Madeleine McCann: The Gardener Questioned, Marcos Correia Cries Rape And Kelsey Lynn Kudla Says
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE: BRITISH ODD-JOB MAN QUIZZED”
A new suspect?
“An anonymous email sent to Portuguese detectives claimed that Daniel Groom was spotted lurking in an alley close to the McCanns’ apartment on the night Madeleine vanished”
The paper says he looks not too unlike the man seen walking from the holiday complex holding a child. You know, that man with no face…
Says Mr Groom: “I think I am being framed. I am the victim of a smear campaign by someone with a grudge against me… During the week two detectives had arrived in town and begun asking friends about my whereabouts. I rang them after they left a message with a friend. I met them in a car park in Praia da Luz… They were two detectives from the Lisbon area, a good cop and a bad cop. One guy was quite small and smoked a cigar. The other guy was really fat, wore girly sunglasses and kept looking around him all the time”
A good cop? We know all about the bad cops (see the Sun). But this good cop..?
They showed him the email. It went:
“Is it a coincidence that this man started working as a gardener in the area and a child went missing?
“Maybe he walked through the car park at the front of the McCanns’ apartment and a little way down the dark alley between the two buildings where he could see and probably hear that the McCanns were there.
“After that maybe he listened at the window of the McCanns’ apartment for any sign that someone such as a babysitter was there. No television…nothing.
“Did this man initially see the McCanns and Madeleine whilst working on an empty apartment/villa and note that the children were left alone? Did he then come back to watch the McCanns when it was dark and not during daylight hours?”
This is front-page news…
Says Groom: “After a few minutes they said they thought it was all b******t. They said if they needed to talk to me again they would, but they thought they were barking up the wrong tree”
A gardening joke to end. Mr Groom may survive his ordeal
“KEEP LOOKING FOR HER, BEGS GRANDAD” – Says Brian Healey: “There has been so much that has been said and written, much of it untrue and hurtful, but so often it seems to me as if the only really important person in all this has been forgotten – and that’s Madeleine”
Indeed. ‘Nuff said…
“Some people don’t seem to want to know about the real Kate”
As we say, ‘nuff said…
THE SUN: “’Paedo dumped Maddie in lake’”
“MADELEINE McCann was raped and killed within 48 hours of being snatched then thrown in a reservoir, a Portuguese lawyer claimed yesterday. Human rights solicitor Marcos Aragao Correia said underworld sources tipped him off on May 6, three days after the tot vanished in Praia da Luz”
May 6?
Correia says he told the police. He then told Metodo 3, the McCanns’ private detectives. Correia says Madeleine’s body was in a reservoir with a small beach and showers for campers, late identified as the Barragem do Arade reservoir
Remerb when X marked the spot - “Vermoedelijke Vindplaats”
“KATE dad: Back off my daughter” – Says Brian Healy: “Some people don’t seem to want to know about the real Kate. She is such a warm and caring person, as well as being intelligent. But you can’t win because people say, ‘He would say that, he’s her father’”
Why would we care? A child is missing, why is it important we like Kate McCann?
“READERS in fury at ’sick stunt’”
“SUN readers bombarded our MySun discussion forums yesterday to vent their disgust following our revelations that an agency is ready to hire out a Maddie lookalike”
“LOOKALIKE mum: Let us help” – “The tearful mum of a tiny lookalike who hopes to play Madeleine McCann in a film insisted last night: ‘We only want to help’. American Kris Pfister, whose three-year-old Kelsey Lynn Kudla bears a stunning resemblance to the missing tot, added: “I feel for Maddie’s family — I am on their team”
Well, no, you’re not. But you are in the papers. Fame beckons? Tonight, Matthew, I’m going to be…
Quote of the week: “Since people started telling her she looked like Maddie, Kelsey’s been following the news. She cries when she hears she’s still missing. When we read there may be a documentary or film on the hunt, she said, ‘Mummy, I could play Madeleine. I look just like her’”
Here’s Kels-seeeey. (Come, on, Kelsey, you’re on… Smile!)
