Madeleine McCann: The A-Team, Ruining Lives And Spinning The Single Thread
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann and Gerry McCann
DAILY STAR: “SECRET A-TEAM IN HUNT FOR MADDIE”
In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn’t commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground.
Desperate Kate and Gerry McCann have forked out £500,000 on an “A-Team” of former top spooks to find missing daughter Madeleine.
Can the plan come together?
The couple now have “a global operation” of dozens of retired FBI, CIA and even MI5 agents dedicated to solving the mystery of her disappearance. The top secret team has been given six months to solve the riddle.
Pah! The A Team can do it in 40 minutes WITH ad breaks…
Says the McCanns’ spokesman – and still the McCanns’ spokesman – Clarence Mitchell:
“They have been on board for a few months and are on a six-month contract. For security reasons we can’t go into detail of the experts involved but it would not be wrong to say some are former military and police personnel with a degree of expertise.”
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire… The A-Team.
THE GUARDIAN: “Diary: Esther Addley”
Our sympathies today are split, however, for we must also spare a small pang of pity for the security guard in Brussels who on Tuesday told the Sun about his sighting of a young girl who absolutely, definitely, without question was Madeleine McCann. “I saw her face and recognised that it was her,” said the man. “I would bet everything I own that it was her.”
It was our Maddie?
And sure enough, Belgian police later confirmed - dear reader, you are ahead of me - that it wasn’t. We can find nothing, as yet, on eBay, but Kate and Gerry McCann will be heartened that the man is without doubt now living under a cardboard box with only his own gnawed fists and his shame for sustenance.
The McCann case ruins lives..?
SPIKED: “‘Our Maddie’ makes a media comeback - The silly-season resurrection of the McCann tragedy shows that this was always a cynical, elite-scripted drama.”
Not that the absence of anything beyond hypothesis has inhibited the frontpage speculation. Indeed, the absence of hard evidence at the heart of the Maddie phenomenon has been its lifeblood. With nothing known beyond the barest of facts, anything, no matter how macabre, can be guessed at. And what better than a mail-order paedophile ring based, of course, in Belgium? In lieu of evidence, good old-fashioned prejudice will do. Indeed, over the past year, two pictures showing obviously Muslim women carrying or walking with a blonde-haired girl have been splashed under the headline: ‘IS THIS MADDIE?’ Well, Arab women with a European-looking child – it’s got to be dodgy.
Madeleine McCann: spinning news from a single thread
Posted: 14th, August 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (527) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on Strictly Come Dancing’s Alesha Dixon Sparks I’m A Celebrity Race Row
- Jess on Strictly Come Dancing’s Alesha Dixon Sparks I’m A Celebrity Race Row
- Wyvern on Bolivian Police And Maddie McCann Introduce The Worst Photo-Fits Ever
- yampster on X Factor: Jedward Go GAY, Win I’m A Celebrity And Hate Susan Boyle
- Nomadic View on Bolivian Police Release Video Of World’s Worst Photo-Fit Killers’ Capture
August 14th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Matt… I agree with you absolutely. Everyone has their own views on it and every view is as valid as the next.
Lone Pigeon asked if my viewpoint had been changed so I was answering that and saying what I thought.
I enjoy a good ‘heated’ debate but preferably without all the personal insults as I’m sure you agree.
There’s something about this case that has attracted huge interest and also highlighted the way the internet has quickly taken over the world!
It’s a phenomena and I bet in a few years time there will be degree courses on it.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
300th
August 14th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
coolandcalm
How do “we” know that C Stagg is not really guilty?
How do “we” know whether/if some in prison are actually innocent?
All we can go on is what our judicial is able to prove, or not. It’s all we’ve got.
But in my mind “we” still never know, really know, who is guilty or innocent at the end of the day. Some maybe had a bloody good lawyer & got them off? Or some that didn’t have such a bloody good lawyer & are wrongly imprisoned?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
On that note, I’m off to bed, as I’m now too scared to say anything about anything
Good Night all!
August 14th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Well said, Matt !!
August 14th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
coolandcalm Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Only whoever is responsible for whatever actually knows….so we are all in the
same boat as regards “knowing”.
We have our suspicions….our speculations etc.
Which cover wide area’s.
