A Therapist’s Words On Madeleine McCann In Belgium
KATLEEN Sampermans is sat at a table. She’s the “child therapist” who saw Madeleine McCann dining in a Belgian restaurant with two adults.
Ms Sampermans is “100 per cent sure” she saw Madeleine. But by the time she had spoken to the waitress and alerted police to her discovery, the trio had “fled”, says the Express.
Now she’s talking to the press. “I feel very guilty that I did not do more when I had the chance,” says she. “I was hesitating. The day after I felt so sick that I had to go to the doctor.”
She tells us: “The only thing that has been in my mind has been the parents of Madeleine. I would say to them that if they want to contact me I would be happy to speak to them.”
About what? How she saw their daughter alive and well and drinking a strawberry milkshake? Perhaps as a child therapist this Madeleine spotter could advise the McCanns on the best way to heal their twin children?
“I would also like to say to them I am so sorry that I did not take the girl and they find her.” So says the child psychologist.
Or as one Anorak writer notes, Sampermans may also be sorry that she did not just ask the child if her name was Madeleine. Dashing over to a table and snatching a child is an ill-advised move, even for an expert in child welfare.
She says the little girl was laughing one minute and then sad. This she tells us is “not normal”. “The parent’s behaviour was very strange. They both spoke to the child but never to each other.”
Strange? Perhaps they were just a typical dysfunctional family at a café, or a group so at ease they find no need for small talk?
“As time went by I became more and more sure it was Madeleine but I did not know what to do.”
The man waited by the car - “his eyes were darting around everywhere, scanning everyone on the terrace.” Was he worried? Was he wondering why this strange woman was staring at him?
Sampermans gathered herself. She called the police. She wrote down three digits of the car number plate in which Madeleine and her dining companions had “fled”. She told all to the Daily Express.
And the Express tell us…
August 6th, 2007 at 11:42 am
It seems new Madeleine witness Katleen Sampermans (Belgium witness) makes something of a habit of being in the right place at the right time. Here is a report of her witnessing a house-fire in Tongeren and of her raising the alarm:
http://www.hetvolk.be/Article/Detail.aspx?articleID=nbra21062003_055
This report can be transalted (very roughly) using this site. Just cut and paste the URL using this:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/tr
Has this woman come into contact with the McCanns whilst they were in Amsterdam?
She certainly seems a popular face in the news offices. Here is another report in which she features:
http://www.nieuwsblad.be/Article/Detail.aspx?ArticleID=GSREH90V
She’s also the second Madeleine witness to be a member of the CARE profession. The first was Mari Olli Pollard who spotted Madeleine in Morocco. She was a retired-Social Worker. She and her husband Raymond Pollard also used to live in Groby, Leics - 10 mins drive from the McCanns in Rothley, Leics (in fact Gerry McCann’s hospital - Glenfield Hospital - is on Groby Road).
Coincidences are stacking up.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
It’s very unlikely to be Madeleine.
We can all hope for a miracle, but it’s like a million billion to one.
PS Anorak - it’s heal not heel.
August 6th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
maybe it is anoraks achiles heel, well why not, nothing else to say that hasnt been said already !!
August 6th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
he may mean bringing them up Manon, not that they are ill and need healing
August 6th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Heal - the griefmongers will out…
August 6th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
The DNA resaults come on wednesday..
A man that was on a holiday in portugal around the time madeline was kidnapped, said he saw that guy in the sketch, all the time at the hotel bar..
i really hope it was madeleine.
August 6th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Probably another wild goose chase…why didn’t the ‘career’ woman (they’re the best witnesses you know) alert the police instead of dithering about? OK, if she made a mistake and it wasn’t Madeline, at least she tried. But offering to talk to the McCann’s about possibly seeing their daughter and letting her get away..? What’s the point in that?
I wonder if someone lower down the social ladder could’ve done a better job..?
August 6th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Yep, someone lower down the social ladder could’ve done a better job - oops, sorry, thought you were talking about looking after the kids.
