Madeleine McCann: Rose Ron, Murder And Portugal’s Bermuda Triangle For Missing Kids
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann and Gerry McCann
SKY NEWS: “Tragic Case Of Israel’s Madeleine”
One day on from the news of Israel’s “our Maddie”, Sky news leads with “Israel’s our Maddie”. As Anorak readers know Israel’s our Maddie is called Rose Ron. Sky News - First for breaking news…
Rose Ron is missing. Rose Ron was missing:
No-one seemed to really notice until her grandfather walked into a Tel Aviv police station two weeks ago and confessed to her murder.
No-one? Subtext: Sky News didn’t notice.
Recounting his actions, Ronny Ron told police he got angry with Rose during a car journey and hit her. After he struck her and did not hear any sounds he realised she was dead. In his panic, he claims to have stuffed her body into a suitcase and thrown it into a river. Speaking in court, he called her death a ‘tragic mistake’.
So Israel’s Maddie is similar to our Maddie because..? And do bear in mind that none of our Maddie’s family members are accused of any hand in her disappearance. Indeed, Kate and Gerry McCann have been cleared. so too has Robert Murat. Sky commented on him…
“I have handled many investigations,” said the Israeli district police commander on Israeli radio. “But I can not recall a single other investigation that turned all our stomachs, that all of us come out of the investigation briefings with tears in their eyes.”
No, not our Maddie, but their Maddie…
THE TIMES: “The sad life and death of Rose, Israel’s Madeleine McCann”
You know, the French girl called Rose Ron..?
Rose, the little girl with haunted blue eyes and ashy blonde hair has been called the Israeli Madeleine McCann.
Yeah, blonde. Well, blonde-ish. Not as blonde as our Maddie, the original Maddie. But then she is a foreigner…
THE SUN: “Party Brit’s girl taken into care”
The Sun’s VERONICA LORRAINE is in Portimao, Portugal. She needs a story quick. She finds one, sort of:
A GIRL of eight was taken into care after her British mum went partying and left her alone in their holiday apartment — a few miles from where Madeleine McCann was snatched.
Jeeze! Just think what could have happened… Remember them?
Portimao is less than 25 miles from Praia da Luz, where Maddie vanished in May last year just before her fourth birthday.
Praia da Luz is the Bermuda Triangle for missing kidz. Fact!
The Sun understands the mum had been urged by a doctor to avoid drink on holiday as she was on medication to combat alcohol-related problems and depression.
How very understanding…
But she ignored the advice, went out boozing and ended up needing hospital treatment.
Some people. Tsk!
Police handed her frightened daughter to a temporary care home in Faro. After being assessed there she was transferred to a children’s home in nearby Loule.
A Portuguese children’s home…. Noooooo!
Madeleine McCann: Accept no substitute…
Posted: 27th, August 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (272) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- June on Global Warming: Every Time You Breathe A Bangladeshi Dies
- June on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Bat E Bird on Jamie Cullum Sings The Pursuit, In Pictures
- Anorak on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Chris on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
August 27th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Hello! Nothing new on Enfants Kidnappés so far.
I also think people don’t want to be told anything different from what they believe in their newspapers. That is why the PR campaign, caricatural as it was, worked so well, I think.
I can’t see how new evidence about Madeleine’s disappeatance can be found now. But I have the hope that someone, one day, will tell enough for all to understand what happened. And I hope that whoever thinks he/she can harm a child and not be accountable for it, can no longer believe that.
August 27th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
G’day all / few?
Some of my thoughts:
Looking at the photos of the bed that was apparently used by Maddie, and the covers itself, I believe it could be possible that she actually crawled over the covers towards the end of the bed and either fell there (speculating that she had sedatives in her system) or subsequently walked out of the room and fell somewhere in the living area.
Also, the assumptions that the furniture in the living room had been re-arranged doesn’t seem odd to me as I am one that re-arranges furniture while on holidays because I never think the items are actually arranged to be functional or to make the room more usable.
I believe the mother is telling the truth in her statement to the PJ. Aparently she had no hesitation to hand over her mobile phone to them. If she was hiding something, she would have been more reluctant to hand it over. IMO, she is one that is being kept in the dark by somebody else (or 2 or 3) about the real fate of the child.
If the culprit(s) is/are among the group, I am more and more convinced it is not the parents.
M and A
Just a thought on the mobile phone, does anyone know if a UK pin works in Portugal or do you need a European one?
August 27th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
wtf: Yes, me too. We’re at an impasse now, aren’t we? The translations of the statements say exactly what we thought they would say; the police and Amaral say there is no evidence to back up an abduction; the sniffer dogs indicated that they found blood and cadaver smells in the apartment, on clothing, the key fob and the car, but in no other property or vehicle; and Madeleine is still missing. This is either going to fade away in the absence of surprising new evidence, or this is the lull before the storm. Personally, I’m hoping for a storm.
August 27th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
catalina
Eddie and keela have stamped out the theory that she is alive and well, for me anyway
August 27th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Abraham Zapruder Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
So what do we expect to see in Russell’s statement? That he and Matt went together at 9.30 ish, Russell went inside his own flat and stayed there?