“People say that I look like Maddie. She lost her mummy and daddy. I want to help bring her home”
DAILY STAR: “MADDIE WAS ‘SNATCHED AND MURDERED’”
“Madeleine McCann was abducted, raped, murdered and thrown in a reservoir, a lawyer claimed last night”
It’s Marcos Correia again. Who told him? He will not say. But the paper notes: “He spent three weeks at the reservoir with investigators from the McCanns’ Metodo 3 agency. Last night he called on the police to search it extensively”
They have done. You can read about it here
Are these underworld figures known to Antonio Toscano?
DAILY MAIL: “Madeleine was ‘raped, murdered - and then dumped in reservoir’”
“Underworld criminals contacted a human rights lawyer on May 6, three days after the girl vanished, with details of her alleged abduction and murder, he said. But when Marcos Aragao Correia tried to tell police, he was ignored, he added”
Or not. The reservoir was searched
“PORTUGUESE police ‘want to keep Madeleine file secret for another three months’”
Says Clarence Mitchell the couple’s spokesman: “We are disappointed, but not surprised given that the police are still investigating.
“We had expected this request, however our lawyers will be examining it and once again we would urge the police to come over and interview who they want to.
“DEATH threats for woman hiring out Madeleine lookalikes” - Shona Juliet-Adams, owner of Juliet Adams Modelling and Talent Casting Agency, says: “”I have had threatening phone calls and death threats. I am not speaking to anybody until I have spoken to the police about my security - I received death threats”
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “McCanns suffer ‘almost inhumane’ police delay”
Kate and Gerry McCann could remain official suspects in their daughter’s disappearance for “several more months”
Clarence Mitchell says: “This is extremely disappointing. We will continue to co-operate with the Portuguese police, of course. However, the delay in resolving the case and eliminating Gerry and Kate is now becoming almost inhumane”
“BAD taste jokes need time to be funny” - An interactive humour survey at the Science Museum’s Dana centre in central London. Only seven per cent of the audience felt that a joke about Bhutto’s death was funny or amusing and only 31 per cent felt humour involving the McCanns was appropriate”
A Joke: “Dr Harold Shipman’s last meal was a curry. He said he enjoyed it but he could have murdered a nan”
FOX NEWS (USA): “Report: Agency Worker Receives Death Threats Over Madeleine McCann Look-Alikes”
“Shona Juliet-Adams, 41, whose agency offers the look-alikes for about $1,174 an hour, said she has been receiving ‘threatening phone calls and death threats’”
Posted: 12th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,006) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
January 13th, 2008 at 2:04 am
nite nite wanderer sleep well
January 13th, 2008 at 2:03 am
Right.. That’s me done for the night/morning! Good night Totje, dcb, Wanderer, anyone else, John Boy, Miss Ellie, etc, etc…
January 13th, 2008 at 2:02 am
905
annie1
The Mcc Team thinks everybody is IDIOT ,and i’m begining to agree.
Most people are really stupid ,or don’t want to admit they were taken for fools
January 13th, 2008 at 2:01 am
911 Totje Says: January 13th, 2008 at 1:50 am
906 Peter O
“It is my possibly biased perception that most of the spin in recent months has come from Team McCann, either directly or indirectly. There seems to have been much less claims of sources closes to the police speaking off the record. Several of the “sources close to the police/prosecutor/PJ articles that did appear quite clearly had completely unsubstantiated “sources” attributed to them.
Unless someone is of the opinion that the entire Portuguese criminal justice system is inept and/or corrupt, and this is not something I believe, then if they’ve asked for and been granted a three month extension to the investigation and been granted one, I don’t see the problem. (Other than I’d like to know the answers please! )
I do agree that a really good behind the scene investigation about who said/did what in terms of briefings/leaks to the media would be fascinating if properly done. I doubt this sort of thing will see the light of day until this whole case has been solved and trials/appeals concluded, in my opinion.”
