Find Madeleine McCann On Facebook
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
SAY the McCanns: “We strongly support and encourage this new initiative to use Facebook to increase awareness of missing children.”
Wherever you are, whatever you are doing, you will know that children go missing.
Although not if you’re watching the TV news of reading the newspapers because Madeleine McCann is no longer in the mass media.
But the campaign has not been in vain. She is on a press release.
And the better news is that no children have gone missing in the past few weeks. We look through the mainstream press every day. It’s a fact. But what of life on the internet?
The statement goes on: “Using the power of social media in this way will undoubtedly capture the attention - and hopefully the help - of a younger population who are a hugely valuable and resourceful group.
“We would urge the millions of Facebook users around the world to keep looking and to do what they can to help bring these children home.”
Missing People has set up a widget for Facebook users to download, which will mean information on current appeals will be displayed on their homepage.
Says missing People Chief Executive Paul Tuohy: “If every Facebook user downloaded our BT-powered application, millions of people internationally could see an appeal that could help us to reunite a family.”
Because BT cares…
Madeleine McCann: Fighting the PR war
Posted: 25th, May 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann, Online-PR Comments (1,240) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
May 26th, 2008 at 11:15 am
799 Garth Says:
97 AgendaWide Says:
769 Salomon ES
…..If it doesn’t go forward imo the strength of the PJ case will become obvious if either charges follow or publication of all the evidence gathered.
————–
The latter certainly wont happen but i would agree that if it does go forward then the next move by the PJ will be very interesting.
———————–
The lifting of secrecy normally accompanies the end of an investigation and it would be decision of the Portuguese whether to publish all the evidence gathered.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:13 am
798
Maria Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 11:08 am
————
Absolutely right!
May 26th, 2008 at 11:13 am
someone call shitheads
May 26th, 2008 at 11:11 am
97
AgendaWide Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 11:02 am
769 Salomon ES
…..If it doesn’t go forward imo the strength of the PJ case will become obvious if either charges follow or publication of all the evidence gathered.
————–
The latter certainly wont happen but i would agree that if it does go forward then the next move by the PJ will be very interesting.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Salomon
I wonder if you can be right?
Haven’t the police said that the recon is not really necessary but that, if it does take place, the Mcs need to be there?
I can hardly believe it’s necessary only for them to decide whom to charge! They have the timeline. They could simply act it out themselves, couldn’t they? In any case, they won’t have other essential people, such as waiters, nannies etc, to confirm anything said by the witnesses/arguidos. What, for example, of the question of whether or not Murat was there?
However, if they do really need the recon, the implication (IMO, I could be wrong) seems to be that they are looking at the evening of 3rd May as crucial. Does this, I wonder, demolish the M-was-dead-on-2nd-May-and-another-child-substituted-at-the-kids-club theory?
Of course, they might hope that a recon will prove that M wasn’t there at all but it seems rather an extravagant way of going about it. I wonder at what time of the day or evening the recon is dues to start? Maybe at breakfast of the 3rd May? Maybe on 2nd May? Who would pay the tapas 9’s hotel bills for the night? And will it end at 10.00pm? When do they suspect the body was disposed of, and by whom?
I cannot believe your idea, Salomon, that the recon is designed solely to decide who exactly should be charged but not to help the prosecution build up a strong case. The two things are too similar, IMO. If it IS only literally, as you suggest, to decide WHICH of the players should be charged, I cannot believe that the PJ will not invoke every possible way of forcing them all back, even if that means making them arguidos.
Or are you implying that the PJ are only undecided as to which of the three current arguidos should be charged?’
Surely it can’t be true that the PJ are saying,
“Well, we know one of ‘em did it but we can’t decide which one until we do a recon. They won’t all come? Oh well, we’ll just have to drop the idea then. Now then, who’s for tennis?”
Really, Salomon!!!!
May 26th, 2008 at 11:02 am
769 Salomon ES
I agree with Matt that it is unlikely that the proposed reconstruction is set up to provide the main evidence for a prosecution case. If there is strong evidence that Madeleine has died then there would be a range of possible charges, including charges associated with concealment of her body and fraud, as well as charges linked to cause of her death.
