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
- KSA crew on Wikileaks Publishes 500,000 9/11 FBI And NYPD Pager Messages, Conspiracy Theorists Read On
- Emily on Miley Cyrus Says Twilight Is A Bad Cult And Zac Effron Is Hot
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
December 18th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
561 Stevo
The last I remember really looking over this pic was a while back on Anorak, when we were discussing whether Kate dyed her hair, and had possibly dyed Madeleine’s hair blonde. I remember looking at this pic, and we here had a discussion about how there was actually a lot of dark hair under the blondish hair of both girls….
But yes, the assumption was, the small girl was Amelie, and Madeleine was the jumping girl, although her face is obscured. And in fact, her face is obscured in several photographs.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
576
Remigius
I think the video was a mobile phone video - hence the low quality. I’m not sure which Tapasman did it.
As for John Corner, he’s not a very credible witness in many respects. Firstly, he’s “family”…or as good as. Isn’t his wife a long term friend of Kate? Then you have to factor in that he’s Madeleine’s Godfather. Not at all good for credibility with no bias eh?
December 18th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
563 Chenier
I had already read your former post when I posted. I really do take your point that, to try and keep someone alive, specialised sterile equipment and bags of saline would be required.
But I just happen to think that, in an emergency situation, where these were not available, someone who knew what to do, such as a doctor, would be able to improvise, as long as some water, salt and a means of getting the fluid into the person were available. Of course, the person would probably die anyway, but I was just trying to illustrate that some prolongation of life might well be possible. After all, hundreds of years ago, before the advent of modern surgery, operations were performed, people went into comas etc etc. The mortality rate was very high but a few survived, according to history.
Of course I accept that the scenario is highly unlikely and survival would probably be short.
But, as I said, like you, I don’t think it happened like that. In fact, I’m pretty sure it didn’t.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
575 Stevo
That’s not a dumb question at all. When it first came out, I thought the PJ had done it to show how she could have fallen down the stairs (when that story first came out). But wasn’t O’Brien the one with the video camera?
December 18th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
532 Maria
REPLIES INTERLEAVED, and as before I just answer your main points
Maria: Quickly here before out to carols!
REPLY: Well, I hope you enjoyed the carols. It’s somewhat unfortunate that Christ’s birthday is celebrated now to coincide with the Roman pagan and Bacchanalian mid-winter festival of Saturnalia (I expect Epona wil have further and better particulars on this), but then if you look at your history - and I am really not making a cheap point here, the facts are there - the Roman Catholic Church took over a lot of the old pagan customs, festivals and saints days etc. and just adapted them or cloaked them with a veneer of Christianity.
In any event, Christ was born in late September or early October, to coincide with the Feast of Tabernacles (”He tabernacled amongst us”), and probably in 2 BC, but that’s a whole different story. And the wise men weren’t there at the birth, only the shepherds. Most of what few religious cards there are this Christmas are still getting it all wrong!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: Thank you for your careful replies…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!
REPLY: That’s a useful acknowledgement and concession, thanks
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: I still am not clear about the shutter thing…
REPLY: Maria, it’s an important part of you coming to understand why we are so insistent on our side of the argument. As and when I have time, I will perhaps post up details of all the *many* references to the shutters being jemmied open, even ’smashed’ in one account. Or perhaps Stevo will be kind enough to add a page to his website.
Once that is fixed in your mind, I will move on to explain how and when the alternative, very different story emerged i.e. ‘abductor-through-the-unlocked-patio-doors-and-out-with-Madeleine-tucked-under-his-arm-through-the-window ‘
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: …I 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 [the shutters not having been forced open]
REPLY: Within days, nearly all media were reporting that *both* Mark Warners *and* the PJ were saying they found no evidence that the shutters had been forced open from the outside [NOTE: See also PeterMac's valuable post on this topic yesterday]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: 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…
REPLY: It was plain what Jane Tanner told police early on about the abductor and Gerry McCann used her early description when he - *without PJ backing* - went on to international televsion to appeal for people to find the abductor. Gerry McCann’s description of the 5′ 7″ abductor on worldwide TV at the end of May is the same as Jane Tanner’s reported description in the newspapers. The new Jane Tanner version is the long-haired, swarthy, Mediterranean chap - with him pictured carrying a girl in frilly pink pyjamas, not the ‘bundle’ or ‘blanket’ she vaguely referred to in her first description
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria; 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.
