Madeleine McCann: McCann Incorporated, McCann Ink And Going Back To Portugal
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
SUNDAY MIRROR: “Tapas 7 in despair at all the ‘lies’”
They say they are also called the Tapas Nine? And the Sangria Seven
“The Tapas Seven are “in meltdown” over the failure of Portuguese police to make any meaningful progress in the hunt for Madeleine”
“IT’S OUR D-DAY - McCanns return to Portugal - EXCLUSIVE Kate and Gerry set date in April for Algarve showdown They’ll tell cops: show your evidence or clear us for good”. Like that D-Day back on November?
“Despairing Kate and Gerry McCann are planning to return to Portugal for a face-to-face showdown with police who think they killed their daughter Madeleine”
They are going back. Now..?
Well, not exactly: “A close friend said the the couple were likely to go back after their ‘D-Day’ of April 11, when their three-month extension is up, and added: ‘They feel they’ve waited long enough with this cloud of suspicion hanging over them. They know their return would be very high-profile. They believe investigators do not have the evidence against them to bring charges, and their presence in Portugal would embarrass them. They’ve so far held off going back there, but they see it as their trump card”
They will go back once they have been allowed to see the police first on them
Says the paper’s source: “They see April 11 as their D-day. They have decided to give the police reasonable time to clear them, or at least open the case files so they can see the evidence against them”
That’s good of them…
FIONA Philips, of GMTV writes: “Have a heart”. Yes, that Fiona Philips
“Unbelievably, every time I write about the McCanns I get messages saying, ‘I used to like you, until you started supporting the McCanns.’ Nice, eh? So I hope you’re happy now that Kate and Gerry have blamed themselves for Madeleine’s disappearance”
Happy?
“In a list of ‘if onlys’, Gerry said: ‘I wish I’d stayed in the apartment that night.’ Now, I expect more bile on praising them for considering making a documentary on the case. Surely you can’t tell me that there’s a parent out there who wouldn’t do anything possible to find their missing child?”
SUNDAY PEOPLE: “’We pray she’ll be at party for twins’”
“Brave Kate McCann is planning a huge birthday party for her twins - and dreams missing Maddie will be there too. Kate, 39, has vowed to go ahead with the bash for Sean and Amelie even though she is still waiting for cops to quiz her again. Mother-in-law Eileen said: ‘The party’s on and it will be an even bigger one if wee Madeleine is back. All we can do is hope and pray.’ Sean and Amelie turn three on February”
Touching stuff. Gerry McCann is a “heart specialist”
MAIL ON SUNDAY: “Madeleine: No film will be made unless she’s found - alive or dead”
“Kate and Gerry McCann have been told that the proposed documentary about their daughter’s disappearance can go ahead only if she is found – alive or dead.
A source says: “It was awkward to raise but there would need to be an ending – either Madeleine being found alive or a body being discovered. If this wasn’t the case, and there was a major development after filming and editing, it could render the documentary redundant”
Or the parents or some other person or persons are charged, perhaps?
THE OBSERVER: “A good week for … a bad week for …”
“A bad week for …
“Tradition – A Lib Dem MP called Lynne Featherstone has made a bid for the limelight by reporting the monarchy to the Equality Commission because it goes in for primogeniture”
“Marcus Agius The chairman of Barclay’s was the target of £10,000 fraud”
“Good Taste - Or indeed any taste at all. A London based agency which supplies celebrity doubles has employed a small girl to rent out as Madeleine McCann. 20 per cent”
It was a “good weeks for… Washing up”
“THE Maddie story is already a soap opera, so why the moral panic over a movie? - Don’t get me wrong - nobody wants to see Maddie: The Musical. However, needs must if the McCanns want to continue trying to find out what happened to their daughter and they do, despite the devastating expense (their somewhat unproductive detective agency alone costs £50,000 a month) and the increasingly shabby odds.”
Maddie: The Musical, eh..?
THE SUNDAY INDEPENDENT: “Strange case of the detectives trying to trace Madeleine”
“After a week when commercials deals were more apparent than clues, we investigate the investigators”. Why not investigate the case?