********************************************************************
Yes, except he must have emerged and found Matt to tell him to tell Jane that he was staying there….
I still wonder why the McCanns are so keen for people to think Madeleine is alive and well and being treated like a princess, and I’m sure a lot of people only believe it because they say so. If that were the case, what has this all been about? I keep trying to ‘think outside the box’ but I’m convinced there are pieces missing, things we don’t know and can’t guess at. If only Madeleine were alive and well, how happy we would all be.
August 27th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
thatpoorpriest, I have a friend who I see on the train home most days. She thinks that the McCanns are innocent and that Maddy is safe and well somewhere, waiting to be found. Recently I showed her copies of the statements for Gerry, Matt and Jane and also some other timeline details prepared by Paulo Reis. Her response was to say “Do you actually read all this? It’s too much to take in.”
A lot of people WANT to believe that Maddy is being treated like a princess somewhere, and they find the timeline stuff too boring/complicated. This is what we are up against.
August 27th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
@
Catalina Says:
AZ: I think JT says that Russ and Matt both went to check their children at 9.30, and it was Matt who, when he came back to the Tapas Bar, told her that Russ was staying in the apartment because their daughter was sick. Matt’s statement says he doesn’t know whether GM met anyone when he went to check the children because he didn’t mention it when he came back to the restaurant. Kate’s statement says he did. More inconsistencies.
@
Yes you are right, JT says she saw the strange man, then she went to check her kids, then she came back to the Tapas and 15/20 minutes later Matt and Russell went to do their checks. So what do we expect to see in Russell’s statement? That he and Matt went together at 9.30 ish, Russell went inside his own flat and stayed there?
Then JT says that she quickly ate her meal and went back to 5D so that Russell could go back and eat his meal. So Russell was back at the Tapas table when Kate raised the alarm, and JT was at 5D at that point. In her statement she says she was in the bedroom and heard Kate and Fiona screaming, on McCanorama she said “I went out to the front door of our apartment and then I saw Rachael came and said: “Oh Madeleine’s gone!” So that was the first that I heard about it. And then I saw Kate and Fiona running around shouting ‘Madeleine’ and Kate said to me: “Jane, Madeleine’s gone! Madeleine’s gone!” and that was the first that I heard.”
C’mon, Enfants Kidnappes, give us the next instalment!!
August 27th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
very good willo - love that !!
August 27th, 2008 at 11:58 am
@
Châtelaine Says:
Good morning 2u2, Abraham.
Where can I find this handwritten timeline by Russell? Have only seen a very short one supposedly by Gerry…
@
There was a handwritten timeline printed in the News of the World a couple of Sundays ago. NOTW said it was written by Gerry, but Paulo Reis says it was written by Russell. There might by something more about this on the Reis/Levy sites.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:41 am
It’s all about a beard………….
Imagine two men drinking whiskey sitting by a roaring fire in a castle somewhere in Scotland in mid 2007.
Sitting in plush chairs with the firelight illuminating the ancient castle walls and the double glazed windows emitting echoing laser like patterns across the polished floor, the inebriated gentlemen struggled with conversation.
“I’m bored, we got all we could want but I’m bored!” said the shorter one. “ What’s left? ”.
“Fly to the moon” his friend chuckled.
“Ha bloody ha”
“Well shave your beard off then, then I can see how ugly you are” He wheezed, the reefer turning his laugh into a raucous cough.
“Fuck that, this beard stays on”
“ Tell you what” said the friend “You heard about that couple in Spain that lost their kid”
‘Portugal” said the bearded one as he took his turn on the joint. “Guilty parents I reckon”
“Where ever, what ever, apparently there’s all sorts of evidence that points to that but if they are found guilty it could uncover your little secret, you know they are connected ”.
“No way, bollocks, I covered my tracks well”
“Fuck off you twat” the friend coughed between explosions of mirth. “ You could be in shit Street. Mind you, you’ll survive, but in all honesty you’d be fucked mate”
“Your serious aren’t you, what a nightmare ” the bearded one uttered “ What the fuck do I do ? ”
“Tell yer what, if I can get them acquitted and everything stays secret, you shave off your beard!”
“Your joking, not the beard”
“Your beard or your world as you know it”. The friend spluttered as the roach burnt his lip and fingers at the same time.
“Ok your on, my beard for my freedom” He half chuckled as reached for the single malt…………..
August 27th, 2008 at 11:41 am
thatpoorpriest Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 11:31 am
The newspapers are still too scared. As GM has now contradicted press reports that the Oakley International contract is being terminated, the newspaper which printed it will probably be sued.
By the way, I’m having email problems this morning. Yahoo keeps telling me I’m forbidden and not authorised, and when I tried to find the enfantskidnapée (not sure how to spell it) website on Google, by putting in ‘enfantskid’, it asked me if I meant ‘infanticide’! I make no comment…….
August 27th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Châtelaine Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Hi Lone, good morning.
I think that talking to “all” this morning is limited to just a few of us
Morning!!
August 27th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Why don’t the newspapers pay for an interpreter and translate for example: one statement a day.
the papers would fly off the shelves.
they could keep that going for weeks and weeks.
especially if they could mention some of the inconsistancies in the headlines.
