Madeleine McCann: Stephanie Bysh And Ariella Encroach On Praia Da Luz
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann and Gerry McCann
STEPHANIE Bysh is mother to Ariella d’Gama, who has passed a while in a children’s home.
What has it got to do with Madeleine McCann. Well, get this:
DAILY MAIL: “British mother whose daughter was taken into care by Portuguese police after she ‘went out drinking’”
A British man told police that her mother Stephanie Bysh, 44, had been ‘drinking heavily’… The town is five miles from Praia da Luz, where missing toddler Madeleine McCann disappeared in May last year from a rented apartment.
Yes, just five miles.
Yesterday, it was all just 15 miles from where our Maddie went missing.
The day before that it was all occuring 25 miles from Praia da Luz.
Anorak estimates that inside week, little Ariella will be actually inside the apartment used by the McCanns that fateful trip…
Such are the facts…
Posted: 29th, August 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (952) | 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 30th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
AZ
interesting post by Pamela…not a clue whats she is on about
August 30th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
1. All the families listed had children abducted from their beds, in their homes, with their parents in attendance. In the case of Polly Klaas, she was taken from a room full of other girls at a sleepover, with her parents next door. Elizabeth Smart was taken from the room she shared with her sister, with her parents down the hall. Jon Benet Ramsey was taken from her room, between those of her brother and her parents, the Groene children were taken after their mother, stepfather, and older brother had been bludgeoned to death. Jessica Lunsford was taken out the front door of her grandparents’ home as they slept.
2. If Madeleine had been stalked, as had most of the children listed above and as we have at least some reason to believe, it would have likely made little difference where her parents were. If her disappearance was a crime of opportunity, their presence might have made a difference.
3. Either way, the “bad guy” is the person who took her–not her parents.
4. It still isn’t a good idea to leave children unattended. A lesson Madeleine’s parents have learned the hard way, and one which I have heard them admit. I’m sorry so many people seem to have missed that part.
Simple enough for you?
August 30th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Julie! Thanks for this Darling - but I think that the Half-Wits were desperate for a bit of blood-letting in my direction anyway LOL.
Julie said …….. ‘Most of the posters assumed I was referring directly to Coco in my post - I WAS NOT! (Apologies Coco if they did assume this, but jumping to conclusions is not a healthy habit!)’
It just goes to show how much power a feeble-minded and frail creature like me can have over the Super-Duper educated chattering classes! LOL! LOL!
Clouseau has just ousted one of these in his post to Professor Pam!
‘Pamela
ffs what the F*** are you on about…put it in simple terms for us comprehensiv lot’
I love you CLOUSEAU! - I love your forthrightness! It’s what she needs!
I think DAISY just needs a bit of good sex to get rid of some of her inertia! - It works for me! LOL
SAINT MARIE NICHOLAS - DISPELLER OF ALL MYSTIQUE AND MYSTERY - Thank you for posting that super and poignant article - reminding us that M would not be missing if the parents weren’t such bad parents!
August 30th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Interesting posts by Doris, anything to do with SOCA I wonder?
August 30th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Chenier accuses Police of mass hysteria:
“It was a classic example of mass hysteria…”
The Police prone to mass hysteria - good one
Whats next A & E doctors and nurses prone panic and indecisiveness?
As ever Chenier, your mind is as sharp as a razor.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Matt. :
Daisy
Yes….and even the infamous Dr Shipman still had ex-patients of his saying that
he was the best GP a person could have, even after his trial and being found
Guilty and Jailed”
And never forget those Prison Social workers who fall in love with and marry the most hideous murderers. And are sometimes in turn murdered by them, which is poetic, but rather pathetic.
Some types of criminal are very controlling, of their own emotions, and by extension of the emotions of others. People are taken in again and again by con-artists, despite knowing their background.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
liza
I completely agree with your post, and specially the last line.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Pamela
ffs what the F*** are you on about…put it in simple terms for us comprehensiv lot
August 30th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I think we need to talk about it. We need it all the more, because we get the feeling that we have been manipulated by PRs and media. So at least, it allows us to exchange our views, and to check that others feel the same.
It is a very unsettling thought, to think that the parents didn’t do anything wrong, according to the law, in leaving the children alone. We wonder if it is a good thing, for society,and for children in general, to consider it a lawful behaviour. it is an important issue. it is unsettling to think that some political people can have their word about a police investigation. We wonder if it is OK. It is a very unsettling thought to think that some millionnaires decide to offer the services of a PR to parents who are witnesses in an investigation. It seems very unfair for the parents who don’t get such help, and it is unsettling to think anyway that it is through PR and media pressure that a child can be saved. It is unsettling to think that the millionnaire meets other witnesses. It is unsettling to think that an investigation in the disappearance of a child has been archived because the main witnesses wouldn’t go for a reconstuction, and because the laobratory changed their conclusions and the analysis can’t be checked by another laboratory because the samples are lost or destroyed, or something similar, we don’t know exactly.
I don’t se why it is harmful to ask such questions. I can’t see how it can do a large disservice to law abiding citizens. There must be some ways to counter the press and PRs in a democracy.
August 30th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Pamela said:
‘Sorry, I just can’t let this slide. Do you not think that maybe, just MAYBE, the standing ovation could have been a way of saying, “We’re with you. We sympathize with your loss and are hoping against hope that your child can be recovered.”?’