********
Spin last months: the most of it were old stories about already mentioned “witnesses”. And about the “letters” send to the UK [or not yet, or next week etc.]. And the “blood”. Question is : who’s behind the publishing of the stories. CM or a journo who wants to print another story to earn his money?
No problem with asking nor granting. And I for sure don’t want to give someone the impression I think the whole portuguese police is corrupt. I want to know the grounds for asking the extention because it seems it’s restricted to several causes.
I’m afraid that even if the investigation is done [your last alinea], it only applies for this case.
The papers/tabloids/journo’s won’t alter, sadly. They’ll find another victim!
+++++++++++++
I’ll believe stories about those letter when people start being questioned, if ever.
If the PJ don’t have to tell us (the general public) why they’ve asked for an extension, well, they are the rules and we’ll just have to put up with it.
And you are quite right.. The media, like all serious/successful business exists primarily to make money/further careers/enhance reputations so once the Madeleine story stops “selling”, they’ll move onto something else and print rumours from unnamed sources close to…….
What has been quite interesting in the Madeline case thus far has been the resistance of various forums to tow whatever the media line happens to be. This is the first time I’ve ever participated, though I’ve been using IT forums since the early/mid 90’s, but I’m sure people have been discussing news online for a lot longer than the last eight months. It does appear to present a ‘challenge’ to the media’s view of the world. Will be interesting to see how these two broad churches co-exist in the future.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:53 am
909
dcb,
Right!
Or someone who wants his 15 minutes of “fame”
Btw where did that waiter fly to?
And that spanish woman threatened by the maffia?
And that friend of the priest?
January 13th, 2008 at 1:51 am
909 dcb Says: January 13th, 2008 at 1:31 am
“sources close to…..”,
means
“a chap I was chatting to in the pub after 10 pints said…..”
++++++++++++
Or…. The Tea – non gender specific – Person was a bit hard up for their Bingo money this week….
January 13th, 2008 at 1:50 am
906
Peter O
“It is my possibly biased perception that most of the spin in recent months has come from Team McCann, either directly or indirectly. There seems to have been much less claims of sources closes to the police speaking off the record. Several of the “sources close to the police/prosecutor/PJ articles that did appear quite clearly had completely unsubstantiated “sources” attributed to them.
Unless someone is of the opinion that the entire Portuguese criminal justice system is inept and/or corrupt, and this is not something I believe, then if they’ve asked for and been granted a three month extension to the investigation and been granted one, I don’t see the problem. (Other than I’d like to know the answers please! )
I do agree that a really good behind the scene investigation about who said/did what in terms of briefings/leaks to the media would be fascinating if properly done. I doubt this sort of thing will see the light of day until this whole case has been solved and trials/appeals concluded, in my opinion.”
********
Spin last months: the most of it were old stories about already mentioned “witnesses”. And about the “letters” send to the UK [or not yet, or next week etc.]. And the “blood”. Question is : who’s behind the publishing of the stories. CM or a journo who wants to print another story to earn his money?
No problem with asking nor granting. And I for sure don’t want to give someone the impression I think the whole portuguese police is corrupt. I want to know the grounds for asking the extention because it seems it’s restricted to several causes.
I’m afraid that even if the investigation is done [your last alinea], it only applies for this case.
The papers/tabloids/journo’s won’t alter, sadly. They’ll find another victim!
January 13th, 2008 at 1:46 am
I think that’s it for me posting wise, night everyone. Better luck for Madeleine tomorrow.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:31 am
“sources close to…..”,
means
“a chap I was chatting to in the pub after 10 pints said…..”
January 13th, 2008 at 1:28 am
Well, I think we can settle one thing (knock on wood). We can’t blame the ‘leak’ of
the ‘movie/film/nonexistent, ludicrous moving picture’ on the Portuguese police.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:25 am
903 Totje Says: January 13th, 2008 at 1:16 am
902
Peter O,
YES! That’s it.