I am unclear about how Portuguese law operates when there is uncertainty about several people who may be responsible for several crimes, if indeed that is the case. Chenier’s post about UK law are interesting in the UK context. Diario de Noticias reports today that Reconstruction in Praia da Luz scheduled for Thursday but it is uncertain if it will take place due to communication (lack of?) from some of the Tapas 7. If it doesn’t go forward imo the strength of the PJ case will become obvious if either charges follow or publication of all the evidence gathered.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:01 am
788
Ferdinand Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
769 Salomon ES Says:
” Under these conditions, I’m tempted to think that without a reconstruction there will be no meaningful charges against anyone. Perhaps charges for abandonment or obstructing justice… but I doubt it that the prosecution will be able to substantiate what the investigation believes happened to MAdeleine. ”
If you assume that meaningful charges could be brought only against the Tapas9, thus nobody else - and only if a reconstruction takes place - then one could hardly blame the Tapas9 to refuse to take part in a reconstruction. Nobody can be obliged to take part in an operation that is designed solely to incriminate herself.
————————————————
But it is not designed solely to incriminate someone. It is designed to test certain claims which have been made relating to the disappearance of a three year old child; something which any decent human being would be feel morally obliged to assist in.
Of course, it may be that the Tapas 9 are not decent human beings…
May 26th, 2008 at 10:55 am
793…Garth
You seem to have adopted a new “posting footprint”….Garth Mk2…or
Garth Mk3 ??…
May 26th, 2008 at 10:53 am
792…Garth
Your desperation is sad….yet amusing.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:52 am
………. and thats yours and not mine……….. just incase you were confused!
May 26th, 2008 at 10:51 am
791
Matt. Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:50 am
———-
Okay, I’ll do it for you………… slow hand clap for the riposte!
May 26th, 2008 at 10:50 am
790…Garth
As Ferdy, has said in post 774…..
“”Don’t ever expect to get any factual inside information form Ferdinand.
In fact Ferdinand is reluctant to post anything that could in the broadest
sense interfer with the investigation. He double-checkes all of his posts to
ensure that it’s nothing more than idle talk, based on what is known in the
“public domain”.”"
I remain firmly seated.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:46 am
#
788
Ferdinand Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
769 Salomon ES Says:
” Under these conditions, I’m tempted to think that without a reconstruction there will be no meaningful charges against anyone. Perhaps charges for abandonment or obstructing justice… but I doubt it that the prosecution will be able to substantiate what the investigation believes happened to MAdeleine. ”
If you assume that meaningful charges could be brought only against the Tapas9, thus nobody else - and only if a reconstruction takes place - then one could hardly blame the Tapas9 to refuse to take part in a reconstruction. Nobody can be obliged to take part in an operation that is designed solely to incriminate herself.
————–
Common sense would tell you that.
Matt
Stand up! ………… and applaud.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:44 am
787…Garth
Not from where I’m sitting.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
769 Salomon ES Says:
” Under these conditions, I’m tempted to think that without a reconstruction there will be no meaningful charges against anyone. Perhaps charges for abandonment or obstructing justice… but I doubt it that the prosecution will be able to substantiate what the investigation believes happened to MAdeleine. ”
If you assume that meaningful charges could be brought only against the Tapas9, thus nobody else - and only if a reconstruction takes place - then one could hardly blame the Tapas9 to refuse to take part in a reconstruction. Nobody can be obliged to take part in an operation that is designed solely to incriminate herself.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
#
785
Matt. Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am
784…Garth
The eternal mantra of the dumbchucks.
I tend to respect intellect much more.
————
Tut tut
Like i said ………… we have a problem here Matt!
M and A
Just a though Garth , re intellect v common sense, you back common sense? but the good doctors seem very lacking in common sense but could be said to be high in intellect…..as I said just a thought….
May 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am
#
782
Garth Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:35 am
#
776
coolandcalm Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Duncan… me to know and the CSA to tell you!!
