The McCanns courted the press from day 1 and they have to take the good with the bad. The Portuguese press reported truthfully what the police were thinking. As for the British press, the parents were treated with kid gloves and presented as the perfect family and perfect parents. They have nothing to complain about. What the McCanns feared was that the truth about the investigation would be made public and they have tried everything possible to silence any criticism. They might have been successful if the police files had not been made public, which was a huge shock for them. They didn't realise that the files were to be made available to the press and public in general, in accordance with the Portuguese legislation. It was the truth they feared and still fear.
Furthermore, Gonçalo Amaral was a target from the beginning of the investigation and along with the PJ and GNR was treated with contempt by the British press. This happened long before he even thought that he would be taken off the case or even write a book about it.
The McCanns courted the press from day 1 and they have to take the good with the bad. The Portuguese press reported truthfully what the police were thinking. As for the British press, the parents were treated with kid gloves and presented as the perfect family and perfect parents. They have nothing to complain about. What the McCanns feared was that the truth about the investigation would be made public and they have tried everything possible to silence any criticism. They might have been successful if the police files had not been made public, which was a huge shock for them. They didn't realise that the files were to be made available to the press and public in general, in accordance with the Portuguese legislation. It was the truth they feared and still fear.a) how did the PT press know what the police were thinking? Clairvoyant?
Furthermore, Gonçalo Amaral was a target from the beginning of the investigation and along with the PJ and GNR was treated with contempt by the British press. This happened long before he even thought that he would be taken off the case or even write a book about it.
The McCanns courted the press from day 1 and they have to take the good with the bad. The Portuguese press reported truthfully what the police were thinking. As for the British press, the parents were treated with kid gloves and presented as the perfect family and perfect parents. They have nothing to complain about. What the McCanns feared was that the truth about the investigation would be made public and they have tried everything possible to silence any criticism. They might have been successful if the police files had not been made public, which was a huge shock for them. They didn't realise that the files were to be made available to the press and public in general, in accordance with the Portuguese legislation. It was the truth they feared and still fear.
Furthermore, Gonçalo Amaral was a target from the beginning of the investigation and along with the PJ and GNR was treated with contempt by the British press. This happened long before he even thought that he would be taken off the case or even write a book about it.
a) how did the PT press know what the police were thinking? Clairvoyant?
b) If the UK press treated the McCanns with kid gloves and as perfect parents then why did the McCanns have to sue them and what was Leveson all about?
The McCanns courted the press from day 1 and they have to take the good with the bad. The Portuguese press reported truthfully what the police were thinking. As for the British press, the parents were treated with kid gloves and presented as the perfect family and perfect parents. They have nothing to complain about. What the McCanns feared was that the truth about the investigation would be made public and they have tried everything possible to silence any criticism. They might have been successful if the police files had not been made public, which was a huge shock for them. They didn't realise that the files were to be made available to the press and public in general, in accordance with the Portuguese legislation. It was the truth they feared and still fear.
Furthermore, Gonçalo Amaral was a target from the beginning of the investigation and along with the PJ and GNR was treated with contempt by the British press. This happened long before he even thought that he would be taken off the case or even write a book about it.
Have you lost touch with planet Earth, Montclair? Or have you (conveniently) forgotten the press coverage by the UK press - an absolute feeding frenzy - which led to various payouts, apologies and retractions.Thanks for saving me the bother of replying. Montclair seems to have had a severe memory lapse.
3.12 The cases of the McCanns and Christopher Jefferies are especially egregious examples of defamatory and sensationalised reporting causing, in their different ways, personal anguish and distress.
The McCanns courted the press from day 1 and they have to take the good with the bad. The Portuguese press reported truthfully what the police were thinking. As for the British press, the parents were treated with kid gloves and presented as the perfect family and perfect parents. They have nothing to complain about. What the McCanns feared was that the truth about the investigation would be made public and they have tried everything possible to silence any criticism. They might have been successful if the police files had not been made public, which was a huge shock for them. They didn't realise that the files were to be made available to the press and public in general, in accordance with the Portuguese legislation. It was the truth they feared and still fear.
Furthermore, Gonçalo Amaral was a target from the beginning of the investigation and along with the PJ and GNR was treated with contempt by the British press. This happened long before he even thought that he would be taken off the case or even write a book about it.
The McCanns went after the British newspapers when they printed the truth about the investigation and they did an out of court settlement with them, which doesn't mean that what they printed wasn't true. It was confirmed when the police files were made public.
Leveson was about hacking and not about the McCanns. They were not hacked, but managed to jump on the bandwagon, because they wanted to use Leveson as a way to stop the newspapers or bloggers from writing anything they didn't like.
