Madeleine McCann: Tabloid Snap, Metodo 3 PD and McCanns Innocent
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY MIRROR: “I’M NOT GUILTY”
“A loner who looks like a drawing of a ‘creepy’ Madeleine McCann suspect has denied any links to her disappearance”
Joaquim Agostinho says: “It’s not me in the picture. I accept that the drawing looks like me”
The Mirror reports: “The former cockle picker, who lives in Altura, 90 miles from Praia da Luz, added: ‘I did not kill Madeleine and I’ve never been to Praia da Luz. I cannot even drive’”
But still his picture is in the paper in connection with a story about a missing child. Fingers are pointed
MADELEINE in Chile. What news of that? “Yesterday, police ruled out a “Madeleine” sighting in Chile after the girl was identified as American Haylee Dreyer, six”
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE – Amazing lookalike: ‘I did not kidnap and kill her’”
Mr Agostinho looks like an artist’s impression of man whom British tourist Gail Cooper says she saw acting hanging around Praia da Luz. He is the “oddball”
Page 11: “DRIFTER MATCHES NEW MADELEINE SUSPECT”
Matches. Like in a game of snap? Snap! Snap! Snap!
“Investigators want to quiz a Portuguese drifter suspected of involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Detectives working for the youngster’s parents are to question Joaquim Agostinho, 42, in the resort of Altura”
Does he have to speak with the McCanns detectives?
“Mr Agostinho, who lives in Altura, said yesterday: ‘I did not kill Madeleine and I’ve never been to Praia da Luz. I cannot even drive.’ Altura is close to the Spanish border and detectives from Metodo 3 – the agency working for the McCanns – were last night travelling there from their headquarters in Barcelona”
Again, does he have to speak with private detectives?
THE SUN: “McCANN COPS QUIZ SUSPECT LOOKALIKE”
“Detectives are to quiz a drifter who looks uncannily like a mystery suspect in Maddie McCann’s disappearance. Joaquim Agostinho, 42, denies he is the creepy man depicted in a sketch issued by parents Kate and Gerry McCann
“But Metodo 3, the Spanish private investigators hired by the McCanns, are taking the possibility seriously”
Is Metodo 3 now a police force?
A source close to Metodo 3 says: “We are going to be talking to this man as a priority, to establish if he is the one Mrs Cooper saw”
What of the McCanns?
“COPS now accept Kate and Gerry, both 39, may be innocent in Maddie’s disappearance, it has emerged. They have so far clung to just one theory — that Maddie was accidentally killed and her parents disposed of her body. Now they are taking seriously the alternative that she was snatched from the holiday apartment last May — which Kate and Gerry have always insisted must have happened”
DAILY MAIL: “Is this drifter the man in Madeleine drawing?”
Mr Agostinho says no. He delivers newspapers for a living. He says he is innocent
Metodo 3 are looking to speak with him
DAILY STAR: “MADDIE: THREE MEN RULED OUT – McCanns’ new hopes shattered”
It’s not Joaquim Jose Marques – police have ruled him out; and the Star was so certain
It’s not the girl in Chile – she’s a girl on holiday with her family
It’s not Joaquim Agostinho – he says it’s not him
METRO: “Twins play ‘find Maddie’”
“Leading world sex crimes expert Ray Wyre” has met with Kate and Gerry McCann
He sees the McCanns’ twins children. Wyre tells the paper: “They said they were going to go and find the monster that took Maddie. Then they dashed off to play the game. It’s a sad story, but it is healthy that Madeleine remains a real presence in their lives”
“A spokesman for the McCanns denied the story”
Madeleine McCann: No news is still news
Posted: 28th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,332) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Anorak on X Factor: Hairy Jordans Jedward To Star On I’m A Celebrity And Coronation Street
- Paul Wainwright on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- yampster on X Factor: Hairy Jordans Jedward To Star On I’m A Celebrity And Coronation Street
- Pete on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity Watch: Katie Price Is More Hated Than Baby P’s Mum
January 28th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Delboy 211.
I think that came about at the time of Sr Sousa as spokesman. He said in one of his press statements at the time that there was no offence with regard to leaving the children; it was not a problem because the mcCanns remained on the property.
I’ve since looked for a link but can’t find it now.
I know posters from then will remember it because it was discussed………..
He also said that the first night the families were all together with their children in the (I think) Millenium? restaurant then after that in the Tapas Bar. Chaplins seems to be another rumour that has grown legs?? If it were true then that would have been the ideal way to keep them all in Portugal, in custody, while they built their case.
IMO.
All old news of course.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
209 Garth
Dont you have an opinion of your own garfy??
