Madeleine McCann: Michaela Walczuch ‘Seen’, Jenny Murat Says And Kate McCann Screams
MADDY WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE – WHY WE KNOW SHE IS ALIVE. Investigators say she was abducted”
Aren’t the Portuguese police working on the theory that Madeleine McCann is dead..?
Maybe. But detectives at the Metodo 3 agency hear a woman tell of a blonde girl in a van with a woman 90 miles from Praia da Luz
Says Francisco Marco, who heads the team of Spanish private detectives: “We’re 100 per cent sure she is alive. We are very close to finding the kidnapper”
Hurry! This is only a six-month contract. More progress reports to follow…
Page 7: “Madeleine hope – We’re convinced she was snatched say investigators.” Although the evidence to support their convictions appears uncertain
“Murat’s mum insists: “He was with me” – Jenny Murat says of the McCanns’ three friends who claim to have seen her son Robert Murat loitering close to the couples’ apartment - Russell O’Brien, Rachel Oldfield and Fiona Payne: “I just don’t know why they are lying…We were sitting in the kitchen talking the whole evening”
DAILY MIRROR front page: “MURAT’S GIRL ‘HAD MADDY - Witness: I saw her bundle child into car”
A witness tells detectives (private ones) she “saw Michaela Walczuch hand a youngster to a man 90 miles from Praia da Luz”
Is she certain? Maybe blonde women all look similar to Spanish eyes, just like blonde Moroccan children can look like Madeleine McCann?
The PIs show the witness a series of photos. One picture is of Michaela Walczuch
Pages 4 and 5: “Murat’s girl and the child in a blanket – TEC’S ‘100% SURE TO FIND HER’”
The witness says they saw Ms Walczuch pass the child from one car to another on May 5. Her memory is vivid…
Says Clarence Mitchell: “Kate and Gerry are extremely encouraged by this latest sighting
On tonight’s Panorama TV show, viewers hear that “GP” Kate was offered a deal to confess – she would get just two years choky for manslaughter. Replied Kate, as overheard by her sister-in-law Philomena: “No, no.”
Says Philomena: “The emotion…her disgust, everything was being conveyed, the anger was palpable, you could feel it.”
Philomena was not there. She was on the phone to the McCanns’ holiday apartment
“’McCanns not killers…child was abducted’” – So says the Mirror’s Anton Antonowisz, the man they named twice, from the city of New York, New York
He has seen the CBS show 48Hours. Joseph Moura is a Boston-based PI. And he says Madeleine was abducted
THE SUN front page: “KIDNAP SENSATION – MURAT’S GIRL ‘HAD MADDIE’”
Michaela Walczuch is a “German divorcee”
Page 7: “WITNESS SAW HER HAND OVER CHILD – Suspect Murat’s girlfriend accused on Maddie”
We know the name Michaela Walczuch. But we don’t know who the witness is…
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE PARENTS ‘WE LIED’ – Amazing new revelation
Pages 8 and 9: They lied? So says Joseph Moura for CBS entertainment, USA: “They would have had absolutely no possibility of seeing someone going in or out of that apartment from where they were that evening. They may have lied about being able to see it because they feel guilty about leaving the kids. But these white lies would not have helped the police investigation”
“Kate insists she is a caring mum” – Says Kate McCann in a video diary being made by a friend, John Corner: “There’s not a day goes by that I’m not thinking ‘Why did I think that was OK?’ I have to keep telling myself I am a responsible parent. We were dining very close to the children and we were checking on them very, very regularly. We are very responsible parents and we love our children so much”
“MURAT ‘LOVER’ RIDDLE” – Says Michaela Wulczuch: “I am not answering your questions”
DAILY MAIL page 5: “Murat’s lover ‘was seen with girl who looked like Maddie’”
A column-high picture of Michaela Walczuch
“KATE’S FURY AT POLICE OFFER OF A DEAL” - Gerry McCann’s older sister Philomena McCann says she heard the “39-year-old GP’s anguished response during a phone call from the couple’s apartment in Praia da Luz”
Says she: “My sister Patricia phoned me and, while we were talking, I could hear this screaming – shouting and screaming. It as 3am and Trish ran out with the mobile and I could hear her say to me, ‘Hold on, it’s Kate’. There I am listening to Kate screaming at the lawyer “No. No”
Is Kate McCann on a mobile phone to Patricia while Patricia is talking on another phone with Philomena?
