Madeleine McCann: A Pundit Says, Judge Eurico Reis Orders And The Sun Omits
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
THE SUN: “Shut up: Maddie cop by judge”
Police national director Alipio Ribeiro “stunned his men” by “admitting” the decision to make “doctors” Kate and Gerry McCann suspects was “hasty”
Judge Eurico Reis said it is “not the cop’s role to publicly comment on cases under investigation. The judge raged: ‘It is his duty to SHUT UP.’”
And: “Portugal’s top prosecutor Antonio Cluny branded Ribeiro’s comment ‘extremely worrying’” – Why worrying? Because of what he said? Or because a policeman has given his personal views about an ongoing case? The Sun fails to make this clear
The McCanns spokesman tells us: “You cannot have the head of the police force openly questioning the validity of the way in which they were made suspects and then not have a review”
Can’t you? Can someone expert in Portuguese law tells us if you can or cannot…
FERGUS Shanahan: “COPS SO WRONG”
Alipis Ribero is on the radiop. Says Shanahan: “In effect, Mr Ribeiro is saying: ‘We never had any evidence agsint Kate and Gerry. We didn’t take Madeleine’s disappearance seriously… Some of our detectives thought Kate and Gerry looked dodgy. So we made them suspects and hoped something might turn up.”
The tabloids, meanwhile, look at “creepy” Robert Murat, also a suspect - you know, the one the Sun calls an “oddball“
DAILY STAR: “BLOW FOR MADDIE PARENTS”
“TORMENTED Kate and Gerry McCann are to remain official suspects over their daughter’s disappearance. They hoped to have their ‘arguido’ status lifted after Portugal’s top cop Alipio Ribeiro admitted it may have been a mistake to put them in the frame. But government legal advisers yesterday denied they were planning to clear their names”
So the personal views of a policeman are not a deciding factor in an ongoing investigation?
“The 39-year-olds may be considered suspects for as long as the investigation continues – possibly years”
Read all about it!
DAILY MIRROR: “STILL SUSPECTS – Maddy probe team in row over letting McCanns off hook”
Says Judge Eurico Reis: “This case has had more than enough media exposure”
Mr Ribeiro is on the radio…
Says “media pundit” Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa: “He killed the investigation when he said there was haste in making the McCanns arguidos in the case”
Says Antonio Cluny, who we heard from earlier in the Sun: “I don’t know if he’s right or not but this conduct of speaking about pending cases is extremely worrying”
Why did the Sun end its Mr Cluny quote short?
LIVERPOOL DAILY POST: “Madeleine McCann: Liverpool grandad hoping for a miracle”
Says Mr Healy: “Like most people I would like to think that if there is a spark of hope I have to hang on to it. They haven’t found anything yet. We have to believe a miracle can happen. I still believe she is alive and until someone tells me different I will believe”
IRISH INDEPENDENT: “Maddy’s grandad hopes for miracle”
Brian Healey says he is pleased that “Alipio Rebeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria, said detectives were too hasty in making the couple suspects over their daughter’s disappearance”
Says he: “I am glad he has said it, it will get things moving to reinstate the fact they’re innocent”
Posted: 5th, February 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (958) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
February 5th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
600 Simon
look back through the postings. You might learn something at the same time.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
316
Peter O Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Oh dear. It’s always embarrassing when one needs to come back and clarify ones valedictory hissy fit!
I would hate to leave posters with the impression that I was defending Sledgehammer, I wasn’t at all. Their barring from Anorak was almost inevitable given their recent postings, in my opinion.
What I am uncomfortable with are the actions and comments emanating from Mods and Admin who then put themselves “beyond comment”. Now, let me be clear, I think these people do an amazingly difficult unpaid job, often under the most provocative of circumstances and oftentimes with certain parties deliberately trying to manufacture a response.
