Was Paxman correct, McCanns "collaborated with them when it was convenient"?

[faithlilly]

I suspect strongly that had the McCanns chosen the option to “guard their privacy” that this would have been interpreted as “they’ve got something to hide”.  Truly, whatever course of action they chose to take would have been the wrong one as far as some are concerned.  We have even in the last few weeks members of the forum lamenting the lack of a public interview this anniversary, bemoaning the fact that Jane Tanner doesn’t give interviews about crecheman etc etc etc.

The lack of an anniversary interview was not ‘lamented’ as you say. What was questioned was the reason put forward for that lack of interview. Perhaps if the McCanns ‘pal’ doesn’t want the proletariat to take about that then he shouldn’t bring it to there attention in a newspaper article.

As to Miss Tanner there was no ‘bemoaning’ the lack of an interview but merely puzzlement that the press had not sought, or obtained, one single, solitary comment on the subject of Crecheman by Miss Tanner. After all she was quite happy to give interviews and comments when the Tannerman agenda was being pushed. I’m sure Miss Tanner has her reasons though, poor soul.

[Mr Gray]

No-one knows if those stories would have appeared if 'Team McCann' hadn't criticised the Portuguese authorities from the very beginning.

Sometime between 0.30 and 1 am, Aurelio Guerreiro, the owner of a bar at the marina in Vilamoura got a phonecall from an old customer: Pat Perkins, the human resources director from a public English organism. She calls him, upset: "She told me the daughter of British friends of her, who were vacationing close to Lagos, had disappeared over 3 hours ago, that they were completely alone and that nobody was helping them to search for her". Pat confirms she was at Kate's parents house at the time (sol 18/8)
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id121.htm

So this statement is third hand... Or is it fourth hand

[G-Unit]

Do you put your, trust in the present investigation  by SY

I'm not in the habit of putting my trust in any institution, but neither am I in the habit of interfering in their area of expertise.

[G-Unit]

Despite Labour's efforts, it seems Leveson Part 2 will not go ahead under the present government, despite Ed Milliband's impassioned plea for people to think about the McCanns and the Dowlers. Gerry McCann appears to have lost interest in the campaign recently anyway.

[Mr Gray]

I'm not in the habit of putting my trust in any institution, but neither am I in the habit of interfering in their area of expertise.

But in your post you said you would put your trust in the investigating authorities now you are saying you wouldn't....

[jassi]

Despite Labour's efforts, it seems Leveson Part 2 will not go ahead under the present government, despite Ed Milliband's impassioned plea for people to think about the McCanns and the Dowlers. Gerry McCann appears to have lost interest in the campaign recently anyway.

He was dragged out for a Today program interview on the subject last week. Clearly wasn't persuasive enough to sway the vote

[Eleanor]

No more Off Topic Posts, please.

[Venturi Swirl]

The lack of an anniversary interview was not ‘lamented’ as you say. What was questioned was the reason put forward for that lack of interview. Perhaps if the McCanns ‘pal’ doesn’t want the proletariat to take about that then he shouldn’t bring it to there attention in a newspaper article.

As to Miss Tanner there was no ‘bemoaning’ the lack of an interview but merely puzzlement that the press had not sought, or obtained, one single, solitary comment on the subject of Crecheman by Miss Tanner. After all she was quite happy to give interviews and comments when the Tannerman agenda was being pushed. I’m sure Miss Tanner has her reasons though, poor soul.

IMO you were looking forward to an anniversary interview with the McCanns and were disappointed when one wasn’t forthcoming, likewise IMO I believe you would like the Tapas 7 to be less backwards in coming forwards as far as the media are concerned.  Now tell me you’d much rather the McCanns and friends had remained completely tight-lipped from May 4th 2007.

[faithlilly]

IMO you were looking forward to an anniversary interview with the McCanns and were disappointed when one wasn’t forthcoming, likewise IMO I believe you would like the Tapas 7 to be less backwards in coming forwards as far as the media are concerned.  Now tell me you’d much rather the McCanns and friends had remained completely tight-lipped from May 4th 2007.

My only interest in this year’s anniversary is the claim that the McCanns were asked not to do any interviews by OG. Does that ring true to you ? No interviewer worth their salt would ask for details of the investigation if they had been specifically asked not to by, strangled enough, OG. A perfectly acceptable  interview about domestic issues ( how are the twins, how do you feel etc etc )  could have been conducted by any interviewer. My only interest is only in why this didn’t happen.

Further no matter what you think about my motivations my point still stands. It is odd that Tanner gave interviews and comments when Tannerman was in the frame and while she has also expressed the opinion  that, other than Madeleine being found, her greatest hope was for someone to come forward to say the man she saw was him, when that happened there has been not one comment of relief from her.

[G-Unit]

But in your post you said you would put your trust in the investigating authorities now you are saying you wouldn't....

The people best placed to investigate a crime are those who are employed to do so. If I thought publicity was necessary, I would make my views known to those in charge but I wouldn't ignore their opinions or their customs and practices and thereby alienate them.