No.
It was a classic example of mass hysteria…
August 30th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Pamela said:
‘Achieving celebrity through taking a horrible personal loss and building on it for the good of others’
I suppose that would be admirable, had that actually happened.
But, as a question of fact, it didn’t.
There has never been an occasion when the McCanns have ever admitted that what they did was wrong; endeavouring to persuade others that leaving small children alone with no adults to care for them is responsible behaviour hardly falls into the category of improving the well being of others.
And the whole Amber Alert caper is a depressing example of Moral Panic legislation…
August 30th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Pamela says:
It doesn’t really MEAN anything, and it doesn’t really DO anything: you all are clearly vested in your various personal theories, and no one appears to have budged in the months I’ve been dropping in.
Wouldn’t it be more correct if the sentence read as follows:
It doesn’t really MEAN anything, and it doesn’t really DO anything: WE all are clearly vested in OUR various personal theories, and no one appears to have budged in the months I’ve been dropping in.
And we do differ as to our ideas about the ‘good for others’ could have been achieved by the McC’s: in my opinion, that result would have been accomplished by a loud and clear
NEVER LEAVE YOUR CHILDREN ALONE (like we did)
August 30th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Sorry, I just can’t let this slide. Do you not think that maybe, just MAYBE, the standing ovation could have been a way of saying, “We’re with you. We sympathize with your loss and are hoping against hope that your child can be recovered.”?
August 30th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Achieving celebrity through taking a horrible personal loss and building on it for the good of others versus achieving imaginary celebrity by posing as someone or something one isn’t in an on-line forum? Hmmmmm, now which is more honorable?
MN, again, all thanks for the work you’ve saved us lazy French students–a big obrigadA–but the forum could go on forever with posters just posting pro- and anti- editorials. It doesn’t really MEAN anything, and it doesn’t really DO anything: you all are clearly vested in your various personal theories, and no one appears to have budged in the months I’ve been dropping in. There was just one big drop off when the parents were named suspects and another when they were cleared–and, like it or not, that’s what happened–the rest is just semantics.
As for the author’s snide (you say toMAYto; I say toMAHto) question about an adult being present: well, we’ll never really know that, so debating it serves no one, BUT I do think it does a rather large disservice, not only to to McCanns, but also to the Ramseys, Smarts, Groenes, Klaases, and hundreds of other families.
How about the Ownby family (whose recovery of their son, I hope, brings some sliver of faith or possibility)? Should they have been there when their thirteen year old stepped off the school bus?
Look, do I believe the parents should have left their children alone while they dined by the pool? Well, no, but my concern would be that a child wakes and has an accident or there is a fire. Most of us don’t believe that happened, and if it didn’t, and if Madeleine did not die at the hands of her parents, then they are NOT the bad guys. This thing of “they are guilty if they killed her, guilty if she died by accident, and guilty if she was abducted” doesn’t work for me.
August 30th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Sam,
I think the parents were considered the victims, even more than the child herself, and everyone wanted to show their sympathy to them, police included. Being photogenic, even when filled with anguish and sorrow, they became icons. We shared their agony through the media, and they acquired a sort of religious status.
It is a now sacrilege to question their ingenuousness. Non believers are callous, and not patriotic, since it was foreigners who officially suspected them. Books against them are forbidden in England, they should be declared unlawful and burnt, and those who talk about the book, or read it, are fishy (probabbly from the sardine-munching) characters!!!
August 30th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
marie n, matt corrected it before i could, i was mowing the lawn. the thing about this standing ovation, it did then make me wonder why, trying to find some more acceptable reason, and wonder whether he was a copper gone underground. except copper and secret service people are not allowed to pose as doctors or priests, unless perhaps they train to be one. more rational perhaps would be to believe that madeleine came to harm in that appartment and the media circus and fund that followed were a snowball effect which went out of control.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Yes I still wonder why they gave him a standing ovation. It shows the influence of the media, how they can paralyse our own judgement.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Sorry Sam, I called you Matt because Matt also sent me a link.
Thank you anyway.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
it is ludicrous, for what, losing his child ?
August 30th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
thanks artemis.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Nevermind Matt. I know from an American article that G McC was given a standing ovation by the police, and that the author of the article found it ludicrous. I agree with him!
August 30th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
i don’t want to feather the rumour mill, but i do make mistakes and they can lead to more mistakes etc obviously.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
yes marie n, made a mistake there. sorry about that.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
dear mod, can you pull the post/link i posted above, i think it might be misleading.
M&A
Artemis
Done, Sam.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
ah but reading that, that might be wrong too. sorry.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Matt
So, he wasn’t given an award from bravery. He just attended the ceremony , and was only given a standing ovation.I am relieved. Good cricket!
August 30th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Time for some Cricket.
Good sleuthing !!!!
August 30th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Matt,
Thanks for the link!
Daisy
Did you read Totje’s little story the other day, about the irreparable slandering of the rabi?
August 30th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Daisy Says:
August 30th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Some people…strewth.
I hope nothing seriously untoward results from her misplaced affection.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Matt,
That reminds me of a story I heard today: A woman, who has 2 teenage daughters, still defends her ex boyfriend (not the father of the girls) even after he has been convicted of abusing the daughter of his previous girlfriend. He is in jail and she still loves him!!????