Madeleine McCann: Child Alert, Daily Mail Knows And Fay Weldon
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY MIRROR: “McCanns win child alert fight MADELEINE”
Kate and Gerry McCann yesterday won their fight for an EU-wide missing child alert system, in tribute to their daughter Madeleine. A declaration supporting the couple’s plea attracted backing from at least 398 MEPs - more than half the 785 European Parliament members.
Or as the Mail said earlier in the week: DAILY MAIL: “Brussels throws out McCann’s appeal for European missing child alert system”
THE INDEPENDENT: “Cultural Life: Fay Weldon, Author”
Film
I went to see Ben Affleck’s Gone Baby Gone for Radio 3’s Saturday Review. “Emotionally disturbing” it claimed to be, with its echoes of the Madeleine McCann case, and so it was, and a welcome change from the dull, written-to-formula films that pour from major studios. If profit rather than enthusiasm is the bottom line, all you get is variations on what made a profit last year.
On it goes…
Posted: 11th, July 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (891) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- yampster on Climate Gate: Politicians Investigate CRU’s Emails And The BBC Sat On The Story
- lone pigeon on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- Anorak on X Factor: Hairy Jordans Jedward To Star On I’m A Celebrity And Coronation Street
- Paul Wainwright on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
July 12th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
703
Ferdinand Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
699 Maria Says:
” I do not know for sure (don’t want chenier accusing me of dishonesty again!) but I strongly suspect that the outcome of the hearing, had the original application gone ahead as planned, was not necessarily 100% a foregone conclusion. ”
It’s obviously a conflict of interests between two authorities. The family court is interested in the ward’s whereabouts and well-being. The police has also to consider the relationship to foreign police forces. Both sides have reasonable arguments. How could the outcome be 100% predicted?
—————————————————————-
Exactly!
July 12th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
To elaborate:
” The mystery lies with one or two of the ten or twelve elements that used to enter that apartment.”
Who used to enter the appartment? Not necessarily all of the Tapas9 (why should they, Mrs. Webster for example?). But certainly some of the staff, cleaners etc.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
Gabdolf. The learned lady? Have you seen the decisions judges make these days? What are they learned of? The freaking dark ages? this is the 21st century for gawds sake!!! Justice Hogg, by all accounts, made a serious cock up and had to backtrack like no tomorrow and then cover her sorry ass by sticking up for the Mccanns as if to act like she was a saint, just how you see her. You are an old stick in the mud. I think it’s time you grew up you old fart.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
702
Cheryl Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
698
chenier Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Chenier, on a serious note (query from me) wasn’t it decided before going into court exactly what would be given or not be given to the McCanns through their lawyers? Thus, Justice Hogg was really ‘rubber stamping’ the agreement they reached?
—————————–
The Court proceedings were certainly pre-planned, but then Court proceedings are; that’s why there are skeleton arguments etc.
It is unprecedented for a judgement in the Family Court concerning a named minor to be made in public.
That was certainly pre-planned; as I keep on pointing out the actions on and after 2 April 2008 were contrary to the public interest, and the public interest has to be defended in public.
Everybody knew what they were going to say before they came into Court, but there was no rubber stamping.
Justice Hogg had no choice about sitting there listening to Counsel noting that the actions on and after 2 April 2008 had compromised the criminal investigation into the disappearance of a small child, just as she had no choice about sitting there listening to Counsel pointing out that those actions were unlawful and contrary to the public interest.
At least Baroness Scotland didn’t turn up herself; the Attorney General’s own field is, of course, family and child law…
July 12th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
701 HOTWATER Says:
” Where were the tenth, eleventh and twelfth elements when the T9 were at the Tapas table?
