Madeleine McCann: Bobby Hands, Cannes And A Hunger For Publicity
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
As Leslie Felperin, the excellent reviewer for Variety magazine remarked to me: the newspaper-reading public can’t be persuaded to react in the same way: they care about Madeleine McCann in a serious mood, or in a non-serious mood, they care about Sir Alan Sugar or Simon Cowell. The idea of actually caring about a violent arthouse film investigating the life of Bobby Sands is a very tall order indeed.
Fact and fiction - the story of Madeleine McCann
Posted: 27th, May 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann Comments (562) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
May 27th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
75
Garth Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
No adjacent doesnt necessarily mean next to. It can also mean ‘lying near to’ and in this case that is exactly what im saying. On the opposite side of the bleedin road (the side road that is ….
_________________
So you’re actually trying to say that the abductor was “lying near to” the apartment on the opposite side of the road (why was it bleedin?)? Nope, that won’t work either, surely someone would have noticed an abductor lying in the road
May 27th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
69 Matt
Yes, I know, but in the absence of any other news and the fact it doesn”t look like
the tapas 9 are going to Portugal………who knows?
BK was responsible for recommending M3 and JS on the Board of NSU drew up the
contract. Apparently the £50,000 does not go straight to M3 and of course JS”s
Legal fees and a “Management “charge , is taken out. The “Incidental” expenses of
£8,000 payable to M3 are presumed to be paid by BK.
Also, BK knows Mr.Geraghty, the Man who rented his villa to the McCanns and
picked up the Scenic at the Airport and garaged it until it could be independently
forensically tested. They are both Members of some Organisation, I did see the article,but can”t remember where.
May 27th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
45 Julie
We concluded last night that you’d made a slight “error” with the use of the word “opposite”, but then you came out with the word “adjacent” - which in my books means “next to” - Yes?
poor garth
never studied geometry
http://www.ict-teacher.com/mathstutor/Trigonometry(i).html
May 27th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
64 annie1
May 27th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Hello again
- is Kate expecting again? It would be a bloody good excuse to delay tactics for a while and also give the good Dr.Gerry an excuse to get out of what could very well be a hostile working enviroment - he could take paternity leave !!
M and a
oh please don’t even think it….
___________________________________
would he have to prove paternity to get his paternity leave?
what fun
May 27th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Telephone calls and emails are not evidences but strong indications.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
72
sam Says:
i wrote:
‘at the minute ther’es just a picture of the fron t page of the 24 horas paper with some headlines that seem to read to me that the pj is prohibited to use the messages of the maccnas mobile phone’
to reads, not to use. i don’t know what it means, whether they’ve not been given permission to track their phones/conversations perhaps.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
45
Julie Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
————
We concluded last night that you’d made a slight “error” with the use of the word “opposite”, but then you came out with the word “adjacent” - which in my books means “next to” - Yes?
————–
Firkin hell, how many more bleedin times have i got to explain?
No adjacent doesnt necessarily mean next to. It can also mean ‘lying near to’ and in this case that is exactly what im saying. On the opposite side of the bleedin road (the side road that is
) and thats what i initially meant……..the apartment opposite 5b on the other side of the road or opposite if you like or adjacent or……… whatever.
Fuck it……… im gonna take the cat for a walk!
May 27th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
64 Annie1,
I tried to find the photo on BBC (flowers been carried) and I saw a flower and an article about Alzheimer.
How can I find the photo?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Scarlett I refer to this, it appears to have upset several os the hell hounds.
“Why did the Prosecutor make this statement back in September, @Wednesday September 19: The Evora district attorney general, Luis Bilro Verao, rules there is not enough evidence to justify further questioning of the McCanns about the disappearance of their daughter.@
They have still not been questioned, or been the subject of any official sanctions, now why would that be.”
“
May 27th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
65
val Says:
‘Apparently, 24 Horas is reporting that the McCanns will be charged with neglect, but
the mobile phone evidence will not be admissable. Can someone get on to the Joana
Morais blog, see if there is any comfirmation there?’
at the minute ther’es just a picture of the fron t page of the 24 horas paper with some headlines that seem to read to me that the pj is prohibited to use the messages of the maccnas mobile phones, jonana quotes underneath
“Relation court says that Maddie’s parents’ private life must be protected” and a translation to follow.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
66…Julie
It could, just as easily, mean that he/she has seen the good Mr Rebelo’s
newly sharpened Talons of Justice….and the Arguido’s have seen them too.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Today’s news (Diário de Notícias)
I’m saying it again:
Murat has not been asked to take part on the reconstruction.
See also Joana’s site.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
65…val
hmmm…24 Horas….not the most reliable of newspapers.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
2 days to go
or not.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
60
Scarlett Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Just a guess but I think Rasputin is referring us to this article:
———————————————-
Not again; he tried it on us a couple of days back, and buggered off once we pointed out that the Mail had no source for its claims.
