explains the McCann’s lack of emotions.
Everything above fits what we know but there are some loose ends:
1. DNA testing…blood, cadaver fluids etc.
2. Botched timeline stories - ever changing.
If indeed this has all been a hoax gone wrong, it could be that other nice people got sucked in to the charade and the McCanns didn’t anticipate that. In other words, you can’t turn nasty on people giving you their time and money. As much as you probably hate their interference, you have to grin and bear it.
What has puzzled me all along is that we’ve only ever once seen Gerry in a kind of anger situation. That was when he badly acted out a tantrum after being interviewed and he angrily (well, calmly) took his microphone off.
If I was Gerry and people were questioning me I’d be spitting chips and retaliating.
Gerry McCann has never once retaliated…why?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
349
Matt. Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
345…Ann
Have no idea what might be stated by each of the psychics.
Maybe they all give a different “picture” of event(s).
Btw…when you mentioned about the “light shining in Madeleine’s eye’s”
what reason did you give for that ?
Have forgotten now…but I did think poss “dodgy interpretation”, at the time.
*****************************************
The men shone a torch in Madeleine’s eyes, we deduced that this was because they were checking for the blemish and - once they found it, realised they had a “hot potato” and did away with her. That is another reason we think it was someone from the complex as I have said before, they could hardly take her back if she “knew him, had seen him” because she could point him out as the “nice man who took her for a fast ride up to the house with stones inside and put her in the dark room ” . This is why we wonder why oh why, did the McCanns make such a big deal of the blemish, especially since they were advised not to by the Police ??
December 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
452
Ian Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
438 Stevo
I dont know about Tony, but I’m now as convinced as I can be without a better version of the playground photo (drawn a blank!). I wondered why the McCann lawyers were said to be discussing the possibility of digital photographs not being good evidence as they could be modified. It made no sense - I thought that it was the McCanns who had something to gain from that fact of digital photographic manipulation not being made too explicit. But the penny dropped a post or two ago (you didnt respond). What if the PJ have suggested the photos were modified and had the Maddie removed from them both? The McCann argument would be that THEY (the PJ) were the ones altering photographs and trying to get them rejected as admissable evidence? Did you send your photograph without Maddie to anyone?
Is there any way to date different pixels in a digital photgraph - I dont really know why I asked that, I know there isnt - but then I’m no expert and its always worth asking!
***
If you alter a photo from a digital camera, you have to change the file fomat and the date and time of “file created” information automatically updates as well. So, yes, there are easy ways to discern photo manipulation–but of course you have to have the camera or the intial scan, or you can just measure the pixels to see if there is are overlaps when you zoom in.
But I doubt the PJ are pursuing the photo angles at all.
What they need are witness testimonies of who saw who, and when.
I’ve heard of one sighting of Kate near the pool on the afternoon of the crime.
One sighting doesn’t account for a lot of her time.
Of course the McCs handled their photos in such a way so as to help their case. That’s why you don’t see any photos of an anorexic-pregnant K, and no K cuddling M–because they aren’t flattering or helpful to their image.
But I DOUBT the McCs could do any reasonable photo manipulation themselves. They would have had to have asked their web guru, I guess. And that would be leaking too much outside the inner circle. The most they are going to do is crop, or perhaps change the dates/times in camera.
Remember, G just had a lap top. It’s not like he had a set up for photo manipulation as so many of us do. So my opinion is there was just selective editing going on, and the real police work is in witness testimony and CCTV enhancements.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Re Coma post 462-sleuth
466
pat Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Get origional I thought of that weeks ago!!
But imo it happened that evening
December 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
462 Sleuth
You are presenting some very different ideas, keep them coming!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
If the unexpected meeting with Jes narrowed the window of opportunity to an unfeasibly short 5 mins, down from the 1 hour they had planned - why did Kate not wait until, say, 10.30 before “show time” as Ian puts it.
Surely this fiendishly clever plot could have been wound back half any hour or so to adapt to circumstances - time, at least show time was hardly of the essence
December 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Get origional I thought of that weeks ago!!
But imo it happened that evening
December 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
455
Judith C Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
26
Ann Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 8:42 am
*****************************
That’s really nice too and I agree with everything you say. People like some of those who have been insulting on here are the first to do one of two things when the truth comes out, they will either say ” oh..I know him/her ever so well, I believed what they said all along” or - if you are like my ex Son-in-Law they will come out with the most incredible “..yeah , well, but….” and seek STILL to disprove the very evidence of their own eyes !
I can’t help it because there have been too many “silly little things” that Christine has come out with to even doubt that there is something to it. Small example, back in the Summer I went over to where Best-Beloved Brother-in-Law is buried because being nearby makes me feel a bit better. It was a hot day and I intended to spend some “me time ” there as I wanted to get away from some problems, so I took a book my son-in-law had lent me which is nothing like my usual reading matter, in fact it was a bind to read it but I had promised him I would. So there I sat in the sun, back against the gravestone reading away. It is - by the way - a very small and old churchyard. A few weeks later I had Christine do me another reading and on the tape she said Nick said he was there and he “didn’t go a bundle on your reading matter, not his choice at all “..also that I should “stop worrying, it will all come right in the end but not if I concentrate on it” Right …explain that one as I had not told her anything whatsoever about my visit, I went, I came back I never told a soul.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
447 Pat.
No stone unturned mate.
All possibilities - yes including the most unlikely one of stranger abduction - must be considered.
Never read any Sherlock Holmes! You have to consider and test all ideas to destruction. It just happens that abduction goes out like a squib with the slightest pressure!
December 18th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
And I’ve seen more attractive men than Gerry McCann in a nightmare. He is a poisoned dwarf.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
I’ve been thinking a bit more about my coma idea.
I know this is wild speculation but…
What if she was still in a coma on Thursday evening and there was no sign that she would recover in the next few days?
What to do if they and/or some of their friends were responsible for the coma?
Couldn’t they invent an abduction and, if she came out of the coma in a week or two, then Madeleine would have no idea what had happened to her and whoever ‘found’ her would get a substantial reward?
This would also explain their unfeeling behaviour immediately in the days after the abduction. She wasn’t dead and they thought she would recover.
This would also explain how they kept a ‘corpse’ for all these weeks before they put her in the car. Madeleine was still alive till shortly before she went into the car.
Could she have been hidden firstly in O’Brien’s apartment and then smuggled into the villa?
It seems a mad idea but whatever happened to Madeleine just doesn’t make sense and so I’m left thinking that’s it’s no madder than any other suggestion anyone has come up with.