Madeleine McCann: Kelsey Lynn Kudia For Hire, Paris Hilton And Propaganda
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
THE SUN front page: “’MADDIE’ FOR HIRE”
Tonight Kelsey Lynn Kudia is Madeleine McCann. Kelsey looks likes Madeleine McCann. She’s not in Morocco. She;s nopt Bouchra Benaissa. She not in Malta. But for the right fee she might be. Kelsey is a working Madeleine McCann double
Pages 4 and 5: “The boss of a lookalike agency who hopes to make a fortune out of a little Madeleine McCann double said last night: ‘It’s not sinister – it’s entertainment’. Shona Adams reckons three-year-old Kelsey Lynn Kudla’s similarity to missing Maddie could earn her £9MILLION for starring in a proposed feature film about the vanished tot”
Well, someone would have to play the missing child, unless she is found alive and well…
Says Shona, owner of London’s Juliet Adams Model Agency: “If the film about Madeleine is ever made, then the world is Kelsey’s oyster. If someone like Steven Spielberg made it, she could make £9million easily – of which I’d take 20 per cent. She will become a name in her own right and make it as a child model or actress because she’s got her foot in the door”
Just when you thought it was safe to holiday in Portugal…Dum-dum…
Of course, great acting careers have begun with less. Didn’t Tom Hanks play the baby in a Cry In The Dark?
She continues: “And from there, her earning potential is limitless. It’s not sinister. And if the McCanns are upset, there’s nothing they can do because it’s a democracy. I wouldn’t back away from it because, if a film is being made, then it’s entertainment”
Kate and Gerry McCann are “doctors”.
Says Shona: “I wouldn’t put Kelsey in a position of doing anything bad taste”
SLAP IN FACE FOR McCANNS: Sun columnist Lorraine Kelly says: “It makes you recoil to think a lookalike agency would have a Madeleine on their books alongside someone who looks like Jack Nicholson or Paris Hilton”
Whatever could she mean? Neither Nicolson nor Hilton were available to defend themselves…
DAILY EXPRESS: “The Madeleine lookalike on hire for £600 an hour”
Do you want to get your resort or country in the papers? Hire Kelsey to be a “Madeleine” and attract the world’s media to your locale as she is spotted time and time again
Kelsey is American
“PARENTS trying to ‘distract’ police
A source “close to the official police” investigation says: “Who do the McCanns think they are? The discovery of new witnesses in the last few weeks lead the authorities to believe they are at war with a gigantic propaganda machine. The McCanns have some very powerful people on their side - millionaires, celebrities, even politicians”
Says Robert Murat’s lawyer: “Robert Murat does not have millionaires supporting him, nor campaign funds. “He just wants to see his name cleared in this case as he has nothing to do with Madeleine’s disappearance, despite every day people emerging trying to forcibly incriminate him”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE – The £600 an hour lookalike”
Page 7: “MADDIE DOUBLE FOR HIRE”
“A sick mother is touting her daughter as a £600-an-hour Madeleine McCann lookalike,” says the paper, amid adverts for “adult fantasies”, “nasty sex” and FILTH”
She is an “unnamed American girl” - see the Sun above
Says Clarence Mitchell: “This is an offensive way to make money out of Madeleine’s disappearance. This is deeply offensive to parents Kate and Gerry”
MADDIE: THE MOVIE: “Yesterday, Channel 4’s head of documentaries Angus Macqueen said he had attended a meeting with the McCanns’ representatives to discuss a movie. He tells us: “Of course we are interested in making a film about this compelling story. We have a history of making quality films about crime matters”
That’s entertainment: “Meanwhile, producers of US psychic TV show Haunting Evidence have been in Praia da Luz planning their own show about Madeleine’s disappearance”
DAILY MAIL: “McCanns are ready to sack detective agency”
Says a source: “We will carry on the search for Madeleine, but not necessarily with Metodo 3. We are stuck with them to the end of the contracted period. The question of whether it is renewed or not has still to be decided. They have faced not having their contract renewed every since Francisco shot his mouth off… It was made clear what they were doing was foolish and unhelpful”
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “US TV psychics join hunt for Madeleine McCann”
“Three clairvoyants from the hit show will travel to Praia da Luz in a bid to find the missing four-year-old”
Come in Madeleine…
Kate and Gerry McCanns have received “1,500” offers from psychics hoping to find Madeleine. Like the Psychic Barber…
Says Clarence Mitchell: “We did receive an offer and chose on this occasion not to respond. We are grateful for any assistance they bring to bear in the hunt for finding Madeleine. We thank them for their concern and any demonstrably checkable fact is passed on to the police or the private detective agency”
Tune and pick up into Madeleine on the telly…
Madeleine McCann: the entertainment, speculation and lookalikes…
Posted: 11th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,399) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
- yampster on Dundee Woman Accused Of Ripping Out Lover’s Testes With Her Bare Hands
- KathyM on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Desperate Dan on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- Desperate Dan on The 14 Ten Most Offensive Google Search Results
January 11th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
498…Daisy
Being worried about neglect charges….and disposing of a body
are two very different kettles of fish.