A rhetorical question by the way, I don’t know the answer myself yet, any ideas? ”
Mark Warner staff methinks.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
No Carmen , you along with Chenny have no idea as is the same for all of us, what information the Learned Lady as a high court judge has access to, the incriminating forensics allegedly was conveyed to the PJ via the Leics plod, perhaps they don’t know or were not trusted with those results, maybe they steamed the envelope opened.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
649 Maria
“Some have suggested that M had an accident while the Mcs were absent from the apartment, and that they subsequently covered up the death….etc. etc.”
I think maybe you’ve got something there Maria. If only one of them was responsible, I doubt very much whether the other one could keep up the lie and would be regularly bitching “if it wasn’t for you, we wouldn’t be in this mess” maybe?
For both of them to stick to the story for so long, I feel they both feel equally responsible. Just a thought.
BTW - hello everybody - haven’t been here for a good while.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
699 Maria Says:
” I do not know for sure (don’t want chenier accusing me of dishonesty again!) but I strongly suspect that the outcome of the hearing, had the original application gone ahead as planned, was not necessarily 100% a foregone conclusion. ”
It’s obviously a conflict of interests between two authorities. The family court is interested in the ward’s whereabouts and well-being. The police has also to consider the relationship to foreign police forces. Both sides have reasonable arguments. How could the outcome be 100% predicted?
July 12th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
698
chenier Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Chenier, on a serious note (query from me) wasn’t it decided before going into court exactly what would be given or not be given to the McCanns through their lawyers? Thus, Justice Hogg was really ‘rubber stamping’ the agreement they reached?
July 12th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Where were the tenth, eleventh and twelfth elements when the T9 were at the Tapas table?
A rhetorical question by the way, I don’t know the answer myself yet, any ideas?
July 12th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
699
Maria Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
‘Monday’s court hearing represents, at the moment, a victory for the Mcs.’
it is being spun so, yes.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
654
Ferdinand Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
652 chenier Says:
It is, in my view, inaccurate to suggest that refusing to disclose the contents - in this case over 11,000 items of information- of a criminal investigation to a Judge who has unlawfully demanded that those items be disclosed to her, constitutes keeping that Judge in ignorance. ”
Why do you think it was unlawful? A request could be refused to obey, that’s what the police did. They then have to defend their position in court, that’s what they did. That doesn’t mean that the initial request was unlawful.
————————————————————————————–
I do not know for sure (don’t want chenier accusing me of dishonesty again!) but I strongly suspect that the outcome of the hearing, had the original application gone ahead as planned, was not necessarily 100% a foregone conclusion. If it were that simple, I suspect the Mcs’ lawyers would have known that as well and not embarked on the case at all. The point is that law is often complicated and outcomes are not always certain, although some may be more likely than others. It would have been a complex case if it had gone ahead, as Scott said, and a diversion from what they really wanted. Now, of course, Scott may have been lying or mistaken. Justice Hogg may be pig-ignorant (thanks meercat!) , but I doubt it. All the Mcs’ legal advisers may be totally ignorant, but, again, I doubt it.
In any case, even if it was a no-hoper from the outset, and I don’t believe that to be the case, the Mcs still won, hands down, whether they are guilty or innocent of killing Madeleine and/or covering up her death, disposing of her body, seriously wasting police time throughout the world, defrauding thousands of their hard-earned cash and helping to speed up the campaign for a consistent European response to missing children simply in order to divert attention from their crimes.
They displayed a desperate need to know more and continue their search for their child. They still appear determined to leave no stone unturned. The police, as well as their own QC, spoke of understanding their desire to have more information. The whole country (at least, those people still bothering to read about the case at all) believes that they have been granted access to information they might otherwise not have had. Most people who read them warmed to Justice Hogg’s comments which have served to renew sympathy for the Mcs.
Monday’s court hearing represents, at the moment, a victory for the Mcs.
