Madeleine McCann: Irvine Welsh, French T-Shirts And A Halo
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
SUNDAY HERALD: “I don’t believe we get rewarded or punished, but I believe we have a responsibility to try to get the best out of life and make it comfortable for other people”
IRVINE WELSH arrives at the Irish Film Institute in Dublin carrying a holdall in two-tone, light beige leather; it gives the impression that he has just walked in from a picnic. Natural atrium light swamps his head and in a flash he’s almost on top of me, swapping his bag from one set of fingers to another and shaking my hand. His face contorts: he is an hour and a bit late and he’s sorry.
A halo?
Welsh’s jacket is reversible yellow. His T-shirt, in French, says “What would you do if this was the end of the world?” Well? “I don’t know,” he says, apparently uninspired by the question he is advertising.
Well, he could plug his new book: Crime:
“It’s the most difficult thing to write about,” says Welsh. “Child sex abuse tests the limits of our liberalism to the full. You have the whole idea of whether rehabilitation is possible or even desirable.” He was about halfway through the first draft when the Madeleine McCann story broke and forced him to stop writing for two months. “I couldn’t look at the novel or at the newspapers,” he says. “I thought I was never going to finish the book.”
Fact and fiction - can you spot the difference?
Posted: 23rd, June 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (318) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- pete on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:18 pm
133…Lawener
They may not have requested such.
It may have been imposed.
We only have Clarence’s word that it was at the parents instigation.
And he has been known to tell fibs.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Matt 126…… looking at Philomena’s statement, I would say that she knew Madeleine had been made a Ward of Court and also knew the twins had not, hence her befuddled statement!
She always appears to me as if she adores her brother (quite rightly) and would do anything to stick up for him and then, once a reporter is there to prompt (?) her, then her tongue runs away with her!
I would guess she has been told to cool it with the interviews.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
132…Lawener
They wouldn’t have to be worrying about SS, Police, Family Courts, Ward of Court
Orders, etc, if the parental neglect had not occurred in the first place.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
129
Matt
I was merely saying the Court could be favorable to the grand parents/closest family(but may be not?who knows?) but,yes,in any case,it is the Court”s decision without any doubt
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
And also having the children made wards of court is eminently sensible as so much contradictory opinion was flying around about them, and still is. To have children wards of the English Court would protect their best interests.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Aunty Phil made those remarks when the ravening wolves (The Anti McCanns) were saying the children should be taken into care. Aunty Phil most probably meant “over the dead bodies of all the McCann and Healey relatives who would be happy to look after the children”.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
128
coolandcalm
I will respectfully ask you to ease off my back
You will notice that I am not around very much for this very reason :you are picking at me all the time and my patience is starting to wear off
Thank you
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Who on earth can believe they are interested in the latest Madeleine”s sightings”?
Why dont they stop deceiving themselves?
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
127…jo
That is true…but my point was that the Court would make the ultimate decisions.
If they viewed the extended family favorably…they may grant that one, or more
members of the extended family look after the children. If they had reservations
then the Court could reccommend other arrangements for the children’s welfare.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
I think I have already explained ‘ward of court’ and ‘visit from social services’ from my ex-social worker perspective but I notice that, as it doesn’t fit with what is wanted to be heard, then its ignored.
Weird that!
But trust me 
my version is correct, Jo is completely wrong and making it up as she goes along (once again).
BF (I think it was you.. I’ve been out and have flicked back) a parent can apply to have their child made a ward of court for any number of reasons and it need have nothing to do with Social Services. A ward of court is not necessarily a ‘ward’ in the physical sense….. it a legal protection not necessarily a physical protection.
Yes… the McCanns did apply themselves under legal advisement. Having asked around about it, I would definitely have done the same in their shoes.
When Social Services went to visit after the McCanns returned it would have been part of their remit to check that, if there is a possibility of parents being sent to prison, there is another approprite adult to care for the twins. It is not a judgement on care… merely looking forward just in case arrangements had to be made.