The McCanns went after the British newspapers when they printed the truth about the investigation and they did an out of court settlement with them, which doesn't mean that what they printed wasn't true. It was confirmed when the police files were made public.
Leveson was about hacking and not about the McCanns. They were not hacked, but managed to jump on the bandwagon, because they wanted to use Leveson as a way to stop the newspapers or bloggers from writing anything they didn't like.
SYRINGE FOUND IN MADELEINE'S APARTMENT
McCANNS ARE LYING
McCANNS HIDING A BIG SECRET
DNA PUTS PARENTS IN FRAME
Are shocking disraceful headlines- thank goodness I do not buy such newspapers.
Trial by media should be made illegal in this country- how many cases have been jepordised by such utterings.
McCanns are quite right to challenge these type of stories.
Having said that The McCanns courted the media not to 'find Maddie' but to promote themselves as people they did not appear to be. They did enjoy the 'celebrity' and did become quite confident in their new found status- mixing with heads of state. pope, Oprah, evan tried to involve Royal family in their media mania. ( an annoymouse person send a message to the royal website) YES, this was a global phenomenon created and enjoyed by the McCanns,
Maddie has never been found!
Everything the McCanns have done has been with the aim of keeping Madeleine's profile as high as possible for as long as possible in the public eye. As Madeleine's parents how could they do that - and at the same time stay out of the public eye themselves? That makes no sense. They couldn't do one without the other.
I've never seen any evidence of a 'celebrity' lifestyle or the slightest desire to have one. What have I missed?
The problem for me with 'Madeleine's profile' is that I wouldn't have known her if I'd fallen over her at the time. The photos released seemed so different. I could have picked her parents out of a police line-up with ease, but if you'd asked me to find Madeleine in a group of similar little girls I'd have been in trouble. Even the coloboma which received so much publicity has been dismissed since by her mother as 'just a fleck', so we can't rely on that.
I personally would have used the bottom days before missing photo but they didn't have many to choose from.
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_30.jpg)(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/dm2505074.jpg)
It has already been explained on the forum by Carana, I think, that the Polícia Judiciária chose which picture would be used.
If you are going to criticise Madeleine McCann's parents at least use something they and not the PJ have worked on.
If that was the photographs they were given what were they supposed to do ?
What do you expect from a third world country only 40 years out of being a dictatorship?
I am not serious about that but some on here are!
I wonder what they thought of Germany in the late 1980s?
Mercy!
What do you expect from a third world country only 40 years out of being a dictatorship?
I am not serious about that but some on here are!
I wonder what they thought of Germany in the late 1980s?
Mercy!
What do you expect from a third world country only 40 years out of being a dictatorship?I was very happy for Germany in the late 1980s on account of the fall of the Berlin Wall, how about you?
I am not serious about that but some on here are!
I wonder what they thought of Germany in the late 1980s?
Mercy!
I was very happy for Germany in the late 1980s on account of the fall of the Berlin Wall, how about you?How about me what?
How about me what?I would say it's all about how quickly and efficiently a country can shake off the ways of old regimes and adapt to a different, more democratic and just way of treating people. Some countries adapt to these changes more efficiently than others.
I am positively ecstatic that every one was happy with Germany 40 years out of its dictatorship. I wonder why some find the 40 year period so significant in Portugal?
The problem for me with 'Madeleine's profile' is that I wouldn't have known her if I'd fallen over her at the time. The photos released seemed so different. I could have picked her parents out of a police line-up with ease, but if you'd asked me to find Madeleine in a group of similar little girls I'd have been in trouble. Even the coloboma which received so much publicity has been dismissed since by her mother as 'just a fleck', so we can't rely on that.
IMO the first photograph was chosen because it showed every detail of her face, hair, eyes etc. That seems very sensible to me. People do look different on different photographs - I can't see why that would be a problem. Surely the more piccies of her out there - the better. Regardless of what the little imperfection in her eye was called - it was an added means of identification - and IIRC was first mentioned by the PJ in a public 'appeal' on 5th May. (from memory).
However we have moved on since then and I do wish the media would show the updated age-related 'piccie' of Madeleine. I can only presume the 'iconic' piccie is considered more advantageous to them - from the point of view of newspaper sales.
Slightly off topic - but I agree the parents were instantly recognisable from the start -and imo that's because we were seeing them 'in the flesh' and not just in photographs. And is also why I don't believe they would be so stupid as to contemplate moving a body and transporting it in a car - not only in the full glare of the world's media, but having probably the most recognisable faces in Portugal at the time they were supposed to have done that deed.
Rule of thumb amongst supporters......if it's foreign it's ( add your expletive here )
I would say it's all about how quickly and efficiently a country can shake off the ways of old regimes and adapt to a different, more democratic and just way of treating people. Some countries adapt to these changes more efficiently than others.