There are posters on all side of this debate whose use of foul language, general tone, debating style and use of personal attacks I do not care for. Mostly this appears to be tolerated by Mods and Admins. Recently however I have detected a bias towards stricter policing of posters on the so called Pro-McCann side of the debate.
agw’s initial response to Sledgehammer’s nonsense post yesterday was, in my opinion, somewhat provocative. Sledgehammer should have had the good sense (listen I still believe in Santa) to have not posted such a rubbish translation. That said, you will note a much milder tone today requesting posters provide sources or risk having quoted posts removed. I have no issue with these requirements which are for all the good reasons Mods and Admins have explained on numerous occasions.
Sledgehammers behaviour over the previous weekend surely warranted the issuing of yellow/red cards? Yet, no action was taken. Why? There then followed direct requests by certain parties to M&A’s to take action against Sledgehammer. Hence my belief that yesterday’s row was precipitated to achieve the outcome it eventually achieved. Sledgehammer did little to help their cause, and perhaps deliberately so, by responding as they did.
Yes, I know that Sledgehammer, or someone(s) similar, will be back here posting within days. However, every time one of these posters is removed from Anorak in these sorts of circumstances it creates the perception, or allows others to paint it as such, that this place is broadly more supportive of one position over another.
To then see comments from M&A’s to other posters making it clear that the opinions of posters in respect of the actions and conduct of M&A’s carries no weight, and are in fact unwelcome, I think is at best disappointing. As I said yesterday, I accept that this is Anorak’s playground and if we went to post here we have to abide by their rules. I find it difficult to accept that M&A’s don’t welcome constructive comment but as I don’t set the rules I can either put up with it or stop posting.
My conscience will not allow me to continue to contribute to a forum which in my opinion has signs of showing an unhealthy bias by those who are supposed to keep order. No one is forcing me stop posting. It’s just my own decision for my own personal reasons. I’m certainly not doing it in defence of Sledgehammer.
Now, this really will be my last contribution. This effort has kept me from my cardigan knitting, again, and I really must away and pick up my grandchild from school. All the best to everyone, Gladys. X
________________________
REPLY: Gladys (Peter O), you renew my faith that real down to earth people still do exist out there and call it as it is! At first I thought it was just me that was crazy, since I’m just a simple American woman, because I had/have the same perceptions as you just stated.
I knew it was coming and tried to warn him by saying don’t get into a spraying contest with those brilliant, complex thinking European anti-mccanns when he started arguing with Ian dear and others and Aaardvark starting whining how important he was and screaming libel and the other brilliant, complex thinking Europeans on here jumped on Sledgie….
Gladys, sure glad to find out you are a woman and congrats on the grandchildren. Guess women aren’t so simple minded after all - you pulled a good off on here - PeterO!
February 5th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Thanks, jo,
please send many smiles to Mods and Admin, I can’t do smiles (tried and failed and no self-confidence now, but I can draw them by hand).
February 5th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
noseycow
Yeah…I have noticed.
Going out for a while.Hope you will be around when I come back?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
593 Batman.
Annoying isn’t he/she!
All statements and silly retorts.
Maybe we are not all adults here and I first thought!!!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
590
Portia Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
———————————————
Garth, as long as they can hide behind a PR spokesperson, they will not concede anything. That is the reason why the government has assigned them a spokesperson, to keep them from further incriminating themselves.
——————————————–
But the fact that they have stated their reasoning from day one is hiding behind a PR spokesperson is it? Not quite……….
February 5th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
598
Quote your four questions and I will answer them four times.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
methinks someone is deliberately trying to get themselves banned
February 5th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
591
When I make a statement I like t be able to back it up. I have asked you nicely four times to explain, and keep getting cocky, evasive answers. It would appear you are just spouting and trying to antagonise people.
Ever so.
Boring
Give it up for lent mate.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
So I think it is time to stop feeding the creationists.