August 6th, 2007 at 11:44 pm
I have deliberately avoided commenting on this case, but I think it utterly ridiculous that a so called “health care professional” would be deemed as a more reliable witness than the average - trustworthy person on the street. Did everyone forget about Beverley Allitt and Harold Shipman?
I can tell that Sampermans has no children herself (sorry, I don’t know how I do that but I can always tell), so it is possible that she doesn’t have a clue what the parents or children are going through? A woman in her position should at least be able to empathise with others. She says she is 100% certain she saw Madeleine - in which case, she deserves a severe slap at the very least, for not doing anything to help.
If she has made this up to get media attention - then she deserves to be flogged in public.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:27 am
Hopefully the child therapist was correct. Does that appear just as possible as Madleine staying dead in the apartment for at least two hours? I don’t know but maybe. If the child therapist is correct and the child was Madeleine the lady deserves a trophy regardless if she acted soon enough or not. Dna has been collected, a picture has been developed if not previously, a nationality established, etc. Most parents would observe correctly, with enough observation, whether people appear to be actual parents of a child, if people appear nervous, if a child appears sad, etc. In this case if a child therapist made an accurate observation then there is something to be said for it but because she was at the right place at the right time and highly aware of Madeleine’s case and had insight, if she is correct. I see the point. The most I could determine about the cafe are the waiters and waitresses were younger maybe not parents and not as considering for that reason.
There are a number of reasons the man might have appeared nervous other than he has an abducted child, although that is one reason. I don’t understand the significance in this case of the mention of the couple not speaking to each other. I remember my daughter once telling me while she was at a friend’s the parents sent messages back and forth by their daughter but avoided talking. They weren’t into anything illegal but they might have been angry at each other. Just an example which okay might have been significant that photfit and the lady with child were angry at each other? I don’t know. Without being there and observing it is hard to know if the therapist lady actually noticed something unusual about behavior first or if the appearance of the people, haven’t seen the lady with the child, suggested they were different than the child in some way. So, did the lady with the photofit have a British husband at one time or were they keeping a child for someone else or is there something more? At what point did the lady consider Madeleine? Right away it looked like Madeleine or after the lady noticed an appearance difference observed something really unusual behavior and then thought of Madeleine? Or, did the lady oberserve an appearance difference then get Madeleine on her mind and then the behavior? Or had the lady been looking for Madeleine? Just curious. No matter how it goes wouldn’t necessarily matter. I don’t know what happened about the sighting of the other therapy lady who thought she saw Madeleine whether that was dismissed or did photofit and her description look the same? I am curious because the information came across more that the first therapy lady sighting immediate came across as having to do with appearance (”couldn’t be her father”} and then she noticed the child being further away from the man, etc. If there is a screaming appearance difference the two ladies recognize, if the same person, and then unusual behavior notice I would think other people would detect that too.
The people who would recognize would have to be somewhat well aware of Madeleine to put together. What appearance did the people have at the other Belgium Madeleine sighting where someone did call out Madeleine? Did those people notice an appearance difference or they just thought the girl looked like Madeleine. I ask because the more people seeing the same thing… So did the photofit guy have a trunk load of drugs and got nervous or did he have Madeleine? or both? Did he have a stolen car but not Madeleine? or on and on reasons he could have been nervous. I think what might be a factor to consider is showing the lady a lot of pictures of Madeleine after the fact and was she 100 per cent sure after looking at the pictures. Wouldn’t she be able to determine if the child she observed so carefully was the child in pictures shown to her? Are many people being wrongly identified in line ups? I don’t know. There are two people or more to show Madeleine pictures, the waitress, the therapist lady and maybe more. That would be a lot of info none of us are privy so I suspect more is known at this time whether the photofit man is suspect for having Madeleine or just suspect in general. I don’t know if the place sells alcohol but the sighting by another person who said he saw photofit earlier date suggests photofit drinks. I still don’t understand the lack of a photofit of the woman with the photofit man and the child. After all, she is suspected of having Madeleine too and wouldn’t