The only time the press coverage was "negative" towards the McCanns was just after they were made arguidos. The press then printed information from the investigation which did not please the parents, even though most of it was true. The outrage over these articles IMO is highly exaggerated and nowhere did anyone of these so-called experts criticise how the Portuguese police, country and people were portrayed in the MSM. Hypocritical attitude.
On the whole the press fawned over the McCanns, never criticising their parenting, for example. If any journalist ever expressed any doubts about the case, they were practically forced to do a mea culpa the next day in the press.
The McCanns, through their pit bulls, Carter Ruck, were very successful in putting the fear of god into the papers, who now only print what meets the approval of the parents.
Then can you explain why - if ''the papers now only print what meets the approval of the parents,' - The Times has recently had to pay compensation of £50,000 for printing lies about them?
Then can you explain why - if ''the papers now only print what meets the approval of the parents,' - The Times has recently had to pay compensation of £50,000 for printing lies about them?
You have evidence that Portugal has not "shaken it off" ?Well apparently there has never been a miscarriage of justice in Portugal - ever. That rings a teensy alarm bell for me!
Well apparently there has never been a miscarriage of justice in Portugal - ever. That rings a teensy alarm bell for me!
Well apparently there has never been a miscarriage of justice in Portugal - ever. That rings a teensy alarm bell for me!
I said do you have evidence they have not advanced significantly in 40 years?Where have I stated that they have not "advanced significantly" in 40 years?
I said do you have evidence they have not advanced significantly in 40 years?
Where have I stated that they have not "advanced significantly" in 40 years?
There is plenty of evidence to the contrary.
There seems to be huge concerted effort going on in Portugal at the moment to root out corruption at all levels in the public services.
No-one appears to be 'untouchable' at the moment.
One welcome development appears to be the total lack of unauthorised leaks from within the McCann investigation.
I take it from that comment you have never made such an assertion so you are content that 40 years on after the dictatorship ended it is of no relevance, except perhaps in a historical sense, in modern Portuguese society that Portugal was once a dictatorship. Much in the same that Germany's society changed in the similar time span from 1946 to 1986. So when posters hark back to Portugal being only 40 years out of a dictatorship it is probably an irrelevant statement.
I don't think it is an irrelevant statement.
Bearing in mind that the revolution was a bloodless one not a great upheaval which overturned the structures of the regime.
The old instruments of governance did not vanish overnight ... but the evolution of the revolution continues.
I take it from that comment you have never made such an assertion so you are content that 40 years on after the dictatorship ended it is of no relevance, except perhaps in a historical sense, in modern Portuguese society that Portugal was once a dictatorship. Much in the same that Germany's society changed in the similar time span from 1946 to 1986. So when posters hark back to Portugal being only 40 years out of a dictatorship it is probably an irrelevant statement.I refer you back to my earlier comment on this thread. Do you think all countries progress at precisely the same rate or something? Portugal may have made significant democratic progress but may still have a way to go to have achieved the level of progress made by Germany in a similar timeframe. And no, don't bother to ask for evidence, it's simply my opinion and in the words of the late great Sweepyface, I'm entitled to it. 8)--))
I refer you back to my earlier comment on this thread. Do you think all countries progress at precisely the same rate or something? Portugal may have made significant democratic progress but may still have a way to go to have achieved the level of progress made by Germany in a similar timeframe. And no, don't bother to ask for evidence, it's simply my opinion and in the words of the late great Sweepyface, I'm entitled to it. 8)--))
My opinion is that the rate of change would be variable, however I find it improbable that a country which threw off the mantle of dictatorship in favour of democracy would retain many if any vestiges of totalitarianism more than a generation later.
But then of course the secret policeman is always the secret policeman so whilst I find it improbable I would not believe it impossible for some of the young rotten apples from the old regime to be in the judicial barrel of the new. But 30 to 40 years on the old guard would be long gone.
Not quite long gone. Amaral was a product of The Fascist State. And this particular Fascist State wasn't annihilated. They just reinvented themselves.
My opinion is that the rate of change would be variable, however I find it improbable that a country which threw off the mantle of dictatorship in favour of democracy would retain many if any vestiges of totalitarianism more than a generation later.Have you been to Russia?
But then of course the secret policeman is always the secret policeman so whilst I find it improbable I would not believe it impossible for some of the young rotten apples from the old regime to be in the judicial barrel of the new. But 30 to 40 years on the old guard would be long gone.
Dr Amaral was 16 at the time of the revolution.
Have you been to Russia?
Yes and?Recently?
Recently?