Justice Hogg’s statement about M being assumed to be alive may well have been simply a legal necessity, given that the court had no evidence to the contrary. But the woman is not a complete fool, however much some people might like to think so. Had she been simply reciting a legal formula, she probably would not have gone as far as she did in adding unequivocal support for the Mcs and a clear belief in the basic veracity of what they have said. She did not need to do so. Certainly she may be wrong but I suspect she believes the police files to contain no meaningful evidence, and so will most people who read the relevant bits of her judgement in the papers.
As you say, chenier, the reporting was poor, but c’est la vie…….it will have had a particular effect and that will have been to encourage even more support for the Mcs….at the moment. Your having actually been present in the court, even in a freshly-ironed shirt, cannot change that.
Of course, if the judge is proved wrong and charges are brought against the Mcs, then she will look pig-ignorant and may retire squealing and pink-faced!
Are you writing a book about the case?
July 12th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
695
Gandolf Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
So Chenny you still wont answer the question, did the Leics police withhold evidence of Madeleine’s alleged death from the judge who made her a ward of court, your waffling and constant quoting of the sainted Judges statement is as you are aware not the issue.The issue being if the plod are aware and have evidence of Madeleine’s demise they are fully aware that Madeleine if dead cannot be a ward of court , hence they would have knowingly misled Judge and court, as the Judges statement about Madeleine’s death or harm having no substance, would have been left uncorrected or the judge not advised of it’s lack of factual basis.
You Chenny are the loser.
———————————-
I stated categorically that the Leicestershire Police withheld all the evidence in their files from the Judge, with the exception of the 81 items.
I have stated categorically over, and over, and over again, that the Leicestershire police withheld all of the evidence in their files from the Judge, with the exception of the 81 items.
The Attorney General despatched her own Counsel to the hearing to make it clear that the attempt to force the Leicestershire Police to disclose the evidence in their files was unlawful and contrary to the public interest. And insisted that the case be heard in public so that the public would be aware of the steps taken to defend the public interest.
Now I appreciate that you don’t like that fact, but you have a remedy.
Write to the Attorney General and tell her she got it wrong.
I’m sure she will be grateful for your learned assistance….
July 12th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
695
Gandolf Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:38 pm e
****************
Gandolf,
Your entire autistic repetition of this question rests on the premise that the PJ would have shared all their evidence with the LP.
We don’t know, that, you don’t know that, only the PJ know that.
If they haven’t shared all their evidence with the LP, and there is no reason why they should do, then LP would not be in a position to confirm or deny the present state of Madeleine’s body.
Lighten up, turn the record over, find something else to talk about.
You are becoming that unforgivable Anorak poster - a bore.
Shame really, you used to be quite entertaining.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
thanks hotwater, maybe the area is called so.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
So Chenny you still wont answer the question, did the Leics police withhold evidence of Madeleine’s alleged death from the judge who made her a ward of court, your waffling and constant quoting of the sainted Judges statement is as you are aware not the issue.The issue being if the plod are aware and have evidence of Madeleine’s demise they are fully aware that Madeleine if dead cannot be a ward of court , hence they would have knowingly misled Judge and court, as the Judges statement about Madeleine’s death or harm having no substance, would have been left uncorrected or the judge not advised of it’s lack of factual basis.
You Chenny are the loser.
Mods and Admin
The case heard on Monday was just to ensure the Mcc received the items asked for, not the ins and outs of what happened to Madeleine. The PJ have not finished their enquiries.
It was NOT to ascertain whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
Gandolf just cool it
July 12th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Sam I can only go on what the article quoted - Mantém a sua convicção de que a Madeleine McCann foi morta na Aldeia da Luz?
Maybe one of our PT posters could help us out?
July 12th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
690…chenier
Doesn’t V Q live in Canada ?
Time for a pint.
Good sleuthing !!!!
July 12th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
From the Sun.
But it was “incredibly difficult,” Gerry, 40, confessed after the family’s return to Rothley, Leics: “To have been on holiday without Madeleine – it is all too apparent what is missing.”
Confessed?