“Just when the Madeleine McCann saga couldn’t get any more agonising, along came a raft of developments last week that began to achieve what you would hope would be impossible: turning a little missing girl into an industry – Madeleine Inc. Item: a London agency hawking around various small girls as Madeleine lookalikes. Item: US television bringing a team of psychics to bear on the disappearance as part of what they no doubt hoped would be a money-spinner of a show. Item: her parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, exploring the possibility of selling the book and film rights to the case”
Madeleine became a brand long ago. Brand McCann…
“Madeleine Inc bring benefits to some, but not, so far, to the girl herself or her distraught parents”
Or Madeleine Ink – see the press
THE SUNDAY TIMES: Ron Liddle writes:
“So, get yourself ready for Maddie – The Movie (PG, until you fancy nipping out for something to eat). Kate and Gerry McCann’s press spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, has confirmed that the couple met with representatives from the US entertainment company IMG before Christmas and that while nothing was agreed, the meeting had been ‘positive’. A day later Gerry McCann hastily backtracked and said no, no, they weren’t planning a movie. Who to believe? And which British actors will Hollywood cast as the parents if there is a film? Sacha Baron Cohen and Catherine Tate? Am I bovvered? Look at my face – is it bovvered? And maybe Matt Lucas as the shady-looking Robert Murat? Norman Wisdom as the Portuguese chief of police?”
Madeleine McCann: Fiction, faction and a single unbearable fact
Posted: 13th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,025) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
January 13th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
704
Peter O Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
611 chenier Says: January 13th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
599 Wanderer Says: January 13th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
598
Chenier, does it have to reference Chaplin’s directly?
—————————————
It doesn’t have to do anything; if the suggestion is that they were much further away than even the Tapas Bar then obviously the point is relevant to the question of just how severe the neglect might be.
I have long speculated that the alleged substantial delay in calling the police may have involved extremely hasty attempts to get legal advice on their position.
You have to bear in mind that the automatic reaction of a doctor to ‘disaster’ is to call the MDU; I assume that the MDU wouldn’t touch this case with a bargepole, but the Tapas 9 may have been calling other lawyers…
+++++++++++
There has been discussion here in the past about a technicality in the Portuguese child neglect laws. I don’t actually know if this is true or not, so please don’t anyone shoot the messenger!
The suggestion is that the Tapas Bar is technically a part of the same complex as Apartment 5A and under Portuguese child neglect laws they would be deemed not to have left the apartment complex and therefore they haven’t broken any laws. Bizarrely it appears, if this is indeed true, that the distance from the apartment to the Tapas Bar has no bearing on whether it was legally neglectful to have allegedly left the children unattended in the apartment.
Now, obviously the matter becomes very different if they were indeed at Chaplins with the children left unattended in apartment 5A.
—————————————–
I have no desire to shoot the messenger; I would simply express scepticism about an unattributed claim that a specific part of Portuguese law could be so easily vitiated.
And that I very much doubt that there is a definition of a ‘complex’ in Portuguese law.
I find it much more plausible that someone who is familiar with Mark Warner’s usual modus operandi assumed that the Ocean Club apartments were part of a gated compound organised and run in the usual way by Mark Warner, and came up with what s/he thought would be a spiffingly good legal argument.
People who assume that they know the facts often come up with what they think are wonderful legal arguments…
January 13th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
chenier: “I have run a number of google searches on this and I can’t find any references in the press to this visit to Chaplins.The only references I can find are made on forums, blogs etc.
It would be helpful if you could indentify the press reports in question…”
REPLY: I have stored a large quantity of press reports on the case but they’re not in any kind of order. As you know, not all press reports are put on line and some of those that are put on line disappear. I will keep a look-out, but as you say a Google search reveals only Forum comments like this one:
“I would also like to know if it is true that on the Tuesday evening of their holiday, the McCanns were dining at Chaplin’s restaurant which is around 800m from the apartment. And if they were dining at Chaplin’s that evening, was there a baby sitter? Or were the parents checking, ‘very very regularly’?”
January 13th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
753
Ian Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
========
nite nite
January 13th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
752
Christine Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
715 Ian
Not to mention Kate’s interview on BBC Radio 4. I think it may have been Womans Hour. A LONG pause when she was asked - “was Madeleine sleeping when you left? A very long pause later she said “yes she was”. But understandable really because maybe she had to check her memory bank for ‘the script’.
****************
The Script indeed, Christine. this so reminds me of Act One, Scene One. and Take 1, Take 2. all i long for now is CUTTTTTT!
on a more serious note, good to see Anorak back in all it’s splendour. we dn’t want no nuclear war here - there’s still lots to talk through.
i’ll be back later to see what other twists and turns this takes. ciao…
January 13th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
I am delighted that you are beginning to see the reality of the situation Ian, the PJ and the Prosecutor make the case if they can, the arguidos need do nothing.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Is anything expected to be announced tomorrow? 14th January was earmarked for something but I don’t know what to expect. Or, whatever it is, now postponed until 11th April?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
till later
January 13th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
With the timelines they have painted themselves into a corner. If these get adjusted, who will believe anything?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
753
Ian
Night Ian
January 13th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
747
Ferdinand
You know very well ,that all this case is obscured by the Politic pressure
As the yankes say ,if what the mccs did ,were on the U.S. ,they be in jail
They are not because MR. Sócrates is doing a favour to Mr. G. Brown
And you know that
Don’t fool me
January 13th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Some excellent points made here tonight - night all!