Do you mean, The 1974 carnation revolution?
Well I don't mean the 1910 revolution so I figure I must mean The Carnation Revolution unless there was another one in the 1970s while I wasn't paying attention. That is always plausible in this manor.
1981 & 2000.Not recently then, so you wouldn't know how much progress they've made in a generation between a totalitarian state and a democratic one then?
No need for sarcasm. By the way he was 15.
Not recently then, so you wouldn't know how much progress they've made in a generation between a totalitarian state and a democratic one then?
I wouldn't know anyway. I went over there and other places in the world to do what I do not make comparisons in cultural or political situations. It is best not to if you want to come home.I asked the question because of your earlier statement "I find it improbable that a country which threw off the mantle of dictatorship in favour of democracy would retain many if any vestiges of totalitarianism more than a generation later". Now, as I haven't been to Russia I thought you, as a seasoned traveller and all round know-it-all would be able to tell us if your statement held true for Russia, which I had been led to believe (probably by the evil capitalist MSM) to have not yet quite thrown off its vestiges of totalitarianism. Still, you don't seem to know, so never mind, I'm sure your statement is correct for almost all erstwhile totalitarian states ... 8(>((
Your first question was had I been to Russia the answer is yes. Then you decided to ask a different question.
Ask me one about the Czech Republic, Jordan or RSA.
I asked the question because of your earlier statement "I find it improbable that a country which threw off the mantle of dictatorship in favour of democracy would retain many if any vestiges of totalitarianism more than a generation later". Now, as I haven't been to Russia I thought you, as a seasoned traveller and all round know-it-all would be able to tell us if your statement held true for Russia, which I had been led to believe (probably by the evil capitalist MSM) to have not yet quite thrown off its vestiges of totalitarianism. Still, you don't seem to know, so never mind, I'm sure your statement is correct for almost all erstwhile totalitarian states ... 8(>((
So a callow youth when democracy was introduced?
Democracy much to some peoples annoyance. Like Amaral and Flores.
MF – Things were different in my time. She would have been under such an attack that before she realised anything, she'd be in jail.
GA – Right, but in your time, in our old times, investigation was made with fuel. Now we all move on honey. Apart from that, this is a process that is uncomfortable for everyone. Nicely archived, nice and quiet, that's how it looks better. Everyone was happy.
They could be talking about policing in the 80s in the UK.
Late 1970s early 1980s The Special Patrol Group (SPG).
but the UK has moved on whereas Portugal seems not to have
but the UK has moved on whereas Portugal seems not to have
Really ?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/21/500-black-asian-deaths-custody-no-prosecutions
Well many places are a bit dodgy; best not go beyond the soggy bit at Dover without mummy.
Really ?Is it possible to find any statistics for ethnic minority deaths in Portuguese prisons and whilst in custody for a similar period? I don't suppose there have been any, seeing as how Portugal has never had a miscarriage of justice either (allegedly)!
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/21/500-black-asian-deaths-custody-no-prosecutions
Portugal did have serious problem, and quite possibly does still have. There never was anything like a serious Revolution. The real shit bags just reinvented themselves. And in the end it was just the same old same old.
I feel really sad about this. But I do know of certain sure that the disappearance of that little girl will forever be the end of Facist Portugal. Not one PJ Officer will ever again even think about beating anyone.
That poor little girl did so much for the real people.
Democracy much to some peoples annoyance. Like Amaral and Flores.
MF – Things were different in my time. She would have been under such an attack that before she realised anything, she'd be in jail.
GA – Right, but in your time, in our old times, investigation was made with fuel. Now we all move on honey. Apart from that, this is a process that is uncomfortable for everyone. Nicely archived, nice and quiet, that's how it looks better. Everyone was happy.
That's how it looks better !
This case has been hallmarked by "looks", propaganda and myth making. Seems those are some of the most important elements to Amarals [senior] crew.
All imo.
My 90 yr old mother was saying the same last week...how old are you?
Mummy would have told me to say "The same age as my tongue and little bit older than my teeth".
Portugal did have serious problem, and quite possibly does still have. There never was anything like a serious Revolution. The real shit bags just reinvented themselves. And in the end it was just the same old same old.
I feel really sad about this. But I do know of certain sure that the disappearance of that little girl will forever be the end of Facist Portugal. Not one PJ Officer will ever again even think about beating anyone.
That poor little girl did so much for the real people.
Portugal did have serious problem, and quite possibly does still have. There never was anything like a serious Revolution. The real shit bags just reinvented themselves. And in the end it was just the same old same old..
I feel really sad about this. But I do know of certain sure that the disappearance of that little girl will forever be the end of Facist Portugal. Not one PJ Officer will ever again even think about beating anyone.
