Madeleine McCann: Saville Kent, Fictional Detectives And D-Day II
MADDIE WATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
Madeleine McCann returns to the nation’s front pages.
No mention is made of Robert Murat’s libel settlement with 11 British organs (more on that later), just the Mirror’s news: “MADDY – Law chief: It’s D-Day on Monday.”
D-Day – much like the Sun’s Maddy D-Day on 29th, November 2007, only more decisive.
DAILY STAR: “D-DAY COMING FOR THE MCCANNS”
THE GUARDIAN: “D-day close in McCann investigation”
Says Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry McCann:
“We have not been told this and we will not prejudge what he has to say. If the case is to be shelved, as has been suggested, clearly Kate and Gerry’s arguido status must be lifted.”
THE SUN: “’Solution’ in Maddie case”
PORTUGAL’S Attorney-General said yesterday he will announce a “solution” to the Madeleine McCann investigation on Monday.
A solution?
Fernando Pinto Monteiro’s comments raised the prospect that Maddie’s parents Kate and Gerry may discover if they will be formally cleared over her disappearance.
May.
They also fuelled speculation the case could be drawing to a close.
Speculation.
DAILY MAIL: “The first whodunnit: How the murder of a three-year-old boy gave us the fictional detectives we know today.”
It’s 1860.
It wasn’t until just after 5am that Saturday that Elizabeth Gough - the family’s 22-year-old nursemaid, who looked after the three smallest children of factory inspector Samuel Kent - woke up, and noticed that one of her charges, three-year-old Saville Kent wasn’t in his cot on the other side of her room…
Whathappened?
But the child had not found his way to his mother’s bed - far from it. He had disappeared. By 8am, a full scale search of the grounds had begun, with a reward of £10 (worth about £650 today) being offered by Samuel Kent to anyone who found his youngest son.
Less than an hour after the search had begun two local men, William Nutt, a shoemaker, and Thomas Benger, a farmer, opened the door of a servants’ privy set among dense shrubbery to the left of the house’s great gravel drive. The two men peered inside, and saw a pool of blood on the floor.
Whodunnit?
Lifting the lid of the privy, and peering into the darkness, Benger saw what looked like a blanket. When he reached down to pick it up, he found it was soaked in blood.
About two feet beneath the privy’s seat - on the wooden ’splashboard’ that partly blocked the descent into the pit beneath - lay the body of Saville Kent.
As Benger lifted the boy’s body out of the privy, his head tipped back to expose the clean cut across his neck. ‘His little head fell off, almost,’ Nutt said later…
Whytellusknow?
Just as the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann today produced a massive reaction among the public, so the gruesome murder of Saville Kent provoked national hysteria in Victorian England - not least because of intense public speculation and rumour about life behind the closed doors of that most respectable of houses in the gentle Wiltshire countryside.
And:
So began one of the most dramatic murder cases in British history, a crime that inspired the murder mysteries of the Victorian authors Wilkie Collins, Charles Dickens and Arthur Conan Doyle - and which has just been brought memorably back to life in the book, The Suspicions Of Mr Whicher, by Kate Summerscale - which was awarded the £30,000 BBC Four Samuel Johnson Prize on Tuesday. It is also set to be turned into a major television drama for ITV.
How the British love a good child crime show…
Posted: 17th, July 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (148) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- June on Why The Royal Mail Rejected Benny Hill
- Karen on The Ten Craziest Reasons Why Nidal Malik Hasan Did It
- Karen on The Ten Craziest Reasons Why Nidal Malik Hasan Did It
- Pam on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- To christ on The Ten Craziest Reasons Why Nidal Malik Hasan Did It
July 17th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
146. Remigus.
Yes, and who knows where the money for the donation from the paper to the McCann’s abduction fund came from?
For all we know, a member from Team McCann could have given the money to the paper to donate back into their abduction fund.
July 17th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Off to Portugal
Marrying R.Murat
July 17th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
143 coolandcalm
Uhm, no…actually, that does sound right!