January 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
715 Ian
Not to mention Kate’s interview on BBC Radio 4. I think it may have been Womans Hour. A LONG pause when she was asked - “was Madeleine sleeping when you left? A very long pause later she said “yes she was”. But understandable really because maybe she had to check her memory bank for ‘the script’.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
740.
annie123 Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
=====
an excellent question…..they really should get their story straight and stick to it
January 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
685
Totje Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
650
irish girl spain,
RE shutters,
I appreciated your efforts and the description you gave of your startled hubby.
Made me almost choke.
====================================================
………..Totje - you must have got your post mixed up and was meant for someone else perhaps.
I don’t have a hubby - not even a startled one..(sigh)…..
January 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
730 Seldgehammer
We dont, but neither do we need to make a case, thats the job of those who have the facts - the PJ.
However, I have to point out that we do have many facts.
Fact: Gerry tells us he saw Madeleine alive at 9:10. OK, he never said alive, but we have to assume he had reason to think she was alive or he’d have raised the alarm.
Fact: Tanner tells us she saw a man carrying Madeleine at 9:15.
There are others, but those two are critical.
One other fact, nobody knows 100% that this was a case of stranger abduction, yet the McCanns ask us to accept it as a fact. Fact - the McCanns want us to stop looking at any option except abduction. In fact, they want us to stop looking at how an abduction took place and just search for Madeleine! A desperate and directionless search, perhaps even stop searching and start looking at cross border security arrangements!
So, in my view, there is another vital and arguably inferred fact - the McCanns do not want us to focus on their part of this sorry tale.
I think we should not get hung up on not having too many verifiable facts - as we’d have nothing to discuss.
Tell me this, would it suit you if we stopped discussing anything except abduction?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
734
Tony Bennett Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
732 Ferdinand says (January 13th, 2008 at 9:37 pm): “You might remember a report that the police made a reconstruction in the apartment (handing a bundle out of the window etc.) . So if the police needs a reconstruction to solve the case, why should I speculate about a detail, without having any access to the crime scene? I can’t offer an educated guess on this in either direction”.
REPLY: Two words. Cop out
***************
HEE HEEE! brutal! you sound like me on a bad day…
Good Cop Bad Cop, Good Cop
Bad Cop 
January 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
736 can’t say no Says:
“Ferdinand
”
Rebelo ,since the begining ,trusted the work made by Amaral & the British Police
Well, maybe. Amaral thought that he was ready to get a confession. He was wrong. Do you think the case would be nearer to a solution now if he stayed?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
735
RedRooster Says:
It was reported on one of the documentaries - the first sky one I think, Kate went onto the balcony to cry - a show for the press. translate - very bad actor lol
January 13th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
698
Grande Finale Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
#
632
chenier Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
“I can see no reference to Chaplins in the article by the Express journos”
I have been searching for the report on google but i’m not able to provide a link yet, it was from early on in the investigation and has probably been archived. I may have taken a copy, as soon as I find it I will let you know !
It went something like “two nights before” blah blah blah “the night they all went to chaplin’s bar”
——————————————-
Good luck.
I have spent quite some time trying to find it, to no avail.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
741
chenier Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
========
and the total lack of any evidence to support abduction ????
January 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
740
annie123
They know ,that mccs & Co tells lots of lies.
They are just doing there job
January 13th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
702
Châtelaine Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
531
chenier Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
“[…] If they hadn’t been in the Tapas bar at all on the night before Madeleine’s disappearance I would have thought that he would have been told that by the waiters etc. After all, the waiters would have no reason to withhold that particular piece of information…”
********
It is my perception that they went to Chaplin’s AFTER Tapas bar.
——————————————–
Excellent.
Do you have anything you can vouchsafe to us about your perception?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
695
Tony Bennett Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
671 coolandcalm says (January 13th, 2008 at 9:06 pm):
“Well I’m not ‘Team McCann’ and I’m still of the: ‘ spotted, stalked, snatched’ school of thoought! Nothing has convinced me to change from that and I’ve been on this forum since last May. Just nailing my colours to the mast once again”.