I think I would worry more about the disposal aspect myself.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
498 Daisy
Yet they still dont come forward and admit that part - to help the investigation on, which is all they want to do, it is claimed.
Thats what puts the lie into it!
Many suspect, even I think you suspect that they have tried to reduce the impact of the appearance of abandonment and any attempts to do that compromises the investigation.
Why then do they not simply admit massaging the timeline, altering where they were and when - for the sake of the only thing that matters, in their own words, finding Madeleine.
It is this stubborn refusal which feeds the suspicions and impacts on any search further afield and it is this stubborn refusal, to state categorically and without attempts to protect themselves that they were wrong and they did leave Madeleine and the twins for longer than they ought to have done, which is killing public support.
Yes they might be punished, but surely this is of no consequence if it allows the investigation to be based on solid incontrovertible facts.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
495…May
Is possible indeed.
But the negative stuff has increased from the McCann side….and if
I were Dr K, I would wonder why and be very suspicious.
Lots of variations on a theme are possible.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
501 Ian
As I have said on many occasion…..what makes them so special
January 11th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
#
462
veritablequandary Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
406 Daisy Says:
” I’m basing that remark about contamination from a published interview I read of an ex Scotland Yard Inspector, not from what the McCanns might be saying. I think it has been established that the scene was not secured by the PJ until much later . . . .”
———–
So what are your rules of evidence? Looks like self-serving cherrypicking to me.
—–
Veritablequandary,
The same rules of evidence you have. Media and speculation.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
501
Ian Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
+++++++++++++++
And how could they “….. show him the strength of our case, to explain Kate and Gerry’s innocence…..” without proving that someone else did it !
January 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
496 dcb
Yes I was taken aback at that one! Very cheeky!
If all of us ‘ordinary folk’ got to meet the PM, fair enough. We should all have the same right as Beckham - Gordon Brown is our (unelected - its true) servant. But the fact is, we dont - so why should they?
January 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
479
RedRooster Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
—-
I think you need a “siesta”… It will make you feel better.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
can’t say no
Hi there!
January 11th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
#
447
Matt. Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
426…Daisy
All persons close to a disappearance are suspect.
Especially parents and other family members.
But Official Suspect was taken because of not wanting to
answer Police questions.
Even if the Police put questions which may be accusatory…
that is their job….there is no reason on Earth where an
innocent person would not need to answer…”No…I had nothing
to do with it”.
Police interviews, by nature, sometimes have to be pretty strong.
They have to get to the truth in order to further their Investigation.
But truthful answers rarely get you into further trouble if you are
genuinely innocent.
—
Matt,
But in this case they knew they were guilty of neglect, but probably didn’t know what their fate would be in that regard. Therefore, the need to hide certain things and refuse to answer certain questions. In that sense, yes, they are not totally innocent and the police knew that something was cooking.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
492 Karen
A child is purported to have been…..might be a more accurate description?
But yes, it all had a life of its own.
Even now they will not let it die down, but now its not to find Madeleine, its to make sure they don’t get quietly shipped back to Portugal for a trial - they need ‘joe public’ to react against the nasty foreigners and that nasty EU thats destroying Britishness (whereas it could be argued that its not the EU that controls immigration from outsiode of the EU into the UK - sorry, slipping off subject!).
