Madeleine McCann: The Tabloid Dog Pack, Kate McCann’s Diary And Shannon Matthews
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann, Gerry McCann and Robert Murat
PRESS GAZETTE: “Furious lawyer attacks tabloids’ ‘pack-dog’ mentality over stories”
Read all about it in the Star, Sun, Mirror etc.
Louis Charalambous represented Robert Murat in his libel action against eleven tabloid newspapers. Two other claimants in the same case, Sergey Malinka and Michaela Walczuch, were awarded apologies and a “substantial six-figure settlement”.
Charalambous tells the Press Gazette:
“Having to capitulate, apologise and pay up is not the end of it. The trust in those titles ebbs away among their combined readership of 15 million. In particular, readers of The Sun, Mirror, Express and Star were told lie after lie about my clients. It brings into question how much more of their paper’s news coverage they can rely on…
“There was a pack-dog mentality here and my clients and their families were the prey. The children of Robert and Michaela, little girls, one not much older than Madeleine, were hounded and had to go in and out of their homes with coats over their heads.
“I’d like to invite the editors of the worst of these titles to have tea and cake with them and explain why they let their journalists and photographers harass them. They are now recovering but the effects are long-lasting.”
Tea with lawyers? Take care. Bring a tape recorder and a copy of the invitation. Leave wallet at home. But what about the story, the single-thread story? What about our Maddy?
“Journalistically this was a story without legs: child goes missing, no idea of her fate and foreign coppers not leaking to their trusted hacks in the time-honoured way. Reporters then developed lines of the story and ‘creatively’ adopted the rubbish coming out of the Portuguese tabloid press.”
Case closed. What what about Murat?
Max Clifford, no longer representing Murat, says:
“If you think that the McCanns got £500,000 from one newspaper group, he went after 11 newspapers – and they were far more vicious to him than they were to the McCanns.”
Maybe Murat wasn’t after the money, just closure? Maybe the papers got of lightly?
“If you want people to believe you are innocent you can forget about it. He and his family are going to have to live with this for the rest of their lives.”
So says a professional PR not in the least bit bitter about being dropped by Murat.
THE SUN: “Kate’s Maddie diaries leaked”
EXCERPTS from Kate McCann’s diary covering the first agonising weeks after daughter Maddie vanished have emerged.
Did you see them? In case you didn’t, here they are:
They show that the desperate mum left messages asking PM Gordon Brown to “increase political pressure” to aid the search. After he phoned 40-year-old Kate and husband Gerry, she noted that Mr Brown was “nice and supportive” — but that she “felt a bit emotional after”.
DAILY MIRROR: “Kate and Gerry McCann: Portuguese cops’ hunt for Maddie ‘pathetic’”
Portuguese police knocked on just 443 doors in the failed hunt for missing Madeleine McCann.
That a lot?
There are 7,000 homes in Praia da Luz…
No door unknocked…
In stark contrast, British police probing the disappearance of Shannon Matthews earlier this year knocked on 5,000 doors and searched 2,000 houses. Nine-year-old Shannon was found in 24 days, whereas Portuguese police have stopped looking for Madeleine after 14 months.
But the police door knocking wasn’t what found Shannon Matthews. The rozzers responded to a tip off from a neighbour of one Paul Donovan.
Also, Shannon Matthews’ mother, Karen Matthews, is under arrest for her alleged part in her daughters’ disappearance. Kate McCann is innocent. So what do the two matters have in common? Or is this Tabloid Bingo?
A friend of the McCanns said: “The 443 doors would barely cover 500 yards from the apartment where Madeleine was taken. That is shocking and unacceptable.”
Is it?
Posted: 28th, July 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (325) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- 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
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
July 28th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Carmen 8:45 am
Greatly appreciated! Very sorry to hear of your arm injury and hope you get well soon.
Carmen, that was a masterpiece of balanced writing. And from someone reported to have a major writing handicap
M and A
And did you not notice that the much maligned moderators stopped precisely nothing of the ‘bitter exchanges’
July 28th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
WARDSHIP
The jurisdiction of the High Court to make a child a ward of court and assume responsibility for its welfare. The jurisdiction is almost unlimited, although subject to consideration of the child’s welfare and, to some extent, the rights of other persons and the public interest. The court exercises detailed control of the ward: it may appoint the Official Solicitor to act as his guardian ad litem and may order either parent to make periodical payments for his maintenance. Wardship proceedings are heard in private and the usual rules of evidence may be relaxed (e.g. in respect of hearsay evidence). The court may enforce its orders by injunction; breach of this or tampering with the ward may constitute contempt of court.
