Shannon Matthews: Bratz, Mystic Babies And Sir Norman Bettison
SHANNON WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Shannon Matthews
Shannon Matthews has been in the care of the local authority since she was found. The media had a few hours to speculate and focus on Shannon “what ifs” but now the shutters are down. The man has been charged and will appear in court today.
DAILY MAIL: “Don’t let Shannon go home because her mother’s not ‘ready’, say her grandparents”
You can always interview the family.
“We just don’t want Shannon going back to that house. She can stay with us,” said the nine-year-old’s grandfather Gordon Matthews. “I don’t think that Karen and Craig are ready to look after her properly. While all this has been happening, we had Shannon’s brother and sister staying here with us and they were both so happy - they didn’t want to go back.”
Wonder why? Let’s speculate…
He and his wife June are fearful that Shannon, who is in foster care after her 24- day abduction ordeal, could soon be back at home. Mrs Matthews, 64, added: “I have been thinking of Shannon going back to Karen. It’s just not right. Karen was a great mum before she took Craig in. Since he arrived they’ve had a terrible life.”
Craig Meehan is innocent. Why mention him?
Mr Matthews added: “Craig is like a tiny child. He’s so immature. He rings Karen all the time on the phone, literally 20 times a day.”
Maybe it’s love? Maybe Karen Matthews likes children?
“Karen is like a taxi service for him. She picks him up and drops him off everywhere. I have never liked him and I don’t want Shannon going back to her mother while he is around, you just wouldn’t want him looking after your child.”
DAILY MIRROR: “SHANNON WILL STAY WITH COPS”
Shannon Matthews will not return to her mum and stepdad but will be looked after by specialist carers. Police chief Sir Norman Bettison confirmed that the nine-year-old will not be going home just yet to Karen Matthews, 32, and 22-year-old Craig Meehan for the moment.
Norman Bettison. West Yorkshire’s leading copper. After listening to the grandparents, listening to Norman is the next story. Prepared to update the Wikipedia entry, sir!
Says Sir Norman B-E-T-T-I-S-O-N: “She is safe. She’s well. She’s in the place where we think that she’s safest at the moment.”
He singles out Detectives Paul Kettlewell and Nick Townsend who refused to leave when they got no answer at a flat where neighbours said they could hear a child’s footsteps. They watched the front and back entrances and called for a battering ram. They broke down the door and discovered Shannon.
Says Chief Constable Sir Norman: “I think it is amazing and I think it is a question of pride for me that they started to make inquiries of the neighbours. Given this was the 700th action they had undertaken since the start of the investigation…
“It’s been phenomenal and it’s been unprecedented [“You’ve already used ‘amazing’ sir!] and let me tell you where I’m standing it’s been entirely professional. It’s painstaking methodical work.”
Of his officers: “They’re special people, extraordinary people doing an extraordinary job.”
Wikipedia: Sir Norman Bettison the Amazing, phenomenal, extraordinary, unprecedented…
What of Shannon’s parents?
Karen and Craig had bought a Bratz Chloe doll for her homecoming but sent her a Mystic Babies toy when they realised she would not be back.
The significance of toys cannot be overstated. What can it mean?
THE SUN: “Prezzies and prayers for Shannon”
SHANNON Matthews was bought a doll by her relieved mum yesterday – hours before the man held over the nine-year-old’s kidnap was charged. Two detectives accompanied Karen, 32, and Shannon’s 22-year-old stepdad as they shopped for goodies to give the youngster after her 24-day ordeal.
What do you get Shannon?
Karen and her partner returned to their semi with a Chloe Bratz doll and Mystic Babies toy…Yesterday The Sun chipped in with MORE Bratz toys for her. We delivered a sackful of gifts to her house on behalf of our readers. They included Easter eggs for her brothers Tony, 11, Cameron, five, and sister Courtney, two.
What about the other children? And what make of Easter Egg is it? Sun readers demand to be told how they are being represented…
Grateful Karen said: “Thanks very much for the presents – they are very much appreciated.”
That’s the parents. Any news, you know. Of Sir Norman?
Sir Norman explained: “Talking to a nine-year-old is not a question of sitting them down with a pen and piece of paper. It’s been ten minutes and 15 minutes at a time while we have been building up the information – the evidence that we need in order to take this investigation further.”
