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
- 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
- pete on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
December 18th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
546
Remigius Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
539 Stevo
Thanks to you and Matt for clarifying this from yesterday.
Now, why would two doctors let a 2-3year-old play with such a thing? Isn’t it kind of dangerous? Why would they have one lying around? A kid could poke his eye out, or the eye of one of the infant siblings….
Wouldn’t doctors be especially vigilant?
———————————————————————-
The manufacturer’s recommendation is 3 year old or older.
And for those of us with experience of 3 year olds, it’s clear that just about anything can be lethal…
December 18th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
547…Châtelaine
No problem….will just add my ^ at the end.
Chatelaine^
December 18th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
514 Batman
If the DNA was taken from a site indoors, and there has been no further “cleaning” of the apartment since the McCanns supposedly scoured the place with bleach, then, actually, the DNA is not likely to have degraded all that much.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
486
Matt. Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
482…Châtelaine
Can we call you Chatelaine ?
—–
Yes! Why not. Can imagine the “ˆ” may be difficult for some of you
December 18th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
539 Stevo
Thanks to you and Matt for clarifying this from yesterday.
Now, why would two doctors let a 2-3year-old play with such a thing? Isn’t it kind of dangerous? Why would they have one lying around? A kid could poke his eye out, or the eye of one of the infant siblings….
Wouldn’t doctors be especially vigilant?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
521 Stevo
You’re right to point this out. Sorry to just jump in, I’ve been working on a project elsewhere.
sounds like there was some excitement earlier. Is Ade around?
I am not saying that it is impossible that Madeleine was killed or “disappeared” on May 3, but the possibility that she died or disappeared earlier must be explored. You are right–the eyewitness “evidence” is inherently unreliable–nobody who “saw” Madeleine at the resort really knew her, did they? The witnesses who claim to have seen her alive and well the day and evening of May 3 are the self-serving, self-interested Tapas 9, and their photos appear to have been doctored. And even if not doctored, the photos themselves raise questions about whether the child in them is actuallyl Madeleine, and when they were taken.
The Guardian writer says her daughter played with madeleine at the resort, but since they only knew each other from the holiday, it does discredit their ability to discern whether the child in question really is Madeleine.
The nannies apparently cared for lots of different children, including at least three little girls who all looked similar to Madeleine.
You’ve raised a very interesting issue. At first, I thought it was a bit of overkill. But no longer. It has to be explored fully.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
“Would that I could discover truth as easily as I can uncover falsehood”
December 18th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
‘The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “This is all lies.’
A promising start, you would think, to his comments to the Evening Standard. Alas, after that it goes downhill:
‘Kate has consistently and categorically denied that she said that on the veranda. Whoever this guy is and if he is saying this, he is either making it up or he is mistaken.”
The festive season doesn’t seem to be doing Clarrie much good; he’s reached the point where he is incapable of distinguishing between a lie and a mistake. This is not good for a PR person…
December 18th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
539…Stevo
Such a toy could indeed have been used to check a person’s retinal responses
in an “emergency”.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Judith C - you didn’t answer my earlier question. I wondered if you were the former BBC presenter.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Reading O’Donnell’s story again reminds you of a Dr Who storyline.
She referred to the group as “The Doctors”.
“Dr’s Who and the Ten Blondes”
I know who I’d like to exterminate!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
537 Matt
Actually, yes it does: http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/cubegoodies/8cff/
It’s what Madeleine is holding in the image where people keep saying she’s holding hair straighteners.
I made a comment yesterday about it looking like Dr Who’s Sonic Screwdriver and little did I know such a toy is available and it is what Madeleine is holding!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
529 Tony Bennett Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
“The ‘half-hour checking’ story only came into play on 3rd May - and various members of the ‘Tapas 9′ acted out their parts that night.”
REPLY: Tony, didn’t Ms O’D’s story mention the half-hour checking regime in her mention of events on previous nights? I haven’t got it in front of me and can’t readily check it.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
536…Stevo
Does it light up ?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
530 matt
Maybe it was Madeleine’s Sonic Screwdriver!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
Ooops, meant to finish that thought …
I agree, and there is probably a serious child-related crime linking all the T9 together. Why else do they take such a defensive posture legally? Sticking together, acting as one.