The McCanns would have known this. Nothing unusual or sinister. There will be a named family member on Social services files.
The other stuff about the ‘at risk’ register and ’supervision orders’ isn’t correct.
Social Services are collapsing under the weight of too many cases, the mcCanns are way down their list of priorities.
Anyone here from leicester? Very busy SS department; they are swamped and under-staffed and using many agency workers…….
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
126
Matt
Yes.The Court would decide but generally,the peripheral very close family is also involved unless the members have ated against the law which really is not the case.There have been some “hiccups” and inconsistencies but the extended family has kept well out of the way…may be to be to present a court a good image (of stability and security) needed if granted the twins custody
2 spin
“Madeleine reproaches her parents for not coming when she was crying”.
“K”s mother goes bonkers and wanted to shake each of them”
Both widely promoted in the media
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Again returning to Philomena’s outburst….
“”””The family are more than willing to look after the children and they will not become wards of the state here or anywhere else.””””
If the State decided that there were justifiable reasons for making the
children “Wards of State”, as Philomena words it, the family would have
not have the right to make any decisions about who would “look after the
children”…the Court would decide.
The Court may decide that the “extended family” could look after them..but
that would be the State’s decision…..not the family’s.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
107
Carmen
Correcto . The social services went to THEMthey could not refuse the s.services to come?could they?they were probably “invited” to “invite” them.
The spin was meant to show “what good parents” they are.
Time will tell about the twins but I guess measures have been already implanted for them “just in case”.There has been generally a great silcence from the mccanns family,may be because of a custodial agreement with the social services and k&g .
No need to wonder why all this comes up just a mere 2 weeks before the files are supposidly released….it has been well kept out of the media and all.
All this makes them appear to be in control,as you say,because the situation is out of control,out of their hands and ,in fact, always has been….hence the spins and manipulation of facts and medias ….hence the massive “interest”…etc…..They never stopped defending themselves….from facts
Time is closing up but I believe they would still have time to amend if they would just finally “cooperate”or speak up,stop being stubborn
Their denial has been their second big mistake after nº1, the crime of abandonment
The third,is demanding the Leicester police…. or making us believe they are and will win because it is in “M”s interest”.Very,very twisted and ever so sad
At the end of this seemingly never ending road,everything still leads us to one and unique fact: a little child has disappeared and will never be found
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
115 chenier Says:
and importantly the offspring survived.
‘and I were carted off to Barts. ‘ But not in bits fortunately
I was interested in your comment about being blown up before but not being Noseycow I did not ask but wondered about one MP who died I think in the Brighton bombing leaving a pregnant wife. Not many pregnant women have been blown up in the UK ? Glad to hear that you are still getting better all these years later! It sound like a long haul, I am sorry to hear.
Radio 4 news 3pm have just announced the McCourt action against the Leicestershire police so I expect there will be something later on the BBC about it.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah (that was a very loud screech) Carmen!!! (Trust you to spot that - I thought I could let that one quietly slip into oblivion) - only after I pushed submit did I realise how I’d said it
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
118…Carmen
Sadly….that too is a possibility.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
120
Julie Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:33 pm e
I hate gas myself, won’t go anywhere near the stuff! And that includes men who can’t contain themselves
**************************
You’ll be celibate then Julie?
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
You’re one lucky lady Chenier, although I think I’ll stick to being a “nobody” than gathering a couple of seconds of fame being blown up by a gas cylinder - although I’m sure you would have chosen otherwise could you foresee the future
I hate gas myself, won’t go anywhere near the stuff! And that includes men who can’t contain themselves
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
rename yourself Sourcey cheryl
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
114
Matt. Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm e
The suggestion that it could not have involved Madeleine is rather odd as
it seems there is, presently, no dispute that Madeleine is a Ward of Court.
***********************
Unless the suggestor knows perfectly well that there is no Madeleine?
God forbid that the High Court have been misled by a vexatious petitioner.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
111
Cheryl Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
You people on here are masters at twisting words or putting your own versions on what someone says to make it look sinister …..
