Madeleine McCann: Our Danny Baldwin And Using Maddie For PR
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann and Gerry McCann
NEW ZEALAND HERALD: “TV Review: Out of the treacle comes trouble for everyone”
If anyone has wondered whatever happened to Coro’s cheeky cockney Danny Baldwin (Bradley Walsh), who went missing from the soap not long ago, here he is…
Where’s Our Danny?
“…playing a cheeky cockney in the missing-child drama Torn, which started on TV One last night.”
Any good?
When Torn screened in Britain a year ago, there was some debate over its merits because of the Madeleine McCann case.
With or without Our Maddie, it was dire… “it was like wading through treacle… Or like running up and down a beach in thick sand.”
PC WORLD (online): “Bungie accused of using Madeleine McCann case to promote Halo – ‘Maddie, where are you?’”
PC World… Isn’t that where Gary Glitter took his hard drive to?
In an unfortunate cross-cultural coincidence, Halo developer Bungie has inadvertently drawn parallels to a famous child abduction case to promote its new Halo 3 expansion pack. In a new teaser trailer, which depicts a war-torn city landscape, various messages flash up on the screen, including one that asks “Maddie, where are you?”
Cross-cultural? Our Maddie is international…
For many people, particularly living in Britain, this seemingly innocuous phrase will bring back memories of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a three-year old British girl who was allegedly abducted from a Portuguese resort while on holiday with her parents. At the time of the abduction, the slogan “Find Maddie” and “Where’s Maddie?” featured prominently in British newspapers and international publicity campaigns around the world.
Innocuous? A missing child and some PR. What a coincidence, indeed. Still, Halo 3…
Bungie has denied any intent to create publicity by exploiting the McCann disappearance, with a representative claiming “This is both an unfortunate and unintended coincidence” on the official Halo forum.
Of course it is.
Posted: 29th, September 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (112) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- David Greenwood on I’m A Celebrity: Naked Katie Price Becomes Kate And Jordan ‘Dies’
- yampster on In Pictures: Erotica 2009 At Olympia, London (NSFW)
- Erotica Visitor on In Pictures: Erotica 2009 At Olympia, London (NSFW)
- Anorak on I’m A Celebrity: Mitch Winehouse Leaks News Of Amy’s Winehouse’s ‘Leaky’ Breasts
- percy on I’m A Celebrity: Mitch Winehouse Leaks News Of Amy’s Winehouse’s ‘Leaky’ Breasts
October 1st, 2008 at 2:06 am
Have not been on this site,or should i call iy shite? for a long time,as was disgusted with the way the Mc Canns were being slated on here,jokes being made about cuddle cat,and Maddie! Surprise,i return,and find its just the same old thing,filled with vile people who have nothing better to do than condemn people who have sadly lost their little gir. DISGUSTING!!!!
September 30th, 2008 at 8:26 am
SpongeBob Says:
Petermac
‘The person making the positive statement has the duty of proof. If they cannot prove it, their argument fails. Exactly the principle used in the English Criminal Law.’
Exactly.
And is it possible to prove that ‘they did it’
or is ‘there was no abduction’ the only argument left that you cannot, or need not, prove?”
Precisely. It appears not to be possible at the moment to “prove they did it”, which is why they have not been charged or convicted of any offence or crime. The law of all civilised countries recognises that the prosecution has the duty of proof. The defence to not have to prove innocence, merely to knock a hole in the prosecution case.
The “Abduction” allegation is a positive one, and therefore requires proof, facts, evidence. So far nothing has even begun to point in that direction.
Since there appear to be no facts, evidence or proof, we are forced to look at other options: to consider statistical probabilities, to think ‘outside the box’ and to consider other things which might have happened to a little girl over a year ago in a far off land, and to say that the “alleged abduction” is unsupported by the evidence.
What evidence there is points to other avenues of enquiry.
September 30th, 2008 at 8:08 am
yes i’m here, good morning
September 30th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Good morning - Anyone home ?
September 30th, 2008 at 12:00 am
yampster Says:
September 29th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Châtelaine
Wasn’t this a problem when you started work?
****
Good night
Sheets are satin BTW. Decided to scale it down so as to avoid repeated remarks…
September 29th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
and it’s good night from me too, good night sleep well and all that to whoever who is still around
September 29th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Châtelaine
Wasn’t this a problem when you started work?
September 29th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
goodnight chatleleine :~), yes i too drink red wine, and white, and rose
‘IF they didn’t have a DNA sample of Madeleine that would be a big mystery in itself. The child had been there for 5 days …’
yes, exactly, which means a change in bedding if that is so.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
sam Says:
September 29th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
[...] and i seriously doubt not being breastfed leads children to drink more.
****
I was breastfed for a very long time [even long in terms of what was normal at that time] and I’m still on red wine …
September 29th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
IF they didn’t have a DNA sample of Madeleine that would be a big mystery in itself. The child had been there for 5 days …
I am actually quite upset with the fact that the entire process on DVD has been available to 1,000’s of interested parties, in majority journalists/newspapers… And what have “we” been “fed” so far in terms of “facts”?
