Madeleine McCann: With Columnist Fergus Shanahan And The Maddie Squad
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann and Gerry McCann
THE COLUMNISTS
FERGUS SHANAHAN: “SWOOP FOR MADDIE”
“I tried to imagine the misery Kate and Gerry McCann must be going through with these Maddie sightings. It’s too awful.”
See the Sun’s front-page Maddie update in which she is served an ice-cream in Brussels. Shanahan is the paper’s deputy editor. It’s too awful…
“They must cling to any hope. But some of the latest rash of ‘sightings’ are based on thin detail.”
The ice-cream was chocolate.
“Sadly, the Maddie tragedy is attracting its fair-share of attention seekers”
The Sun’s front page says the ice-cream was cold and sweet – just how Maddie likes them!
“It seems unlikely that Europe’s most instantly recognisable child would be walked through city streets by her abductors.”
More likely she’d stop and be bought an ice cream…
“But if convincing reports of sightings continue, Scotland Yard should set up a Maddie squad capable of moving instantly anywhere in Europe.”
On the Sun’s word…
Posted: 12th, August 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (348) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
- yampster on Dundee Woman Accused Of Ripping Out Lover’s Testes With Her Bare Hands
- KathyM on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Desperate Dan on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- Desperate Dan on The 14 Ten Most Offensive Google Search Results
August 12th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
LP
By the way, whether or not they are guilty of neglect under the law is irrelevant to my opinion of what they did. They should NOT have left the children out of earshot and without an adult presence.
I have always said that and can’t see any way I would change my mind. The law is not the only judge of human behaviour but it is the only one, IMHO, under which punishments should be inflicted in a civilised and democratic society.
(But then…do we live in one…?!)
…..gone
August 12th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
M and A
Quite correctly, the police have indeed said that, although K and G are not involved, there is no evidence to support any theory of how she disappeared.
LP
I really do have to go and a proper answer to your very reasonable question would require more time than I have and more expertise than I possess. I’ll just make a few points.
I would have to know whether you mean “punishment” under Portuguese or British Law.
Then I would have to read the small print of what the relevant laws, in each country, actually say and the advised interpretations. I am not a lawyer and would hesitate to venture an opinion.
Then I would have to know the exact details of what their arrangements were, eg, how often the children were checked etc, whether the adults were drunk and incapable or having a meal with a couple of bottles of wine, whether or not the children had been asleep and well at all the previous checks, what their sleeping pattern was etc.
Then I would have to look at precedent to see how the law (Portuguese or UK) has been interpreted in the past. (And I don’t mean the one quoted by chenier which was totally different in kind.)
Then I would have to know whether or not this is an offence which the UK would be ABLE to pursue even though it took place outside the UK. It’s not always the case. There are different categories of offence. I simply don’t know about this particular case.
Then there is the question of whether or not the UK would bring charges, even if it could, when a fellow EU country has decided that there is no case to answer for the nearest equivalent offence in its own country.
Then, in any case, the CPS also has always to decide whether or not they would be likely to succeed with a prosecution, even supposing all the other conditions did exist. I HUGELY doubt that they would decide they were likely to succeed in this case, for the reasons set out on this very matter in the final Portuguese report.
We ARE talking here about whether they should be punished under the law, I presume? Your question is very loosely worded. You speak about “punishment”. I presumed you meant a punishment under the law. From the legal point of view, it’s too complex and technical a point for me to answer meaningfully and of the “facts” of the case, I only know what I’ve read and seen in the media. Not a good basis for decision-making!
If you meant some other kind of punishment, then, no, I don’t think there should be any punishment inflicted outside the law. I believe 100% in the rule of law.
Of course, fate seems to have inflicted its own punishment, worse than any the law could impose.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Have we heard anything on the evidence of the tennis professionals, Dan and Georgina? I’m sure I can remember a number of reports about the 4 Tapas men playing “social tennis” 6 pm - 8 pm 3 May 07.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I think maria has gone. They ALWAYS go when asked a tricky question. Why is that?
August 12th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Maria
Sorry just to add The majorca couple, the female was a close childhood friend of Kates from school too.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Daisy Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I don’t think the detective actually introduced himself by name.
Why would that be ??
But further to his boast about “first use in Britain of “Psychological Offender
Profiling”…..
He has omitted to mention that………Mulcahy still protests his innocence
and avers that he was implicated by Duffy.
http://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/famous_criminal/53/biography/1/John_Francis_Duffy.htm
“”Only after 15 years did the advance of forensic science allow them to arrest
David Mulcahy, a childhood friend of Duffy, who was eventually convicted.
This case saw the first use in Britain of “Psychological Offender Profiling”.
However, Mulcahy still protests his innocence after stating that Duffy implicated
him in the murders.
Early days yet in the MM case…..he sounds very impatinet for a Tec.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
night Daisy!
x
August 12th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/mccanns-versus-media-3-may-08-part-1
August 12th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
sorry june :-I
August 12th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
I have solved the sightings issue !!!! The police is staging these sightings …. to make someone crack
Watch the next episode …. 
Good Night all!
August 12th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
It’s not tedious for me though Maria. Before you go I would just like to know if you think there should be a punishment for leaving them alone night after night?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
LP
A lot of people on Anorak have suggested it, as you must know if you’ve followed posts over the months.
