Clarence Mitchell And A Debate On The McCanns And The Media
OVER the news wires: “Madeleine’s parents ‘not suspects’”
Says Clarence Mitchell: “I have never once seen or heard anything from either of them to give me any cause for suspicion in any shape or form.
“I have also had briefings privately from the police and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) centre that also gave me complete reassurance that the authorities, in this country certainly, are treating this as a case of rare stranger abduction, as they call it.”
Mr Mitchell says he feels “shamed” as a former reporter by the “sloppiness” and “laziness” of certain journalists in covering the story of the missing child.
Anorak has been commenting on just this for months…
Mr Mitchell was speaking at a debate on The McCanns and the Media at the London School of Economics.
He adds: “What we have taken issue with, and our lawyers continue to review, is the aspect of coverage that is not only distorted but wilfully misrepresentative at times of the facts as we know them or the lack of facts. In that vacuum I’m afraid some very sloppy standards have crept in.”
He singled out “the sloppiness and laziness of some of the journalists, and the lack of independence of thought and checking of facts”.
Mr Mitchell said he understood putting a story about Madeleine’s disappearance on the front page could add 70,000 sales to some newspapers, meaning there was “definitely a commercial imperative” to reporting on the case. He assured the audience they could be certain that “every single one” of the negative stories they read or heard about the McCanns was untrue.
But wasn’t it the Independent on Sunday that reported: “Maddy’s off the front page”:
“Followers of the Madeleine McCann story have been able to depend on the ‘Evening Standard’ to clear the front page for any development. So how come a potential breakthrough, with police looking into the disappearance of another little girl near Praia da Luz, was buried on page 17? The answer is: sales fell by 10,000 the last two times Maddy made the cover, so the news desk have been told to curb their Maddy enthusiasm. If only they’d tell the ‘Express’ to do likewise.”
As for the McCanns being innocent, all we know is that they deny harming their daughter but remain on the Portuguese police’s list of suspects, along with Robert Murat….
January 30th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
1st?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
2nd?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
As for the McCanns being innocent, all we know is that they deny harming their daughter but remain on the Portuguese police’s list of suspects, along with Robert Murat….
And refused to answer to some interesting Questions put by the P.J.
And flee after being named “Arguidos”
And have Pinochet Lawyer
January 30th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
evening all - take a look at the ohoto above - whats happneing to k’s right boob??? looks like fingers have been removed by photo shop
January 30th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Mr Mitchell said he understood putting a story about Madeleine’s disappearance on the front page could add 70,000 sales to some newspapers, meaning there was “definitely a commercial imperative” to reporting on the case. He assured the audience they could be certain that “every single one” of the negative stories they read or heard about the McCanns was untrue
____ ——–
WHAT NEGATIVE STORIES ?
How hard it is, sometimes, to trust the evidence of one’s senses! How reluctantly the mind consents to reality.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
i meant the photo above of course
January 30th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
I hope the audience reacted (at the London S. of E. debate). If they let Clarrie tell them his version all evening, it is quite despairing.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Did they let Martin Brunt in, and did he ask questions?
He might be on the Rebel side as against the Imperium…
_________________
“If she is dead she is dead but not by their hands”, Clarence Mitchell said
January 30th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
8 cant say no
An accident whilst they were drinking in the bar, he might meant?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Abraham Zapruder
Do you really think Sledgie is so close to the MCs that they told him they would make an extraordinary announcement on Friday?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
5
can’t say no
Yep! No negative stories in the UK!
But if I hear a story about them leaving the kids to go for a drink nearby, which is a little negative isnt it..I’m supposed to think ‘thats not true’ am I?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
10
Marie Nicholas
Is that what sledgehammer said? Well, lets challenge him should it not happen and challenge him BIG TIME if it does!
Personally Im expecting them to get off, but they will never be free of the neglect charge.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
11 Ian
Yes, probably, and then they thought she had been abducted.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
13 Marie
They did? They KNEW it I thought?
January 30th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
12 Ian
I am a bit pessimistic tonight. The big powerful people who supported them will not suffer to be misjudged. I hope I am wrong, but I don’t believe we will ever know the truth for sure.