“LIE DETECTOR TEST SNUBBED” – Dan Cargill has offered to test Kate McCann. Mr Cargill is the chairman of the British and European Polygraph Association. You might know him as the lying expert on TV’s Trisha. The McCanns declined his selfless offer
Says Mr Cargill: “I don’t think it was the McCanns’ fault. I was left with the impression the while thing was a PR exercise”
Says Clarence Mitchell: “Of course they are not going to take the test. It is inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy”
DAILY TELEGRAPH page 15: “Madeleine police ‘have not ruled out abduction’”
Says Alipio Ribeiro, had of the Policia Judiciaria: “We are assessing all possibilities. New information reaches us every week. Doors are never closed in these cases because there’s always the surprise element”
THE TIMES page 21: “Madeleine was seized by predator who watched me leave flat, says father”
Says Gerry McCann: “I’ve no doubt that Madeleine was targeted and that makes us sick to the core to think that someone was watching us and our daughter and then targeted her. I think the true word is a predator
“They’ve watched me go in, come back out and then they’ve thought: ‘That’s the window of opportunity to get in and get back out’”
Says Alipio Ribeiro: “We have stronger assurances on certain aspects of the investigation, but it is also true . . . that we still do not have the solution.”
THE INDEPENDENT, THE GUARDIAN: No Madeleine news today
Posted: 19th, November 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,289) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- pete on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
April 14th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
ANCHORS AWEIGH! Methinks:- SEND IN MACREA?
December 17th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Clarence Mc Cann, whilst rubbishing everything about the PJ; strangely, when a certain man offered to put the McCann’s through a lie detector, Mr Mitchell said no, because it is inadmissable in Portuguese court. Seem’s to me that Team Mccann are picking through portuguese laws like a pick and mix sweet stall; accepting the laws that suit them, and rubbishing the ones that don’t. What I’d like to hear from Mr Mitchell is, that no, the Mccann’s must not take a lie detector test because it is inadmissable in a Portuguese court, and yes, the McCanns should face prosecution for the fact that their neglect has resulted in their child’s fate, as this is how it would be in Portuguese justice system. If a lie detector was admissable in Portuguese courts, Mr Mitchell would be rubbishing it, and various corrupt brown nosing experts would be rubbishing the validity of such a test. Maybe Gerry and Kate and Clarence will be sainted in the near future for what has happened to them, I mean they are obviously completely absolutely fastidiously innocent aren’t they. I mean if you were so convinced of your innocence, you wouldn’t have a problem taking a lie detector test. Especially as they both bleated on that they would be happy to take one, but the minute a legitimat offer is made, they suddenly don’t want to. It’s just words, rattling in the voice box, with as much substance as their remorse.
November 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 am
[...] Anorak - I have a CCTV in my youngest’s bedroom - saves on having to use the stair lift every 10 mins and possibly waking 3yr old. Any parent of a 2 or 3 yr old will know that there are nights the kids wake. Not often but it does happen. My 3 yr old climbs Continue Reading [...]
November 21st, 2007 at 9:30 am
I am happy to believe that Madeleine was abducted by someone who had watched the movements of the Tapas 9 and had targeted the child as being the right “type” for whatever he/she is involved in, I still think that is the most likely scenario as I have said before. I also believe that - once all the hoo-ha about her eye blemish was trumpeted from the rooftops - said abductor/s dumped her like a hot brick and that is why I am also convinced we are looking for a body. Some of the theories being expounded as to what , why and where are incredible !! Go and sit in any Supermarket on any Saturday and notch up the number of “Madeleines” you see there, and see what reaction you get from the parents when you stare too hard !!