that help to identify people more quickly? There must be some reason not to show her picture. For all we know there is a nut case with a woman and child and that child is in danger whether it’s Madeleine or not? I don’t know. The fact is there was a letter and somehow someone had an interest to do that and why exactly is unclear. Then there is an area and then a language and then nervous behavior and then a lot of reason to track down photofit for whatever reason, just in case. I would think with enough Madeleine awareness people in the general public, un theraputic, would be able to make appearance, behavior, or Madeleine observations. There is either lack of being in public, not much in public, careful selection of public, or around type of people who aren’t as observant, or only with people who know, or not enough awareness in areas about Madeleine. If photofit and the lady have Madeleine and go around people that know you would think that a huge reward would bribe “greedy and unscupulous” people? Could there be people have tried to report sightings or unusual circumstances which have been overlooked for one reason or the other? Maybe not the same photofit or something like that but possibly connected? I suppose I am hopeful Madeleine is with someone than the something happened in the apartment theory. P.S. I have noticed on news sites that appears a 10,000 reward for Madeleine and I thought it much higher. You would think most “greedy and unscrupulous” people would be interested in any large reward but just in case there appears confusion about how much awareness there is about the actual amount? and maybe news places are offering another reward unclear
August 7th, 2007 at 12:52 am
Okay Catherine I agree that the therapist lady might have actually held back more than many non therapist people I can think of no doubt a little if she is wrong look like a doo doo so did her ego get in the way of her taking quicker action and does she need a little therapy to act on what might be danger LOL If the child was Madeleine the lady tried, had insight, wanted to do the right thing and maybe she was careful not to do the wrong thing and insult innocent people, where in reality other than an abduction case, unusual, she would have no reason to act quickly from what she observed. Poor lady! All I can say is there are other non thera people’s sightings and observations to consider and may have been overlooked because they aren’t therapists and because the info doesn’t fit something and there could be reason for that too. Only pros and doctors have insight remember but we are looking for a doctors child remember So much for fun at the brain pickers!
August 7th, 2007 at 8:02 am
[...] of the black Volvo in which Madeleine McCann was removed from a Belgian restaurant. Madeleine was spotted by Katleen Sampermans. The “33-year-old therapist is professionally qualified in child welfare”. The Express places [...]
August 7th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Catherine L said ‘I can tell that Sampermans has no children herself (sorry, I don’t know how I do that but I can always tell), so it is possible that she doesn’t have a clue what the parents or children are going through?’
Well according to This Is London:
‘The woman, who has a seven-year-old daughter, was alone in the cafe when she noticed the child. ‘The girl was often looking at me,’ she said. ‘Her eyes were very big and strong.’ ‘
A lot of snide remarks have been made about Sampermans being a health professional. I doubt there’s been anything like as much coverage of the Madeleine case in Belgium as there as been here, and it doesn’t seem as if Sampermans became sure the child was Madeleine until she saw a photograph after the couple had driven off.
Her only mistake in my view was to say ‘100%’ certain, when she should have said something like ‘90% certain’ to leave a margin for error and not raise the hopes of the McCanns too much. But then again maybe she said ‘100% certain’ to make sure the police acted, otherwise she’d never have been able to forgive herself if the child did indeed turn out to be Madeleine.
It sounds as if she was watching them and thought something was odd about them but didn’t make the connection with Madeleine until it was too late. She cannot be blamed for this as we really do have no idea how aware she was of the Madeleine case in the first place. This was Belgium, remember.
August 7th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
Maybe I am confused but I read where they were having a birthday party in the restaurant. Did this mean the child and 2 adults were with that party?? I would not think so however I also would not think 2 people that had a kidnapped child would dare show up anywhere in public with her.
Not sure what all the fuss is about with this lady’s profession. We NEED more like her out there!!
Regardless - if she has followed this like I have then she KNOWS she would know Madeleine if she saw her. After all this, I know if I saw that child I would risk jail time and my dignity to run up to her, take her away from them start screaming to get attention and others to help.
I hope the DNA is Madeleine’s. That would “wipe” out the traces of blood theories then.
Have a Good Day and say a PRAYER for Madeleine, her family, and those ligitiment authorities looking for her non stop (I HOPE).