REPLY: Yes, I fully concede you may be right. But there remain problems about Bridget O’Donnell’s statement. Her journalistic neutrality was for me utterly and fatally compromised by her donating her article/interview fee to the ‘Find Madeleine Fund’. I cannot trust her to give us a truthful account
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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….
REPLY: I didn’t deny that at all. I just said it would have been much easier to walk the baby round the room for a few minutes soothing her. Instead of: “Bridget, leave this to me. You can’t calm the baby. *I’ll* take the baby for a walk in the pushchair. I may be gone some time…”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: The drawing [FBI-assisted version of 'bundleman' issued October] ? No idea.
REPLY: My answer. It was to keep the abduction smokescreen/hoax alive. What other practical value could it have 6 months after the event? None at all. Come on, Maria, you’ve conceded that you’re not that ‘naive and simple’ and have a good brain on your shoulders. Use it!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: I did hear a programme on Radio 4 ages ago about an artist who works for the FBI trying to jog people’s memories, e.g. after rapes and even when they think they can’t remember much.
REPLY: This sounds dangerously close to the havoc caused by ‘recovered memory’ therapists who claim to have ‘recovered’ infant memories of children being abused by their parents at the age of 1 year or even younger. ‘Recovered’/'jogged’ memories? Very dangerous stuff indeed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: 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!
REPLY: We will draw our own conclusions
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maria: Hopefully the criminals, whoever they are, will be brought to justice. It is the least we can all hope for Madeleine.
REPLY: Amen
December 18th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
572 chenier
I’m not trying to demonstrate anything. i was just looking at the pic the other day, and I wondered what the bloody thing was in her hand! It is weird-looking!
You know, when my son was a teething infant, I let him occasionally chew on my pen (cap on), but I didn’t take a pic of it! It came up only because we were discussing the pic, and I wondered what madeleine was holding.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
562 Tinsel, Stevo
The problem is this–Corner doesn’t per se fabricate evidence. He does take film footage that is strongly supposed to promote the McCanns’ abduction scenario.
But by going to Huelva with them in what we can safely call “the cadaver car,” he becomes a witness. Now, he implies on CBS/BBC that he was in the car the whole time with the McCanns, and saw nothing and smelled nothing suspicious. But his own film footage shows that at least for part of the trip, he and his assistant had their own car. You can see it as he films the McCanns on the road to Huelva.
This film footage is certainly evidence of their trip to Huelva, but it is curious, self-generated, self-created evidence designed, as is all of corner’s film work, to put the McCanns in the best possible light.
I suppose in the end, it comes down to his credibility. I mean, in theory, the waiter at the Tapas bar is a witness. One could argue he is a “paid” witness, but this just means he was working his shift at the time he saw and heard what he saw and heard. So the waiter remains an impartial, disinterested witness with a high indicia of credibility.
But if Corner is working directly “for” the McCanns, being paid either by them, the fund, or some millionaire supporter, or even just selling his “exclusive” footage (like the Madeleine birthday party vids) to the BBC etc., then this fact would greatly decrease his credibility as an impartial observer of the scene.
But Corner
December 18th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
I know this might sound like a dumb question but who posted the Youtube video of Madeleine falling up the steps of the plane?
December 18th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
555
Remigius Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
550 chenier
Lethal? Yes! so why would the take a photograph of her holding it?
If they are such bril physicians, wouldn’t they first take it away from her, and THEN take the pic?
—————————————————————-
Because, as I pointed out, anything can be lethal in the hands of a 3 year old.
The manufacturer’s recommendation is 3 year old and upwards.
The toy is probably a great deal safer than, say, a biro.