November 21st, 2007 at 7:49 am
1283 Hideki Says:
1276 Peter O Says:
Edit…
+++++++++++++
Er…… I’m dumbfounded!
My position is quite clear, I refuse to believe every utterance from the McCann’s and people who are either outrageously Pro or Ant-McCann.
How you can read some of the stuff you did into my previous post is really quite bizarre.
I do not know if the McCann twins were sedated. Neither do you. If we believe the gossip/rumour/leaks then there seems to be a strong possibility that they were.
Gerry suggested in an almost throwaway remark on camera that “it did make you wonder if they hadn’t been sedated” and in doing so implied that it was the work of the evil predator.
That to me is clearly a ‘positioning statement’ so that whatever the PJ may eventually claim about the sedation state of the twins/Madeleine, the McCann’s already have a ‘ready prepared excuse’.
What I questioned/wondered, is that if Gerry & and his mates had any suspicions, why didn’t they raise them at the time? They are all doctors for heavens sake. Surely they should be able to spot a child that was behaving in an ‘unusual’ manner’ and certainly one which had been sedated?
Now, how on earth you can conclude that that sort of line of reasoning is somehow Pro-McCann simply beggers rational explanation.
November 21st, 2007 at 7:40 am
1282 Hideki Says:
1281 Kiwi Says:
Peter O wrote:
“Some Spanish Profs built a computer model of the alleged timeline based on witness claims that are in the public domain.”
More pro-McCann rhetoric from Peter O. He never seems to tire of it. The “witness claims that are in the public domain” which were used are the Tapas9 statements. There are NO independent witnesses who can testify that they actually checked the apartment even once.
Edit…
+++++++++++++++
You are arguing with yourself now.
The whole point of the work done by the Spanish Profs is that it appears to make the abduction claims almost impossible, if you believe the alleged witness statements. Hence the McCann’s recent switch to the whole “we must have been watched by an evil predator who plpanned the whole thing with slick military precision”.
November 21st, 2007 at 7:36 am
1281 Kiwi Says:
1278 Peter O Says:
Some Spanish Profs built a computer model of the alleged timeline based on witness claims that are in the public domain. Edit…
**************************************************************************************
…but how does that fit in with the Tapas Bar staff saying that any or all of them were sitting there most of the time and didn’t go to the apartment for anything between 45 minutes to an hour and a half ? If these Spanish Profs built this timeline, which adults were there ?
++++++++++
Sorry Kiwi, don’t know, you may need to Google it if you’re interested.
It is interesting that on the recent Panorama programme the McCann’s themselves appear to concede to the ‘tight timeline’, though of course there was no mention of the eight minute thing. The McCann’s are now leaning very strongly in favour of a ‘planned abduction by an evil predator’. You’ll have to decide for yourself if that claim is believable/possible. While I have to accept that it may be possible, it just seems so unlikely given everything else in the public domain.
November 21st, 2007 at 7:24 am
1276
Peter O Says:
“You have patently decided that since I don’t agree with every utterance you issue that I’m a “Pro-McCann”.”
No, I have observed that your conclusions are exclusively pro-McScam, though somewhat more camouflaged than others.
“Your reasoning for this belief is as dumb as those who believe the “sainted ones” are completely innocent and that the entire world is conspiring against them.”
You may delight in calling people dumb, but my reasoning is based simply on a close reading of your posts. They all contain pro-McConn conclusions, despite the fact that you do not doubt them as “sainted”.
“He [Gerry] was, in my opinion, covering all the bases that may crop up in relation to allegations that he and Kate sedated the twins themselves. i.e. He is not admitting that they were sedated, because he doesn’t actually know if the PJ can prove that. If however the PJ can prove that the twins were sedated, then he’s already setup their excuse, it was the abductor(s).”