Wardship proceedings are usually used (1) when there is a dispute between estranged parents but no divorce proceedings have been started; (2) when a foster parent or potential adopter wishes to prevent relatives interfering with the child or when a third party wishes to remove the child from parents who are considered unfit to have parental responsibility; (3) when a child has been “kidnapped” by a parent; (4) to exercise control over a wayward child; and (5) to control medical treatment, such as sterilization, even when this is contrary to the wishes of the child. Any person who can establish a proper interest in the child may apply for wardship (including the child himself), but the Children Act 1989 restricts the right of local authorities to use wardship proceedings. It also repeals the court’s power to commit a ward to the care or supervision of a local authority. Since the Children Act came into force use of wardship may be limited as the court may prefer to make a section 8 order instead.
http://www.hammonoakleysolicitors.co.uk/family.htm
Assuming 1, 3, 4 and 5 do not apply – that leaves 2
July 28th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Saul Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Any one seen Dave
——————
Well, he’s not in the gas cupboard, that’s for sure.
If you provide me with further and better particulars I could use Google Earth…
July 28th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Perhaps not the right place to share this, but what the heck …
My 6 year old just decided that the kitchen was the ideal spot in which to try and perform the impossible acrobatic act with his bicycle …. needless to say he landed butt first on the floor with the bike all over him, I was waiting for the inevitable screech, but NO!! He comes out with :
“AWESOME … my balls are sore!”
Apart from my giggles which I had to swallow until I could get well away from him, I will have to check the background of his current little circle of friends …….
M and A
Ok his little circle of friends, or his circle of little friends…if you can stop sniggering
July 28th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Julie, tut tut
July 28th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
As far as I know there was no inquest in the UK into the missing Ben Needham, he is still formally ‘missing’.
The canoist’s alleged death was different because he was presumed drowned in UK territorial waters.
Without Madeleines body being found and returned to the UK there will be no inquest.
There is no proof she is dead and she is classed as missing in Portugal.
This is from the Gov website…..
>>>>>>>>>>
Inquests
An inquest is a legal inquiry into the medical cause and circumstances of a death. It is held in public - sometimes with a jury - by a coroner, in cases where the death was:
violent or unnatural
took place in prison or police custody
or when
the cause of death is still uncertain after a post-mortem
Coroners hold inquests in these circumstances even if the death occurred abroad (and the body is returned to Britain). If a body is lost (usually at sea) a coroner can hold an inquest by order of the Secretary of State if death is likely to have occurred in or near a coroner’s area of jurisdiction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Gee its too hot today and I like hot usually.
July 28th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Karen and Liza,
I agree that the claim that the only conceivable danger would be a wholly inconceivable danger- i.e an abduction- strains credulity beyond any reasonable point.
The fact that they are both doctors reinforces this because, nowadays at least, doctors are supposed to practice evidence based medicine, and the evidence is wholly conclusive on the dangers of leaving small children with no-one to care for them.
It isn’t one of those ‘we need more research’ grey areas.
And the McCanns must have known that if, as they claim, they knew that Madeleine had been abducted straight away, they should not have had all and sundry tramping through the scene of what they alleged was a crime. We are back to the importance of evidence, which should be second nature to a doctor…
July 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Any one seen Dave
July 28th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
FFS what planet are these reporters (?) on,
http://tinyurl.com/6z4ft2
July 28th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
….. but I was
July 28th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Gandolf
That ’so what’ wasn’t referring to your leg.
July 28th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
My kind of man …….
July 28th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Gandolf
So what?
They declared John Darwin dead.
So they’re obviously not that fussy about evidence.
July 28th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Stiff !
July 28th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Gandolf Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
———————–
Drawn, as ever, like a moth to the candle, Gandolf?
Can Justice Hogg have been the girl of your dreams, back in the days of yore?
Do the embers of a long dead romance still flicker in your heart, waiting for that longed for moment when they could burst into flame once more?
And how’s your leg?
M and A
Chenier, indeed his Morgan Le Fey?
July 28th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
At least if a child is awake they might have a chance of seeing a stranger and getting away or screaming.
There’s not much they can do fast asleep.
July 28th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
What I think really bothers many of us, is the McCann’s insisting that there was no risk, that they couldn’t conceive of a danger to the children, and this really goes against the grain because they are physicians and know perfectly well what CAN and often DOES go wrong when children are left alone and may I add in a non-child-proof apartment
So either their training accounts for nothing (although I’m no physician and yet I could list a gazillion dangers, leaving out opportunistic abductors) and that makes them a realk hazard to the patient population, or they are being dishonest and lying
July 28th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
There is fuk all strange about it, if the Leics plod were in the sainted Justice Hogg’s court knowing that they had evidence Madeleine McCann is deceased and never imparted that knowledge to the sainted Justice Hogg………..they are in deep shit very deep shit………
July 28th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Brandon, they are three assumptions I guess. Are you going to set up a 3As site?