That poor little girl did so much for the real people.
Mummy would have told me to say "The same age as my tongue and little bit older than my teeth".
8@??)( Very perceptive.
Portugal goes on as it always has but now it is wrapped up in disinformation, propaganda and glitzy paper to make it look palatable and new.
My PT friend did not even know what Democracy meant.
He could not get his head around the concept of "innocent until proven Guilty". Nor could he get his head around the concept that tortured out evidence was not evidence at all. He said "But it is OK because it helps the PJ to solve cases"
sadie rolls her eyes in despair. 8(8-))
I think he had some understanding by the time I had finished with him !
Sadly it seems that THEY have suckered most of the people into thinking they, the ordinary trusting people, won in the mid 1970's
But Fascism still rules.
Amazing what lies, propaganda, media manipulation and "glitzy paper" can do to mislead the ordinary people
You have one PT friend and he doesn't know the concept "innocent until proven guilty"!! I have lots of Portuguese friends and they are well aware of the concept. I even had colleague at work whose husband was a judge and think that he would know the concept.
I don't think that you have even the slightest idea of what democracy is like in Portugal. For one thing, the people have more rights when comes to unions and public demonstrations than in the UK.
To be honest Montclair I don't think it would have mattered which country Madeleine had disappeared in the faithful would still have given it a verbal kicking.
You have one PT friend and he doesn't know the concept "innocent until proven guilty"!! I have lots of Portuguese friends and they are well aware of the concept. I even had colleague at work whose husband was a judge and think that he would know the concept.I have a number actually Montclair.
I don't think that you have even the slightest idea of what democracy is like in Portugal. For one thing, the people have more rights when comes to unions and public demonstrations than in the UK.
I think the following article sums up much of the 'reasoning' behind the very unfriendly press treatment to which the McCanns were subject.
In the days after Madeleine's disappearance criticism was being made that she was being looked for.
from the article ...
In his Thursday column in the Público newspaper, the former head of Portugal’s bar association, José Miguel Júdice, said the enormous mobilisation was due to the fact that the little girl “is English, white, and the daughter of doctors.”
In the cases of the 31 children who went missing last year in Portugal, “we didn’t see helicopters or planes chartered by TV stations, or hundreds of police officers and trained dogs,” he wrote.
The only thing I could say in response to that is ... why the Hell not ??
PORTUGAL: Some Missing Children More Equal than Others
By Mario de Queiroz
Reprint | | Print | Send by email
Mario de Queiroz
LISBON, May 18 2007 (IPS) - Never before has the Portuguese idiom “para o inglês ver” (literally: for the English to see), which means putting on a front to impress outsiders and ward off criticism, been so apt as today in Portugal, when the entire country has its attention riveted on the case of a four-year-old British girl who disappeared from a hotel two weeks ago.
The investigation into the May 3 disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a resort in Portugal’s southern Algarve region has come up with few leads and little evidence, despite the unprecedented police effort in a country where kidnappings of local children have gone largely unnoticed.
The saying “para o inglês ver”, remarkably pertinent with respect to this case, emerged in Brazil in 1831, when a law was passed prohibiting the importation of slaves under pressure from the British. However, the law was not enforced, and the slave trade continued at a brisk pace in Brazil and in Portugal’s African colonies, thus giving rise to the idiom that referred to a law approved merely for the sake of appearance.
Madeleine went missing from her hotel room at the Ocean Club resort in the village of Praia da Luz, where she was sleeping along with her two-year-old twin siblings while their parents had dinner at a poolside tapas bar 40 metres away.
Since then, the British ambassador has gotten involved, and the Judicial Police, with the support of other police forces, has launched a search and investigation operation of a scope never before seen in Portugal, with130 senior officers and 800 beat officers reportedly assigned to the case.
In the last two weeks, the quiet former fishing village of Praia da Luz has been overrun by police officers and their dogs, as well as battalions of British and Portuguese journalists who have set up satellite dishes to broadcast around the clock.
The only suspect investigated so far is Robert Murat, a British resident of Praia da Luz. Also questioned, but as a witness, was Russian computer specialist Sergei Malinka, who helped design a web site for Murat.
Murat’s home, near the Ocean Club, was searched by the police, who said they did not arrest him because not enough evidence was found, although tests are still being carried out on objects found in the dwelling.
The police have not been forthcoming with information, and much of the media coverage has been speculation.
The case has triggered a media feeding frenzy and has snowballed into an international cause, in which ordinary citizens, analysts, psychologists, doctors and criminologists have all offered their opinions and advice on radio and television programmes and web logs (blogs).