The fact that they are all paid money just means that the publishers’ insurance companies don’t want the hassle. Kate Moss actually litigated (which neither of the McCanns ever did), won a huge judgment and declaration that she was “not a drug addict,” but now, we know differently, don’t we?
The McCanns’ and Murat’s legal status as arguidos in Portugal has nothing to do with the lawsuit settlements obtained here. In the McCanns’ case, apparently, they never filed a lawsuit–just postured and threatened, and they received a “donation” to their “fund” in return, I would imagine, for giving up their right to litigate with the parties who paid. Those newspapers just “bought their peace.” Same with Murat, although Murat did file a lawsuit. That meant that the papers could have challenged his accusations, joined issue, and submitted proof, etc.
This is what happened with the O.J. Simpson murder case, where there was a criminal trial aquittal and a civil trial finding of guilty.
July 17th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Coolandcalm
But we absolutely know the McCanns contributed to Madeleine’s disappearance by abandoning her.
Where as - if Murat isn’t guilty - then he’s got no responsibility at all.
July 17th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
coolandcalm
Actually - no one’s said that it has to be true.
On the other thread we were expressing doubts about how anyone could say that Murat was in no way involved (but Chenier pointed out it was a legal requirement or technicality or something).
July 17th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Soooooo…. the apology today states that Murat is innocent of any involvement in madeleine’s disappearance. That has to be true of course.
The McCanns apology states that they are innocent of any involvement in madeleines disappearance. That has to be untrue of course.
Strange that! Especially as all three are still official suspects in Portugal. Where it happened. Something not quite right?
July 17th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
124 wtf
Why wait? Because today, it is Murat’s turn, and over the weekend, traditionally, nothing ever happens in this case, so…Monday it is.
July 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
140 Karen
yes, it does make sense.
But that does not mean that this is why she did it.
To figure that out, you’d have to dig deeper, to ask whether there were any problems in her previous jobs or schooling, and then figure it out. When people fail at things, or, say, accidentally kill a patient and get sacked (or perhaps with docs it is just quietly suggested that they tackle opthamology or dermatology), they could easily say, ah well, it is fine because I didn’t like the hours required to be an anesthesiologist or an obstetrician anyway.
So we can speculate, but because we know so little about either McCanns’ personal careers (I mean, what does Gerry REALLY do, anyway?), it’s not possible to say whether their jobs or job histories had any affect or role in Madeleine’s disappearance.
It’s more than a cul de sac, I think. It is a very attractive little roundabout that could open, through a shady glen, on to the autobahn….
July 17th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Remigius
It’s true that if she said she was around 6 dead bodies - that’s suspicious.
But it makes sense to me that someone who was a mother would prefer to be a part-time local GP. The hours, the location and the type of pressure would be more suitable to family life (and it still has a great salary).
July 17th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
132 Sally & Mods & Admins
Why close up the cul de sac Sally has so nicely opened?
It is actually a good issue Sally raises. Why did Kate McCann so constantly change not just jobs, but careers? We can speculate about why, but it would be interesting, perhaps even enlightening, to hear Kate’s answers. Did she or Gerry ever kill a patient in their various medical careers? Did she ever give anyone–adult or child–an accidental overdoes? At the least, the changes indicate possible personal instabilities, or some other problem in the marriage, perhaps, that may have led to them killing Madeleine, accidentally or otherwise, destroying her body, scouring the apartment with bleach, etc.
If Kate has previously killed a patient or two, it would not in itself be proof that she killed Madeleine. But it raises a lot of issues. Kate herself claims to have handled, wot, FIVE corpses or so right before she went on vacation, and apparently did not wash her clothing or hair or hands in between times, so….well, M&A, Sally’s question fairly raises itself, n’est pas?
Convictions are almost impossible without a body.
July 17th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
136 Melanie
Does Kate McCann have a job to switch?
Oh, you must mean the job she had handling all those dead bodies….
July 17th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
At least in the Saville Kent case, there was a body.
Imagine now, the nursemaid wakes up, the child is missing, and the servants search and search, but there is no body ever found….and the privy has been washed and wiped and bleached and bleached and bleached, and Mrs. Kent, who never sheds a tear, thereafter busies herself with weeks of endless clothes washing….