Thanks to Enfants kidnappés we’ve seen e.g. the first day statements of T9. What about the statements of early September just before the arguidos status? What about indeed [ Chenier and myself offering folding money ] the full reports and emails of the FSS? And so on …
Well. Good night to you Sam, Sponge, Marie et al.
Tomorrow is another day.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
spongebob, the breast feeding was an interesting example of what to governemnt will use to ‘explain’ things, i know i was breastfed and i know my kids weren’t after a few weeks, some things cannot be conveniently explained away by behaviours much as our governments would like it to be so, and i seriously doubt not being breastfed leads children to drink more.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
spongebob i am not sure re the validity of the evidence gathered and analysed because in other forums i have read some unsubstantiated claims that there may not have been a dna sample of madeleine available for cross reference of the samples gathered. i have read some really wierd stuff, such as there being no dna from madeleine and a cross match was made from the dna of her parents. it’s all quite confusing and one really needs to know, did the fss have a pure dna sample from madeleine in the first place to make their examinations with, even that apparently is not clear.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Garth received his salary and he went home.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Maravilha,
Yes I did.
Maybe he is on holidays.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Yes
September 29th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Did you all notice that Garth disappeared, after September the 20th?
September 29th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Chenier
Ah, ok
and I agree.
Despite being cast as a ‘pro’ I am more than willing to accept evidence that is presented to me. I might take from another angle, but the truth is that.
If it comes, and who am I to say it will not, I will be eager to read it. If I am wrong, then I am wrong
September 29th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Spongebob,
You enquired about the email; if you look back at the coverage you will see that edited highlights of the email were provided to the media before the media had had the chance to translate stuff from the DVD.
I said at the time that I would pay folding money to see the email in full, along with the 50 pages or so about the DNA evidence.
I’m still waiting…
September 29th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
What email Chenier?
September 29th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Sam
I did not know your child was disabled. I meant no offence by the breastfeeding example. It was an example that sprung to mind. Both our children were breastfed and have had the normal illnesses that you would expect - I meant, despite the research, things happen. Most children of the sixties were not breastfed, including me, with no ill effects, other than the self abuse such as drinking too much etc.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
The 15 out of 19 is in the edited highlights of the email touted by Clarrie…
September 29th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
No Sam there is science and other evidence.
The dog’s evidence, whilst interesting, is and should not be enough. You must question the safety of such evidence in isolation, however much you might believe the McCanns of skullduggery.
The DNA evidence is all a mismash. 15 out of 19 in some reports; being enough to pointer FSS family members being another…
September 29th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
chataleine, enjoy
September 29th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
spongebob, by all accounts it wasn’t science that discounted any sound result but more that science could not corroberate the dogs findings and as such it is, or was, more a legal binding. some evidence is admissable, some isn’t, that really hasn’t much to do with the science but more perhaps to do with interpretation.
i really dislike the tendency of politicians, for instance, to use or abuse science to further, or create policies,scare tactic at their best, or, fear breeding. as in oh my goodness, i did not breastfeed is that why my child is disabled, personally i can safely discount that theory for myself as i have the same disability and i was breastfed but it is worrying that such claptrap is used and spread to promote this or that according to whatever someone else thinks we should be doing or not doing.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
I’m quite happy this thread has quieted down a bit. I have been reading 3 books already
Nice things about books is that they have a beginning, a middle and an ENDING.
So, back to a book again.
Have a nice evening
September 29th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
The people who are making the definitive statement are the “there was no abduction camp” so by your thesis PM, they are required to do the proving, or did that escape your attention.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Sam
Yes, statistics are useful but they are not all.
Tell me, if you drink more than 2 units per night, are you sick? if you didn’t breastfeed your baby, did it make him sick, thick, as was in the news recently?
Science in this this case have discounted any sound result. The dogs could be indicative at best, and far more evidence would be required to support it.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
spongebob, usually in science there is no proof either, it is more that results are either deemed to significant or not according to whatever the parameters are.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Petermac
‘The person making the positive statement has the duty of proof. If they cannot prove it, their argument fails. Exactly the principle used in the English Criminal Law.’
Exactly.
And is it possible to prove that ‘they did it’
or is ‘there was no abduction’ the only argument left that you cannot, or need not, prove?
September 29th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
chateleine, why would she have been in another apartment ? i simply think if no cadaverine scent was detected on her bed then she was not in that bed after her death (if she was dead and if the scent came from her body).
and, if no dna of madeleine was found there then perhaps her bedding had been changed. as to rearrangoing of the furniture in the apartment, i’m not sure what he means other than the beds were pushed to the walls to place the cots in the center of the room perhaps.
September 29th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
sam Says:
September 29th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
chatelaine, i read that they only sent the other dog in if the first dog signalled.
***
Exactly. Yet, I think it might have been interesting to send in the 2nd too,even if the 1st one didn’t signal anything. All we know is that Amaral claims that apt 5A had been “re-arranged”. Madeleine’s bed looks like it hasn’t been slept in and she herself is missing. So … she might have been in another apartment., if you know what I mean.