January 28th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
The problem with the abductor theory is that it requires you to ignore crucial bits of evidence in order to keep the theory going. Specfically, the ‘cadaver scent’ in the apartment and the car. On her clothes and on the cat. It’s always very dangerous to ignore evidence simply because it doesn’t fit the theory. (We all do it of course, but it’s usually the reason that the theory turns out to be wrong). Conclusion: There seems to be no way to reconcile the cadaver scent with an abduction.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
209 Garth
Long winded and unconvincing.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
209…Garth
That was only in stig’s opinion of course.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
my dustmen are really late today………..oh sorry garth, i didnt notice your post 210!
January 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Logic
Yeah he works at Mc Donalds
January 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Brandon
What is this about? Is Garth sitting his A levels?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
143 Increasingly Incredulous
When people start getting personally insulting, such as telling another poster to go away and learn about the law, it usually means that they feel they are losing the argument. It is called bullying.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Good luck with the A level Garth!
January 28th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
I think its time questions were answered you know the simple ones that have nothing to do with being arguido, like …
who told them they were within the legalities,of leaving their kids alone,we can then put the boot in to them as well,
3come on who told them that?????? answers please, and why hasnt some jurnalist asked the same……………waiting,dum da de……..
January 28th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
…….and its back to work for me you time wasters…………………..
January 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
700
The Real Stig Says:
September 25th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
131 puzzled
I am not opposed to contemplating that it was not an abduction. I have contemplated the idea but I do not see any way to reasonably argue for any of the alternatives that have been raised. Many of the alternative theories are at best, convoluted, and at worst, utterly preposterous. So applying Occam’s razor, that seems to leave abduction.
Occam’s razor is my logical reason, but being semi human, I have another illogical reason - an emotional reason. I don’t really like mentioning this one, though I have before, because it can all too easily be called into question and doubted because I am not in a position to point to any source material saying - ‘there it is.’
I have followed all this from the beginning. In the first few days, there were TV reports which showed Kate in grief. I am pretty cynical and not exactly the most emotionally demonstrative person you will likely meet. I am not exactly young either, but I tell you that in all my life I have never seen a greater expression of utter profound grief than I saw in Kate those first few days. The nanny saw it, Maria saw it and my wife saw it. I suspect Moderation may well have seen it also. It wasn’t an act or faked.
So to me, I have Kate’s grief, and to me it is evidence of an emotional state. So when I try and reason through some of the proposed scenarios, as logically as I might try, I can not put aside the illogical clue of the grief. For instance, If you take a scenario like sedation, death, coverup - the grief clue doesn’t fit. Sedation, discovery of accidental death, hide body, concoct story, return calmly to Tapas, carry on as if nothing happened, return later and explode into body wracking, paralysing, hysterical grief as witnessed and described by the nanny and others. I don’t think so, personally. You can’t turn it on and off like a tap that close in time to the trauma.
There are logical problems also. Kate trained as an anaesthetist. This might sound silly but I think an anaesthetist would be one of the least likely of people to ever sedate their child for the sake of convenience. Even if they were to, such a person is also LEAST likely to use a strong sedative or get the dosage that wrong. I have seen an expert opinion that it would be very difficult to persuade a child to consume enough oral sedative to constitute a lethal dose. If you want to get really loopy and start talking about intravenously administered sedatives - I would sooner believe in fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Why any of that complicated nonsense when in reality, anyone wanting to ensure sleep would most likely administer a very mild sedative - an antihistamine of some sort such as contained in cough mixture. Even if that were the case, death by overdose becomes away with the fairies again. A surgeon/anaesthetist doesn’t know the difference between one and ten, twenty, thirty spoonfulls? - yea right! Try to get just one spoonfull down a small child!
Allergic reaction? - No, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you suspect nightly sedation while the adults do the Tapas, you can’t turn around and claim Madeleine had an allergic reaction after several nights of sedation, a profound allergy sufficient to cause death would have shown up the first time.
None of the other hypothesised accident,coverup scenarios work for me either, but I am not going to go through them all.
I think that about leaves the pathological monster scenarios. For any of those to work you have to have a cold blooded pathological monster, which as we all know, must be Gerry. Have you heard the expression ‘if you want me to believe an extraordinary claim, you must first show me an extraordinary proof’? I have seen articles where Gerry has been described as a hands on loving and devoted father, I have seen pictures of him playing and cavorting with his children to back that up and so on. Circumstantially I have inferred that if your colleagues willingly choose to go with you on holiday, not just once, but at least twice, they must like you just a little. That’s it. Nothing put positive anecdotes, visual evidence and inferences. There is just absolutely nothing to indicate he isn’t a loving husband, devoted father and likeable in the eyes of his colleagues. There is not an iota of anything that comes within a light year of the extraordinary proof you would need to reasonably consider he was the monster any of the other scenarios require.