Still, gives me a chance to repeat Lord Drummond Young on the reliability of such things:
‘If that is so, the quotation must be fictitious, made up by the author of the Daily Mail article and presumably repeated uncritically by the author of the article in Scotland on Sunday.’
The fictitious quotation was:
‘”I could not be more convinced that what these nuns did was ritual abuse, sadism and not far away from satanic”.
That sort of fiction sells a lot of newpapers…
May 27th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
60
Scarlett Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Just a guess but I think Rasputin is referring us to this article:
_____________
Can’t be Scarlett - that article is dated 05 Dec 2007, as well as Rasputin’s post says “Ihave noted an excellent point elsewhere, which seems to have the inhabitants of arguidohell, floundering somewhat.” This to me means that someone, somewhere has made a point? that has left the “inhabitants of arguidohell” in a bit of worry?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
58 Matt
Good morning to you et al……if your”e leaving now, I”ll tell you later.
Apparently, 24 Horas is reporting that the McCanns will be charged with neglect, but
the mobile phone evidence will not be admissable. Can someone get on to the Joana
Morais blog, see if there is any comfirmation there?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Hello again
- is Kate expecting again? It would be a bloody good excuse to delay tactics for a while and also give the good Dr.Gerry an excuse to get out of what could very well be a hostile working enviroment - he could take paternity leave !!
M and a
oh please don’t even think it….
May 27th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
60 - Scarlett
Why would you guess that particular article ?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
60…Scarlett
If it is the matter referred to….then it’s nothing new…he/she has been
posting that link…or similiar…since his/her reincarnation.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
on the bobby sands tack
there was a joke at the time about taking a dive at fort bovisand
http://www.ukdiving.co.uk/places/coastal/articles/fort_bovisand.htm
i’ll get me coat
May 27th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Just a guess but I think Rasputin is referring us to this article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-499923/Madeleine-Portuguese-polices-fury-British-DNA-experts-attack-unprofessional-amateurish-work.html
and the facts that K&G have not been questioned since September nor have they been arrested or charged with anything.
Any news on the reconstruction and the Blue Jeep in Vila Real de Santo Antonio?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
48 Julie
May 27th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
44 Maria
May 27th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
As yet, I have seen no compelling evidence for their guilt, other than, of course, leaving their children vulnerable. That is beyond dispute; they have admitted it from day one.
—————————————–
That’s a load of hogwash! “They have admitted leaving their children vulnerable from DAY ONE!?” - only thing I’ve heard them admit is that they were naive AT THE WORST - and that certainly took quite a while for them to compose those words!
____________________________
quite
they have been very careful never to say “neglect”, “vulnerable”, “responsible” or any words that highlight the fact that it was entirely their own selfish thoughtlessness that caused the problem
all they have said is they wished there were there at the moment “when it happened”
whatever “it” was, of course
this all seems to be connected to their obvious fear of spending time in jail for child abuse
neglect is a form of child abuse, of course
http://tinyurl.com/3n5r9l
such fun
May 27th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
57…Julie
Don’t fret….he/she likes to appear mysterious….sort of like grannydaft
used to do.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
54
Rasputin Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Ihave noted an excellent point elsewhere, which seems to have the inhabitants of arguidohell, floundering somewhat.
————————————
Raspy, please put me out of my misery - what on earth are you talking about?
May 27th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
50
Totje Says:
May 27th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
One more remark:
NON of us knows! It’s all speculation, whether it’s a [hate the labelling] pro/anti/fence post. Maria’s stand has allways been very clear. Though she seems to be able to look at things from both ’sides’. Which could be confusing for people who only look at things from one side.
Back to work, much more fun! Awhoooooooooooo
—————————————————————-
No, Maria’s stand has not always been very clear. If you actually read her post 1051 yesterday, you will see that at one point she claimed that I was:
’searching for reasons to excuse the act of killing Madeleine, at least if it was Kate who carried it out.’
No rational person, having read my very lengthy posts on this case, over many months, could possibly draw that conclusion.
Not least because it’s bonkers…
May 27th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
M&A
Don’t you?
Ah.
I did.
Maybe it isn’t then.
Damn. Back to the drawing board.
Ideas?
Go on give us a clue.
:pleading:
dawn
May 27th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Ihave noted an excellent point elsewhere, which seems to have the inhabitants of arguidohell, floundering somewhat.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
49…Matt.
I agree….The Authorities can be very nit-picky in such instances.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Dear M&A
Just caught your apology on the other thread regarding ” Pikey”, the other night.
It wasn’t a major problem … I was a bit taken aback to be receiving his abuse though,
I always thought I got on ok with Ian when he was allowed on here.
Obviously not.
And he should stay on the other site that cannot be mentioned.
We don’t need his sort here!
Are we any nearer finding Madeleine.
And is Kate expecting again?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
M and A
We don’t think Pikey is Ian.