UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Admin on November 19, 2014, 10:58:21 AM
-
Madeleine McCann A Global Obsession: Madeleine campaign gets 'favouritism' claims father of missing Norfolk boy
The Independent
18 November 2014
The father of a seven year-old boy who has been missing for 11 years has claimed that the parents of Madeleine McCann have received “favouritism” over the campaign to find their daughter. Norfolk Police launched an extensive hunt for Daniel Entwistle, of Great Yarmouth, who failed to return to his home on May 4 2003, four years to the day before the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal.
Daniel was captured on a local shop’s CCTV and his bike was found near a local quay, leading to a river bed search. But he remains missing 11 years on and the case faded from the headlines.
David Entwistle, Daniel’s father, questioned the resources and media attention which the McCann case still receives, seven years after her unresolved disappearance. “I’ve got 110% respect for Madeleine. I hope she does get found but I can’t understand why they’re in the paper every couple of days,” Mr Entwistle told Channel 5 documentary, Madeleine McCann: A Global Obsession, which airs Tuesday night. He added: “Feels like to me it’s favouritism because they’re up there and they’re always…they’re campaigning, they’re getting money here, there and left right and centre.”
Contributors to the programme claimed that the disparity was because the McCanns were a “middle-class family” who were able to successfully “market” their family tragedy.
Judy Bachrach, Contributing Editor at Vanity Fair who covered the case and interviewed the McCanns, said: “Gerry McCann (father) made it his business to, as he put it in an interview with me, ‘Market his child.’ He called it the ‘Marketing of Madeleine McCann’ and this, of course, was the act of a very desperate father. I cannot tell you that it worked perfectly, it worked very imperfectly but it worked.” Ms Bachrach added: “They were told by child abduction experts ‘If you cry on television…the kidnapper might get off on that.’ Horrible though that sounds, so she (Kate, mother) had to keep a stoic face on television. She couldn’t weep, she couldn’t look distraught and so she looked kind of like a robot.”
Matthew Parris, the Times columnist, told the programme: “Middle class people are better at arousing interest and at keeping attention focused. Sometimes they have the levers at their disposal that working class people don’t.”
Journalist Martin Bright said: “If you’re a missing person, you shouldn’t be a boy, black or working class. I find it very worrying that journalists and editors go down the route of being particularly selective about the missing children that they focus on.”that it worked perfectly, it worked very imperfectly but it worked.”
Martin Frizell, GMTV editor at the time of the Entwistle and McCann cases, who narrated the documentary, admitted: “ The police investigation continued (into Daniel Entwistle) but after a few days and with no donations and no PR campaign, there was nothing new to report so we, and the rest of the media, quietly stopped covering it. It’s the nature of news that other stories were developing at the time. Eleven years on, Daniel’s still missing.”
Michael Cole, PR advisor to Mohamed Al Fayed, said of the negative media coverage that McCanns subsequently received: “The monstering of the McCanns by the British media is one of the most shameful episodes of the British free press. It should not have happened. Perhaps it was the heat of the Algarve sun or the fact that they were a long way from Fleet Street, though a collective madness seemed to afflict the whole of the British Press corp.”
In 2008, the McCanns accepted £550,000 libel damages and front-page apologies from Express Newspapers over false allegations that they were responsible for Madeleine’s death.
Madeleine McCann: A Global Obsession airs tonight at 7pm on Channel 5
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/madeleine-mccann-a-global-obsession-madeleine-campaign-gets-favouritism-claims-father-of-missing-norfolk-boy-9868280.html
This documentary can be viewed tonight on Ch5 +24 (Sky Ch 175) at 7pm
www.channel5.com/shows/madeleine-mccann-a-global-obsession
or on Demand 5 now...
www.channel5.com/shows/madeleine-mccann-a-global-obsession/episodes/madelaine-mccann-a-global-obsession
29
-
Madeleine McCann A Global Obsession: Madeleine campaign gets 'favouritism' claims father of missing Norfolk boy
The Independent
18 November 2014
The father of a seven year-old boy who has been missing for 11 years has claimed that the parents of Madeleine McCann have received “favouritism” over the campaign to find their daughter. Norfolk Police launched an extensive hunt for Daniel Entwistle, of Great Yarmouth, who failed to return to his home on May 4 2003, four years to the day before the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal.
Daniel was captured on a local shop’s CCTV and his bike was found near a local quay, leading to a river bed search. But he remains missing 11 years on and the case faded from the headlines.
David Entwistle, Daniel’s father, questioned the resources and media attention which the McCann case still receives, seven years after her unresolved disappearance. “I’ve got 110% respect for Madeleine. I hope she does get found but I can’t understand why they’re in the paper every couple of days,” Mr Entwistle told Channel 5 documentary, Madeleine McCann: A Global Obsession, which airs Tuesday night. He added: “Feels like to me it’s favouritism because they’re up there and they’re always…they’re campaigning, they’re getting money here, there and left right and centre.”
