Madeleine McCann: Duarte Levy, Clarence Mitchell And The Daily Mirror
DUARTE Levy writes on the case of Madeleine McCann. He alleges that that Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’ PR adviser, is “using the Government’s services to keep watch on journalists and forum participants.” Says Mr Levy:
Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s PR adviser and spokesman, continues to make use of the British government’s services despite having officially resigned from his position as director of the Media Monitoring Unit*. The accusation comes from a Home Office source who has stated that the outgoing director had called upon his former service to keep a watch not only on several journalists but also on the behaviour of participants in a list of forums and blogs considered to be “highly detrimental to the image of the McCanns and that of the British government”.
Can what Mr Levy alleges be true? And if it is, why would it be a big deal for the McCanns’ spokesman to keep an eye on the web, and get what help he can? Mr Levy continues:
Clarence Mitchell, a former journalist for the Daily Express and the BBC, was seconded by the Foreign Office to act as a liaison officer between the media and Madeleine’s parents. Through the intermediary of the respective British embassies, it was he who organised the McCann’s visits to the Vatican, Madrid, Berlin, Amsterdam and Rabat.
Since the very early days, media monitoring has been an important part of Clarence Mitchell’s work. While the McCann’s were in Praia da Luz, it was he who decided to separate journalists according to nationality: the British first, and the Portuguese last.
Today, the McCann’s PR campaign relies more than ever on monitoring public opinion: over the past few days several UK forums and blogs have been shut down due to “anti-McCann” comments. Amongst them is the Mirror newspaper’s forum, which erased all comments about the case without warning when the participants started to debate Home Office interference.
No response from Mr Mitchell is quoted in Mr Levy’s email to us. But why did the Daily Mirror close its forum? Anyone from those forums care to tell us what they know?
Anorak’s monitoring team try to read all reader comments - of which there are thousands.
Posted: 27th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (741) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- f0ul on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- dairy on I’m A Celebrity: Quitter Katie Price Wanted To Die With Jedward
- dairy on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- dairy on Jeremy Kyle: Access All Areas: Kyle Meets The People Of Walmart
January 27th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Mods and Admin, nowhere did I state that I thought the PJ had concluded their investigations, if as we are led to believe the Portuguese are desperate to reinterview various parties, why not apply for and execute a Euro warrant, which would stop the continuing circus dead and also act as a message of intent from the Portuguese, why the constant delay. It would be ironic if the cover up that many seem to think is being perpetrated, was in fact at the Portuguese end rather than the British end. I know how you like posters to be precise, do you know, which “suspicious” death TB alludes to ?
—————————
Mods and Admin
You seem under the impression that the PJ must move along at a pace thatsuits others, thats all.I suggest you ask the PJ all the questions you ask me, I cannot answer for them.
As for Tony Bennetts posts I have just logged back in after a break. We might remind you we are unpaid and do have other interests/family and commitments elsewhere, and arenot here constantly
January 27th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
378 Amused Bystander Says: January 27th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Ian 447 January 24
Ian, unless I missed something, I don’t think I have yet had a considered reply from you to my post 447 from Thursday (=Jan 24).
Edit…
+++++++++++++++++++++
If you talk nicely to Sledgehammer, I’m sure they’ll take you next time they go fishing!
January 27th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
407 can’t say no says (January 27th, 2008 at 7:18 pm):
“404 Tony Bennett - If you are here please say Hi”.
REPLY: Hi, can’t say no, popping in and out of Anorak just now as I’m involved every day with the Lee Balkwell inquest at the moment, which will probably continue until 4 February (see Wikipedia entry on ‘Lee Balkwell’) - plus I’ve been frantically mailing out over 60,000 purple postcards in the past 4 weeks as part of our campaign to win a referendum on the European Constitution, which they’ve craftily re-styled the E.U. Reform Treaty). See:
http://www.european-referendum.org.uk
January 27th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
311 Grand Finale reproduced this extract from a statement made in August 2007 by the Find Madeleine Fund Trust:
“QUESTION: What is the money being spent on?