There really is no point in attempting to demonstrate the carelessness of parents by criticising them for allowing their child to hold a toy appropriate for their age group.
It just makes it look as if you are desperate to find something to criticise them for.
I would have thought that, on the facts, there are a number of very serious shortcomings in their childcare.
I see no value in muddying the waters by introducing make-weight arguments…
December 18th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
566 Kris
Two different people, two different times.
Unlike the promaccanites, who apparently work in shifts here.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
566 Kris
Shouldn’t you be eating donuts?
December 18th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
565 Tinsel
Yes, I love the Scooby dance!
December 18th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
458 Harry Hind Sight
Envy? I doubt that very much. It’s true enough that some people will envy anybody. But ask yourself–if you needed to select a “physician,” would you select EITHER of the Drs. McCann?
No. I didn’t think so.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Someone the other day mentioned seeing two different buggies used by the McCanns. They were right:
http://s221.photobucket.com/albums/dd104/Jacy40/?action=view¤t=pushchair.jpg
December 18th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Has anyone else noticed that when Hideki goes away, Stevo appears? It’s becoming rather obvious to some of us what is going on! Hmm.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
560
Stevo Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
548 Remigius
I like on the RTP documentary how they showed the DNA samples (blood) had seeped in between the cracks of the wooden tile. That’s the sort of thing that thwarts the perfect murder!
***
Yep, that’s the kind of think you hear that makes you want to do the Snoopy dance.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
549
Matt. Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
547…Châtelaine
No problem….will just add my ^ at the end.
Chatelaine^
——-
Hm, why not…? I like a change
December 18th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
551
Logic Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
512 Chenier
If Madeleine had been in a coma and they weren’t too concerned whether she survived or not (which they wouldn’t have been if they didn’t get her to hospital), I don’t think they would have bothered about arterial gas monitors and ECG machines etc. I agree that she would have needed to be hydrated in order to survive for long but, if given adequate fluids, I think it would be possible for a person to survive for a while in a coma or semi-coma - the monitors only measure their condition, not keep them alive. You only need a line in to a vein. A couple of doctors could have managed this. Of course, this would not be optimum management and care, but we are not thinking along those lines. If that was wanted, the patient would be rushed to hospital, for better or worse (possibly to die of MRSA!).
However, I don’t subscribe to the coma idea - I think it’s “ludicrous” - but then, who of us knows anything???
—————————————————————-
I think perhaps you have overlooked my original post on the subject together with the post I was replying to; would you like to take a look at it?
Unless, of course, you believe that doctors customarily travel with paediatric venflons and enough saline for 1400mls/day or so for the several weeks postulated in the original post…
I am well aware that machines only monitor, hence stating that they would be required to inform management rather than do it themselves!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
557
Remigius Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
554 Tinsel
“Complicit” is not exactly the word I’d use. But a “motive” to be an accessory, wittingly or unwittingly? The motive is money.
How much did the BBC/CBS pay Corner for his “private family friend” videos/pics?
***
Yes, I’m sure Jon Corner was working in his own interest, and doing it for money.
But I don’t think he would have changed/altered any evidence, for that kind of money.
Anyone on the fringes who would illegally help the McCs is positioned for a sting, if they are caught. And it would take the entire fund to make it worth the risk.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
552
Remigius
One thing is certain. John Corner was helping the McCanns above and beyond what would be considered normal. On Panorama for instance where he uses a zoom lens to emphasise how short the distance was from Tapas Bar to room.
What I’d like to know is how Mr Corner got into the Tapas Bar. The 5 former British police couldn’t get in could they? The McCanns had left Ocean Club by the time Corner was there to help with the movie making on their way to Huelva. So, how did Corner get in?