Then, after a month or two, Mr. and Mrs. Kent go off alone in a carriage through the shires, stopping at a beautiful spot on the craggy, cliffy, cavernouse coast for a pikanik, just the two of them….
gosh, what would have happened to the British sleuthing industry?
July 17th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Sally, I am not disrespecting your opinion. I am merely stating there may not be anything in KM switching jobs…
July 17th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
But given all due respect, my opinion should be allowed to remain. People speak of abduction and I do not believe there was an abduction. The mccanns trashed the crime scene and waited almost an hour before they called the police and now the mccanns have the nerve to call the Portugeuse police inept.
July 17th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
133
Melanie Says:
July 17th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Sally, maybe she just fancied a change…
————————————————————————–
Melanie, I really don’t think so.
July 17th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Sally, maybe she just fancied a change…
July 17th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Have read a few posts on here today but sorry time does not permit me to read anymore. Just would like to say, I think there is WAYYYYYYYYYY more to this story/ sad tale than we know. I am interested in past footprints. Such as: why did k mccann give up her job as an anesthesiologist (highly lucratve and high paying)? Where their any incidents that influenced her decision (perhaps an overdose or two (or more) and if so, how many. What would cause a person to leave a high paying and lucrative job such as an anesthesiologist and become a regular gp—————–part time general practiononer at that. Just some thoughts.
Mods and Admin
its possible because anaethetists do become affected by the gases they use on patieints , and it can badly affect unconceived children, and its not only maternally but also paternally.
An NHS anaethetist wouldn’t earn as much as an US one anyway.
I think that cul de sac you have opened can be safely closed
July 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
LP just you wait! you got your own wings? Gimme mine back
July 17th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
new thread
July 17th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
127 jule
Lovely daydream, wouldnt it be wonderful if those kind pj were thinking of giving us a lovely surprise to thank us for our perseverence with the case
July 17th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Will we be able to read the full grovel online somewhere?
July 17th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
wtf …. perhaps the PJ could only get a flight over to Rothley over the weekend …. oh, don’t mind me …… daydreaming AGAIN
July 17th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
and a couple might just be singing this..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yteMugRAc0
July 17th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Yes, of course I saw Robert Murat and Miss Walczuch, and the Court was jam-packed with what I assume was family.
M&W were very serious, but the children and teenagers had huge grins…
July 17th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Silly question, but why do they have to wait until monday to make the anouncement? If they have already made up their mind, why not just announce it now?
July 17th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
105
JuneJohnson Says:
July 17th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Lone Pigeon,
I’ll have my besom back , if you don’t mind…..
I’m ex -RC convent educated , and I need that besom nowadays
No you can’t! I’m having too much fun riding it round the office cacklin like an old witch
July 17th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
hannasus
9/11 was not an excuse to invade Iraq - Iraq was a ego salve for not stopping 9/11
(if 9/11 really was a ruse they’d've gone into Iraq before the shock had time to wear off - when the UN and EU would be less likely to raise objections - as it was, they waited too long and failed to convince anyone outside of their their own government and New Labour).
July 17th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
And I have seen grovels before, but 3 pages of A4 isn’t just a grovel, it’s an obeisance before Sulemain the Magnificent with the Court Eunuchs standing by to make sure you do it right….
July 17th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Oh, that’s excellent Chenier … so they played dress-up as well …… a certain poster will be most impressed
So c’mon …. c’mon …… darn it ….. did you see Murat …. what happened? C’mon ……
July 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Well, that was a fun morning out for all the family.
I thought it was very sweet of Justice Eady not only to retire from Court to gown and wig up, but also to look particulary stern for the children and teenagers; that’s what they indisputably thought was what a proper judge looks like!
July 17th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Thanks for that link Matt (YO
)
I haven’t seen the actual videos of him speaking, but from his words, he appears to be a true gentleman? Am I wrong in thinking that a man who has been so wronged who can speak so honestly and openly about what happened cannot be a gentleman? I think this is a chapter of his life that he wishes closed permanently, so that he and the others can move forward - unfortunately it can’t happen until they remove his arguido status.