Whoah, wing commander. Slow down, sir Norman. Wikipedia doesn’t write itself…
FERGUS SHANAHAN: “Shannon must not be allowed home”
“How can Shannon Matthews go back to the hell she has had to call home? How can she be allowed to live in that mad managerie of fractured relationships, bitter resentments, shouted insults and warring relations?”
Shanahan investigates. And his judgement: “The truth is that we don’t know the truth.”
Such are the facts…
DAILY EXPRESS: “SHANNON POLICE ‘ARE HEROES’”
It’s Sir Norman Bettison – B.E.T.T.I.S.O.N:
Sir Norman said: “The jigsaw pieces came together and gave us what we needed to give Paul and Nick the opportunity to go to an address on Friday morning. Given that this was the 700th action they had undertaken since the start of the investigation, I think it is amazing.
“It is a question of pride for me that they then made inquiries of the neighbours and they heard for the first time about the pitter-patter of the girl’s footsteps in the maisonette above them.”
THE SCOTSMAN: “Police chief praises work of officers in Shannon search”
B-E-T-T-I…
West Yorkshire chief constable Sir Norman Bettison highlighted the work of detectives Paul Kettlewell and Nick Townsend in finding the missing nine-year-old as he defended the professionalism of his force.
THE GUARDIAN: “Man charged with abducting and imprisoning Shannon”
West Yorkshire’s chief constable, Sir Norman Bettison, yesterday described as “fantasists” those critics who claim to have pointed the finger at Donovan early in the huge inquiry, unaware of his detectives’ jigsaw puzzle of clues.
THE TIMES: “Michael Donovan is charged over Shannon Matthews kidnap and false imprisonment”
The chief constable said that the child, who has been under an emergency police protection order and has not yet been reunited with her mother, 32-year-old Karen Matthews, was “in safe and caring hands. Shannon is in the place where she is the safest at the moment. She is away from the flashing lenses and the glare of publicity.”
Police chief? Surely the paper means to say Sir Norman B-E-T-T-I-S-O-N…
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “Michael Donovan charged with kidnapping Shannon Matthews”
Sir Norman said the three-week long investigation involved searching 3,000 houses and interviewing 6,000 people, mostly within a mile radius of Dewsbury Moor, West Yorks. He said officers had received 2,000 calls from the public “with just a hook in there about a weirdo, paedophile, living at X or living at Y”.
THE INDEPENDENT: “Shannon suspect charged with kidnapping
Police have charged Michael Donovan with the kidnap and false imprisonment of nine-year-old Shannon Matthews, who was found on Friday after being missing for 24 days.
Officers had been granted an extra 24 hours to question Mr Donovan, 39, of Lidgate Gardens, Batley Carr, Dewsbury, and announced at 10.15pm last night that he would be charged and would appear at Dewsbury magistrates’ court this morning.
Peter Mann, of the Crown Prosecution Service, said that charges were being brought by officers from West Yorkshire police after they had carefully considered all the material in the case. He warned the media to report the case responsibly. He added: “Michael Donovan stands accused of this offence and has a right to a fair trial.”
HOLD THE FRONT PAGE: “News agency’s Shannon photo exclusive brings massive exposure”
Where there’s missing kids, there’s PR…
Ross Parry Agency, based in Pudsey near Leeds, acquired a photo of Michael Donovan, the suspect arrested after missing schoolgirl Shannon Matthews was found.
When reporters started asking questions, they discovered a family connection that led them to the suspect’s sister Alice Meehan, mother of Shannon’s step-father Craig Meehan. Staff at Ross Parry Agency learned that Alice’s maiden name was Drake – the same as Michael Donovan’s birth name, Paul Drake.
Reporter Liam Miller visited Mrs Meehan Friday night, a few hours after Shannon had been found, and bought the old photograph of Michael Donovan and his young nephew Craig Meehan.
It has since been used carrying the Ross Parry Agency byline on Sky and BBC News, their websites and countless other national news papers and news organisations, bringing the agency unparalleled exposure.
Hurrah!
News editor Sam Yule said: “There was word going round that he (Donovan) was related to the Meehan family. In the run up to Friday we had spoken to a lot of the family and got some phone numbers. We ended up getting hold of Caroline who is Craig’s sister. We met both Alice and Caroline and Alice gave us the photo. It was the only one she could find.”
Sam added: “It was just good journalism, a bit of persistence. We worked very, very hard for that and it was not just one day’s work. We got to the stage where a couple of reporters were working on the story all the time. We got the picture exclusive and everybody has no alternative but to use our picture. We feel proud of ourselves.”