Couldn’t be any libel claims because they would be just the facts with no spin necessary.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:30 am
doris Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 11:28 am
But they did act; they made it perfectly clear that the timelines didn’t work - that’s why they wanted the reconstruction.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:28 am
is it possible to sue the PJ or perhaps the prosecutor for failing to act on this ludicrous set of dodgy timelines etc , surely its incompetence
Mand A
No, because the statement is purely imaginary
August 27th, 2008 at 11:25 am
AZ: I also agree that the people making the statements often refer to what other people did or saw, when they couldn’t possibly have known that because they weren’t there. I’m surprised that wasn’t pointed out to them.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Clarrie does seem to have gone quiet all of a sudden, but in every recent picture I have seen of him he looks more pugnacious.
AZ: I think JT says that Russ and Matt both went to check their children at 9.30, and it was Matt who, when he came back to the Tapas Bar, told her that Russ was staying in the apartment because their daughter was sick. Matt’s statement says he doesn’t know whether GM met anyone when he went to check the children because he didn’t mention it when he came back to the restaurant. Kate’s statement says he did. More inconsistencies.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Abraham Zapruder Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:54 am
While we wait for Russell O’Brien’s first statement, here are a few thoughts on what it might reveal. [...]
****
Good morning 2u2, Abraham.
Where can I find this handwritten timeline by Russell? Have only seen a very short one supposedly by Gerry…
August 27th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Hi Lone, good morning.
I think that talking to “all” this morning is limited to just a few of us
August 27th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Really? I’d have never guessed
August 27th, 2008 at 10:55 am
yeah great thanks - apparently there is absolutely no evidence of abduction still
August 27th, 2008 at 10:54 am
fine thanks and you?
August 27th, 2008 at 10:54 am
While we wait for Russell O’Brien’s first statement, here are a few thoughts on what it might reveal.
We know where he was at 6 pm on 3 May 07 – the Paraiso with the rest of the T7.
In her first statement, JT says that Russell, Matt and David left shortly after that for the “men’s tennis night.” Gerry was already on court by that time. The tapas women, minus Kate, were looking on. According to JT, at “around 7 EVERYONE went back to their apartments with their children. “ She gave a bath to the children though one of them was ill. I THINK she is saying that Russell was there for most/all of this time. She says they left for the Tapas Bar at 8.30. So for how long was Russell on the tennis courts? Did he or JT see Kate between 6 and 8.30?
Russell’s own handwritten timeline says that everyone had assembled for food by 8.45. This implies that he and JT were both there by 8.45 and possibly they arrived before. He says that at 9 pm Matt went to listen at the windows of 5A, B and D and ALL shutters were down. How did Russell know this? Was he there when Matt left the table to do this check? Russell says at 9.15 Gerry went to 5A and looked inside the kids’ room. How did Russell know this? Did he see Gerry go and come back? Did Gerry mention his meeting with Jes Wilkins?
Russell says that at 9.20 JT went to CHECK at 5D. At this point she sees the stranger carrying a child. Where was Russell at this point?
By 9.30 Russell’s timeline states he is IN 5 D due to a “poorly daughter” – does he mean he went there at 9.30, or had he been there a while? Why does he not mention Matt’s check at 9.30? How long had Russell been at 5 D and if more than 15 minutes why was it necessary for JT to check at 9.20? Where was Russell between 9.30 and 10 pm?
Wonder if Enfants Kindappe do his statement next.
Mods and Admin
The above statement is AZ’s own version and is not a portrayal of any witness statement
August 27th, 2008 at 10:54 am
morning lone how you doin?
August 27th, 2008 at 10:45 am
morning all
August 27th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Looking at the photos of the child on the back of the woman, can I be sure that the child was not Maddie.
M and A
The Police interviewed the family, they are peasant farmers , and indeed their small children are known to be blonde
August 27th, 2008 at 10:12 am
PeterMac Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Chenier,
Chateleine
And as the glaring inconsistencies in the statements are made more public each day, I suspect one or two more people will begin to start thinking.
Is it me, or has Clarrie gone very quiet lately ?
[...]
****
Unfortunately, we haven’t see any of these glaring inconsistencies in “public” yet, only on websites. The general public is still well in the dark, subsequently being fed propaganda, voir Bâtman”s post last night about an Irish tv programme [!]
And, yes, I was wondering the other day too about our Clarrie. Recent statements on behalf of McCs or Fund are from “A spokesman” …
August 27th, 2008 at 10:11 am
PeterMac
What could be greater than defending the world’s most responsible parents from the baying mob?
He’s probably at home hugging himself.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Chenier,
Chateleine
And as the glaring inconsistencies in the statements are made more public each day, I suspect one or two more people will begin to start thinking.
Is it me, or has Clarrie gone very quiet lately ?
The best form of defence may be attack, but perhaps even he is now beginning to realise that to say anything further might be professional suicide.
He does, after all have to get a job after Madeleine is found and returned safely home by M3
August 27th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Chatelaine
That is a question only Saul can answer.
I hadn’t a clue.
I need tea…