The only thing wre will know for sure is that the little girl was left unattended at night, that her parents claim it was not irresponsible to leave their children, and that the PJ seemed to have enough evidence to suspect them. We will also remeber the pressure, especially from the omnipresent PR.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
‘He singled out “the sloppiness and laziness of some of the journalists, and the lack of independence of thought and checking of facts”.’
Excellent point….
For me, he’s thrown down the gauntlet. If someone doesn’t talk about what a pile of crap we’ve been fed from Clarrie et al and the ball-less media, the media are toast for me.
This B.ll.x stinks. If some clever techie doesn’t make use of everything we’ve learn’t from this case and the media shenanigans then I’ve got a pot of cash to finance an underground counter media stream, which believe me, is in it’s embryonic stages in the uk.
Enough! We are going to follow the states eventually (US), internet penetration and opinion is going to rise exponentially.
Jeez, I really think we need an underground news channel. There’s two layers to this and the underground will win out eventually!
I am actually pissed off with the amount of rubbish we’re fed. There’s definitely a better way, and it’s the way we’re going.
Rant over.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Marie Nicholas
Yes me too. Never mind, worse things happen!
January 30th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Ian
I can’t remember Sledgie’s predictions. We were sin for a big surprise on Friday at 11. 30 a m I think. I am not sure though.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Marie
I don’t think Sledge is close to the McCanns, or Tanner or O’Brien, or Dianne Webster.
But as for David and Fiona Payne, and Matt and Rachel Oldfield, I have my suspicions and I’m not the only one.
Also I have a hunch there is a connection with the Fiscal’s office.
But I could be wrong!
January 30th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
18 Marie Nicholas Says: January 30th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Ian
I can’t remember Sledgie’s predictions. We were sin for a big surprise on Friday at 11. 30 a m I think. I am not sure though.
+++++++++++++++++
Snow is forecast? I’ll be in a job interview.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Evening jousters, have been away for a few weeks. Any startling revelations?
I see there are two threads tonight, which do you reccommend?
Any favourites fallen to the new red card system, or are all the usual protagonists still here?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Slyfox
Clarrie is becoming a big star isn’t he? People report everyone of his words. He will soon be the most famous man in England. Nobody will ever bring contradiction to him now. He knows what is good and what is bad, who is innocent and who isn’t. Great!
Careful Clarrie, don’t become megalomaniac.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Peter O
Good luck. I’ll think of you. Promised.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Marie Nicholas
Go to the “SOS Madeleine McCann” site ,and read the comments
January 30th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
What is the first thought that spring to mind on viewing Clarence Mitchell - look closely!
January 30th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Delightful. Clarrie turns on the ‘lazy and sloppy press’. The same press that have been almost universally supportive of the McCanns. What a player!
What an idiot! Presumably he was angry that it was the press that blew his ‘police sketch’ out the water within 2 days, and made him look a fool into the bargain!
I also hear he claimed that ‘we closed it down’ regarding the Mirror Forum. Which again is what we all suspected.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
All in French dammit!
January 30th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
24 Can’t say No
(Go to the “SOS Madeleine McCann” site ,and read the comments )
- OK I’m doing it now. I am really upset by what I read in the gazetadigital
25 Lyn
- (What is the first thought that spring to mind on viewing Clarence Mitchell - look closely!)
I did what Jo told us to do, hide the right part of his face (on the left on the picture), and study the left part. He looks hard and tense. No humour. Very touchy about his self-importance.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Ian - an attempted translation of the last 2 paras:
The procurator was obliged to clarify the situation after publication of news that claimed that the rogatory letters were still in Portugal. The letters are seen as essential in taking forward the resolution of the mystery that is Madeleine McCann
“The rogatory letters are in fact with Jacqui Smith, but were not accepted as they were” confimed a source from the Interior Ministry (of portugal), emphasising that “the whole matter had become delicate and that Gordon Browns government would find it difficult to carry out all of the requests made by the PJ”
January 30th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
23 Marie Nicholas Says: January 30th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Peter O
Good luck. I’ll think of you. Promised.
+++++++++++++
Thank you! First interview, so hopefully nothing too stressful/challenging!