Madeleine McCann: Joaquim Agostinho Gives His Friends A Laugh
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY MAIL: “A Portuguese drifter who strongly resembles Madeleine McCann’s suspected kidnapper has been spotted at an Algarve resort”
Oh?
“Joaquim Agostinho was seen in Altura last week after two British tourists complained they had been followed by a prowler who looked ‘identical’ to a sketch of the alleged kidnapper.
Says Mr Agostinho, who denies any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance: “I did not kill Madeleine and I’ve never been to Praia da Luz.”
Says Gail Cooper: “ He’s the spitting image of the man I saw three times at the resort where Madeleine vanished.”
News Of The World: Says Mr Agostino: ”I cannot even drive. I accept that the drawing looks like me. All my friends have been laughing about it”
Fingers are pointing…
Posted: 27th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (81) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- danniella on X Factor Singers JLS Do GAY, In Pictures
- danniella on X Factor Singers JLS Do GAY, In Pictures
- Katie Norman on Katie Price Should Marry Samantha Fox To Give Her Kids A Better Start In Life, Research Says
- Anthony on X Factor: Jedward, John & Edward Grimes, Are Voted Out At Last
- percy stilton on I’m A Celebrity: Quitter Katie Price Wanted To Die With Jedward
May 2nd, 2009 at 8:02 pm
i will be happy to help u find Maddy
January 30th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
I was hearing this man on TV. For me, “Maddie”’s fathers are by far more questionable than him. And people that is disturbing him should be processed. But he is poor, don’t have the money to do it and he is not worried about all this. he only says “They are mad!”. And he is right.
aw1654
January 30th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
78 Joy Says: January 30th, 2008 at 3:51 am
77 Patricia Says: January 30th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Ohhh, came on!! Just because the poor man has long hair and beard he is a suspect? How many men look like him? The man on the left is very different from the man on the right. For me, the man on the left looks like a woman on disguise. My believe is the man on the left is a product of a woman’s imagination: so many months after the incident and she described it? Hmmm…
The private detectives are being well paid, so they have to show service…false service, but service.
Here in Portugal, most people believe that Madelaine is, sadly, dead. Thats why he said that.
Wrong judjemets could lead to inocent people to have their lives spoiled: remember the brazilian man who was killed by the british police in London times ago? Well, he was innocent…
January 30th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Anorak without vulgar Spanish was better. Bilingual and vulgar Anorak is no better than in English but decent Anorak. The level of reasoning here has fallen far. That is typically Spanish. It is unfortunate!
dr:30.01
January 30th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Molly, I couldn’t agree with you more. That statement about not killing Madeleine leaped out at me before I read your comment. He needs to be put on a lie detector machine.
rel:dr:30.01
January 28th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
What I find very interesting is that this new suspect said: “I did not kill Madeleine”. He didn’t say that he didn’t TAKE her, he said he didn’t KILL her. That worries me a lot. No one said that Madeleine had been killed.
January 28th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
73 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
72 Peter O Says: January 28th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
71 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
66 Peter O Says: January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
42 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 am
35 Pilimary Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
*****
[..]Any impression that I may have suggested you in particular hold certain opinions is a combination of my poor writing and perhaps a little over sensitivity on your part?
I wasn’t sure if it was a general remark or that I somehow gave you or someone else the impression that I was thinking the PJ was crap.
++++++++++
No, I was speaking in the most general terms not referring to you specifically, nor everyone in particular, though of course I must be referring to somebody. Therefore, one supposes that anybody who wanted to assume that they are in fact “somebody” could quite validly suggest that my remarks were aimed directly and squarely at them personally.
There, is that clear now?
January 28th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I think that this man will know something, maybe he was paid to take Madeleine
January 28th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
72 Peter O Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
71 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
66 Peter O Says: January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
42 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 am
35 Pilimary Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
*****
[..]Any impression that I may have suggested you in particular hold certain opinions is a combination of my poor writing and perhaps a little over sensitivity on your part?