Will Alice and Caroline now get a share of any monies earned form such terrific exposure, or Craig Meehan whose face features in the celebrated picture?
Posted: 18th, March 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (94) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- James Mcdiffett on Wikileaks Publishes 500,000 9/11 FBI And NYPD Pager Messages, Conspiracy Theorists Read On
- leesmith on Michelle Obama Is A Monkey And Other Offensive Google Images
- magnetite on Church Gives Soul Tattoos To Worshippers
- Evie Walton on Peter Andre ‘Begs’ Katie Price To Come Home
- yampster on The Chilcot Inquiry Into The Iraq War, In Pictures
March 18th, 2008 at 9:47 am
A link to the story of the Hastings girls.
http://forums.digiguide.com/topic.asp?id=23798
March 18th, 2008 at 9:47 am
43
happy 30
Morning
unfortunately you do not have to venture out on the street for too long before you see/hear the way some children are swore at, shouted at, pushed about.
The middle classes (upper m) do the same thing with different language- don’t sit on my loveley white cream sofa- don’t put your hands on my polished table, don’t put your drink on my beautiful new carpet. Let’s find a crech or a boarding school for our little darlings…
one of the mcc’s siblings said- not exact quote here: I want madeleine to come home and see my beautiful house.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:46 am
58
Matt
Actually Kate isnt unemployed. Thats Clarence ’spin’.
She’s still on the GMC register and available for locum work - if requested!
I guess they don’t have any cadaver work at the moment (she cleared up quite a few in late April 2007)
March 18th, 2008 at 9:44 am
56
Ian
Lets see if within the next 2 weeks they recup their position in the front page
March 18th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Matt…. Maybe…
but the two young girls who were abducted in Hastings (?) some years ago went straight home to their parents and received ongoing counselling.
It was only a couple of months ago that one of the girls told her story (she’ve over 18 now) in one of the magazines. (can’t remember which now).
There was so much we didn’t know about that case and what happened to the two girls, though it was pre-internet. or rather, pre-everyone having access as we do now, so maybe the specualtion was less also.
IF Shannon was abused no-one outside of the family and involved professionals will know about.
I have a foster son (he’s been here for 14 years now) so have been caught up in fostering from both sides of the fence both as a Social Worker and as a foster carer. Very different perspectives!
March 18th, 2008 at 9:37 am
56…Ian
Dr G P McCann, 39, is a Cardiologist.
Dr K McCann, 40, is unemployed.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:36 am
56 Ian
I know! Am off to gym for a hour
see you later……….
March 18th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Im waiting for the Madeleine thread - they seem a bit slow in coming nowadays.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:34 am
42 Eringena
A certain Little Lady is most probably already in heaven with the angels…doubt if there will be a burial. The sea give up their dead though.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:32 am
49
Cheshire Set Says:
March 18th, 2008 at 9:27 am
48 Jo
Yes I read the news over the arrest
Full control is necessary it is also to protect her/them from any further “harm”/complications methinks
March 18th, 2008 at 9:30 am
48…jo
All we know is that a man has been charged for kidnap and false imprisonment
of a child.
Time will tell.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:28 am
45
Cheshire Set
True :give her a break and help surely instead of bashing on her head
Karen is 1 out of millions all over the world
March 18th, 2008 at 9:28 am
This is how the brits do things…they need full control over a child in these types of cases so they can interview and watch
Should have said this is how brit COPS do things
March 18th, 2008 at 9:28 am
46…coolandcalm
I think the uniqueness of this case can lead to misconceptions regarding
the “Fostering” situation.
The “safe” recovery of a kidnapped/abducted child is rare in this country.
And the procedures needed to cater for such will be unusual overall.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:27 am
48 Jo
The ’scam’ theory has been discounted - the ‘bloke’ who was with her when they found her has been charged with abduction etc.
This is how the brits do things…they need full control over a child in these types of cases so they can interview and watch
March 18th, 2008 at 9:25 am
44
Matt
ok
Karen knows something but the most important is her decision in regrads of S safety
Thats what it is about really
What a bizarre case or is it? It has been said it was a scam but I guess it may be all speculations as usual
March 18th, 2008 at 9:23 am
40 Matt.
Iagree. I see no reason to place more credence on what the grandparents/uncle say when they accuse than on what Karen and Meehan say when they deny. Time will tell. Obviously the family’s a mess, but that doesn’t mean that Shannon was abused.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Karen would have had no say……….
