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
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- June on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- June on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- Tony on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- Cheryl on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
January 28th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
“Of course some of the statements you and sledgehammer make are so silly that I believe I could have spotted the holes in them prior to ‘O’ levels in ‘76!2
Odd, then that you don’t point them out, backed with any explanation, caselaw or legislation…..
January 28th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
487 Matt
In French, we call him “Le roi Salomon”.
Remember the story of the two mothers, one of their children died, and both claimed the one still living as theirs. King Salomon pretended he believed them both and said “OK, we’ll divide the child in two, and each one of you can have half”. One of the women said OK. The other one, who really loved the child, and that leant being unselfish, said “No, she can have him. I want him to live”.
January 28th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
488
Ferdinand Says:
465 Matt:
Call it strong concern, isn’t that fear?
————————
Concern for who exactly?
January 28th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Grande finale
Dont get mad get even better has always been my motto
January 28th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
i Sorry, but you’re wrong again… and you really keep showing you know nothing about the law
If you prefer the phrasing “the Portuguese System’s preference” feel free to substitute that.
“Therefore, in either case - at the end of the investigation phase - they will have access to the files and to the evidence that was held against them”
And isn’t it odd that that’s the phase that the Police AND Prosecutor have applied to extend…. so, basically spin this out long enough that eventually everyone forgets about it.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
485
brandon flours Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
I am spending lots of money on work not done by my husband, to pay a very fit and agile builder!!
Very therapeutic.
***************
Madge!!!! :redface:
January 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
476 Increasingly incredulous
I suspect youa re either a very close friend of sledgehammer or perhaps you simply have a similar lack of legal knowledge and access to the internet!
Its painful - even with my embryonic legal training - to see people trying to apply legal rules with rudimentary or non-existent understanding of the fundamental concepts!
I have to say however, its useful for me - as I can more easily spot the gaps than before I’d started on the subject.
Of course some of the statements you and sledgehammer make are so silly that I believe I could have spotted the holes in them prior to ‘O’ levels in ‘76!
January 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
488…Ferdinand
Any fear present is Fear of the Long Arm of the Law.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Rockhopper
I have no sound! but will save to favourites.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Inc Inc
“To make it clear - I think the PJ’s prefernece would be for this case never to come to a conclusion, and hence for their case files to remain secret - in order to avoid public scrutiny of just how thoroughly they’ve cocked matters up.”
Sorry, but you’re wrong again… and you really keep showing you know nothing about the law:
1. The PJ’s preference is of no importance. It’s a judge from the public prosecution that instructs the process and decides if and when to press charges or to archive the case.
2. After the investigation phase is closed (because the PJ have exhausted all lines of investigation) the public prosecutor decides to either a) press charges - that’s it the case transits to court and the legal team has access to the files to start preparing the defense. or b) archive the process for insufficient evidence that would allow charges. The process is archived but the legal team will be able to request access to the files (and is granted that access).
Therefore, in either case - at the end of the investigation phase - they will have access to the files and to the evidence that was held against them.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
465 Matt:
Call it strong concern, isn’t that fear?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
481…Marie Nicholas
That’s King Solomon isn’t it ?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
jogging=talking in private,
golf=not biological father
hair done=I mustn’t look like an ugly murderer
clothes, earrings=obsessive compulsive behaviour about buying stuff, signs of depression=cause of rage.
Who knows? This is all my personal belief only, you know guys.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Grande finale
I am spending lots of money on work not done by my husband, to pay a very fit and agile builder!!
Very therapeutic.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Brandon Flowers,
I know you’ve got some catching up to do, check out the link, it might come in handy!
http://www.log.tv/callmickey/Home/tabid/2220/EntryID/530/Default.aspx
January 28th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
“The fact that Inc Inc has produced outright lies about the relevant law and is quoting legislation that is simply not relevant in this case, to me suggests that he or she does not have those credentials”
For what it’s worth LLb - but never practiced.