I wasn’t sure if it was a general remark or that I somehow gave you or someone else the impression that I was thinking the PJ was crap.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
71 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
66 Peter O Says: January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
42 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 am
35 Pilimary Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Jo
You mean Totje and Lyn?
*************************
Whether she is alive or not; she deserves to have the truth revealed.
and whether it was an abduction or not, so as long as the PJ doesn’t know for sure either way, they have to investigate all clues that could be overlooked during the beginning of the investigation.
IMO it’s about finding the truth about what happened, finding Madeleine and charge the perpetrator[s] no matter whom they are/ s/he is].
+++++++++++++++++++
Notwithstanding that we don’t know what the PJ know for definite, of course all leads that follow fruitful or unresolved lines of enquiry should be being followed. There isn’t, from a public perception, any evidence that the PJ are not doing this?
Just because the Comical One and his cohorts keep coming up with wizard wheezes to sidetrack the investigation, in my opinion, it doesn’t follow that the PJ should either take them seriously nor respond in a manner that might expose any of their investigation tactics. The PJ and not Team McCann are the ones conducting this investigation.
With the above in mind, it makes no sense for the PJ to pursue lines of enquiry relating to say abduction if they already have incontrovertible proof that abduction is/was impossible. What most of us tend to forget from time to time is that we do not know what truths the PJ are already operating with and how that determines their day to day actions.
Now, none of the above makes sense if you regard the PJ as a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons. I don’t however.
* * *
I knew some people couldn’t resist moaning about Allison’s post. She’s as much entitled to her opinion as I am to mine. That’s why I afterwards highlighted [italic] the part of her post I agree to. I think she’s one of the people that were babbling on the closed thread and who are a bit afraid to be exposed to the sometimes nasty attacks on the main thread. I might be wrong, but I’d like her to be encouraged to debate in stead of scaring her off or ridicule her.
Now regarding your post. If you’ve read one of my serious posts on the other thread, you’d seen that imo there’s proof that the pj is [re-]examining all leads. When did I ever complain about mr. Rebelo and his team? “Au contraire”, I think he’s doing a hard job re-examining the case. I admire his guts to get involved in this “high-profile” investigation.
And when did I ever suggest I consider the PJ “a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons”?????
I do think at the beginning the pj made some mistakes [who doesn’t ever make mistakes?], however I don’t know how serious they spoiled the investigation. Have a look at the picture of the lady that’s trying to find fingerprints on the shutters!
I don’t know if Clarrie is trying to sidetrack the investigation, time [and pj] will tell.
I’m sure the T9 know more about the events that lead up to the disappearance of Madeleine, I’m also sure they know more then we know by the stories in the papers. Remember the secrecy law? I don’t know if the T9 muddled the investigation by their statements [assuming there are some serious inconsistencies]. Again, I hope time will tell.
PS: this took me my luchbreak. Have to go back to work. Will be back in the evening.
++++++++++++++++++
Any impression that I may have suggested you in particular hold certain opinions is a combination of my poor writing and perhaps a little over sensitivity on your part?
I was just making the generic point that I don’t believe there is any evidence that the PJ are not conducting the investigation properly, nor following up relevant/appropriate leads.
I don’t much care what Team McCann think/say/do in respect of the PJ/Portuguese authorities, since the former is wholly responsible for having brought themselves to the attention of the latter in the first place.
January 28th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
66 Peter O Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
42 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 am
35 Pilimary Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Jo
You mean Totje and Lyn?
*************************
Whether she is alive or not; she deserves to have the truth revealed.
and whether it was an abduction or not, so as long as the PJ doesn’t know for sure either way, they have to investigate all clues that could be overlooked during the beginning of the investigation.
IMO it’s about finding the truth about what happened, finding Madeleine and charge the perpetrator[s] no matter whom they are/ s/he is].