July 28th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
brandon flours Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
sam no he was over the road.
my sons dressed inapropiately for the weather too, and wears a cap and a hoodie over it and sometimes a face scarf, odd i know. he has aspergers syndrome.
July 28th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Abraham Zapruder Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
‘There has been no announcement, even from Clarrie, to say that the UK end of the investigation has been shelved, so who knows what is going on behind the scenes?’
well in that sense it’s possible yes. interesting thought.
July 28th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
melanie
I can see 3 differences there,
I bet there was some motherly 10 -15 year olds in the group.
The children were free to come and go and find their parents.
The children I would imagine would have the choice if they were scared or hurt themselves to cry and be comforted by someone and alert the parents.
Or they could refuse to leave their parents side.
Madeliene didnt
July 28th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Abraham Zapruder Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Sam, actually no I wasn’t suggesting that, though I don’t see why it wouldn’t be possible. The Ward of Court matter is no doubt ongoing, the only clue we have being the recent open court pronouncement of LJ Hogg.
We have to remember that a lot of things have been going on behind the scenes recently. MM was made a Ward of Court in April 08 (the initial application being made 10 months earlier) though the public only found out about it 2 or 3 weeks ago.
Robert Murat’s libel case was announced 3 or 4 days before the actual hearing, and it was only that morning when we found out Sergey and Michaela were also Claimants.
There has been no announcement, even from Clarrie, to say that the UK end of the investigation has been shelved, so who knows what is going on behind the scenes?
————————–
We knew about Robert Murat’s libel case some months ago, though not the involvement of the two others, since the news was leaked and the Scotsman bit the bullet and apologised straight away.
It seems certain that Clarrie is not empowered to speak on behalf of the police or for SOCA, and I am sure that there is a great deal going on behind the scenes.
Some of it may be civil suits, here and elsewhere.
It occurs to me, however, that if the McCanns had obtained injunctions prohibiting press comment on the grounds that publication might endanger the search for Madeleine, proof that Madeleine was indeed dead would presumably void those injunctions…
July 28th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Thanks, Karen!
July 28th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
@@@@@@@@@
M and A
I think its very strange indeed that we haven’t heard from the Leics police, perhaps they are waiting to have a look at the PJ files?
oh yes there would have to be an Inquest, but then again I don’t know the protocol when a person goes missing abroad, and is now a Wof C, perhaps the UK Police are still looking ? perhaps C&C might throw some light , as she has an interest in Ben Needham. Perhaps the whole case has been moved to the care of the FO?
@@@@@@@@@@@
I can’t quite get my head around the Inquest situation. As I understand it there was an inquest into the “death” of the canoe man, even though he was alive, and there has not been an Inquest about Ben Needham, even though he has been missing a lot longer than the canoe man ever was. Plus there is the added factor of MM being a Ward of Court which is based on a presumption that she is alive.
Perhaps it is open to LJ Hogg to call in all evidence, from the PJ and the UK police, even evidence that would be inadmissible in a criminal court, and then make some kind of pronouncement or further directions as to how things should go.
I wonder if LJ Hogg has read Amaral’s book? !
July 28th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Melanie… yes - but horses and unattended children don’t mix! It’s actually quite dangerous
July 28th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Liza
Sky News : Kate McCann : I Would Never Have Taken A Risk.
(I was watching a few others as well - but I can’t remember the titles. They’re all from May 2008 though).
July 28th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Kiddy risks. I have just been having a coffee with a friend of mine who went to a wedding over the weekend in Ireland.
The one thing she thought was truly great was that there was a field next to the reception (held somewhere like a mansion) that had horses in it. The reason is was so good was that apparently it meant all the children could be outside playing while the adults enjoyed the drinking and dancing!
Luckily there were no eggmen, pig farmers or doctors nearby to worry them…
July 28th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
sam no he was over the road.
July 28th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Sam, actually no I wasn’t suggesting that, though I don’t see why it wouldn’t be possible. The Ward of Court matter is no doubt ongoing, the only clue we have being the recent open court pronouncement of LJ Hogg.
We have to remember that a lot of things have been going on behind the scenes recently. MM was made a Ward of Court in April 08 (the initial application being made 10 months earlier) though the public only found out about it 2 or 3 weeks ago.
Robert Murat’s libel case was announced 3 or 4 days before the actual hearing, and it was only that morning when we found out Sergey and Michaela were also Claimants.
There has been no announcement, even from Clarrie, to say that the UK end of the investigation has been shelved, so who knows what is going on behind the scenes?