Some observers point out that Madeleine comes from a well-heeled British family (both of her parents are doctors), unlike so many Portuguese or immigrant children whose disappearance has drawn scant attention from the press.
Brazilian-Portuguese activist Ana Filgueiras told IPS that “the deployment of resources to find the missing girl is laudable, but it is regrettable that the same does not happen in the case of people who are less well-off. In Portugal we have never before seen a mobilisation of this magnitude.”
Filgueiras founded the non-governmental Brazilian Centre for the Defence of Children’s Rights (CBDDCA) in the 1970s, which drew attention to the killings of street children by military police in Rio de Janeiro.
“Across the globe, but especially in Africa, Latin America and Asia, the kidnapping of children is almost routine, but the phenomenon receives little coverage from media that are more interested in reporting each and every detail of the disappearance of a British girl, even though the case is insignificant in statistical terms,” said Filgueiras.
According to UNICEF (the U.N. children’s fund), 1.2 million children are trafficked every year around the world.
In Portugal, SOS Criança Desaparecida (SOS Missing Children) of the Instituto de Apoio à Crianza opened 31 new cases last year of missing children, involving 19 girls and 12 boys.
Filgueiras said that when Portuguese children go missing, “no TV station airs photos of the victims,” but in Madeleine’s case “we are watching a soap opera conceived of to boost ratings and readership to a maximum, by playing on people’s feelings.”
“If Madeleine were the daughter of parents from Africa, Eastern Europe or even Portugal, would the media have seized on it like this? Would there be so much news, and such an outpouring of concern?” asks someone writing at http://mrsleeves.blogspot.com, a Portuguese language blog.
Another blog, http://insolitos-da-gravata.blogspot.com/, notes that in the case of Joanna, a Portuguese girl who disappeared a year ago, “it took the police several days to start searching, while in this case it took just 30 minutes, and I can’t avoid thinking, selfishly, that it was only because she was from a well-off English family, since any of us would have had to wait for 48 hours after the disappearance, as established by law.”
The Judicial Police launched the investigation six hours after Kate McCann, Madeleine’s mother, reported that her daughter was missing. “Record time in Portugal,” said Carlos Anjos, president of the association of criminal investigators, who added, however, that six hours was enough time for the kidnappers to have sped across the border with Spain, just 150 kilometres away.
In his Thursday column in the Público newspaper, the former head of Portugal’s bar association, José Miguel Júdice, said the enormous mobilisation was due to the fact that the little girl “is English, white, and the daughter of doctors.”
In the cases of the 31 children who went missing last year in Portugal, “we didn’t see helicopters or planes chartered by TV stations, or hundreds of police officers and trained dogs,” he wrote.
The British and Portuguese media have not reacted this way on other occasions, “and they couldn’t care less about reporting on the immense tragedy in (the Sudanese region of) Darfur, because doing so is infinitely more dangerous and brings less audience and readership than describing, live and direct, every single detail of the family drama” in Praia da Luz, Júdice maintained.
http://www.ipsnews.net/2007/05/portugal-some-missing-children-more-equal-than-others/
Mainly just means the media campaign events were counterproductive with some people. Nothing more than that.
They were with me back in the UK, so it's no surprise they would be a good deal more with some of those in Portugal.
I have just watched a news broadcast of parents making an appeal for information on their missing daughter ... that is what happens ... publicity!
I am sickened that only fifteen days after Madeleine's disappearance in Portugal there was already resentment being publicly expressed that she was being looked for.
If you think that is acceptable and wish to defend it, that is between you and your conscience.
There was - in UK and doubtless much more so in Portugal - concern that the media circus hampered police and reduced Madeleine's chances (if abducted/kidnapped and still alive).
I've no problem defending that.
That concern emerged much sooner than 15 days in.
In the UK the police use the media to get the message out and they keep them informed. They will advise relatives what to say and what not to say during an appeal. In Portugal this doesn't happen, so the parents took it upon themselves to publicise not just the disappearance but also their own conclusions on why their daughter disappeared. The UK media ran the story that she had been abducted because that was the story given to them. The apartment had been broken into and a child taken.
Once it emerged that the apartment had not been broken into the questions began.
Are you a priest, monk or ex pupil of Ampleforth College, perchance?
There is something familiar about the way that you put word to paper
To be honest Montclair I don't think it would have mattered which country Madeleine had disappeared in the faithful would still have given it a verbal kicking.
There was - in UK and doubtless much more so in Portugal - concern that the media circus hampered police and reduced Madeleine's chances (if abducted/kidnapped and still alive).
I've no problem defending that.
That concern emerged much sooner than 15 days in.