That’s exactly what I posted (as you should know) so I guess we can agree every once in a while. As I pointed out, Kate already claimed that the corpse evidence in the car had been planted by abductors (her initial reaction). As you put it, sh has “already setup their excuse, it was the abductor(s).”
“It is, again in my opinion, a fairly dumb thing for him to ‘suggest’. ”
Indeed it is, but not for the reason you give. The reason you give is yet another PRO-McCann twist. Congratulations, Peter O. You are very good at camouflaging your Team McCann position! Your reason:
“You would think that given the number of doctors in PDL on May 3rd/4th that they’d have been able to spot if two young children had been ‘sedated’? Assuming of course there really was anything unusual about the children’s state.”
There WAS something unusual, which was remarked on by many on-lookers — the children slept and slept and slept, all through the most noisy chaotic cacophony and hysteria imaginable. What other indicators did you have in mind, with your claim that doctors should have been able to notice? Give an example, if you can.
So I do think people WERE “able to spot if two young children had been ‘sedated’”. Your claim that nothing unusual was noted is… ludicrous pro-McCann rubbish. Good job, Peter O. You deserve a raise.
November 21st, 2007 at 7:06 am
1281
Kiwi Says:
Peter O wrote:
“Some Spanish Profs built a computer model of the alleged timeline based on witness claims that are in the public domain.”
More pro-McCann rhetoric from Peter O. He never seems to tire of it. The “witness claims that are in the public domain” which were used are the Tapas9 statements. There are NO independent witnesses who can testify that they actually checked the apartment even once.
“As I recollect, their general conclusion was that because of all the comings and goings there was never a period of more then eight minutes on May 3rd when there wasn’t an adult in or near the McCann’s department.”
That’s some recollection, Peter O. BTW you forgot to add “alleged” — based on ” all the ALLEGED comings and goings” — ie. IF the Tapas members were not lying about how frequently they checked on the children, then “there was never a period of more then eight minutes …”
The big problem with this IF is that the Tapas9 statements are filled with contradictions, and so cannot possibly be true. So it makes no sense to use ALL Tapas member claims as a basis for analysis.
Yet this so-called 8 minute window was then accepted by Metodo3 and used in its Paedophile Abduction Theory.
Kiwi wrote:
“…but how does that fit in with the Tapas Bar staff saying that any or all of them were sitting there most of the time and didn’t go to the apartment for anything between 45 minutes to an hour and a half ?”
Exactly the point. There are NO independent witnesses to confirm the Tapas9 claims (which Peter O calls “wintess claims in the public domain”).There ARE independent witnesses who contradict these claims.
Therefore if ALL witness claims are included in the analysis, there is no result, because of contradiction. There is contradiction even within the Tapas9 statements, and there is complete contradiction with Tapas staff statements. If you give weight to the Tapas Bar Staff testimony, then the window of time suddenly expands from 8 minutes to an hour and a half.
November 21st, 2007 at 4:05 am
1278
Peter O Says:
November 20th , 2007 at 7.20 Some Spanish Profs built a computer model of the alleged timeline based on witness claims that are in the public domain. As I recollect, their general conclusion was that because of all the comings and goings there was never a period of more then eight minutes on May 3rd when there wasn’t an adult in or near the McCann’s department.
**************************************************************************************
…but how does that fit in with the Tapas Bar staff saying that any or all of them were sitting there most of the time and didn’t go to the apartment for anything between 45 minutes to an hour and a half ? If these Spanish Profs built this timeline, which adults were there ?
November 20th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Further to my earlier query, according to their website, they have nine divisions, all much needed by big corporations, but unsure why you would choose this firm for the biggest abduction case this century.