REPLY: Or to put it another way, despite the ‘21 reasons for doubting the abduction story’, despite the list of ‘81 lies’ posted the other day, despite the contradictions, the changes of account and in the timelines, the barrage of stories of Madeleine being ‘found’ here there and everywhere, the misuse of the Fund, the cadaver dogs, and it being ‘hugely entertaining and fun’ to work out who would play what part in ‘Maddie the Movie’, you don’t entertain the slightest doubt that the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 9′ friends are telling us the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth.
Is it fiction or non-fiction books that you write?
——————————————————————
In fairness, Tony, a hefty number of your claims have been pruned by the iron hand of Mars, sorry AGW, as being lacking in evidence to support them.
If you can’t convince him, you cannot claim that someone else is ignoring evidence. The whole point is that you do not have the evidence to support them…
January 13th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
For those who say no lies, no contradictions etc.
This weeks big news - the Maddie Movie.
CM - The ‘movie’ would be more a documentary to highlight Maddies disappearance and to keep her focused in the public eye (or words to that effect) then he goes on to say there will be NO movie until Maddie is found dead or alive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Um if Maddie is found dead or alive - why a ‘movie’ to keep her focused in the public eye?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
700
Ferdinand Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
674 Pray For Little Soul Says:
“please explain why you say “no relevance for the police investigation”? because i’m sure the police would also have been told by Kate, at least, that the window had been broken by the abductor??”
Why should anyone tell the police the window had been broken when it is obviously not broken? And even if so, what more should the police answer her than “You’re obviously mistaken.”
*************
Erm, Ferdinand,
in response to that question: well, it’s about trying to tell an Unconvincing Lie.
the police officers who did that first interview are there to collect ‘the facts’ only. they have no business telling her “You’re obviously mistaken” - that’s the job of Good Cop, Bad Cop.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
731
Totje Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
696
RedRooster,
you said dont forget when gerry did his check maddie wasnt there and
Try again. She wasn’t where? At the bathroom? Remember if we believe the stories in the papers he stood beside her bed and looking at her he thought “what a lucky guy he was, to have such a lovely beautiful daughter”?!
=============
so which story is true then ???
January 13th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
716 totje
It was an incredibly quiet night, dont forget!
The McCanns, their supporters and friends could be left alone for a month or two and they’d provide enough to prove either that there was no abductor or that the T9 were the most dreadful parents in terms of their protective role!
The difficulty they have is they are being pressed to prove abduction, when they dont want to have to prove it - they just want it accepted.
At the same time they have to prove that they were not neglectful, or the impact on career will be significant and they may face charges from that direction. The less neglectful they were, the less likely is a stranger abduction. The mroe neglectful they were, the more likely is the possibility of stranger abduction! They are in a classic cleft stick, stuck between a rock and a hard place.
They need Fiona Phillips and other supporters to make it look as if they are saying they regret leaving the children unattended without really saying any such thing - they need attention off the cause and onto the idea of searching for Madeleine.
Their strategy is and has always been totally transparent to anyone with a clear and keen mind - many such people post here!
January 13th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
732
Ferdinand
You really don’t know how the police works
What we saw on the media ,was made by Rebelo & others ,just for the media
Rebelo ,since the begining ,trusted the work made by Amaral & the British Police
January 13th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
715
Ian Says:
January 13th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
705 annie12
There are two versions (at least)! In one Gerry had a protractor and measured angles, in another he thought Mdeleine had gone to the toilet (and hence wasnt there).
Why were Gerry and Kate so sensitive to the question ‘who saw Madeleine last’ - have a watch of the Spanish ‘tears’ interview - when that question is asked, its clear Kate hesitates and Gerry steps in quickly.
=================
speaking of “tears” does anyone have a link Kates tears. There have been so many reported tears from kate but i still havent seen any tears. How about anyone else??? I think i’ve shead more tears over maddie than that apparently heartless bitch kate. Come on pro mc s PLEEEASE prove me wrong
——————-
Mods and Admin
I’m certain I saw one evaporate as it trickled to her eyelid in the Panorama prog
January 13th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
732 Ferdinand says (January 13th, 2008 at 9:37 pm): “You might remember a report that the police made a reconstruction in the apartment (handing a bundle out of the window etc.) . So if the police needs a reconstruction to solve the case, why should I speculate about a detail, without having any access to the crime scene? I can’t offer an educated guess on this in either direction”.
REPLY: Two words. Cop out