I also think the …
…abduction scenario seems to have been hastily put together and shoddily produced. Very little rehearsal time. Flawed timeline. CCTV not figured in.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
526 Tony Bennett
I guess so. I’m still thinking about hoax abduction gone wrong and wondering how such a situation would resolve itself. The good news with such a theory is that there’s a strong chance of Madeleine being alive. But even so, is that good news? A tiny toddler’s world turned upside down? No…I don’t think so. Hoax abduction, accidental death…perm any 8 from 10 and it all stinks whichever way we look at it.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
527
Ann Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
Personally I think the only reason the McCanns et al are so uptight is because they could be found guilty of Child Abandonment, Criminal Neglect and maybe even drugging the children
***
I agree, and there is probably a serious child-related crime linking all the T9 together. Why else do they take such a defensive posture legally? Sticking together, acting as one.
I also think the
December 18th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
342 Tony Bennett
Quickly here before out to carols!
Thank you for your careful replies. I remain totally puzzled. That’s an honest answer. Why the panic if she’d died much earlier? I still think the JT story was very silly, if not true, and, even in panic, I could have thought up a better one myself! No story at all would have been better than that! I still am not clear about the shutter thing but I would have thought that a faked break-in would be pretty conclusive. However, I also accept that, with the greatest respect to them, the initial police investigation does seem to have been poor so they even may have missed this. I really would have thought the McCs would realise that such a faked break-in would have to very carefully thought out to be convincing. Actually, it didn’t even take the police themselves to say there’d been no sign of a break-in, did it?? The MW staff said so.
I don’t know what, if any, changes were made to JT’s story because I cannot possibly know what she said to the police initially. I have only newspaper reports and the Panorama programme to go on. I never trust newspaper reports and we didn’t hear every single thing on the programme that might have been enlightening, did we?! What wouldn’t I give for 10 minutes to talk to her and ask her questions!
If JW was involved in a cover-up, I would have expected him to back up JT’s story. He doesn’t. I think it highly unlikely he is anything more than an innocent witness. Honestly, Tony, your remarks about walking the baby are just not sound. Someone could easily walk a baby in a buggy to amuse/soothe them. Part of that 50/60 minutes (can’t remember) was chatting to GM anyway. If JW wasn’t involved, then GM, if he had asked JT to lie and say she’d seen someone carrying a child, would simply have had to ask her to change or drop the story. As a lie, it would be pathetic and counter-productive. (It has been!)
Nevertheless, there is the small window of opportunity which remains to be explained, as well as the shutters, which, if JT passed by after an “abduction”, might have been noticed. (Unless it is supposed that KM opened them herself on returning to the apartment at 10.00pm? Don’t know how strong you’d have to be to do that?) These are essential questions to look at. If lying, why didn’t JT say she had noticed the shutters open but assumed an innocent explanation? (Of course, for all we know, she did notice them and has told the police! we can’t really know what was said to the police!)
The drawing? No idea. I did hear a programme on Radio 4 ages ago about an artist who works for the FBI trying to jog people’s memories, eg. after rapes and even when they think they can’t remember much. I almost thought of writing to K and G (no, I didn’t know their address but knew the letter would reach them anyway!) to suggest it. I didn’t though. I have no idea who the artist was who did JT’s picture, do you? The one on Radio 4 was a woman.
With regard to your other questions, I shall simply answer that I neither ask nor reply to personal questions on the net. With the greatest respect, your question is a cyber-impropriety and any reply would be to collude with that and ought anyway to be completely irrelevant. I certainly won’t answer it and you can conclude nothing from my refusal beyond my wish not to accept that I SHOULD reply! I appreciate Murder’s opinion of my honesty. S/he has, however, totally misinterpreted my comments last night……totally. I didn’t realise s/he had asked a question last night, by the way, as I went straight on to the new thread this morning.
I hope anyone would refuse to answer such questions even if Murder thinks they “should” be put! The facts, the very few we know, should be examined on their own merits.
I think your position is a little different because you are known public figure and have chosen to be so. I knew about your some of your views, and followed them with interest, well before all this! (Not the Barrymore case.)
I will be working tomorrow and Friday (as I discovered today!) and have several social engagements connected with the festive season, as well as relatives (lovely!) staying just now and more friends arriving tomorrow. I hope to pop in again but, if I can’t, Happy Christmas….and to everyone else as well!
Hopefully the criminals, whoever they are, will be brought to justice. It is the least we can all hope for Madeleine.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
129 Hideki wrote: “…as others have pointed out, some information will become public in January, such as what evidence led to their being suspects, etc. Yet I wonder if even this information might be suppressed or diluted”.