In the UK the police use the media to get the message out and they keep them informed. They will advise relatives what to say and what not to say during an appeal. In Portugal this doesn't happen, so the parents took it upon themselves to publicise not just the disappearance but also their own conclusions on why their daughter disappeared. The UK media ran the story that she had been abducted because that was the story given to them. The apartment had been broken into and a child taken.
Once it emerged that the apartment had not been broken into the questions began.
In the UK the police use the media to get the message out and they keep them informed. They will advise relatives what to say and what not to say during an appeal. In Portugal this doesn't happen, so the parents took it upon themselves to publicise not just the disappearance but also their own conclusions on why their daughter disappeared. The UK media ran the story that she had been abducted because that was the story given to them. The apartment had been broken into and a child taken.
Once it emerged that the apartment had not been broken into the questions began.
Any normal person's immediate first thoughts on finding their daughter missing - and the previously closed window in her room - now wide open - would be that someone had got in through that window and abducted their child.
There would be something wrong with them if they didn't think that IMO.
Later - when more facts emerged - they realised that the intruder may have entered via other means.
Also perfectly normal.
The police didn't see the window open and finger prints found were not from an abductor. You would think he/she would wear gloves but no marks found.
You have one PT friend and he doesn't know the concept "innocent until proven guilty"!! I have lots of Portuguese friends and they are well aware of the concept. I even had colleague at work whose husband was a judge and think that he would know the concept.
I don't think that you have even the slightest idea of what democracy is like in Portugal. For one thing, the people have more rights when comes to unions and public demonstrations than in the UK.
Ofcourse it is just a concept...because here's the thing. If I kill someone I am guilty of killing that person, there is nothing innocent about it.BUT in the eye of the Law (mega bucks industry for the great and the greedy) I may be 'found' to be innocent ON ACCOUNT that no one saw me and CPS had no 'evidence' proof'...cool eh? well sweet for the crims.@)(++(*
UK does not have a 'democracy' in any form.. we are serfs- ruled by monarch we are still slaves. Dontcha know!
It is a romantic notion thrown at us during election time...
Just wondering did April Jones parents meet the pope? go on Oprah? go jogging and blogging.. I heard they were and still are distraught....No but they have written a book which is on sale at half-price on Amazon and WHSmiths, which, according to sceptic logic means that no one wants to buy it and is therefore a flop.
Just wondering did April Jones parents meet the pope? go on Oprah? go jogging and blogging.. I heard they were and still are distraught....
No but they have written a book which is on sale at half-price on Amazon and WHSmiths, which, according to sceptic logic means that no one wants to buy it and is therefore a flop.
I should think most will be delighted that it is going to a real charity ?{)(**I think you'll find that most "sceptics" don't consider Missing People to be a real charity.
So... what you are saying is, they should have had a marketing manager, fund organiser and lawyers galore, oh and full backing of the 'good and the great'....and and a PR team. wow see now we know the difference.
Which sceptics are these you speak of, and whatare they sceptics of?
You know how I arrived at that...work it out!. Why is Aprils mum not an ambassador?Why is April's mum not an ambassador? You'd have to ask the charity that. Obviously she is a supporter of the charity however.
What is it you are accusing me of exactly; calling me a sceptic?
You know that Madeleine had not been abducted ... how exactly?
I have no opinion on what you call me. You are now claiming that I am a sceptic as a fact- so why not share what it is I am sceptical about.You tell me. If you actually do believe that it's most likely that the McCanns were telling the truth about the events of that night as they perceived them, then you are not so much a McCann sceptic, more a critic.
It is no secret that I do not hold any theory of which there are many,what happened to little Maddie as being the truth.
I do not wish the parents to be harmed,and do not accuse them of murdering their child, or hiding bodies. Now what is it I am sceptical about- without any evidence /proof -no theory can be sold as a given.
Is this what makes me a sceptic?
What I know is the sensational story told to the media on 3rd/4th May by friends and family of the McCanns that the apartment had been broken into. The story was immediately denied by John Hill. Whether the parents did it by mistake or not it is one of the reasons they were looked at with suspicion. The second problem was them leaving the children alone in an unlocked apartment, which wasn't in the first stories as far as I know. That confirmed there was no need for a break-in, all that was needed was a walk-in. After that everything they said and did was taken with a large pinch of salt.
I think you'll find that most "sceptics" don't consider Missing People to be a real charity.
You tell me. If you actually do believe that it's most likely that the McCanns were telling the truth about the events of that night as they perceived them, then you are not so much a McCann sceptic, more a critic.
I wonder why when it was obvious that the fund would no longer be needed to fund the search for Madeleine the money in it wasn't given to Missing People as some of the money paid to the McCanns by the Sunday Times was ?