Note to myself: must add to Fanny Adams list!
++++++++++++++
Thank you!
January 13th, 2008 at 1:23 am
896 Totje Says: January 13th, 2008 at 1:04 am
886 Peter O
[..]Well, certainly nothing they want discussed, in my opinion
884 Totje
Or may be they want, but won’t or aren’t allowed to?
875 Peter O:
++++++++++++
Well, possibly… However, I’d quite like to know what they’ve been paying M3 for? I’d quite like to explore M3’s various assurances that they knew where Madeleine was, who had her and her being home in time for Christmas. I’d quite like to know about the “hole” in the Limited Company accounts colloquially known as “The Fund”. I’d quite like someone to decipher some of the “spin” from the various stories emanating from the likes of Clarence, source close to the family, sources close to the McCann’s legal team, etc.
*******
I don’t know if there’s a “hole” in “the Fund”. I’m sure someone [the police? fraud teams? tax teams?] will investigate or have a close watch at it.
Plenty of “spin” also from Portugal “sources close to the investigation” , “a friend of”. I’d like someone to decipher that too.
I’d like to have someone take a look at the tabloids/journos and question them on their “sources” or investigate how much stories they themselves “invent” and how much is just translated/copied from another journo without proper investigation of the story.
AND I’m soooo curious to know on what ground the pj asks for extention of the investigation period, and I can’t wait to hear if it’s granted.
+++++++++++++++
It is my possibly biased perception that most of the spin in recent months has come from Team McCann, either directly or indirectly. There seems to have been much less claims of sources closes to the police speaking off the record. Several of the “sources close to the police/prosecutor/PJ articles that did appear quite clearly had completely unsubstantiated “sources” attributed to them.
Unless someone is of the opinion that the entire Portuguese criminal justice system is inept and/or corrupt, and this is not something I believe, then if they’ve asked for and been granted a three month extension to the investigation and been granted one, I don’t see the problem. (Other than I’d like to know the answers please!
)
I do agree that a really good behind the scene investigation about who said/did what in terms of briefings/leaks to the media would be fascinating if properly done. I doubt this sort of thing will see the light of day until this whole case has been solved and trials/appeals concluded, in my opinion.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:22 am
McCanns ‘Keen’ To Speak To Police
Updated:21:58, Saturday January 12, 2008
Madeleine McCann’s parents have said they are “very keen” to speak to Portuguese police if it helps end the agony of being suspects in the hunt for their missing daughter
WELL GOOD ON ‘EM EH?? WOULDNT IT HAVE BEEN GOOD TO HAVE HAD THEM SAY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY KEEN TO SPEAK TO THE POLICE IF IT HELPED FIND THEIR MISSING DAUGHTER - BUT NONE OF IT - “THE AGONY OF BEING SUSPECTS” IS THE UPPERMOST IN THEIR MINDS
January 13th, 2008 at 1:16 am
724
willo Says:
543
jane Says:
Willo : Some very very vague similarities in my opinion [between the Azaria/Lindy Camberlain case and that of the McCanns]
Child disappears from holiday tent.
Willo: (Parents were very close by as opposed to the McCanns back garden dinner 150m away)
Jane’s Reply: Not that close, I understand they were in a barbecue area some 20-30 metres from the tent.
Lindy was criticised for failing to zip up the tent
………………………………..
Mother claimed her child had been abducted
Willo’s Reply: (mother actually saw abductor)
Jane’s Reply: Lindy saw a dingo emerge from the tent, she didn’t see it had the baby. Lindy’s account was disbelieved
……………………………..
On discovery, mother’s odd comment - something like, the dingos have taken my baby (?) taken as evidence of a cover up of parental murder
Willo’s Reply: (mother actually saw abductor. Kates utterings where based on what?)
Jane’s Reply: Lindy sent the dingo packing because she wasn’t aware it had the baby - she made the connection later
Kate’s use of ‘they’ to suggest an indeterminate other (singular) is a common figure of speech which may not been intended to suggest a plural ‘they’
………………………………
Police errors - e.g. misinterpretation of forensic evidence in car/ on baby’s clothes
Willo’s Reply: (McCann dna evidence not disproved yet).