In this case I would have asked the UK police to explain to the PJ how media appeals were organised in the UK. If the UK police agreed that the media could play a part I would have been guided by them as to how this should be organised.

[Mr Gray]

The people best placed to investigate a crime are those who are employed to do so. If I thought publicity was necessary, I would make my views known to those in charge but I wouldn't ignore their opinions or their customs and practices and thereby alienate them.

In this case I would have asked the UK police to explain to the PJ how media appeals were organised in the UK. If the UK police agreed that the media could play a part I would have been guided by them as to how this should be organised.

That's up yo you... The mccanns had every right to do what they wished..... One of those being to ask SY to take the case on.. Which was helped by pressure from the media

[Venturi Swirl]

My only interest in this year’s anniversary is the claim that the McCanns were asked not to do any interviews by OG. Does that ring true to you ? No interviewer worth their salt would ask for details of the investigation if they had been specifically asked not to by, strangled enough, OG. A perfectly acceptable  interview about domestic issues ( how are the twins, how do you feel etc etc )  could have been conducted by any interviewer. My only interest is only in why this didn’t happen.

Further no matter what you think about my motivations my point still stands. It is odd that Tanner gave interviews and comments when Tannerman was in the frame and while she has also expressed the opinion  that, other than Madeleine being found, her greatest hope was for someone to come forward to say the man she saw was him, when that happened there has been not one comment of relief from her.

You choose to see "odd" where no "odd" exists IMO.  JT has never in my recollection done an interview about herself or her feelings about the case, nor do I believe it would be appropriate for her to comment on any developments on an on-going police investigation.  As for the McCanns, you've been told why they didn't give an interview to the media, you may choose to find that "odd" too, but I find it perfectly understandable in the circumstances.  Perhaps though, there was an underlying agenda behind OG's request and that was - "don't keep feeding the trolls" because these days that's all a McCann interview really does - create an online furore of righteous indignation about the amount of money spent on the case, not to mention a ramping up of the general hate and bile directed at the couple.  Personally if I were them I would never give another interview with the media again as long as I was drawing breath unless I felt it was going to help specifically in the hunt for my child or those behind their disappearance.

[Lace]

But that's the whole point surely, the parents or family of a missing child should not initially involve themselves in any media collaboration unless under the direct auspices of the police who are in charge of the investigation?  The police are best placed to deal with the media, not parents or immediate family who are in any event emotionally involved.

I disagree John,   Gerry is right when he said what parent wouldn't want to involve themselves with the media in order to get their child in the news in order to find her.    It is when they print made up stories in order to sell their papers that causes the problem.   

[faithlilly]

You choose to see "odd" where no "odd" exists IMO.  JT has never in my recollection done an interview about herself or her feelings about the case, nor do I believe it would be appropriate for her to comment on any developments on an on-going police investigation.  As for the McCanns, you've been told why they didn't give an interview to the media, you may choose to find that "odd" too, but I find it perfectly understandable in the circumstances.  Perhaps though, there was an underlying agenda behind OG's request and that was - "don't keep feeding the trolls" because these days that's all a McCann interview really does - create an online furore of righteous indignation about the amount of money spent on the case, not to mention a ramping up of the general hate and bile directed at the couple.  Personally if I were them I would never give another interview with the media again as long as I was drawing breath unless I felt it was going to help specifically in the hunt for my child or those behind their disappearance.

As to interviews, Panorama.

As to the rest of your post the Met had every opportunity to ‘protect’ the McCanns from trolls when the dodgy dossier was handed to them yet did absolutely nothing. What does that tell you ? OG has been reviewing and investigating the case for 7 years now and for those 7 years there has been questions about the amount spent on it and yet the interviews have still taken place. Why do you believe that this year OG suddenly became sensitive to the online noise? Why this year have they suddenly become sensitive to the McCanns feelings ?

[Venturi Swirl]

As to interviews, Panorama.

As to the rest of your post the Met had every opportunity to ‘protect’ the McCanns from trolls when the dodgy dossier was handed to them yet did absolutely nothing. What does that tell you ? OG has been reviewing and investigating the case for 7 years now and for those 7 years there has been questions about the amount spent on it and yet the interviews have still taken place. Why do you believe that this year OG suddenly became sensitive to the online noise? Why this year have they suddenly become sensitive to the McCanns feelings ?

Sorry, was there a Panorama about Jane Tanner?  I must have missed that.  There was a Panorama in which  she contributed her first hand account of the sighting, but I don't recall it being all about her and her feelings - has she been in the habit of telling all to the media since 2007?  I don't think so. 

As for the Met, I'm not talking about them protecting the McCanns per se, just not encouraging the online hysteria about the amount being spent on Op Grange.  It's hardly in the interests of the investigation or Madeleine or her parents to have so much negative chippy sanctimonious online harping on about it, hence why this time, unlike other times, there was a reluctance to divulge the amount being spent.  In any case who knows what threats the McCanns may have recently faced as a result of previous media appearances, perhaps the Met really do have their best interests at heart and have advised them that a lower profile is in the interests not only of the investigation but their own and their family's safety.