So, however I try and assemble the pieces, the only theory I can get a sandwich out of is the abduction hypothesis. But there is no evidence for this. That is not the same as ‘there WAS no evidence’. I have seen criticisms and suggestions that the herd of people to pass through the McCann apartment that night were as a result of a deliberate attempt to eliminate or conceal forensic evidence. I do not think that is the case. Everyone was utterly frantic, Kate was inconsolable and from the nanny’s depiction and other witnesses, I doubt she was capable of thinking about the niceties of forensics. There are accounts that similarly suggest Gerry was frantic also, rushing around in the dark shouting for Madeleine. I don’t think anyone was thinking too clearly in those first few minutes, and why would they? If they had been cool, calm and collected, I would have found that suspicious.
Another reason why there might not be any evidence of abduction is that the PJ stuffed up almost everything it was conceivably possible to stuff up, procedurally and forensically. Can someone please explain to me how it is the McCanns fault that their apartment was allowed to be thoroughly cleaned and put back into use after they left it to move into the premises they later leased? It has become almost politically incorrect to insinuate the PJ are anything other than highly professional with unquestionable motives and integrity. Well I don’t pray to the idol of PC so I beg to differ about the PJ.
There is another reason why there might be little or no evidence of an abduction - I think it perfectly possible there was little or none in the first place. I have tried to think through what an abductor might have done, and what trail of evidence you might expect them to leave in doing it. I did this before in a previous post which you can find in a previous thread so I am not going to repeat it. If you do want to look at it, please bear in mind it is not a hypothesis for what did happen, it is a hypothetical ‘modus operandi’ - a method of carrying out the abduction that would leave virtually no trace. The scenario was not meant to explain facts, timelines or any of that, just what a perpetrator might have physically done and the traces of that which would have been left on the real world for people to find later.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/madeleine-mccann/176493.html post 441
We live in a world where innumerable crime based TV fodder like CSI (Crime Scene Investigation), Waking the Dead and more mainstream police and detective shows have swamped us with the automatic expectation that every crime scene contains a subtle but rich trail of faint and convoluted clues for acute forensic senses to follow. These shows have created a popular mythology that every crime scene must have a magical essence of clues to follow, but this isn’t the reality. There are innumerable cases of missing persons and other crimes for which insufficient clues can be found to allow them to be solved.
Please don’t even begin to try and persuade me that Gerry is really other than how I have infered him to be, based onhow you think he is because of your negative since this started, because to me it, is utterly invalid.
———————————
This, I think you will find is how most people who dont believe the conspiracies view this case.
I didnt link it as thought it better in yer face!
January 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-1302699,00.html
looks like the photofit pic to me. wonder where he was in May?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
202
delboy
January 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Garths favourite song is
” Bend me, Shape me, anyway you want me”
January 28th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
195
yes of course cuddlecat on shelf…must have been an abduction then..case closed
January 28th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Surely Team McCann will have to drop ‘George Harrison’ hunt after spotting ‘Quim-man’. Especially as the ever-reliable Mrs Cooper confirms it IS him:
But when eyewitness Gail Coop, who helped create the sketches, saw the scruffy man’s photo she gasped: “Oh my God, that’s so like him. He’s the spitting image of the man I saw three times at the resort where Madeleine vanished. It’s deeply shocking to see my drawing come to life. His cold, emotionless eyes sent a chill right through me.”
The 50-year-old granny added: “I thought there’d be no doubt in my mind if I saw him again.”
Er, case closed Clarrie? Red-faces and helpings of humble-pie all round?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
198
just_me
Ignore him
x
January 28th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
can’t say no Says: who is cruella de ville…..
1001 dalmations, she hated kids(cruel devil)………might have spelt it wrong though, but who cares….
January 28th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
141 Garth
“It seems apparent to me that Kate had contemplated this and purely out of desperation Kate needed to speak to the vicar that married them.”
—————————————–
But couldn’t she have just wandered off? Why so sure of abduction? Doors were not locked and there was no evidence of an abductor.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
197
brandon flours
hihihi
January 28th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
and the bed was tidy
January 28th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Cant say No - bless your heart x
I know Garth doesnt agree with me, but I didnt lose my daughter because of neglect or abandonment. If he thinks I should be open minded about all of this case he is so very wrong. I tried to be at first, and I will be honest and say I felt sorry for the McCanns for a while, but as the following days weeks and months went on, I see no reason to see innocence on their part, however, I accept we all have differing opinions, and we are all entitled to view them x
January 28th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
194
Garth
Like you showed mr rooster?
January 28th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
191
Garth
RR is a he a she ,both ,neither ?????
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
clouseau Says: give us 1 piece of evidence of an abduction
err, cuddlecat was on a shelf!!
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
189
clouseau Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
some evidence please of the abduction…….hmmmm oh there is none
—————————-
I’d love to be in the same room as you. I could show you how its done.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
183
delboy
Whos ?…….cruela de ville?
And please don’t tell me that is from some forum
January 28th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
184
Matt