The nine divisions are:-
Insurance, financial, legal, franchises, fraud, mutual insurance, patent and trademark falsification, information protection and due diligence and disloyal competition.
In short, absolutely nothing to do with searching for a missing person.
Why choose Metodo 3?
http://www.metodo3.es/eng/entrada.html (and click divisons)
November 20th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Has anyone examined the detective agency used by the Mccanns? It seems that an awful lot of credence is being given to statements that they are 100% certain of this and 100% certain of that. They have talked about Morocco, Bosnia, Murat, his ex wife, etc.
Is it not possible that this organisation has been employed to muddy the waters and influence the British press and opinion writers?
Surely amongst all the people writing about this on the web and these pages, someone could look into the validity of this organisation with a supposed 100% (there’s that figure again) success rate in returning missing children. Someone, somewhere, please, investigate the investigators!
November 20th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
1277 Kiwi Says:
Edit…. Also whenever there is talk of a predator, they keep coming up with the fact that there could only have been an eight minute window of opportunity !! ….where did they get that from when it has been proven that the kids were left alone for hours on end ?? …did I miss an episode or something ??
+++++++++++++++
Some Spanish Profs built a computer model of the alleged timeline based on witness claims that are in the public domain. As I recollect, their general conclusion was that because of all the comings and goings there was never a period of more then eight minutes on May 3rd when there wasn’t an adult in or near the McCann’s department.
November 20th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
I don’t know why everyone in the Press is getting so hung up about the fact that there “may have been a predator” who watched and targeted the McCrims….doh !! doesn’t take a lot to work that one out !! I have said all along that it was someone from the complex, probably a kitchen hand or waiter or something, who saw them, knew their movements, knew they left the kids alone every night and just took the opportunity because this is something he / she is involved in anyway, and who better than someone who knows the complex inside out and which are the best escape routes ? In, out, round the back through the alleyway, parked van in the car park and away we go !! Also whenever there is talk of a predator, they keep coming up with the fact that there could only have been an eight minute window of opportunity !! ….where did they get that from when it has been proven that the kids were left alone for hours on end ?? …did I miss an episode or something ??
November 20th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
1275 Hideki Says:
PRO-McNeglect PETER STRIKES OUT AGAIN
You have patently decided that since I don’t agree with every utterance you issue that I’m a “Pro-McCann”.
Your reasoning for this belief is as dumb as those who believe the “sainted ones” are completely innocent and that the entire world is conspiring against them.
I was reporting what Gerry said and attempting to get across the point that he implied the twins may have been sedated by the alleged abductor(s) but that he did it in a fairly off hand/matter of fact way.
He was, in my opinion, covering all the bases that may crop up in relation to allegations that he and Kate sedated the twins themselves. i.e. He is not admitting that they were sedated, because he doesn’t actually know if the PJ can prove that. If however the PJ can prove that the twins were sedated, then he’s already setup their excuse, it was the abductor(s).
It is, again in my opinion, a fairly dumb thing for him to ‘suggest’. You would think that given the number of doctors in PDL on May 3rd/4th that they’d have been able to spot if two young children had been ‘sedated’? Assuming of course there really was anything unusual about the children’s state.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
PRO-McNeglect PETER STRIKES OUT AGAIN
1274
Peter O Says:
“You seriously need to get over yourself.”
I’d suggest following your own advice.
“I wasn’t ‘throwing the comment away’, Gerry was.”
Oh, stop your quibbling. YOU were claiming that the remark is not significant:
“unimportant, of relatively little importance or seriousness
a light throwaway remark”
(encarta dictionary)
In that sense, yes indeed you were also throwing it away.
“There are a number of potentially factual inaccuracies in your closing paragraph, or at least allegations for which there is currently no evidence in the public domain.”
