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
- Desperate Dan on Jamie Cullum Sings The Persuit, In Pictures
- June on Wikileaks Publishes 500,000 9/11 FBI And NYPD Pager Messages, Conspiracy Theorists Read On
- June on Chilcot Inquiry Into Iraq War: Day 2 In Pictures
- percy stilton on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Clairey80 on Nicholas Cage Turns On Bath Christmas Lights, In Photos
January 28th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
979
Chloe Spain
Sorry ,i don’t agree!!
What a rap case as to do ,with what happened to MM ??
Unless ,you want to confuse the others ,and forced them to believe that ALL the police (safe the British Police) are bad !!
It’s all about smoke and mirrors
January 28th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Jo,
Thank you.
Let’s see if it’s worked.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
976
Peter O Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
and I am not up to translating right now….too long but very interesting
****************++
There is a very good link but it is in spanish : el esplendordelaforma
If Mods & Admin allow me I will post it and you could translate it with goolge translator.Mine for some reason doesnt work
January 28th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
975 May
I’m not sure what that was about, but just to let you know that I have not and do not intend to discuss anything with that poster outside Anorak.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
956 Sledgehammer Says: January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Peter O, what is there to tease in such a tragedy.
+++++++++++++++
Dunno… Why release pictures of innocent men, sorry creepy bar stewards, via the media?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
969 CSN
I think, in this case, you’re being a little unfair. What Totje says is completely true. Here in Spain, they now have specialised police officers but only in the last few years.
Must go. Husband arriving.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Ian 972……. its nice to see you being silly. It’s good to be that now and again, especially here!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Chloe
http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=Pq4d3_z9
Sorry about ferdinand if I have not understood him…
January 28th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
955 jo Says: January 28th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
950 Peter O Says: January 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
******************
But in the mccanna case,I believe there could be a possibility to be charged.Of course,I am not a lwayer and know nothing of the portuguese law.
What about the UK? (on the same subjetc of being accomplice by negligence)
+++++++++++
It’s really not my area of expertise.
If Madeleine had been abducted by a complete stranger in unforeseen circumstances as a consequence of the McCann’s alleged evening child care arrangements, then it’s difficult I think to see how they could in any way be considered as “accomplices”, in my opinion.
If there was any form of premeditation in the abduction, to which the McCann’s were party to, then of course they are complicit, in my opinion.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
658
Amused Bystander Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Ian 459 8:22 pm
**********
I recall when Amused Bystander previously posted, requesting off forum e-mail communication with Ian, my initial impression was that he wanted private insight into Ian’s perceptions to enable him to martial, and attempt to combat, whatever logical deductions Ian might be tempted to provide.
AB obviously didn’t want to ‘waste time’ dealing with input from anybody else (as he mentioned to Val), which Ian should take as a compliment, even though it shows that this poster has tunnel vision and a limited capacity for dealing with the whole picture. He would like us to believe his ‘commitments’ outside the forum leave him with less time than anybody else to engage in a many faceted debate.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
963 Ferdinand
I appear to be the only person who understood you! (and I still haven’t got to grips with using smileys).
January 28th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
969
can’t say no
I know you didn’t invent the electricity, nor the light bulbs! You don’t have to stress it.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
It must be Monday blues. we arent all making sense to each other (worse than usual!).
January 28th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
968 coolandcalm
I was being silly. Ignore me.
Stevo wasnt serious.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Sorry pushed send button too soon.
960
Totje add:
So while we think it’s unfair to accuse a victim, in some cultures/countries they still do.
That’s why Ferdinand was a bit sarcastic about the matter.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
jo Says:
__________________
Look how the pros are twisting everyting
The rape ,the women being afraid to go to the police
That’s how they work
January 28th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
945
Ian Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
940 coolandcalm
The intention is to involve the McCanns, when someone says ‘oh no, we dont have a little three year old’ they are hoping Kate will say ‘thats ok, she wasnt really there on that day, we changed the date on the camera…oh shit…GERRY!’