Jane’s Reply: Agreed, as far as we know, not disproved…yet.
………………………………..
Police failed to secure crime scene, mishandled evidence - baby’s blood stained clothes in dingo lair
Willo’s Reply: (McCanns failed to report crime and trashed the crime scene themselves)
Jane’s reply: By your definition, Lindy Chamberlain also ‘trashed the abduction scene’ while looking for her baby, plus a police officer is reported to have messed about with the baby’s clothes in the dingo lair crime scene
Do you believe that the PJ did secure the Portuguese crime scene?
……………………………………
Police relied on unreliable forensic procedure
Willo’s Reply: (PJ let the Bristish handle the DNA testing so first similarity I suppose)
Jane’s Reply: Low copy number analysis, which appears to apply here, has been rejected in a recent case
……………………………………
Allegation body was hidden in large camera case.
(apart from Mr Corner’s there seemed very few cameras on holiday with the McCanns)
Splitting hairs, Willo, you are aware of the allegation that Madeleine’s body could have been concealed in a bag
…………………………..
Parents’ religious beliefs used as evidence against them
Willo’s Reply: (Evidence used as religeous beliefs for the McCanns)
And against them, I’ve seen a fair bit of anti-catholicism on forums
…………………………….
Disappearance received massive and unprecedented publicity
Willo’s Reply: (Azarias spawned by dingo curious Australian media. The media by and large have been disinterested in the McCanns and the publicity has been self generated).
I disagree, the case has been in the newspapers for months.
……………………………….
Media frenzy suggested the mother had murdered the child
Willo’s Reply: (No Madeliene media frenzy accusing Kate, public opinion was putting the subject forward though).
Jane’s Reply: I disagree. I believe that uncritical UK press reports of leaks published by the Portuguese press have played an instrumental role in shaping public opinion and these reports were riddled with accusations against the McCanns.
………………………………
I believe there was also misuse/abuse of statistical ‘evidence
Willo’s Reply: (yes the McCanns have done this)
Jane’s Reply: So has TB, in my opinion.
TB said: “Something like 99% of all claimed ‘abductions’ from a house turn out to be intra-family murder”. (Democracy Forum)
NSPPC website states: “Home Office child homicide statistics record the relationship of the victim to the principal suspect. The figures quoted here are for child homicides where the principal suspect is a biological parent, step parent, adopted parent of the victim or the resident or non resident partner of the victim’s parent. (Home Office (2007) Homicides, firearms offences” (NSPCC - from Home Office statistics
“On average, 67 children in England and Wales are killed at the hands of another person every year…Every ten days in England and Wales one child is killed at the hands of their parent. ” (NSPCC)
“In 2005/2006 in England and Wales, 24 children were killed at the hands of their parents.” (NSPCC) That Parent may be “biological parent, step parent, adopted parent of the victim or the resident or non resident partner of the victim’s parent.”
In other words, the so called parent in the statistics may not be a parent of the victim at all.
“The proportion of child homicides where a parent is the principal suspect falls as children get older. For homicides of children aged under five the proportion of cases where a parent was the principal suspect was over 70%; for homicides of children aged 14 or 15 it was a quarter or fewer.” (NSPCC)
………………………………..
Mother accused of lack of emotional anxiety
Willo’s Reply: (Ok Similarity no.2, Lindy was seemingly cold too).
………………………………..
Mother accused of failing to search for baby
(No.3 if the accusation was proven. We know Kate did not search at all!).
……………………………….
Mother accused of dressing the baby in odd colour - black
(Pink , black, reminds me of a joke. I’m not sure pink is a odd colour for a little girl. Black is a bit weird though).
As I understand it, the baby had one black dress with coloured floral and ribbon trimmings.