January 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
492 Karen
And the sheer arrogance of this:
“But it is true that we have requested a meeting with the prime minister to show him the strength of our case, to explain Kate and Gerry’s innocence—and yet all we’ve been offered is a medium-level-consular meeting, which we rejected.”
January 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
254
Matt. Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
****************
Have wondered whether there is some kind of family conspiracy going on to subtly emphasise that Kate is unstable so that, in the event of a serious charge ever being made against her, a more lenient judgment would be made.
This thought first occured to me when her mother claimed that Kate would phone her at night in a panic, claiming that ‘Madeleine was climbing into bed with her’.
Kate herself is naturally thin, and is capable of emphasising the look, whilst at the same time keeping fit, if she knows what products to take to maintain a balanced diet. The skeletal, haggard image is more likely to attract sympathy.
Also, if Kate does have reasons to feel guilt about anything other than the neglect charge (which she and G feel able to refute), it would be extraordinary if that knowledge didn’t wear her down, not to mention dealing with the burden of public opinion.
Gerry constantly telling us that they are overwhelmed by support from around the world will not combat the knowledge Kate must have of the contempt felt for them by so many of the public, evidenced by the dwindling fund, if nothing else.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
487
Karen Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Garth
It would be puzzling and disturbing even if the McCanns were innocent.
They turned their lives into a media soap opera - victims of crime behaving like Big Brother contestants is a new and odd thing.
————————————————–
Indeed so.
If you look at the lengthy uncredited Mail article on their arrival back in September you can see all of those aspects, in spades.
That and their willingness to use the twins as objects of sympathy in photographs reflecting young innocence.
Given their claims about Madeleine’s disappearance it seems strange that they were willing for the twins to be photographed over and over again and smeared all over the media.
It was not, apparently, until the Social Services department in Leicestershire put their foot down that the twins ceased to be used as photogenic props.
Blurred faces don’t invite the same degree of response…
January 11th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
489 Redrooster
Yes, I was going to add that, accident and disposal - but I think the disposal was out of Kates hands.
I think she was expecting to find Madeleine and that this is what had been agreed, someone decided that to get a real reaction from her (I think they knew she wasnt a good actress) by removing the body.
But this would mean that Kate would have had to think they were going to pretned to find Madeleine dead, so that causes a difficulty for my little theory - was she to be found having had an accidentor having died in her bed?
Maybe I just talked myself out of that one!
January 11th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I think everyone should remember how bizarre Maddie Mania actually was.
A child is taken from her bed in Portugal - probably by an opportunist paedophile.
And half of Britain thinks wearing ribbons, praying, going on fun runs, putting up posters in Britain, releasing balloons, writing poems…. etc…. is going to bring her back.
That’s insane and it’s never, ever happened before.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
482…chenier
His arrogance will be his eventual downfall.
A very frequent occurrance for Sociopaths.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
486
Ian Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
464 Daisy
I meant, the things people do are appalling - I couldnt strike an animal with intent to harm it, let alone a human being.
Regarding the McCanns, initially even when it was soley the idea of them leaving the little ones which made me even glance at this case, I felt that they naively thought all the publicity would distract from the risks they had been taking - they are doctors and are trained in acceptable child care matters - especially Kate as a GP.
I thought that they were using publicity to keep them safe from the nasty portuguese authorities (I think its always a fear in a foreign country!). Then I thought it was the momentum - it had a life of its own. They could hardly suddenly say, ‘well, actually, we really shouldnt have left the kids alone’.
But when they were being accused of worse, I did expect them to admit they had bent the truth a little and they still have not. Its the refusal to accept the basic responsibility which now shapes by belief that they are hiding something worse than I thought - though I still think accident.
……………
it may well have been an accident but it was no accident disposing of the body if thats what happened. imo if this is the case then in some ways it is worse than murder….
———
Mods and Admin
It is the neglect and the apparent alleged cover up which negates their value as parents, and also professionally allegedly
January 11th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
461 Garth
Yes, could be.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
#
475
Karen Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Daisy
Denial. Fame addiction. Hide in Plain sight. Attack is the best form of Defence.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Misdirection on a massive scale. But so few leads/sightings the attention refocused on them.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Garth
It would be puzzling and disturbing even if the McCanns were innocent.