ANSWER: The Fund is supporting the McCann family during their search for Madeleine and in ensuring a high profile of Madeleine’s abduction is maintained. As at the end of July 2007, only a small proportion of the money raised has been spent. This has been on awareness raising items e.g. wristbands, website, family expenses and professional fees, including concerning international law on child abduction and the costs of setting up the Fund. The directors are considering the future strategy of the Fund to ensure effective use of funds”.
REPLY: Grand Finale, in this case, where an appeal is made to the general public for money, it is like donating money to a charity, and the public has *every right* to know in detail how this is being spent. As I’ve written here before, we know virtually nothing. We don’t know how much has been raised, and we don’t really knows what it has been spent on. The McCanns and their secretive close buddies in the private trust will never tell us.
Which is why The Madeleine Foundation will be doing the following as one of its first public actions: Writing to Bates, Wells and Braithwaite, Solicitors to the Find Madeleine Fund Trust, raising several serious concerns about the operation of this private trust. (We appreciate that others, like Stevo on this very Forum, have also written letters to Bates, Wells and Braithwaite on this subject).
We shall also be writing to the relevant regulatory body which covers private trusts asking them to investigate certain matters.
If, as I suspect, the McCanns know how Madeleine ‘disappeared’, then the Find Madeleine Fund Trust is a criminal enterprise from the start and the McCanns would have committed any one of a number of offences under the Theft Act 1968, e.g. obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. The Trustees would have also placed themselves at serious risk of prosecution, which is no doubt why a couple of rats deserted the sinking ship recently.
I emphasise the opening word in the above paragraph.
If…
January 27th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
408 Can”t say No
I noted your comments, but Amused Bystander has replied to Ian but doesn”t think I
deserve an acknowledgement…….I”m not bovvered.
Where is the other site?
January 27th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
403
val Says:
January 27th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
“392 Chatelaine
I just wanted to stick to the Facts because everything else is hearsay and we don”t want
to appear to be believing everything we read. [...]
********
Val, I lived under the impression that PeterMac quoted literally from a “quote” in an article. From what I know, a journalist is bound to be correct once he mentions a name and uses reading marks.
Also, I think Amused Bystander spent an awful lot of time & effort in 2 posts today, whereas the debate [with Ian & others] would have been more clear by just quoting instead of giving references.
S/he doesn’t have enough time to spend on here… I think most of us have the same problem
If I were Ian, I would be hesitant to email him.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
OK ,i’ll go to the other site
January 27th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
404
Tony Bennett
If you are here please say Hi
January 27th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
More facts
British snifer dogs never went to Portugal , by the Bristish Police
more to follow
I’m betwen sites
January 27th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
And facts are :
Being on Tapas Bar ,is like to be in our Backyard Garden
It was so near we could see the apartment
We checked the children very often
more to follow
January 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
372 Stevo says (January 27th, 2008 at 5:58 pm):
“Tony Bennett - Hope it went OK yesterday”.
REPLY: Yes. We agreed at our meeting in Harlow yesterday to form The Madeleine Foundation - a democratic membership organisation open to anyone who supports our aims - and made several decisions relating to its aims and initial actions. We believe that the name Madeleine should live on forever and that her main message to this genration and to future generations of parents should be: “Never leave young children on their own”. May we all care for and love the children we bring into the world.
Initial actions of The Madeleine Foundation will include writing formal letters to:
1) The McCanns’ Solicitors, asking their clients to tell the PJ the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance
2) Bates, Wells and Braithwaite, Solicitors to the Find Madeleine Fund Trust, raising several serious concerns about the operation of this private trust
3) The General Medical Council, raising the question of whether either of the McCanns is fit to practice as Doctors, especially having regard to their status as criminal suspects, and
4) Home Secretray Jacqui Smith, urging her to give maximum help to the PJ in their efforts to solve this suspicious death.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
392 Chatelaine
I just wanted to stick to the Facts because everything else is hearsay and we don”t want
to appear to be believing everything we read.
See my post 399 to Ian, I think Amused Bystander is gone.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
And I didn’t post my comment there
yet 
January 27th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Ian 381 6:24 pm
Thanks, Ian.