The favourite theory eventually came to be that Madeleine died by accident and her body was concealed and disposed of by her parents who then faked an abduction and went on to launch a worldwide fraudulent financial scam.
If they did any of that, it would be a crime. The police have found no evidence to link them with a crime.
Anyway, this is tedious….for all of us!
I simply replied to Doris’s suggestion that no friends or neighbours had ever spoken up for them. Others did as well, Gerry’s colleagues for example. But there’s little point in bothering to find it!
Bye! Sorry I interrupted!
M and A
Maria, the Police have found no evidence of any crime, including abduction
August 12th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Maria
Sorry if I mistook you, but the comments were about her neighbours and their opinions of them as parents, leaving them etc……
Your challenge to me as to how well I knew them, I thought was in reference to the parenting
It appeared to me that my opinion in the parenting, was opposite to your own.
Now we have cleared that up then, we can beg to differ on the cover up, abduction simulation, and opinion.
edited jj
August 12th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Would like to add my 10 cents worth - I HIGHLY doubt that if they thought that child was Madeleine they would have broadcast all that video footage - I mean HELLLOOOOO! Who do they think they are fooling?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Brandon,
Yes, it is sickening to watch that photo in particular so soon after Maddie had “vanished” …
Has there ever been any hint or pics of the T9 socializing AFTER returning to the UK? Someone is holding something over someone else’s head, which is why they have all kept silent for so long, IMO.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Abraham Zapruder Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
From the NOTW detective article
@
Evidence from cadaver dogs, for instance, could not be used to bring about a conviction here. Generally they are regarded as being at best 80 per cent reliable.
@
Kind of skates around the issue IMO, and doesn’t really tie in with the thrust of his article. I mean, if you went to a lawyer and said “how strong is my case?” and he said “at best I’d give it an 80% chance of success”, wouldn’t that make it quite a good case?
there’s no smoke without fire AZ!!!
August 12th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Maria Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
ttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-452633/Maddy-abducted-suspect-mind.html
and the other one. I think this is the one with the nurse’s comment.
I think everyone remembers the Panorama programme anyway!
BF
I have NEVER said I excused that behaviour. Never once.
So what do we do them maria - sweep it under the carpet? Hope it all goes away and if the police can’t find her then blame them? That’s the easy way out isn’t it.
What is your suggestion? Should parents that leave kids alone night after night whilst out on the piss be punished or not?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
From the NOTW detective article
@
Evidence from cadaver dogs, for instance, could not be used to bring about a conviction here. Generally they are regarded as being at best 80 per cent reliable.
@
Kind of skates around the issue IMO, and doesn’t really tie in with the thrust of his article. I mean, if you went to a lawyer and said “how strong is my case?” and he said “at best I’d give it an 80% chance of success”, wouldn’t that make it quite a good case?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
who’s saying they killed her maria? Who?
August 12th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
BF
I dont need to know anymore, thank you very much!
———————————————————–
But the courts do, BF, the courts do.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
ttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-452633/Maddy-abducted-suspect-mind.html
and the other one. I think this is the one with the nurse’s comment.
I think everyone remembers the Panorama programme anyway!
BF
I have NEVER said I excused that behaviour. Never once.
I don’t excuse it and have never said I could.
That’s not the same as saying they killed Madeleine, accidentally or on purpose, and hid her body.
That’s all. Two very different things.
I think you know I’ve never said I excused that behaviour, even when Stiggy was pointing out how unlikely it was, statistically -speaking, to result in any mishap, I never excused it. Even though many people do similar things with baby-listening services, I have never said I excused it. Never once.
——–
M&A
Artemis
Whilst it is good to see you finding one link to support your many claims, you are on very dangerous ground in implying that posters here have claimed that the McCanns
‘killed Madeleine, accidentally or on purpose, and hid her body.’
And your claim that it was statistically unlikely to result in any mishap is unfounded in fact.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/05_02/Mccanns270507_468×430.jpg
August 12th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Cool
She was an ex pat! So maybe she cares more about a little girl than getting her wrist slapped.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
doris Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
…. later 
thanks Julie , im orf out now , take care of him til i get back
___________
No problem, it’ll be a pleasure
August 12th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Maria
How on earth do you know either ?
I can make my own mind up from what I have seen of their behaviour this last 16 months.
from their own mouths!
I am sure I can point you to a few reminders but the one I think speaks for its self is the fact and it is a fact, that they left their daughter after she cried for 1.15 mins and asked them why, and they did it againthe very next day !
I dont need to know anymore, thank you very much!
And if you can excuse that behaviour then it shows exactly what type of person you are.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Maria Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
That’s the first link.
_______________
Carry on Maria - see you CAN do it ….. at least it’ll keep you out of our hair for a while
August 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
thanks Julie , im orf out now , take care of him til i get back
August 12th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
doris Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Julie , can we share him please ?
_____________________
Well considering he’s this “6ft huge hunky biker boy” … I s’pose we could have half each
August 12th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
One thing I know from personal experience … when it comes to a marriage or a family, NOBODY really knows what happens behind closed doors! Before I decided to split up from my ex-husband, not one of our friends had a clue that there were problems in the marraige. We kept all of it quiet, until it was over. It was a big shock for the rest of our families and our friends.
I have put this question forward in the past … why paint Kate as the alleged guilty? There are two in that marriage and IMO he is the controlling force.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482027/Our-friend-Kate-McCann-perfect-mum-closest-friends-speak-out.html
That’s the first link.