REPLY: Hideki, I wonder if this is correct. It is not normal in any jurisdiction for evidence to be made public *in any shape or form* in advance of a trial. Of course once someone has been charged with an offence (and NOT before) suspects and their legal advisers then get to see the statements, forensic etc. evidence against them.
The most that happens (at least in the U.K.) is that IF the defendants allege there is ‘no case to answer’ (unusual but it does happen), there will be a discussion in open court (in summary form) of what evidence the prosecution have. But not the detail
December 18th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
519…Ann
Doctors also use a torch/light to attempt to ascertain eye/retina responses
in states of sedation/coma/death.
December 18th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
524 Stevo says (December 18th, 2007 at 6:46 pm):
“For a hoax to gain momentum and credibility, they had to have several days of leaving their children unattended…as part of the ruse - if indeed this is what happened”.
REPLY: More likely they left their kids unattended, and quite possibly sedated, night after night as they said.
The ‘half-hour checking’ story only came into play on 3rd May - and various members of the ‘Tapas 9′ acted out their parts that night.
The ‘Tapas 9′ stories about what happened on May 3rd are so inconsistent and contradictory as to suggest they did not have that much time to plan this
December 18th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Merry Christmas all! Our Anorak experience has been enlightening and beneficial. I hope all our friends here have a joyous and wonderful holiday.
Judith, I too believe in the power of “animal” spirits to guide and protect.
Best to everyone from Me, Pitty, and our wolves!
December 18th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
Personally I think the only reason the McCanns et al are so uptight is because they could be found guilty of Child Abandonment, Criminal Neglect and maybe even drugging the children - sorry - sedating them, but the latter would now be impossible to prove and the former carry jail sentences in Portugal I think someone said ?
December 18th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
520 Stevo
I have considered that. I think Mrs Fenn identified which apartment it was. There are many other indications that Madeleine’s demise was not earlier than the night of May 2nd/3rd
December 18th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
Tony Bennett
I think a hoax gone wrong is as valid as any other theory but I agree with you that it probably wasn’t something hatched on day 1 or day 2 etc. For a hoax to gain momentum and credibility, they had to have several days of leaving their children unattended…as part of the ruse - if indeed this is what happened.
December 18th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
504 Ian
It’s a bright sunny day here - well it’s struggling to be one. In the times the sun has cast good shadows, I went out on the patio and organised some objects to look at the shadows. All I can deduce is that there’s a vanishing point in your photo and another one which is the target of the rays casting the shadows. Clearly they are different in any position other than one in which the focal plane of your camera is in direct line of the sun.
Respectfully to Dr Watson, I don’t think the shadows on the ground at extreme left (to the left of the girl in black) and the shadow going up the Tapas wall are credible. If so then then Ocean Club is perhaps a Dr Who, “timewarp space continuum” type of place where light gets reflected at goofy angles.
Talking of which….Jeremy Wilkins looks like “The Master”!
December 18th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
147 Hideki
“I’d assume that Team McCann was astute enough to hire the people they needed to do what they thought might have to be done. Extradition was a possibility so they hired an expert. Metodo3 was their choice for laundering money, staging sightings, etc. and…”
REPLY: Agree wholeheartedly with this part of your post and also with the burden of the rest of it. The McCanns knew precisely what they were getting when they appointed Metodo 3. I wonder if Gerry interviewed the head of Metodo 3 and agreed privately what they were to do? - also he must still be in communication with them about how their ‘work’ is progressing. Probably not far off daily
to possibly eventually recover the body or to “find” a fake Madeleine.
December 18th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
494
Judith C Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
********************************************
There are so many things you cannot dismiss and this was certainly telling you about your friend which was very sad.
Spirit can’t exactly walk up to you and say ” ….oi, this is going to happen ” so they attract your attention in whatever way they can with something that is usually symbolic, in your case the bird in the house, acceptable meaning, to us that is - a death.
December 18th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
513Tony Bennett Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
378 Salomon ES
Both theories are ruled out if Mrs Pamela Fenn is right in having heard Madeleine sobbing ‘Daddy’, ‘Daddy’ on the evening of Tuesday 1 May between 10.30pm and 11.45pm
__________________________________________________
Tony…I think both possibilities could be correct. Mrs Fenn probably heard “a child” crying “daddy, daddy”. Doesn’t mean it was Madeleine though does it?