Potentially factual — that’s a good one. Anyway, I’m not surprised there is “no evidence in the public domain” for what were quite obviously mere sarcastic speculations as to what the McCanns might try next. I wrote:
“Perhaps the McCanns in response to such evidence will claim that the PREDATOR sedated the children…”
Unlike you , I regard Gerry’s remark as SIGNIFICANT, and I think it might mean that there is evidence of sedation. That is also speculation.
Your claim that it was a “throwaway remark” is also speculation — pro-McCon speculation.
You need to listen to yourself again, Peter O:
“You seriously need to get over yourself.”
November 20th, 2007 at 9:45 am
1271 Hideki Says:
NOT A PRETTY PICTURE. THE MCCANNS HAVE BEEN FRAMED.
1150 Peter O Says:
“Justine McGuiness confirmed they were texting ‘updates’ out to people on the outside.[while being interrogated]”
How fascinating? Were they receiving replies to these “updates”?
“Yes, Gerry remarked the twins had slept through the ‘commotion’ and I *think* he said up until they were moved to the other apartment. He then chucked in an almost throwaway comment about wondering if they hadn’t been slipped something.”
What makes you want to throw the comment away, Peter O? And “something”… didn’t he use the word sedative?
This could be a hint that the evidence clearly shows sedation. Perhpas the McCanns in response to such evidence will claim that the PREDATOR sedated the children, killed Madeleine while trying to ABDUCT her, and then planted the body in the boot of their car, in Murats basement, and a few other places, before finally getting rid of it. In this way the clever PAEDOPHILE hoped to convince people that the McCanns killed the girl and hid the body. But this ABDUCTOR cannot fool people like Peter O… lol..
++++++++++++++++
You seriously need to get over yourself.
I wasn’t ‘throwing the comment away’, Gerry was.
There are a number of potentially factual inaccuracies in your closing paragraph, or at least allegations for which there is currently no evidence in the public domain.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:14 am
1264
Ian Says:
1255 Hideki
“I think Gerry just isnt very good at communicating (ridiculous over use of ‘incredbly’ as a ’sentence packer’ for example).”
Yes, but he just flat out refused to answer the question.
“He did know Murat - definately from the holiday week - perhaps from before (I always suspected that the holiday location was from a word of mouth connection with Murat and O’Brien, both have Exeter connections. This doesnt mean any conspiracy…”
To me it means quite obviously that he was reluctant to tell the public that he knew Murat. That shows he is hiding something about the relationship. No need to bring in the word “conspiracy” — it is Gerry’s own refusal to come clean about his past history with Murat. Why has he refused to do this?
“- just that Gerry didnt know how to answer - he did know Murat, thought he shouldnt say either way - fumbled the ball as usual. ”
I cannot remember his wording, but he did not appear to be fumbling. He was very forthwith and adamant, saying that he could not answer the question. His implication seemed to be that he was not allowed to talk about it. However, I do not think that information falls into the “gag” category.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:10 am
1254…Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
Shouldn’t you have put a “sh” in front of the “it” at the end of your headline. ?
November 20th, 2007 at 8:06 am
NOT A PRETTY PICTURE. THE MCCANNS HAVE BEEN FRAMED.
1150
Peter O Says:
“Justine McGuiness confirmed they were texting ‘updates’ out to people on the outside.[while being interrogated]”
How fascinating? Were they receiving replies to these “updates”?
“Yes, Gerry remarked the twins had slept through the ‘commotion’ and I *think* he said up until they were moved to the other apartment. He then chucked in an almost throwaway comment about wondering if they hadn’t been slipped something.”
What makes you want to throw the comment away, Peter O? And “something”… didn’t he use the word sedative?
This could be a hint that the evidence clearly shows sedation. Perhpas the McCanns in response to such evidence will claim that the PREDATOR sedated the children, killed Madeleine while trying to ABDUCT her, and then planted the body in the boot of their car, in Murats basement, and a few other places, before finally getting rid of it. In this way the clever PAEDOPHILE hoped to convince people that the McCanns killed the girl and hid the body. But this ABDUCTOR cannot fool people like Peter O… lol..