As I said, unfortunately time constraints prevent me from investing much time consulting on and contributing to the Anorak forum. However if ever you do get a chance to read my post of Jan 24, I’ll be keen to get your reactions and to engage you by e-mail (and of course I will make sure I post all my answers on the Anorak blog—unless for any reason you wish me not to).
I really do feel that what I say in my Jan 24 post goes to the nub of the issue. That’s why I do hope you read it. Sorry if it seems long-winded but I could find no shorter way of explaining why I think there are fundamental weaknesses and flaws in this whole debate.
Regarding your invitation for me to put (briefly
) the case for abduction: I already confessed back in late Sep early Oct that I certainly consider myself no expert in this matter. But I did also say that I think Stig’s post 700 in the Sep 25 thread:
http://www.anorak.co.uk/madeleine-mccann/176547.html?cp=all
puts the case very well (imho). I couldn’t put the case better than he did.
“getting those who agree to re-agree doesnt prove a lot” So true, isn’t it! Glad we agree on something
That makes a change, doesn’t it 
And glad we are both keen on a genuine debate.
So my invitation remains open:
) to your challenge you made to me back in Oct
1. to engage if ever and whenever in a discussion by e-mail (+Anorak) based on my Jan 24 reply (albeit belated!!!
2. to make proper acquaintance if ever you are passing through Belgium
Cheers! Keith.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
BabyJane - sure, be my pleasure lol
January 27th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
384 Ian
Agreed, they didn”t waste much time from the 7.30pm bedtime for the children to the 8.30pm arrival at the Tapas Bar. How could they possibly think three young children
under 4 would not wake up……….back to the old “Sedation theory”.
Amused Bystander must have left without reading my Facts which I thought were
unarguable..If you e-mail him your responses, will you send mine to show him we are all
not the vindictive anti-McCanns he suspects.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Our favours to you Mr. G.B. ,aren’t good enough
January 27th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Take Mr. G.B.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
January 27th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Geez ,the comments ,that are being made by the French ,about the article ,that says the twins play with the “monster” :shocked:
January 27th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
389
just_me, muchos gracias!
If we all are still here next christmas discussing the case, may I ask you for a photoshop-picture of myself together with Cuddles?
January 27th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
391, sorry…please see link 389
January 27th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
388
val Says:
January 27th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
“Amused Bystander 378
I realise your beef is with Ian, but I just want to make the following observations [...]”
*****
And may I quote/add PeterMac 272 this morning:
“He said the fighting fund which has raised almost £300,000 had allowed them to set up a “comprehensive legal team”, but at present the family was happy to follow advice not to call in private investigators.”
At only 3 weeks after the disappearance they had set up a legal team !”
January 27th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
349
just_me Says:
January 27th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Matt, thanks
2 more bubbles to fill….anyone?
Lower bubble: “Think it’s Friday……”
Upper bubble: “Must be Chile then..”
January 27th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
383 Grand Finale
It may have been 20years but surely the new Law which came out this year was meant
to reduce this……..it is certainly inhumane to suspect someone for that long.
It might be worth asking one of the Portugese posters.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
385 BabyJane - just for you x
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj15/just_meme5/rifcopy-6.jpg
January 27th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Amused Bystander 378
I realise your beef is with Ian, but I just want to make the following observations:-
1. The McCanns left Portugal two days after being declared Aguidos, despite Kate
swearing she would never leave without Madeleine.
2. Within 24 hours of their return to the U.K. they employed top flight Lawyers
even though they have not been charged.
3. Kate apparently refused to answer certain questions at her interview with the
Portugese Police, and despite their PR spokesperson declaring they are ready to
return to Portugal to be reinterviewed, she has not done so voluntarily.
4. They seem to command an inordinately amount of support from people in high places
and one wonders why.
No doubt Ian will give you his reasons, but these are mine and the reason I don”t think
the McCanns are blameless.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
381 Ian
378
Amused Bystander
Well?
January 27th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
******Back Later*************
January 27th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
just_me, your picture is just great - can’t get enough of it!
Maybe it’s too late now, but I would have had a speech-bubble-suggestion for poor, unnoticed Tannerman (walking away with the child):
“I’ll get me coat”