As long as they are based on reasonable thoughts and reasoning they are
valid discussion points.
But, somewhere out there….is a child.
What physical state she may be in no-one but the whoever(s) know.
But we care….and will continue to probe and question until the truth is revealed.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Mercedes
Good news.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Daisy
I dont get it either
August 14th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
M&A - Artemis,
Thanks for that explanation. I still don’t get it though. Many posters refer to things they have read or things that someone said in a newspaper, etc. and it doesn’t seem to be considered a problem if they add that it is their opinion or understanding of what they read. But, I will be most careful in future.
—–
M&A
Artemis
Thank you, Daisy.
Keeping the good ship Anorak afloat is a joint enterprise.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
LP….. I have tried to see it from all angles but I always come back to the same thing.
If there had been an accident (as is the common thought) how could they have hidden the body of their daughter so successfully in a strange country and in a short space of time? How could they have gone to dinner on the third and been normal?
If it was a conspiracy that night then they would surely have all made sure the timelines were spot-on and there would have been no discrepancies; they would have made sure that other guests and the waiters were aware of their every movement. ‘I’m just going to check on my children’, said very loudly.
If an accident really happened that night then surely it would have been better to get through the night and raise the alarm next morning?
I believe Amaral believes what he says (plus a bit of icing now) but I don’t think the rest of his team agreed which is why he had to go. Rebelo does seem to have been more professional in his approach.
Obviously I don’t know any more than anyone else. I will be stunned if it is proved they did it, any of them, but it was then it was.
However… I was convinced that Colin Stagg was the right man, I never had any doubt at the time and now feel so guilty about it, so what do I know?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
M&A - Artemis,
Sorry again. Now I’m confused. English is not my first language, as I explained before. Maybe I do not explain things correctly, but what I meant is that my wording of my first post did not include things like “alledged” or “in my opinion” (which is what I was trying to say with the words “too accurate”) I had made a statement which apparently could have been damaging to someone or libellous and I had not included “in my opinion” or similar in it.
——
M&A
Artemis
Putting ‘in my opinion’ in front of a libelous statement does not stop that statement from being libelous.
Our libel laws require you to be accurate; the fact that someone else has said something is not proof that what they said is true.
Equally, if you are going to allege that someone said something you are required to be able to demonstrate that the person did in fact make that statement.
Paraphrasing can be grossly misleading.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Daisy Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
“”IMO, what he states is very significant. It does not in my opinion, release
the parents from being neglectful, which is a fact, but opens a whole lot of
other questions with regards to what could have happened and presumably
who else could have been involved, if any. Or was it a terrible accident?
That there is a cover up, IMO there is definitely one, but why?”"
Mr Amaral states he believes that a fatal accident took place. He clarifies
this by saying that because of the cadaver odours and the DNA evidence
a death did take place…but that evidence was not sufficient to show that
someone had caused Madeleine’s death. Until further evidence emerged
the PJ could only deduce about a fatal accident occurring.
If a fatal accident did occur in the apartment…then what happened to
the body ?
Etc…….
August 14th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
In this weeks tvmais is an article on an analysis of “Kate’s Diary” by a Portuguese psychologist.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Marie Nicholas Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Yes it it.
I’m sure that “somebody” will let us know all about it. Namely Mr. Pascal…
August 14th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
BF,
is that the same Mr. António Jimenez who has been arrested for the half a ton of cocaine going walkabout?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Hi M&A,
Why am I again in moderation? I said “alledged” and “IMO”.
—–
M&A
Artemis
It is explained on the post itself, and can be viewed by everyone.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
hope clown has read focus ! ha ha bloody ha
August 14th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
14.8.08
Brian Kennedy and Metodo 3 meet the PJ detectives
On October 19, 2007, Alberto Carbas, the head of the Spanish CID Anti-Kidnapping Unit (Unidad de Secuestros de la Policia Judicial) contacted PJ and asked detectives in charge of Madeleine’s investigation it they were willing to have a meeting with a representative from Metodo 3 and a Spanish police officer from the same unit.
The purpose of the meeting was to give PJ some information those detectives had. The Spanish police officer made clear that Metodo 3 had no intention to interfere in the Portuguese police work, but only to transmit some useful information. In the same contact, Metodo 3 said that they were not working for the Mccann, but for Brian Kennedy.