+++++++++++++++++++
Notwithstanding that we don’t know what the PJ know for definite, of course all leads that follow fruitful or unresolved lines of enquiry should be being followed. There isn’t, from a public perception, any evidence that the PJ are not doing this?
Just because the Comical One and his cohorts keep coming up with wizard wheezes to sidetrack the investigation, in my opinion, it doesn’t follow that the PJ should either take them seriously nor respond in a manner that might expose any of their investigation tactics. The PJ and not Team McCann are the ones conducting this investigation.
With the above in mind, it makes no sense for the PJ to pursue lines of enquiry relating to say abduction if they already have incontrovertible proof that abduction is/was impossible. What most of us tend to forget from time to time is that we do not know what truths the PJ are already operating with and how that determines their day to day actions.
Now, none of the above makes sense if you regard the PJ as a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons. I don’t however.
* * *
I knew some people couldn’t resist moaning about Allison’s post. She’s as much entitled to her opinion as I am to mine. That’s why I afterwards highlighted [italic] the part of her post I agree to. I think she’s one of the people that were babbling on the closed thread and who are a bit afraid to be exposed to the sometimes nasty attacks on the main thread. I might be wrong, but I’d like her to be encouraged to debate in stead of scaring her off or ridicule her.
Now regarding your post. If you’ve read one of my serious posts on the other thread, you’d seen that imo there’s proof that the pj is [re-]examining all leads. When did I ever complain about mr. Rebelo and his team? “Au contraire”, I think he’s doing a hard job re-examining the case. I admire his guts to get involved in this “high-profile” investigation.
And when did I ever suggest I consider the PJ “a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons”?????
I do think at the beginning the pj made some mistakes [who doesn’t ever make mistakes?], however I don’t know how serious they spoiled the investigation. Have a look at the picture of the lady that’s trying to find fingerprints on the shutters!
I don’t know if Clarrie is trying to sidetrack the investigation, time [and pj] will tell.
I’m sure the T9 know more about the events that lead up to the disappearance of Madeleine, I’m also sure they know more then we know by the stories in the papers. Remember the secrecy law? I don’t know if the T9 muddled the investigation by their statements [assuming there are some serious inconsistencies]. Again, I hope time will tell.
PS: this took me my luchbreak. Have to go back to work. Will be back in the evening.
January 28th, 2008 at 10:57 am
20…Allison
“”"” What is important is finding out what happened to Madeleine.”"”"
Indeed….and all the more reason for Dr G P and Dr K to answer all questions,
put by the PJ, wholly truthfully.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:51 am
66
Peter O Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
****************
Very correct.Thank you Peter O ….and a big slice of sun for you
January 28th, 2008 at 8:49 am
36
ks Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Hey Jo- have you just graduated from charm school? Didn’t they tell you there’s NO NEED TO SHOUT?
WHY don’t YOU go BACK to your WHISKY…
rel:dr:28.01
*********************
I absolutely reject this type of vile personal comment.
Please not: I do NOT drink AT ALL and surely not wisky
The ones who drink and get absolutely trashed are the english people who come to my country and while they are happily getting pissed they leave their children unattended and they mysteriously disappear
A bons entendeurs,salut!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:32 am
This one could run forever, with endless portugeuse drifters being brought in, but all rejected as “like the man I saw, but not him” How can anyone rule this so called suspect out? It can’t be proved that any one person they find is definately the man in the picture, so if he has an alibi, then they will decide it wasn’t him Mrs Cooper saw, and keep on looking. Clarrie will always be able to say that the PJ never traced the suspicious looking man seen in the area.
January 28th, 2008 at 7:04 am
42 Totje Says: January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 am
35 Pilimary Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Jo
You mean Totje and Lyn?
*************************
Whether she is alive or not; she deserves to have the truth revealed.
and whether it was an abduction or not, so as long as the PJ doesn’t know for sure either way, they have to investigate all clues that could be overlooked during the beginning of the investigation.