And you credentials are?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
473…Increasingly incredulous
The Investigation continues.
Ask Mr Rebello.
Am sure he will put you right.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Salomon,
Me again, did you choose the name Salomon because King Salomon was such a great judge?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
407
Matt. Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Hi Matt,
That pigeon’s not dead he’s just sleeping!
January 28th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Salomon,
I thought you were going to tell us what the appeal process - other than to the same Magistrate who imposed the status in the first place - is?
Or does this have as much substance as you being about to tell us of the ECtHR cases about Article 6 won by the Portuguese?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Dr Watson 467
I don’t know if Incresingly Incredulous is in anyway subsidised by any interests involved in Madeleine’s disappearance… I know I’m not.
I suspect Incr Incred is not subsidised. You’d have thought that the McCanns would get someone with some legal understanding and basic knowledge of the relevant legislation to come into forums and start discussing some of these issues.
The fact that Inc Inc has produced outright lies about the relevant law and is quoting legislation that is simply not relevant in this case, to me suggests that he or she does not have those credentials.
IMO it would be counterproductive for them to have some sort of wanna be paralegal coming here claiming Human rights violations for the McCanns being named official suspects after failing to answer questions.
IMO Inc Incred is just someone who likes to pretend that he/she knows something about something… without really knowing much about anything.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
454
Salomon
LOL!
This poster is very much like another one who has one dimensional view of legal concepts (well, a no dimensional view of ‘concepts’ and a google search access to some legislation).
January 28th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
“This is not your only name, is it?”
Yes, it is.
*******************
MODS AND ADMIN - Hmmmn!
********************
” Would you mind telling us what previous name you have been using on this forum?”
None
“Do you have any commection to Mccanns or helpfindmadeleine campaign?”
No.
Out of interest, who do you think I am?
January 28th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
455 Salomon
I can see that you are growing increasingly incredulous as regards that person’s arguments. Isn’t it incredible, but so am I.
You are convincing, because you are patient and accurate, and you carefully listen to the other party’s argument. I am taking a lesson. I wish I had studied law.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
461
Ferdinand Says:
454 man on a hill Says:
“I agree it’s fear that i see in K and G, not grief.”
Which is what you would expect in case of an abduction as opposed to a case of death.
———————————–
I disagree. Try taking a lion cub from it’s mommy and see how scared she gets.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
i So clarify for me… in Britain, when I’m suspect of committing a crime, but have not yet been charged, I can apply “not to be a suspect” and have a tribunal examining my request?
I can challenge my arrest and/or questioning under caution under the requirements of “Code C” of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 - and can appeal to an independent judge to do so.
If it’s found that the Police have breached “Code C” they are subject to charge of wrongful arrest….
“ii fails to see that it is in the McCann’s interest to go to Court if innocent.”
Matt, agreed - but it’s the PJ who are showing reluctance to take the case to Court. Like an independent tribunal to show the status of their evidence to justify “reasonable cause”.
To make it clear - I think the PJ’s prefernece would be for this case never to come to a conclusion, and hence for their case files to remain secret - in order to avoid public scrutiny of just how thoroughly they’ve cocked matters up.
Mods,
that rather depends if there actually is a course by which legal redress can be sought - that’s part of the Article 6 & 13 requirements, under which we’ve already identified that Portugal’s been frequently found to be in breach.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
458 Marie Nicholas Says:
“Maybe they are too engrossed into their pain to think of that.”
That’s what I think on my lenient days.
I hope that they hand in later what they owe the public some way…
January 28th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
lone pigeon
(((((((((((((((((((( WHIP )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
January 28th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
451
brandon flours Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I have a date with a pole, a mound and a shovel!
**********************
What are you up to with your polish builder ????
January 28th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
466…Dr. Watson
Used to be, “ImA_Fecking Irriott_ Please ignore_Me”, I think.