Madeleine McCann: McCanns Want Hewlett To Co-operate
IT’S the media’s Summer of Maddy - and Clarence Mitchell, Kate and Gerry McCann’s spokesman, is talking about Madeleine McCann and a Raymond Hewlett.
Mr Hewlett has denied any involvement in Madeleine’s abduction.
Says Clarence Mitchell:
“Our investigators hope he will see sense and co-operate by giving them whatever information needed so they can eliminate him from the investigation.
‘It’s clear the man is ill and it is clear he has information that our investigators need. It is also clear that our investigators will be speaking to him in the near future.’
Private detectives can now point the finger at a man (Hewlett has form) and then a spokesman can tell the media that this man is needed to be questioned so that he can be eliminated from their enquiries?
If things are “clear” then why not leave it to the police to do police work?
Which is why we need a police force, defamation laws and to maintain the principal that the suspect need not prove their innocence - it is the prosecution that must prove your guilt.
The McCanns were cruelly libelled. So too was Robert Murat. All are innocent.
Madeleine McCann is missing. There are no official suspects. Indeed, no proof of a crime has been offered up to a voracious media.
Pictures Of All The Madeleine McCann Suspects
Madeleine McCann: The Story In Pictures
Posted: 23rd, May 2009 | In: Madeleine McCann, Media Comments (11) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- SoDak-GhostDog on India Castrates Slumdogs
- SoDak-GhostDog on Sarkozy And Brown: A Love Story
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Cheryl on US Forced Fort Hood Murderer Nidal Hasan To Join The Army
- Cheryl on US Forced Fort Hood Murderer Nidal Hasan To Join The Army
May 25th, 2009 at 7:23 am
I happen to believe that the McCanns will be in prison before the whole thing is over– I remember that one Matthews(?) woman went to to the clink for fabricating a kidnapping–I do think the truth concerning Madeleine’s true condition will come to light eventually and that the McCanns will pay the price.
They already called that “person of interest” a monster–I think they’re going to ruin a person’s life too many times for some reason.
Have A Good Day
May 25th, 2009 at 2:18 am
Thentherewere4, I don’t wish to misintepret what you just said, please spell out for all to understand exactly what you are saying!
In the meantime, here is an interesting article that appeared in the “News of The World” in the UK, which you might find of interest. You may wish to read it.
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/298893/Ex-police-officers-hired-by-parents-Kate-and-Gerry-McCann-have-the-names-of-at-least-FIVE-new-possible-kidnappers-of-Maddie.html
May 25th, 2009 at 1:30 am
thentherewere4
Eggman ?
It was only a matter of time before someones face fitted up ?
May 25th, 2009 at 12:30 am
Is it just me, or does the finding of a pedo with inoperable throat cancer all seem just a little too good to be true for the Mccanns?
Chickens and eggs.
Nah that can’t be right. Surely?
May 24th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
June
Al those risks were there, which is why they should never have left the children in the first place.
What I’m wondering is why nobody really suggests wandering away as a serious possibility, except that bloke (Mark…???) who says she probably wandered away and was picked up by a lone paedophile.
The official police investigation didn’t conclude that wandering out was a more likely scenario than any other, did it? I think it might have done if the doors or windows could have been opened by a small child.
Anyway, off to enjoy the sunshine now! Enjoy the rest of the weekend.
May 24th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Maria, there will always be sanctimonious ones who will blame the McCanns forever. Let’s overlook many thousands of parents who leave their children alone when on vacation or even at home to run to the store. If you will recall it was admitted on here and stated the people in UK have been known to leave their children in the room and go drink their pint of whatever. Ahhh to be a perfect parent as those holier than thou art ones on here try to pretend to be or pretend they were..
Have you sorted out yet how little Maddie went ‘poof’ and disappeared into thin air? Noted we are reminded abduction hasn’t been proven. Even if she wandered out of the room and then was grabbed she was abducted!
Frankly, Maria, I think there should be a black out on further news re the search for the perpetrator or alien ship or whatever caused her to disappear into thin air. The papers write their sexed up headlines to sell their papers and the mob starts getting itchy. Unfortunately, even paedos have their Rights to a fair trial or hearing or whatever …
May 24th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Maria
Its not only wandering out, there could be a risk of fire, a child vomiting or falling, or playing with electrical sockets. I know these risks are still there when the parent is sleeping, but if the parent is absent?
Small children are also very prone to high temperatures, and holidays are very exciting times and changes of diet and routine can ‘upset’ kids
Oh I agree they would still want to know what happened, but they are intelligent people and maybe could have anticipated something could happen, even when the odds are nothing would , BUT
May 24th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
June
It depends what those events were. If she simply fell to her death somewhere and the police didn’t find her, yes, I’d agree. But if someone met and took her, than that person is still “to blame”.
In any case, I think the Mcs would probably know if Madeleine had been capable of opening the patio windows or front door herself, or the shutters and main window. Not even Amaral suggests that. Why would the Mcs not think it likely? It can’t just be to avoid the accusation of negligence because leaving your child open to the possibility of being got at by someone from outside is just as serious “negligence” as leaving her able to get out and wander away. I don’t think it a likely scenario though one would have to know the apartment and the doors and windows to be able to judge, and also the way the apartment looked when Kate went back at 10.00pm. The tapas friends do know those apartments and don’t seem to think it likely that she just wandered away. The police surely carried out the sort of search of the immediate locality which would have revealed where she was if that had happened? A small child wouldn’t be able to go far in the time.
But even if that was what happened, they’d still want to know what happened next, wouldn’t they?
Of course, I agree that it can’t be dismissed as a possibility unless one does know the apartment well.
May 24th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Maria
If someone took Madeleine , yes they (who took her) are to blame, but if Madeleine wandered out of the apartment, and unknown events befell her, then her parents are to blame.
There is contributory negligence here, that must be remembered.
And the consequences
May 24th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
“Someone to blame” ??? What an odd phrase!
Are you saying that if someone took Madeleine, that person is not to blame because the Mcs left the children?
So it’s OK to commit a heinous crime if someone gives you the opportunity?
We should leave this person alone because all s/he was doing was taking advantage of an opportunity to kidnap and child…plus whatever else happened to her afterwards?
Don’t think so! I do agree that, at this late stage, it’s unlikely the person will be found, but I think, if I was the mother, I wouldn’t want to give up the search either.
Moderator _ There is no proof of abduction.
May 24th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Anorak says “The McCanns were cruelly libelled.” Yes indeed.
I will add… Madeleine McCann was cruelly left unprotected, and the worst happened. Now the macabre exercise of finding someone to blame lurches into its third pathetic year.