‘Voluntary Care’ is catch 22 in most cases.
If there are sufficent grounds then the parents are given a choice… either agree to a voluntary care order OR we’ll issue an emergency care order.
Also, if parents try then to retrieve the child because it’s ‘voluntary’, Social Services will immediately apply for a variation.
Despite what the tabloids say, few children are in care for no reason, there just aren’t enough foster homes to care for the ones they have.
Cold cold cold today. where’s spring gone??
March 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am
41 Lyn
Agreed - help, not slagging off and suggesting that because she has a lot of kids etc that she automatically must have abused/neglected her kids. Fractured families can be just as loving ( I know, many of my freinds come from this type of family)
I would not like to live like her but would certainly not sit as judge and jury on the poor woman…giver her a break
As far as we know neither her nor her partner had anything whatsoever to do with her disappearance…
March 18th, 2008 at 9:21 am
39…jo
Karen made a public statement that she wants SM home but only when
what needs to be done by Police/SS etc is completed. She said she was quite
agreeable to this situation. S’s welfare is the most important matter.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:20 am
It makes me want to cry for all those children out there in a similar situation! You read the books and hear the news but I had the shock of my life this morning. Walking to my local shop for the paper and milk, to be horrified by a young mother “ragging” her 2? year old son about on a bike! Telling him in a rather hateful way, ” You have had this bike for a year now, you still can’t ride the f***** thing”. I wanted to take the child there and then. BUT you can’t. Id be looked on as a wierdo, if I rang social services i’d be doing wrong. Because lets face it, statistically children put into care are usually out of the frying pan straight into the fire. There are alot of good mothers out there that are young, live in an area thats classified as deprived, but seeing what I saw this morning, you can see why people stereotype, I live here, im 30, two children, have my own business, partner is a teacher. But the way innner suburbs are looked upon , well I leave you to make your own mind up. The McCanns are middle class, where is their part to play in negleting their beautiful 3 children?
March 18th, 2008 at 9:19 am
“I wonder if a certain small person gets a choice if she wants to be returned or will all the decisions be made for her. “ - Just_me
A certain small person got no choice. A certain small person had all the decisions made for her. A certain small person didn’t want to be left alone, in the dark, night after night. A certain small person didn’t want to take that yukky stuff her muumy gave her to make her sleep. A certain small person, when she woke in the dark, wanted her Daddy, and called for him, hour after hour. But Daddy didn’t come. Mummy and Daddy were busy.
A certain small person didn’t want to be carried off into the night by a smelly, nasty man. A certain small person didn’t want to be abused. A certain small person really, really, wants to return to her mummy and her little brother and sister.
A certain small person just wants a decent Christian burial, and to go to Heaven.
Take your choice.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:17 am
27 Cheshire Set
No, not saying children should be taken away from poor families. There are a lot of them around and that is why help is afforded to these people. Kids don’t need money to be happy that is for sure. I do agree though, that not all poor families abuse their kids. Isn’t is a known fact that that is not always so. Yes, the mother is a bit dim and probably gets used a lot by people. But in this family’s situation they do need help it seems.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:17 am
37…Cheshire Set
I agree.
I think it is much too early to attribute the “Fostering” as being suspicious
regarding Karen’s care of SM.
The investigative procedure is still ongoing….one which needs to be done
so carefully in so many ways that it will probably be quite prolonged.
Only at the end of this procedure will we become aware of the actual situation
re return to family is indicated or not.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:11 am
26
Matt
Yes
“Karen agrees with Shannon”s arrangements” say the grand parents
What does Karen say????
March 18th, 2008 at 9:09 am
36
Perhaps they’re being paid by the monosyllable(sp)
March 18th, 2008 at 9:09 am
31 & 13 Lynn & PeterMac
Wheres the evidence? The Mathews family might be a train wreck but there is not a shred of evidence pointing to them being anything but a bit dim….this is not criminal offence!
You seriously cannot be saying that the child should be taken from its mother and siblings because they are not what we expect from a faimily??
There are PLENTY of people who come from poor families and dont abuse/neglect their children.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:05 am
33…just_me
I would be rather unwilling to take anything those G/parents said as being
Gospel Truth.
If they had concerns previously whay didn’t they take them up with the
proper Authorities ?
Their constant cribbing to the Press is suspiciously opportunistic.
March 18th, 2008 at 9:01 am
must go, got a very sick puffer fish to deal with…bbl
March 18th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Matt - ahhh ok