They turned their lives into a media soap opera - victims of crime behaving like Big Brother contestants is a new and odd thing.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
464 Daisy
I meant, the things people do are appalling - I couldnt strike an animal with intent to harm it, let alone a human being.
Regarding the McCanns, initially even when it was soley the idea of them leaving the little ones which made me even glance at this case, I felt that they naively thought all the publicity would distract from the risks they had been taking - they are doctors and are trained in acceptable child care matters - especially Kate as a GP.
I thought that they were using publicity to keep them safe from the nasty portuguese authorities (I think its always a fear in a foreign country!). Then I thought it was the momentum - it had a life of its own. They could hardly suddenly say, ‘well, actually, we really shouldnt have left the kids alone’.
But when they were being accused of worse, I did expect them to admit they had bent the truth a little and they still have not. Its the refusal to accept the basic responsibility which now shapes by belief that they are hiding something worse than I thought - though I still think accident.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
481
jo Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
469
RedRooster Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:21 pmwell thanks for the ruffling i enjoyed that
so your’e in sunny spain…..am i supposed to be jealous, just because its peeing it down here in the uk again.
***************+
Were never happy! some are complaining coz it rains too much and others coz it doesnt rain enough…..GRRRRR!!!!
I love the rain and green hills and the smell of the earth after the rain….I am in spain at the moment.I dont know where will be in the future.
I am a flying bird!!!
……………..
well i wouldnt fly over here
its very overated 
January 11th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
#
410
Stevo Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
391 SC45
Also, the reality of the innocent until proven guilty concept is that it doesn’t always apply and isn’t always seen to apply.
For instance, in civil cases, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. “proof” can mean guilty or innocent - depending on the situation of the lawsuit.
Not everything is black and white in law and this is why Daisy get’s leaped all over for banging on about it like it’s something set in stone. It isn’t.
—–
Stevo,
It is my view, is that acceptable to you? I use that expression to indicate that until I am satisfied that the evidence (coming straight out of the PJ’s mouth) is enough to prove that they are guilty, I will not point the finger at them. Why can’t you and the other few who keep on having a go at me just understand that that I AM ENTITLED TO MY OPINION. PERIOD.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Daisy
Huntley and Shipman didn’t hide exactly. Huntley went out of his way to talk to the media about how terrible it all was. Shipman was playing at being a good, kind doctor.
You could argue that the McCanns OTT need to appear like responsible parents was a sign that there was something else motivating them.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
471
Matt. Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
464…Daisy
Because they miscalculated.
They thought the creation of a Media Circus would draw attention
away from them personally….and focused on Madeleine.
However the monster they created gets ever more hungry…and
the spotlight….which they wanted to be elsewhere…is now firmly
pointed at them.
————————————————————-
Certainly at the outset the media did play it entirely by the McCanns’ rules; one photo-opportunity a day and leave them alone for the rest of the time.
By the time it had got to Gerry ordering the Press around, eg. the flight back, it seemed as if he really had no clue as to what could happen if the press turned on them.
This is a quite mindboggling degree of conceit…
January 11th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
469
RedRooster Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:21 pmwell thanks for the ruffling i enjoyed that
so your’e in sunny spain…..am i supposed to be jealous, just because its peeing it down here in the uk again.
***************+
Were never happy! some are complaining coz it rains too much and others coz it doesnt rain enough…..GRRRRR!!!!
I love the rain and green hills and the smell of the earth after the rain….I am in spain at the moment.I dont know where will be in the future.
I am a flying bird!!!
January 11th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
473 Daisy
I agree. It was just a thought that it ”may” not be wood.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
477
Daisy Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
#
411
Ian Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
391 SC45
I agree entirely that Daisy should not be abused, I did not abuse her - did I? If I did?
Daisy - if I abused you in my posts it was not intentional.
Please accept my unconditional apologies - I do not agree with you on all points, but I understand your statements and respect your right to make them.
—-
Ian,
No, you did not abuse me. It was RedRooster and a few others a bit too.
……………..
careful or i may sue you for libel
January 11th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
476
Garth Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
474
jo Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
——————————–
And if they are innocent,…would it be so puzzling or disturbing?
……………
you are silly garfy