July 12th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
688
HOTWATER Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
hotwater, yes, it’s very interesting, i will be buying amaral’s book. why does it say aldeia da Luz, and not praia da luz ?
July 12th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
So says the Sun.
Vancouver in July…
Well, it’s an improvement on Vancouver in March.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
hi wtf :), i’ll be on and off as i’ve shopping to put away, my, food is getting expensive!
July 12th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Sorry, here’s the link, and translation.
http://www.semanario.pt/noticia.php?ID=4234
How do you read the process of the removal of Gonçalo Amaral Dias?
Gonçalo Amaral is a great policeman who did an excellent job and one day couldn’t take the pressure anymore and said some unpleasant things to the English. He shouldn’t have said it but the world was not damaged because of him saying it, either. The truth is that he understood where the investigation was being stalled, and well fed up of being insulted, maltreated without a single voice to defend him. In fact, he should have remained silent but it is also true that a man is not made of iron.
Can we say that, together with the novella of little Madeleine and the removal of the coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, we’re looking at another case of Portuguese submission to the “perfid Albion”?
I don’t know. It will take somewhat longer until we manage to understand how far this mess has reached.
Do you maintain your conviction that Madeleine McCann was killed in Aldeia da Luz?
I do. There are no material conditions to opt for another solution. The mystery lies with one or two of the ten or twelve elements that used to enter that apartment.
I possess little data apart from knowing the location and the positions of each one of the persons that intervened. It is impossible for an abduction to take place under those circumstances. Only as an academical hypothesis.
In your opinion, do you think that the PJ’s image was affected by this case? Can the Portuguese [people] believe in the Police that we have?
There will be some damage to the PJ’s image that the criminal turbulence itself and the succession of solved crimes will dissolve. This, if it is confirmed that there is no indicia and the process is archived. And of course the Portuguese can believe in their police. It has a history of prestige and their level of effectiveness is one of the highest within Europe. It is not by one unsolved crime, among hundreds of thousands that are solved, that the capacity of the PJ can be evaluated.
Within this process, which was often surrounded by obscure outlines, what do you think has failed?
Let’s see when the process becomes public. It is too early to make that evaluation.
Was the archiving of the process foreseeable?
I don’t know whether the process is going to be archived.
What illations can be taken out of this case, in order for another process not to suffer the same outcome?
I don’t know what the outcome is going to be but every case is a case. There are no formulas or rules. That is why criminal investigation is a set of methods and not a science.
In what aspect did the media influence the course of the investigation into the case of Maddie’s disappearance?
The negative aspects are related to the natural pressure on the investigation. The PJ wants evidence, the journalists want news. Those are different things. But the publicizing of the problem was positive because it caught the attention of so many people about children’s rights, about the duties of protection towards the minors.
What measures should be taken to diminish the abductions of children and adolescents?
Abductions are hard to predict and to prevent. The only way to avoid them, or at least to reduce the possibility, is to watch the children directly.
Do you consider Portugal to be a safe country?
It’s the safest country within the European Union.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
685…wtf
Didn’t stop them going to Brussels or Strasbourg.
But I may be in error in thinking that those two Cities are in Europe.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
hi sam
July 12th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
matt
A pal said: “They couldn’t even contemplate going anywhere in Europe.”
Why onearth couldnt they contmeplate europe, if thats where they believe maddie to be? Or is it because they managed to tour most of it last year
July 12th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
682
wtf Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
‘hi all
I was under the impression that they had popped over to ireland from gerrys blog, although he didnt say where they had been did he, which seems a tad odd if your writing a blog not to mention where you went on your hols’
hi wtf, i had assumed so too, thanks matt.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
681…sam
So says today’s Sun….
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/maddie/article1413790.ece
July 12th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
hi all
I was under the impression that they had popped over to ireland from gerrys blog, although he didnt say where they had been did he, which seems a tad odd if your writing a blog not to mention where you went on your hols
July 12th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
hi matt, chenier and all,
they went to vancouver ?