………………………………
Evidence of several witnesses in support of mother’s claim discounted,
(Similarity no.4)
Two cases with far more than four or the ‘very very vague similarities’ you claim, Willo. Lindy McCann herself has also spoken of the similarities between the two cases and has offered the McCanns her support.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:16 am
902
Peter O,
YES! That’s it.
Note to myself: must add to Fanny Adams list!
January 13th, 2008 at 1:12 am
897 Totje Says: January 13th, 2008 at 1:09 am
887 Peter O,
Risée : someone who’s the laugh of the town[?]
Hard to translate.
Mockery
+++++++++++++++
As in “S/he is/was a laughing stock ?
January 13th, 2008 at 1:12 am
I don’t know … what I got most out of the Vanity Fair article and the tension thick as a knife feeling in the air about the PJ’s next step, is that comment by Aunty P that in effect said “Gerry and Kate are measured people.”
That contrasts a lot with O’Donnell’s opinion of as Kate as Ms. Calm, and Gerry as Mr. Boisterous.
Aunty P is a teacher. She is an acurate judge of character. She chose that word very specifically: measured. She said Gerry acted completely out of character when he called her about the vacant bed in 5A.
But see … that makes me suspicious. We don’t break character that quickly in a tragedy. We become more ourselves at first. Tragedies bring out the truth in us–not some “out of character” behavior.
O’Donnell is a journalist. She is nosy by nature, edgy, and sounds sort of lonely to me.
Me, I’m analytical by nature.
I found Gerry’s description of the whole thing as “Bleak” rather sad.
If they’re guilty, why don’t they just do the time. Why do they have to be such cowards and fakes? People make egregious mistakes sometimes, fuel by booze or other addictions.
Why can’t they do the right thing and admit to where they put their child?
Did Kate beat her? Why would a group of people conspire to hide something like that?
January 13th, 2008 at 1:12 am
890
Peter O,
hmmmm
January 13th, 2008 at 1:11 am
888
Wanderer Says:
[..]Adding to that, I do think it would be interesting if some posters really did take on Ian’s experiment seriously (yesterday’s experiment), and really tried to argue for the other “side”. (general comment, not directed at anyone)
********
Me too. The thought of this experiment has crossed my mind many times.
I’ve done it often just to test a theorie. Love it.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:11 am
896
Totje, I am curious about that. I believe most of the money can be used “as seen fit” under the current points listed in the fund information article (or something on that page). In any case, I do wonder if some sort of false advertisement comes into play? People not realizing certain points, etc. I know the phrase is “buyer beware” and most likely, all the money can safely be spent unless they are found guilty of something, but I have been curious about that.
I’m just more interested in it, seeing as they are asking for more donations.
895
lol, well hopefully one day we’ll just be able to understand one another, lest vitriol be spilt! (kidding)
January 13th, 2008 at 1:09 am
887
Peter O,
Risée : someone who’s the laugh of the town[?]
Hard to translate.
Mockery
January 13th, 2008 at 1:04 am
886 Peter O
[..]Well, certainly nothing they want discussed, in my opinion
884 Totje
Or may be they want, but won’t or aren’t allowed to?
875 Peter O:
++++++++++++
Well, possibly… However, I’d quite like to know what they’ve been paying M3 for? I’d quite like to explore M3’s various assurances that they knew where Madeleine was, who had her and her being home in time for Christmas. I’d quite like to know about the “hole” in the Limited Company accounts colloquially known as “The Fund”. I’d quite like someone to decipher some of the “spin” from the various stories emanating from the likes of Clarence, source close to the family, sources close to the McCann’s legal team, etc.
*******
I don’t know if there’s a “hole” in “the Fund”. I’m sure someone [the police? fraud teams? tax teams?] will investigate or have a close watch at it.
Plenty of “spin” also from Portugal “sources close to the investigation” , “a friend of”. I’d like someone to decipher that too.
I’d like to have someone take a look at the tabloids/journos and question them on their “sources” or investigate how much stories they themselves “invent” and how much is just translated/copied from another journo without proper investigation of the story.