Contributors to the programme claimed that the disparity was because the McCanns were a “middle-class family” who were able to successfully “market” their family tragedy.
Judy Bachrach, Contributing Editor at Vanity Fair who covered the case and interviewed the McCanns, said: “Gerry McCann (father) made it his business to, as he put it in an interview with me, ‘Market his child.’ He called it the ‘Marketing of Madeleine McCann’ and this, of course, was the act of a very desperate father. I cannot tell you that it worked perfectly, it worked very imperfectly but it worked.” Ms Bachrach added: “They were told by child abduction experts ‘If you cry on television…the kidnapper might get off on that.’ Horrible though that sounds, so she (Kate, mother) had to keep a stoic face on television. She couldn’t weep, she couldn’t look distraught and so she looked kind of like a robot.”
Matthew Parris, the Times columnist, told the programme: “Middle class people are better at arousing interest and at keeping attention focused. Sometimes they have the levers at their disposal that working class people don’t.”
Journalist Martin Bright said: “If you’re a missing person, you shouldn’t be a boy, black or working class. I find it very worrying that journalists and editors go down the route of being particularly selective about the missing children that they focus on.”that it worked perfectly, it worked very imperfectly but it worked.”
Martin Frizell, GMTV editor at the time of the Entwistle and McCann cases, who narrated the documentary, admitted: “ The police investigation continued (into Daniel Entwistle) but after a few days and with no donations and no PR campaign, there was nothing new to report so we, and the rest of the media, quietly stopped covering it. It’s the nature of news that other stories were developing at the time. Eleven years on, Daniel’s still missing.”
Michael Cole, PR advisor to Mohamed Al Fayed, said of the negative media coverage that McCanns subsequently received: “The monstering of the McCanns by the British media is one of the most shameful episodes of the British free press. It should not have happened. Perhaps it was the heat of the Algarve sun or the fact that they were a long way from Fleet Street, though a collective madness seemed to afflict the whole of the British Press corp.”
In 2008, the McCanns accepted £550,000 libel damages and front-page apologies from Express Newspapers over false allegations that they were responsible for Madeleine’s death.
Madeleine McCann: A Global Obsession airs tonight at 7pm on Channel 5
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/madeleine-mccann-a-global-obsession-madeleine-campaign-gets-favouritism-claims-father-of-missing-norfolk-boy-9868280.html
This documentary can be viewed tonight on Ch5 +24 (Sky Ch 175) at 7pm
www.channel5.com/shows/madeleine-mccann-a-global-obsession
I watched it, another hour of my life needlessly spent.
-
Did anyone find the documentary to be worth watching?
Two points I find worthy of mentioning...
Great play was made of the telephone call which Kate McCann's pal Jill Renwick made to GMTV at around 7.45am on the morning after the disappearance claiming on national TV that there was a broken shutter, a claim which we all now know to be a load of total bull. The documentary failed to point this out so has left the uninformed viewer with the myth in their head that an intruder broke into the children's bedroom.
The documentary also repeated the claim that they (Kate and Gerry) took it in turns every so often to check on the children. This again was misleading since Kate McCann never returned once to the apartment between the time she and Gerry left for dinner at 8.30pm and her first and only check after 10pm.
My own view is that these TV companies are not helping matters with their flawed information and ridiculous claims being passed off as fact.
-
Was mainly about how the McCanns used PR/marketing to keep Madeline in the news so everyone kept searching. Thought the whole programme was PR/propaganda in itself tbh this time in favour of the McCanns.
-
Did anyone find the documentary to be worth watching?
Two points I find worthy of mentioning...
Great play was made of the telephone call which Kate McCann's pal Jill Renwick made to GMTV at around 7.45am on the morning after the disappearance claiming on national TV that there was a broken shutter, a claim which we all now know to be a load of total bull. The documentary failed to point this out so has left the uninformed viewer with the myth in their head that an intruder broke into the children's bedroom.
The documentary also repeated the claim that they (Kate and Gerry) took it in turns every so often to check on the children. This again was misleading since Kate McCann never returned once to the apartment between the time she and Gerry left for dinner at 8.30pm and her first and only check after 10pm.
My own view is that these TV companies are not helping matters with their flawed information and ridiculous claims being passed off as fact.
You forgot Renwicks other foot in mouth claim that nobody was searching for the kid in PdL that morning.
-
Yeah well, she could only retell what she'd been told in the first place. How could she know any better?
-
Yeah well, she could only retell what she'd been told in the first place. How could she know any better?