IMO it’s about finding the truth about what happened, finding Madeleine and charge the perpetrator[s] no matter whom they are/ s/he is].
+++++++++++++++++++
Notwithstanding that we don’t know what the PJ know for definite, of course all leads that follow fruitful or unresolved lines of enquiry should be being followed. There isn’t, from a public perception, any evidence that the PJ are not doing this?
Just because the Comical One and his cohorts keep coming up with wizard wheezes to sidetrack the investigation, in my opinion, it doesn’t follow that the PJ should either take them seriously nor respond in a manner that might expose any of their investigation tactics. The PJ and not Team McCann are the ones conducting this investigation.
With the above in mind, it makes no sense for the PJ to pursue lines of enquiry relating to say abduction if they already have incontrovertible proof that abduction is/was impossible. What most of us tend to forget from time to time is that we do not know what truths the PJ are already operating with and how that determines their day to day actions.
Now, none of the above makes sense if you regard the PJ as a bunch of sardine munching, beer swilling. Cigarette ash dumping, incompetent and corrupt buffoons. I don’t however.
January 28th, 2008 at 7:00 am
Cooper says this man is the spitting image of the man she saw three times, but she doesn’t go the whole hog (sorry - not a good pun, but it is early) and state that IT IS the man she saw.
I think she is keeping her options open.
January 28th, 2008 at 5:10 am
And, perhaps Tanner and Cooper should be told to wipe that stupid amused smirk off of
their faces before going on camera. What is that all about? It’s disturbing!
January 28th, 2008 at 3:27 am
Joaquim Agostinho might only have the one jacket he is pictured in and it doesn’t look like the jacket Gail Cooper described - hers has a large lapel, Joaquim Agostinho’s does not.
rel:dr:29.01
January 28th, 2008 at 3:24 am
How many more innocent people will be wrongly accused?
Still can’t get over how much the facial sketch looks like Kate McCann!
Anyone notice that the sketch of Jane Tanner’s “eggman” has hair that looks like Jane Tanner’s hair and a sweater similar to what Jane Tanner has been photographed wearing?
January 28th, 2008 at 3:16 am
ziggy, funny isn’t it, how the McCanns blame the Portugal police for not finding what the McCann’s lost.
rel:dr:28.01
January 28th, 2008 at 3:14 am
The picture of a person Gail Cooper claims to have seen looks more like Kate McCann than Joaquim Agostinho.
Will Portugal police get a search warrant to look for a wig and moustache at the McCann house?
rel:dr:28.01
January 28th, 2008 at 2:51 am
No matter the outcome of this tragedy, the parents are responsible
for what happened to Maddy. Their careless and LAZY parenting
skills put three small children in Harms Way! Who knows what
they must have gone through. It is such a shame that the Media
keeps on “Pimping” these two! Ya Basta!
January 28th, 2008 at 1:27 am
The bloke side on has the greasy dark hair that Ms Tanner saw. Could say this poor chap has been in target for a while and he has nothing to do with it all. Maddy is still missing!
January 28th, 2008 at 1:11 am
This is all reminiscent of American Idol- the new predator of the day is the reject that everyone wants to see. How sad.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Jo
I was only joking. But I meant the poor guy the McCanns have caused to be falsely accused this week.
I wonder who the next will be?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:43 am
52
Karen Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Hang him.
**************
Who?
MccDrifter? McClarence?
McGordon?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Hang him.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:35 am
50
Pilimary Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:30 am
***************+
Whats up with this new thread?
It seems that they”ve all gone….I think this week the PJ is going to say something,well,lets hope so…and I hope they are going to crucify them…
January 28th, 2008 at 12:30 am
Nice to be here but have to sleep
Lástima que no se mueran de una puta indigestión. Acabaríamos antes..
January 28th, 2008 at 12:30 am
pili
AND Alicante and London and everywhere….hasta Chile,tia…..