………………
Rasputin… we may be on the same wavelength. Was he banned from Anorak?
————–
He was indeedy.
————–
Damn, im not Rasputin…………. honest!
May 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am
784…Garth
The eternal mantra of the dumbchucks.
I tend to respect intellect much more.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:38 am
#
783
Matt. Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:36 am
779…Garth
No doubt one of our Portuguese poster’s will be able to tell us the
Educational Standards required by entrant’s to the Investigative
Branch of the Portuguese Police.
I rather think that that requirement is rather high….University Degrees
etc.
—————-
Matt
When are you going to understand that common sense overides intelligence ?
This is where we have the problem……….
May 26th, 2008 at 10:36 am
779…Garth
No doubt one of our Portuguese poster’s will be able to tell us the
Educational Standards required by entrant’s to the Investigative
Branch of the Portuguese Police.
I rather think that that requirement is rather high….University Degrees
etc.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:35 am
#
776
coolandcalm Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Duncan… me to know and the CSA to tell you!!
………………
Rasputin… we may be on the same wavelength. Was he banned from Anorak?
————–
He was indeedy.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:32 am
769
Salomon ES Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:07 am
————
An interesting viewpoint.
“Anyone with some basic understanding of the PJ and the judicial system in Portugal will know very well that these are not games that the authorities play. If they have asked for this reconstruction, it’s because it is necessary - and maybe essential to progress with the case”.
I can see some flaws in that statement however…..
May 26th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Cool & Calm
Admin & Mods have very powerful search tools available to us, however the front of house search function is quite limited.
If you want to search for previous comments by a particular poster, it is as well to enter their ‘username + anorak’ in google search box.
For example, if you were looking for previous posts by me then type -
duncanr+anorak in a google search box
If the person you are searching for though contributes to the Opinions side of Anorak, what Google will return is the thread where they have posted one or more comments. It does not take you directly to their comment. You then have to scroll through that thread to find the comments from the particular poster you are interested in
May 26th, 2008 at 10:29 am
#
771
Matt. Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:13 am
769…Salomon ES
…..But I doubt if the PJ are into putting all their eggs into one basket.
————–
Well it would make sense for them………….. they are scrambled!
May 26th, 2008 at 10:27 am
769
Salomon ES Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:07 am
————————————————-
The question of attributing responsibility amongst a limited number of people has been tackled here by introducing the legislation in the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 which brought into existence the new offence of causing or allowing the death of a child or vulnerable adult; the mother and stepfather of the little 7 year old child said to have died of starvation have been charged with this offence.
There have been a number of successful prosecutions, including those relating to vulnerable adults; Shazad Khan (25) of Oakwood, Leeds was found guilty of his wife’s murder in January last year. Now Khan’s mother, Phullan Bibi (52), two of his sisters, Uzma Khan (23), and Nazia Naureen (28) and Nazia’s husband Majid Hussain (28) have all been found guilty of Causing or Allowing the Death of a Vulnerable Adult contrary to section 5 (1) and (7) of the Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/west_yorkshire/news_events/press_releases/family_members_convicted_of_allowing_sabia_s_death/
Perhaps Portugual might consider bring in a similar provision?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:23 am
I don’t know for certain, but I think he may have been, some of his comments were really quite insulting on the other board.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Duncan… me to know and the CSA to tell you!!
………………
Rasputin… we may be on the same wavelength. Was he banned from Anorak?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:18 am
774…Ferdinand
I have already sussed that.
I do know the difference between a silk purse and a sow’s ear.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:16 am
767 Matt. Says:
” Ah…a mere speculator….sigh…for a very short moment I though you
”
were quoting factual inside information.
Don’t ever expect to get any factual inside information form Ferdinand. In fact Ferdinand is reluctant to post anything that could in the broadest sense interfer with the investigation. He double-checkes all of his posts to ensure that it’s nothing more than idle talk, based on what is known in the “public domain”.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:15 am
No bail conditions have been imposed or charges brought but the couple can be called back to the Algarve at any point to be re-interviewed. So why haven’t they been called back, another myth.
http://tinyurl.com/49kxtq