November 20th, 2007 at 8:05 am
1261
Ian Says:
November 20th, 2007 at 7:46 am
Absolutely agree !!
I have never understood the mind-set of people who can casually go jogging and playing tennis within days of their child disappearing, and saying that they “sleep very well” although apparently they didn’t for a couple or so nights immediately after Maddie disappeared - shame !!. I would be half-mad with fear for the child, sleep, playing tennis and jogging would be the last things on my agenda !! Don’t they understand ????!!!! I would be out there day after day, night after night not sitting at my computer as if that is going to somehow bring her back.
I have a very fertile imagination and I do not want to go through some of the scenarios that has thrown up but these two….!! well….words nearly fail me !!
November 20th, 2007 at 8:05 am
new thread
November 20th, 2007 at 8:02 am
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/breaking-news/2007/11/20/madeleine-mccann-friend-did-not-identify-abductor-100252-20132397/
November 20th, 2007 at 8:01 am
Having watched the Panorama programme I am still struck by how terrified KM looks all the time - scared of GM perhaps. Maybe he is a bit ‘handy’ witht the wife and kiddies sometimes - especially perhaps MM
November 20th, 2007 at 7:57 am
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/17/mccann.profile/index.html
Idolising ones children…means dumping them in a creche.
November 20th, 2007 at 7:51 am
The priest made a very unwise comment about lost souls,how did he know they were lost souls unless he had something to gauge this against,it is not an expression any priest would use lightly.
November 20th, 2007 at 7:46 am
1255 Hideki
I think Gerry just isnt very good at communicating (ridiculous over use of ‘incredbly’ as a ’sentence packer’ for example).
He did know Murat - definately from the holiday week - perhaps from before (I always suspected that the holiday location was from a word of mouth connection with Murat and O’Brien, both have Exeter connections. This doesnt mean any conspiracy - just that Gerry didnt know how to answer - he did know Murat, thought he shouldnt say either way - fumbled the ball as usual.
One thing from that Panorama prog, the video making hairless friend, saying Gerry on his laptop searching endlessly for Madeleine broke his heart..does Gerry really think he can google her back?! He should have been off his sainted arse and out looking! The Panorama prog failed to mention the jogging and tennis next day (NEXT DAY!!!! Can any parent beleive that is ‘logical’? At best its ‘odd’).)
November 20th, 2007 at 7:40 am
1252 My wife suggested the trip to Pope was being used as a ‘funeral’ whilst someone was disposing of Maddie in the car hired for their use two days before the McCanns went - but I think it was just something Mitchell arranged as part of his media circus.
What makes me cringe is this claim that they are ‘devout catholics’ as if its a badge of respectability and righteousness. Only devout from the night of the 3rd - why did Kate want a priest that night - are priests good for sniffing out abductors?
November 20th, 2007 at 7:37 am
The Priest is directly quoted as refering to the McCanns as two lost souls,also he would rather have his tongue cut out than reveal any of his discussions with them,not a word of comfession simply discussion.
November 20th, 2007 at 7:36 am
1256 It hasnt.
Murat is a suspect because the media (half baked female ‘journalist’) pointed at him.
The police suspected (according to that shallow Panorma with the ’serious journalist who thinks being ‘in depth’ means speaking pointedly) the McCanns on about 6th May. Murat was for public consumption (in my opinion).
November 20th, 2007 at 7:32 am
1247 And Kate and Gerry arent weird, Kris?
Rgeading Garth, he becam very vitriolic with me yesterday and suddenly someone called Will (who I think was him too, as he made an error and used Garths ’signature’ pattern of posting). Because I have not seen anything which I accept as ‘good’ evidence of abduction, he started saying I was a paedophile trying to protect a ring of some sort!
He is very ‘odd’ and not here for the debate and discussion - though I dont thin he is anyone of consequence or connected to the ‘players’.