___________________
Oi don’t generalise - do you know for a fact that we are all masters at twisting words? LINK PLEASE!
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
That was a sweeping statement ‘ you people on here!’
I thought I was being polite and diplomatic
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
98
Julie Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I have to ask …. you were blown up????
———————–
I was indeed; it constituted my obligatory 15 seconds of fame when the London tv news reported it.
I had been receiving oxygen therapy at home, and the mechanic arrived to deliver some cylinders, with the happy cry of ‘these are more expensive than the others, but they are safer’.
I should have started running then…
15 minutes later the ambulance, police and fire service arrived, and the mechanic and I were carted off to Barts.
And a journo covering the Brighton bombing trial at the Old Bailey, who had emerged in search of refreshment, thought he had a genuine scoop when he saw a very obviously blown up, and very obviously pregnant, woman being wheeled in to the A&E.
The hospital didn’t actually ask for my permission in making the statement about how it happened, though obviously in those circumstances I would not have withheld it; I don’t believe that whipping up hysteria about terrorists benefits anyone but terrorists.
The offspring survived, I survived, and the mechanic survived, but I still don’t like gas cylinders…
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
111…Cheryl
“”"You know damn well that I was speaking solely that her comments were
about the twins!”"”
If she was referring to the twins I think she would have made that clear.
She said “children”….and as far as I am aware, Madeleine is/was one of
their children.
The suggestion that it could not have involved Madeleine is rather odd as
it seems there is, presently, no dispute that Madeleine is a Ward of Court.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
’s knowledge?
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
110
Cheryl Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:15 pm e
105
brandon flours Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Cheryl
And another thing if your theory is correct, is that not how the leak about madeleines ‘ Why did you leave us cry mummy’ story come out?
Are they choosing these releases to make the casual reader think they are being victimised ?
____________
The police themselves acknowledge they have the letters and investigating them. Police don’t waste their time on just a “I wish you were dead” type of letter!
By the way, was it decided who leaked that story about crying for her mummy? I missed that and have wondered if it was ever settled who leaked it to the press - not speculated but settled?
***********************
…………………………….meanwhile, from the quilting corner, Cheryl happily speculates as to whether a foreign police force ‘wastes it’s time on just a ‘wish you were dead’ type of letter. No, I am wrong, she doesn’t speculate, she positively knows that they don’t!
Is there no end to this woman
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
brandon flours Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Cheryl
Oh i see whne philomena said this
“”””The family are more than willing to look after the children and they will not become wards of the state here or anywhere else.””””
She meant ‘unlike Madeleine’
I see, she knew all along
_________________
You people on here are masters at twisting words or putting your own versions on what someone says to make it look sinister. You know damn well that I was speaking solely that her comments were about the twins!
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
105
brandon flours Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Cheryl
And another thing if your theory is correct, is that not how the leak about madeleines ‘ Why did you leave us cry mummy’ story come out?
Are they choosing these releases to make the casual reader think they are being victimised ?
____________
The police themselves acknowledge they have the letters and investigating them. Police don’t waste their time on just a “I wish you were dead” type of letter!
By the way, was it decided who leaked that story about crying for her mummy? I missed that and have wondered if it was ever settled who leaked it to the press - not speculated but settled?
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Cheryl
Oh i see whne philomena said this
“”””The family are more than willing to look after the children and they will not become wards of the state here or anywhere else.””””
She meant ‘unlike Madeleine’
I see, she knew all along
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
102
brandon flours Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Cheryl
Also how do you think Aunty Philomena feels as in Matts post….38
Matt. Says:
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:11 am
It seems that Dr G P has kept big sis Philomena in the dark about something…
Philomena McCann…11/9/2007…
“”””The family are more than willing to look after the children and they will not become wards of the state here or anywhere else.””””
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-480931/Madeleine-Now-British-police-ask-twins-risk.html
That was 4 months after tey made her a ward of court.
____________
That statement was made about the twins is my thought. At that point in time, Maddie was already missing! Crap was flying everywhere at that time about the twins and what would happen with them!