……………………………………
Eh? I really don’t know what you’re talking about! rephrase?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
954 Chloe Spain Says: January 28th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
950 Peter O
There have been some very heavily criticised decisions by Spanish judges (in particular, one judge in Catalonia) who have ruled that the victim provoked the rape and reduced the sentence imposed on the rapist accordingly. The most recent one was only a few months ago - can’t remember all the details.
+++++++++++++
Ahh thank you for the clarification.. Without knowing the circumstances it’s difficult to comment. Though I think that the idea that a lone woman in the wrong place at the wrong time can somehow be considered to automatically have consented/been complicit, just by being there, is perhaps stretching matters slightly?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
jo,……..Really!!!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
954 Chloe Spain
Happens all too often here in the UK.
What sticks in my throat is the European Convention on Human Rights applies to convicted rapists, murderers, child killers and molesters etc…but I guess if we are to consider ourselves as civilised we have to accept such things, even though they seem so wrong.
Of course there is also the risk of miscarriages of justice.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
958 Ian
I totally agree with you.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
950 Peter O Says:
“Irony? I’m not aware that a woman can be charged under the circumstances you describe?
I appreciate that certain parties may attempt to argue that she was asking for it , but actually that’s no defence for the rapist at all.
So far as I am aware, there are no designated areas where it is legal for anyone to assume that if a lone female is dressed in a certain manner that it’s somehow permitted to rape them should the urge take you?
While it may indeed be unwise for a lone female to be in certain areas, that’s still no basis for attempting to excuse or mitigate the behaviour of a rapist?”
This is exactly what I wanted to say in plain mode.
“I’m sure we’re losing something here in translation?”
The problem of irony which is not understood is not a matter of translation. It is recommended to use smileys. I did, but apparently it didn’t work this time.
——————-
Mods and Admiin
Ok, contributory negligence, such as leaving the house unlock and burgled, the ins.co wouldn’t pay out, your rape/girl scenario, she can wear what she likes, but reserves the right to say no, leaving children however is a little different because they and not the adult are taking the risk, some in put from Ian would be interesting here, or PeterMac?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
jo
Do you see ,what and how they twist everything ???
January 28th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
956
Sledgehammer Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Peter O, what is there to tease in such a tragedy.
***************+
Peter is teasing YOU!!!!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
947
jo Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
922
Ferdinand Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
****************
I cant believe your last post on rape etc….
**********************************************
I think you don’t understand what Ferdinand is saying.
Not too many years ago women were “scared” to go to the police to make a statement when they were raped. One of the reasons why they were scared, was the “treatment” they got by the police and the questions and suggestions that were made to them.
Remember only a few weeks ago in Saudi Arabia a woman got raped [she sat in a car with a man that wasn't her husband and a gang raped her] and send to prison [and got lashes] because the judge said “she asked for it by her behaviour”.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
951
Chloe Spain Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Jo 947
I think he was being ironic!
***************
oh ok…british sense of humour? still escapes to me at times!!!!
January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
946 Chloe Spain
The most revealing thing is an item not in dispute (even by sledgehammer) and that is that Kate wanted her mother to get hold of the priest.
Within minutes of finding you daughter gone, instead of being out scouring the countryside, opening the bins … hunting like any other desperate mother would…kate was on the ‘phone asking for a priest.
Are priests good trackers, known for their sensitive sense of smell? Or was it some kind of ‘absolution’ that was sought? Why did she need a priest to comfort her when there was searching to be done - why give up the search so soon and turn to faith so soon?
To me this is one of the most compelling items that points toward something other than stranger abduction.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Garth
leave the rooster alone
January 28th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Peter O, what is there to tease in such a tragedy.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
950
Peter O Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
******************
But in the mccanna case,I believe there could be a possibility to be charged.Of course,I am not a lwayer and know nothing of the portuguese law.
What about the UK? (on the same subjetc of being accomplice by negligence)