Frogmen update anyone?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
593
Wow! Your detective skills are mind-blowing.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
jo - just a not so new poster winding up the boys
scroll on by boys or i might have to issue a new challenge
February 5th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
585
Batman Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
572 Remigius
I know, the abduction theory, imo, is rubbish. Just look at the evidence:
**************
Dont waste your time
February 5th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
I note that Simon does not bother with the courtesy of putting the name of the poster beside the post number. There was another very similar style poster on here previously who also did that. But that moniker was female.
Same person?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
577
Batman Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
————————————–
568 Garth
You are right, I just don’t understand why - if they are innocent - they did not come out with their hands up and say ‘We made a huge mistake, we should never have left our kids alone. In hindsight we were irresponsible and now we are paying the highest possible price - our daughter is missing’.
——————————–
I just believe that in their own heart of hearts they did, at the time, feel it was okay to keep check on the tots the way they did. There might be a bit of arrogance, denial, whatever in their refusal to accept responsibuility, however, its not the comments of paprents implicit in the disappearance of their own daughter.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
586
Glad to hear you have a great sense of humour. A good laugh does everyone good.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Garth makes an interesting point:
“…They are in denial that they were at fault which ultimately led to the disappearance of their daughter.
If they were guilty of something more to do with her probable death then they would concede to the fact that they made a mistake, thus suggesting that as a result of their selfishness, she was abducted.”
Garth, as long as they can hide behind a PR spokesperson, they will not concede anything. That is the reason why the government has assigned them a spokesperson, to keep them from further incriminating themselves.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
584
Petal? Who is Petal?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
582
Dr. Watson Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
**************
:smile.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
580
You have a lively imagination and seem prone to over-interpretation, I will say that much.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
579
Simon Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
The parents did not kill their daughter. .
—————————–
You are funny. Evasion. Not into spin too are you……like pink?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
572 Remigius
I know, the abduction theory, imo, is rubbish. Just look at the evidence:
.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
noseycow
Whats up? any new spin yet? still arguidos….jeje….
I am dying to hear .Been out the whole afternoon and missed Tony B. again….
February 5th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Dear Mods and Admin,
PlePlease, could you consider introducing some new rule on Anorak that the different usernames of multiposters could be disclosed to anoraki folk on the discretion of Mods and Admin and on the collective request of posters? Just as a thought? Because, if a poster abuses others and then changes name, and then goes on to repeat every single argument of his, the forum goes into discussing the whole thing again and again. Genuine posters will have nothing to lose, but any bullying and trolling will surely stop? It would be heaven if, in a window where the post is composed, an e-mail address would be “tied in” with the username,
just a thought? It is far more difficult psychologically to withstand insult from seemengly 10 persons, (when, in fact, it may be one nasty individual) than from one multiheaded opponent.
Please do not punish me for my little suggestion. I only wish the best to you and Anorak!
_________________________
Mods and Admin
Dr Watson we are unable to reveal such info, but it does explain sometimes why a user suddenly get banned for what appears to be no apparent reason.
February 5th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
572
I don’t find the lack of a ransom note that odd, if there truly was an abductor. With the amount of press this story got from the start, I think it would scare people off a bit. But hey, perhaps there was a random note? Hence starting up the fund so soon….
February 5th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
576
On what? Adults? The weather? My new socks?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Carmen
Are you still struggling with my logic?
February 5th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
568 Garth
You are right, I just don’t understand why - if they are innocent - they did not come out with their hands up and say ‘We made a huge mistake, we should never have left our kids alone. In hindsight we were irresponsible and now we are paying the highest possible price - our daughter is missing’.
So because they did not do that - the logic in this argument is that they are not innocent!
Enough! We could go on like this all night!!!
February 5th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
571
Wa that your opinion?
February 5th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
549
Remigius Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
538 Garth
Still, you can’t walk away from the fact that there is no evidence of any abductor. And that door, intentionally left unlocked….
———————–
Well there’s no evidence of an abductor if you choose to discount Tanners sighting. And leaving the door left intentionally unlocked? Dont follow………..