True and no guesses who told her in the first place.
-
Ooh, you can't say that, you'll upset some people @)(++(*
-
Ooh, you can't say that, you'll upset some people @)(++(*
Miss Renwick did say that Kate told her so there you have it. Mystery solved 8((()*/
-
Did anyone find the documentary to be worth watching?
Two points I find worthy of mentioning...
Great play was made of the telephone call which Kate McCann's pal Jill Renwick made to GMTV at around 7.45am on the morning after the disappearance claiming on national TV that there was a broken shutter, a claim which we all now know to be a load of total bull. The documentary failed to point this out so has left the uninformed viewer with the myth in their head that an intruder broke into the children's bedroom.
The documentary also repeated the claim that they (Kate and Gerry) took it in turns every so often to check on the children. This again was misleading since Kate McCann never returned once to the apartment between the time she and Gerry left for dinner at 8.30pm and her first and only check after 10pm.
My own view is that these TV companies are not helping matters with their flawed information and ridiculous claims being passed off as fact.
I have never heard either kate or Gerry say the shutter was broken...my feeling is they said it was forced open and this has been repeated as a chinese whisper...seems like the programme was very supportive of the McCanns and this has annoyed some
-
I don't mind at all if the program is supportive of the McCanns if that is their findings as long as they give logical reasons for saying so. This just felt like a brain washing exercise without much else other then wheeling in a lot of journalists who sycophantically gave their personal opinions. Not interested in the highly subjective plus frankly questionably honest opinions of someone in the TV biz - prefer the scientific/logic approach...
Would you guys recommend the last book by Summers? Does it take a fact based approach?
-
I thought that the documentary was rather boring. But then it wasn't aimed at people like me because I know all about how disgraceful was the behaviour of The British Media. And The Portuguese Media.
-
I don't mind at all if the program is supportive of the McCanns if that is their findings as long as they give logical reasons for saying so. This just felt like a brain washing exercise without much else other then wheeling in a lot of journalists who sycophantically gave their personal opinions. Not interested in the highly subjective plus frankly questionably honest opinions of someone in the TV biz - prefer the scientific/logic approach...
Would you guys recommend the last book by Summers? Does it take a fact based approach?
The logical reason to be supportive is that there is no evidence to prove otherwise....
-
I'd certainly defend their right to innocent until proven guilty and certain elements of the press always exceed expectation when it comes to the disgrace category. They don't seem to have much respect for this right. And the programme did well to highlight that.
I for one don't know if the McCanns are guilty and I would not say they are. I think there are indications which arouse suspicions. There's definitely big holes imo when it comes to the staging theory which I haven't heard really anyone address or at least not satisfactory. Actually I think an open mind is the most logical stance to take. That's the conclusion I have come to after reading this forum/documentarys/books and at least trying to find out the facts.
-
I'd certainly defend their right to innocent until proven guilty and certain elements of the press always exceed expectation when it comes to the disgrace category. They don't seem to have much respect for this right. And the programme did well to highlight that.
I for one don't know if the McCanns are guilty and I would not say they are. I think there are indications which arouse suspicions. There's definitely big holes imo when it comes to the staging theory which I haven't heard really anyone address or at least not satisfactory. Actually I think an open mind is the most logical stance to take. That's the conclusion I have come to after reading this forum/documentarys/books and at least trying to find out the facts.
having looked at all the available evidence I would say maddie was almost certainly abducted
-
Would we expect anything less from you?
-
I'd certainly defend their right to innocent until proven guilty and certain elements of the press always exceed expectation when it comes to the disgrace category. They don't seem to have much respect for this right. And the programme did well to highlight that.
I for one don't know if the McCanns are guilty and I would not say they are. I think there are indications which arouse suspicions. There's definitely big holes imo when it comes to the staging theory which I haven't heard really anyone address or at least not satisfactory. Actually I think an open mind is the most logical stance to take. That's the conclusion I have come to after reading this forum/documentarys/books and at least trying to find out the facts.
Is that the big hole in the wall to prove she was abducted? Or is that the big hole in the moving door to prove a stranger got inside? Or is the big hole believing what you are told. Seeing is believing as Smithman knows! Now where were those efits hidden for 5 years?
-
I'm not afraid but I'm not here to cause trouble. I know my theory so let's see what happens.
-
I'm not afraid but I'm not here to cause trouble. I know my theory so let's see what happens.
I've started a thread for your theory, pending approval, in the members only lounge.
-
I'm waiting until certain people are made suspects by the yard first so delete it.
-
I'm waiting until certain people are made suspects by the yard first so delete it.
Right. Back to the grind for me then.