On November 13, 2007, the meeting took place, in Portimão. Two PJ detectives – Ricardo Paiva and Paulo Ferreira. - the director of Metodo 3, Mr. Francisco Franco, an adviser from the private detectives company, Mr. António Jimenez (former head of Police Anti-Kidnapping Unit from Catalonia) and Mr. Brian Kennedy participated in the meeting.
The two PJ detectives submitted a report, about the meeting, the information exchanged and the investigations, following the leads given by Metodo 3.
Sorry this goes above the other it
August 14th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Daisy Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
My pleasure, Daisy.
Re your other query….he is only stating the conclusion of the investigation
at THAT time.
What followed after he was relocated within the PJ…regarding the course of
the investigation…we do not yet know….until we get to read the complete files.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
IMO, what he states is very significant. It does not in my opinion, release the parents from being neglectful, which is a fact, but opens a whole lot of other questions with regards to what could have happened and presumably who else could have been involved, if any. Or was it a terrible accident? That there is a cover up, IMO there is definitely one, but why?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
On November 13, 2007, the meeting took place, in Portimão. Two PJ detectives – Ricardo Paiva and Paulo Ferreira. - the director of Metodo 3, Mr. Francisco Franco, an adviser from the private detectives company, Mr. António Jimenez (former head of Police Anti-Kidnapping Unit from Catalonia) and Mr. Brian Kennedy participated in the meeting.
The two PJ detectives submitted a report, about the meeting, the information exchanged and the investigations, following the leads given by Metodo 3.
On the report, which is in the DVD files, it’s referred that Mr. Kennedy stressed, just as the meeting started, that his only intent was a charitable one, because he was concerned with cases related with child neglect and missing children. He stated that his concern, in that specific case, was only the truth and nothing more than the truth, no matter the McCann, their friends or any other person was involved or suspect.
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/
August 14th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Matt,
Thanks … I had to rephrase my initial post as it was moderated because I was too accurate, I believe, with which I had initially stated. But, I have it clear now. Thanks.
Therefore, in his alleged answer, he is IMO basically “clearing” the parents of that important aspect of the case.
——–
M&A
Artemis
I did not ask you to rephrase because you had been ‘too accurate’, as you put it.
I asked you to rephrase bearing in mind the laws of libel which govern this jurisdiction, which require accuracy.
Incidentally, I do not consider that you have yet accurately reflected the passage provided by your fellow poster.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
coolandcalm Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Well… Dr G P has a “wider agenda”….has it been copyrighted ?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
coolandcalm Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I think one has to be aware that Amaral has another agenda now.
If his book has really sold 140,000 copies and is up for foreign editions then he is well on the way to making a lorra lorra money. AND he has said he kept stuff back for another book……
will eagerly await my mag that gives contintental europe sales.
Must be very tempting to ice the cake!
C&C - does what he states at all change your mind about things?
August 14th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I think one has to be aware that Amaral has another agenda now.
If his book has really sold 140,000 copies and is up for foreign editions then he is well on the way to making a lorra lorra money. AND he has said he kept stuff back for another book……
will eagerly await my mag that gives contintental europe sales.
Must be very tempting to ice the cake!
August 14th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Daisy Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“”I have read on another site that apparently Amaral has stated in an interview
that he does not believe the parents are responsible for whatever happened
to the child.””
As this is the quote you made….I would say that you misinterpreted it a bit.
Your following post in reply to me is true….he was saying “No” to the parent’s
being responsible for MM’s death…which was the question posed by Focus.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
What was not clear was that the drop from the window - underneath which was the flower-bed was 4 metres - and the settee was under that window inside.
I can’t find the drawing showing where the dogs got scent but - did not think any of the windows were that high up !!
August 14th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Matt,
That’s what I mean. He is saying “NO” to the question of “being responsible for their daughter’s death” … or am I not understanding this correctly??
August 14th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
mods are we allowed to talk about the GA and focus article ?
M&A
Artemis
Can you be more specific?
Remember we are stuck up here on a cloud, not able to read everything and moderate simultaneously.
As a rule of thumb, can you prove anything you say?
Because if not, and it appears to damage someone’s reputation, we could be in trouble.
August 14th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Marie Nicholas Says:
August 14th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Haven’t seen any evidence yet that it is.