Also, we have to realise Panorama must have applied some heavy editing of their own. I often wonder why John McCann wasn’t mentioned. He went to Huelva as well but nobody would realise that by watching Panorama.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
548 Remigius
I like on the RTP documentary how they showed the DNA samples (blood) had seeped in between the cracks of the wooden tile. That’s the sort of thing that thwarts the perfect murder!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
545
Remigius
Plus we already can see from the playground photo that Gerry is playing with a girl other than his daughter Amelie. For months we’ve assumed it was Amelie so why wouldn’t an eye witness in PDL assume the same? The truth is they wouldn’t know Madeleine and even wouldn’t know the kids names in general. I bet for many, the first they knew about the name Madeleine was well after May 3. You’re right…it has to be explored if only for completeness.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
#
556
Meejician Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
261
Harry Hind Sight Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
establish a primia facie case.
****************
Let’s start with that as your ineptitude with Latin.
**************
And PS, before I retire for dinner, could I add,
“This is old Harry Hind Sight acting pro bona”
You ain’t got a clue, have you, Harry?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
554 Tinsel
“Complicit” is not exactly the word I’d use. But a “motive” to be an accessory, wittingly or unwittingly? The motive is money.
How much did the BBC/CBS pay Corner for his “private family friend” videos/pics?
Who paid Corner’s travel/living expenses in PDL?
Who benefits? Who paid?
Does Corner receive any kind of payment from “The Fund” for his services?
I don’t have a clue, but that drive to Huelva is very interesting. You can clearly see that Corner and whoever’s helping him have a separate car from the McCanns. And Corner becomes the “instant witness” that there was nothing untoward (like Madeleine’s dead and decomposing body) in the car boot. so that’s a win-win point for Team McCann, isn’t it?
And since they didn’t go to Huelva until August, but Panorama said that Corner arrived in PDL almost immediately after the disappearance, that is a 3-month period, more or less. A long time to be in PDL for a working videographer. And who’s footing his tab?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
261
Harry Hind Sight Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
establish a primia facie case.
****************
Let’s start with that as your ineptitude with Latin.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
550 chenier
Lethal? Yes! so why would the take a photograph of her holding it?
If they are such bril physicians, wouldn’t they first take it away from her, and THEN take the pic?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
552
Remigius Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Stevo & Tinsel
Isn’t John Corner’s presence in PDL intriguing?
He arrived shortly after May 3, didn’t he? And the photos started coming out….when?
Is his wife the “Kate mate” who works for Sky News? Or is that someone else?
***
If John Corner is complicit in a crime involving one or more child, there would need to be a motive.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
548
Remigius Says:
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.
***
Add to that, if the DNA was under a floor tile, or even on the wall behind (the side of) the couch, then it can not be said to be contaminated by people traipsing through the room.
Since the newspaper said you only need 17 cells to re-grow the DNA chain, I think that’s obviously what’s been going on. Replicating the samples, so that drug-test after drug-test can be run to determine what, if any, it contains. You can understand why it is taking so long, when you have to account for cleaning products too.
But I think the amount of time elapsing points to what type of data is being compiled.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Stevo & Tinsel
Isn’t John Corner’s presence in PDL intriguing?
He arrived shortly after May 3, didn’t he? And the photos started coming out….when?
Is his wife the “Kate mate” who works for Sky News? Or is that someone else?
December 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
512 Chenier
If Madeleine had been in a coma and they weren’t too concerned whether she survived or not (which they wouldn’t have been if they didn’t get her to hospital), I don’t think they would have bothered about arterial gas monitors and ECG machines etc. I agree that she would have needed to be hydrated in order to survive for long but, if given adequate fluids, I think it would be possible for a person to survive for a while in a coma or semi-coma - the monitors only measure their condition, not keep them alive. You only need a line in to a vein. A couple of doctors could have managed this. Of course, this would not be optimum management and care, but we are not thinking along those lines. If that was wanted, the patient would be rushed to hospital, for better or worse (possibly to die of MRSA!).
However, I don’t subscribe to the coma idea - I think it’s “ludicrous” - but then, who of us knows anything??? Some of the theories are becoming so far-fetched that I am almost starting to have a bit of sympathy for the McCanns.
And, Ian, I have never come across anyone before with such a hatred for star charts! (Don’t take offence - you are perfectly entitled to your opinion.)