August 7th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
P.S.
Just saw the UK Express article “MADELEINE LOOKALIKE SNATCHED BY PERVERT”
It has a picture of the 5 yr old missing girl and under the pic “YLENIA: The missing five-year-old bears a striking resemblance to Madeleine”
SORRY - that child looks Nothing like Madeleine. The only resemblance is they are girls and close in age and missing. . . unfortunately.
August 8th, 2007 at 2:36 am
Pat, Please write in shorter paragraphs (ideally 3-5 paragraphs). Long paragrapsh are hard to read, and few people bother.
August 8th, 2007 at 4:25 am
I have a feeling Madeleine will be found on Thursday.
August 8th, 2007 at 4:51 am
Ylenia and Madeleine don’t closely resemble one another facially, but they are similar in age, size, and ‘type’ — a cute blonde girl with a chin-length haircut with a fringe. Paedophiles usually are attracted to a certain ‘type’, just as normal people are — except that for the paedophile, one of the desired characteristics is that the object of interest is a child. So it’s not entirely in error to draw comparisons between the two missing little girls.
August 8th, 2007 at 8:44 am
Alan the description I have seen involving the man walking off with a child, possibly believed to have been Madeleine, is he was 35 - 40 and the Swiss guy is 67. He has been on our news too along with Robert Murat. No mention of other sightings here.
There have never been follow up reports about the alleged sighting of Madeleine at a church. It would be good if the people who actually have Madeleine take her to church, buy a pink dress for party, etc. Just to think the people have to function just like anyone else, gas, somewhere to live, clothes, food, money, other habits and no mention if the car was new, used, etc. I prefer the people who took Madeleine to church or the ones having a b day party have her over the other news choices at the time. Hopefully the man wasn’t wired but wild eyed nervous.
I assume the man speaks English too or some way he and the lady communicate? Also, the news is unclear whose b day. It is possible that would indicate someone with Madeleine birth date. Without observing it is hard to know if the sighting would suggest people who have Madeleine as their own or a transfer but it is hard to imagine people wanting to be seen. People wanting to be seen, as I have seen suggested, would have a lot of nerve and not sound like people who took her for their own.
If the man carried the child that could mean he had more self interest in something about the situation than the lady? Just a guess. Maybe one of the people wants to function as normal but not the other. Just another guess. How many people would know or observe the circumstances and not say considering the offer? How many people see and don’t know although something should be obvious to most and why?
How many of us really expect to see Madeleine? The picture I see of the therapist appears more of a precise person, as opposed to one who see something everywhere, so I would be inclined to put more faith in her judgement for that reason alone. Also, she would look more like people Madeleine is familiar.
Anna Hopefully I am not one of the ones that came across snide. I am around more lawyer types than therapist types. Lawyer types like therapist types if it makes their case and there are a lot of lawyer jokes too! Otherwise, intangible information can be chancy, maybe correct maybe not with danger of too great of value placed, for an accurate outcome in some situations. Is that fair? All of which really has nothing to do with the therapist lady and this case. The British people’s “spiteful” carrying on is a little interesting to observe. LOL Maybe sometimes stirring the pot brings forth something valuable. I hope so. Also, Lisa I hope you know.
August 8th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Oh, forgot to say the people who took Madeleine did have a lot of nerve so???????
August 10th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
NEWSFLASH:
“Madeleine & her 2 abductors spotted seated at Belgium Cafe table”
In other news :
A man says he spotted Bin Laden shopping in HMV on Oxford Street. The man who wishes to remain anonymous consulted the sales assistant who served Bin Laden and then went to call the police, but Bin Laden had already fled the premises. DNA test are now being carried out on a empty carton of Macdonald’s cola that Bin Laden was seen drinking from.
Results due next Wednesday.
August 12th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
The DNA test of the CIA about Bin Laden shopping on Oxfort Street, was negative.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:24 am
[...] And her name is not Madeleine McCann. Her name is Sjanneke Hofstede. She was the girl spotted by the child therapist who told the police and then posed for pictures in the Express. She was 100% sure Sjanneke was [...]