-
Well if your theory can't be questioned and hold up to reasonable logic then it is basically wrong. Personally I have no emotional attachment to this case though I find it sad. Simply I always thought a detective would be a fascinating job and this case interesting otherwise the rest of you wouldn't be here I assume. Anyone who wants to find the truth(although this will never happen by anyone on a forum imo) would I have thought want someone playing devils advocate to test their theory though someone simply becoming insulting or getting ridiculous I wouldn't be so interested in!
I do actually have a theory where staging could have happened - seriously! Though it involves multiple people(3 or 4). But I also don't want to post libel(plus I think there are also abduction theories which stand up) though I'd like to post it for the chance to discuss nothing more. I would only be willing to discuss on skype or something and I have a busy life.
BTW I agree with you about people not willing to engage in debate - Pat Brown for instance. People are too emotionally involved. I don't know why. I don't know these people. Though, I'd hate to cause them any grief that's for sure. There are people who maliciously troll all over the internet for no other reason then a cheap thrill imo.
-
Well if your theory can't be questioned and hold up to reasonable logic then it is basically wrong. Personally I have no emotional attachment to this case though I find it sad. Simply I always thought a detective would be a fascinating job and this case interesting otherwise the rest of you wouldn't be here I assume. Anyone who wants to find the truth(although this will never happen by anyone on a forum imo) would I have thought want someone playing devils advocate to test their theory though someone simply becoming insulting or getting ridiculous I wouldn't be so interested in!
I do actually have a theory where staging could have happened - seriously! Though it involves multiple people(3 or 4). But I also don't want to post libel(plus I think there are also abduction theories which stand up) though I'd like to post it for the chance to discuss nothing more. I would only be willing to discuss on skype or something and I have a busy life.
BTW I agree with you about people not willing to engage in debate - Pat Brown for instance. People are too emotionally involved. I don't know why. I don't know these people. Though, I'd hate to cause them any grief that's for sure. There are people who maliciously troll all over the internet for no other reason then a cheap thrill imo.
And another sensible post.
There aren't very many Fence Sitters left anymore. And most McCann Supporters aren't really into changing minds these days.
Just nice to know that someone is trying to understand it it all.
-
Thanks. I have noticed some if not most passionately believe one way or the other. It's like a religion for sure. One or two show some doubt either way.. they likely know more then me about this case tbh. I have not read the files(read bits) and likely don't intend to... life's to short ?{)(**
-
Thanks. I have noticed some if not most passionately believe one way or the other. It's like a religion for sure. One or two show some doubt either way.. they likely know more then me about this case tbh. I have not read the files(read bits) and likely don't intend to... life's to short ?{)(**
Some of us have been at this for more than seven years, me included. But I have been very impressed with some of the research on this Forum, most of it delivered without bias.
Most of us made up our minds a very long time ago, one way or the other. Although I wouldn't call myself passionate.
People like you offer some balance. So please keep at it.
-
Well if your theory can't be questioned and hold up to reasonable logic then it is basically wrong. Personally I have no emotional attachment to this case though I find it sad. Simply I always thought a detective would be a fascinating job and this case interesting otherwise the rest of you wouldn't be here I assume. Anyone who wants to find the truth(although this will never happen by anyone on a forum imo) would I have thought want someone playing devils advocate to test their theory though someone simply becoming insulting or getting ridiculous I wouldn't be so interested in!
I do actually have a theory where staging could have happened - seriously! Though it involves multiple people(3 or 4). But I also don't want to post libel(plus I think there are also abduction theories which stand up) though I'd like to post it for the chance to discuss nothing more. I would only be willing to discuss on skype or something and I have a busy life.
BTW I agree with you about people not willing to engage in debate - Pat Brown for instance. People are too emotionally involved. I don't know why. I don't know these people. Though, I'd hate to cause them any grief that's for sure. There are people who maliciously troll all over the internet for no other reason then a cheap thrill imo.
I'd be happy to debate your theory with you, by PM if you prefer ?{)(**
-
What I picked up on that documentary was that the Portuguese police like the 'softly softly' approach to investigating when a child goes missing. It was said they don't like publicity, journalists etc. the news being spread far and wide they like to do it quietly.
Why then have they now got the system that when a child goes missing the news it put out straight away? Very much like 'Amber alert'? Changed their way of policing?
-
Since this documentary went out Daniel Entwistle's Grandfather (Keith) started a Facebook page and has contacted various TV stations including Channel 5, saying that when Daniel disappeared The Police & Social Services had told the family that Daniel's father (David) was convicted (with 3 others) of sexual offences against an 11yr old girl in 1986. He has a Facebook page called "Veto channel 5's Advertisers Goods and Services https://www.facebook.com/groups/659616667493295/?ref=ts&fref=ts
This appears to be an FB page that isn't accessible to the general public for some reason...