AND I’m soooo curious to know on what ground the pj asks for extention of the investigation period, and I can’t wait to hear if it’s granted.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:02 am
888 Wanderer Says: January 13th, 2008 at 12:54 am
883
Sorry, Peter, we do seem to be suffering from miscommunication today. It’s most likely my fault, I’m still a bit out of the posting loop. I generally agree with your most of your points/possibilities, my post was simply agreeing with yours whilst adding a bit of my own views. I just didn’t want to speak for you at the end there and didn’t want it seem like I disagreed with you, as I believed we were on the same page.
Edit….
++++++++++++++
I do love it when posters are in violent agreement with one another!
January 13th, 2008 at 1:02 am
774
Leeza Says:
This case took place in the Northern Territory. Lindy Chamberlain sought publicity and apperared on the cover of a woman’s magazine holding the child. She also dressed up for court and showed little emotion, which people found strange. The main reason for prosecution was inconsistency in her statements about the events she had witnessed and lack of any corroboration from anyone else. Aboriginal trackers always asserted that a dingo could carry as child in the manner that Mrs Chamberlain described but there was a lot of opposing opinion too. She was convicted and only released and acquitted when new evidence - in the form of a bloodstained jumpsuit - was found about 5 years later. Your take on this is very inaccurate. Please quote your source.
……………………………………
I’ve read that an Aborigine and his wife who were witnesses at the trial stated that they tracked the dingo and found a number of marked places where it put the baby down, yet their evidence was ignored because the court would not accept their customary Aboriginal way of describing the events.
Lindy said that she was thought to be uncaring because her face has a rather angular, severe appearance. She faced substantial hostility from the police and public and was booed and hissed in public. You try, said Lindy, being yourself when you face that degree of hostility.
January 13th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Pity - it would have answered some of the questions raised!
January 13th, 2008 at 1:00 am
889 Mariab Says: January 13th, 2008 at 12:54 am
Perhaps the Fund should have been set up as a charity and then they could have applied for Lottery funding?
+++++++++++++
Under UK Charity law you can’t set up a charity which is ostensibly for the benefit of just one person (possibly family). Since the stated intention of the Limited Company colloquially known as “The Fund” was to find Madeleine, this intention fell foul of the rule and hence the Limited Company had to be set up.
I may have some of the technical words/definitions wrong, but in principle that’s why it’s not a charity.
January 13th, 2008 at 12:58 am
889
Mariab, shame you lost your chance to be on the funding board!
January 13th, 2008 at 12:55 am
885 Totje Says: January 13th, 2008 at 12:46 am
879 Peter O,
It seems that was merely a link to a poll in the early days. It’s discussed at the MF.
+++++++++++++
I believe there was a blog entry relating to the Find Madeline campaign which has now been removed? I think I found the links to Esther’s blog, and a webarchive of it, on that Mirror Forum link posted earlier this evening? Anyway, there was a mention, now there isn’t. Nether is there any comment about why it’s been removed nor why Esther left.
January 13th, 2008 at 12:54 am
Perhaps the Fund should have been set up as a charity and then they could have applied for Lottery funding?
January 13th, 2008 at 12:54 am
882
Ahh, but Scarlett, tomorrow is here for some!
883
Sorry, Peter, we do seem to be suffering from miscommunication today. It’s most likely my fault, I’m still a bit out of the posting loop. I generally agree with your most of your points/possibilities, my post was simply agreeing with yours whilst adding a bit of my own views. I just didn’t want to speak for you at the end there and didn’t want it seem like I disagreed with you, as I believed we were on the same page.
In any case, I find your posts quite clear and generally good (but I’m biased, as I can’t typically disagree with views close to my own, unless I’m just being stubborn).
Adding to that, I do think it would be interesting if some posters really did take on Ian’s experiment seriously (yesterday’s experiment), and really tried to argue for the other “side”. (general comment, not directed at anyone)