I wonder why when it was obvious that the fund would no longer be needed to fund the search for Madeleine the money in it wasn't given to Missing People as some of the money paid to the McCanns by the Sunday Times was ?Perhaps because the Investigation has not yet found Madeleine, and may be closed without finding her, at which point the McCanns will no doubt put the fund money to resume their own private investigation.
Sceptics will also be disgusted to learn that profits from the book by April Jones' parents are being given to Missing People Charity, of which Kate is the ambassador.
No Alfie, stating facts is not critizising - it is stating facts! You know those facts you and your 'non sceptic' love to chuck around about anyone who dares to speak against Team McCann.So you have no opinion whatsoever on whether or not the McCanns are liars / body hiders etc? And you have never once been critical of the McCanns?? Gosh. I stand corrected then.
I have just said I do not hold any theory up as actual events. ANY. Not a one... due to lack of evidence or proof to charge and find guilty perpetrators.
an ambassadorAnd I stand corrected again. Look at me, admitting my mistakes all over de place.
No Alfie, stating facts is not critizising - it is stating facts! You know those facts you and your 'non sceptic' love to chuck around about anyone who dares to speak against Team McCann.
I have just said I do not hold any theory up as actual events. ANY. Not a one... due to lack of evidence or proof to charge and find guilty perpetrators.
Hmmm...that sounds a teensy weensy bit like a criticism.
Yeah Faith. That did disgust me as well.
So you have no opinion whatsoever on whether or not the McCanns are liars / body hiders etc? And you have never once been critical of the McCanns?? Gosh. I stand corrected then.
Perhaps because the Investigation has not yet found Madeleine, and may be closed without finding her, at which point the McCanns will no doubt put the fund money to resume their own private investigation.
I think you'll find that most "sceptics" don't consider Missing People to be a real charity.
Perhaps they were more concerned about their daughter and not becoming 'z-list celebs'.
Or perhaps not. %£&)**# &%&£(+ &%+((£
The Jones were concerned about their daughter.
As to the mccanns, actions speak louder than words.
Hmmm...that sounds a teensy weensy bit like a criticism.
What I know is the sensational story told to the media on 3rd/4th May by friends and family of the McCanns that the apartment had been broken into. The story was immediately denied by John Hill. Whether the parents did it by mistake or not it is one of the reasons they were looked at with suspicion. The second problem was them leaving the children alone in an unlocked apartment, which wasn't in the first stories as far as I know. That confirmed there was no need for a break-in, all that was needed was a walk-in. After that everything they said and did was taken with a large pinch of salt.
Kate McCANN admits to telling lies, they have been shown as being untrustworthy. These are facts.
I have never accused them of killing their daughter or hiding bodies or being paedophiles /swingers.
They made bad descisions- I comment on them...
I discuss with others, anomolies in all the theories as this is a discussion forum- you want to call it McCann Bashing- you have issues.
Wonder if you would give me a cite for Dr McCann admitting to telling lies ... I have asked Stephen for one but he hasn't bothered ... maybe you can assist?
Oh, I see ... all your suppositions based on really hard prejudice ... quelle surprise! but thanks for the answer.
Kate McCANN admits to telling lies, they have been shown as being untrustworthy. These are facts.OK I'll call a spade a spade then - a McCann basher is precisely what you are. Why this description should irk you so I have no idea as it is an accurate description of what you do.
I have never accused them of killing their daughter or hiding bodies or being paedophiles /swingers.
They made bad descisions- I comment on them...
I discuss with others, anomolies in all the theories as this is a discussion forum- you want to call it McCann Bashing- you have issues.
And what would be the point if three police forces and tens of millions of pounds were unsuccessful ?Because unlike 3 police forces they have vowed never to give up looking for her - got a problem with that?
To do a 'Davel'... It has been said on another thread. Or you could buy and read Kates book. It is in there.
SHe mentioned she had to tell a lie, and didn't like it.
It was debated at lenght, but then you know that because it claimed it was..just a little lie" and that is where we discovered that Kate's lies are better than anyone elses'. We also discovered that there were 'shades' and levels of lies..oh how laughed that night!
My 'suppositions'are actually facts, 'prejudice' doesn't enter into it;
According to friends and relatives, her mother, Kate McCann, came back to check on her three children and found Madeleine's 18-month-old brother and sister asleep in cots on either side of her empty bed. The window had been forced open and the door left ajar.
"They were all sound asleep, windows shut, shutters shut," said Trish Cameron, Madeleine's aunt. "Kate went back at 10pm to check, the front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jammied open, and Madeleine was missing."
"It looks as if somebody has come in the window, that's either been watching or they've targeted her."
John Hill, the manager at the British-run Mark Warner resort, said Madeleine's parents and twin siblings were distraught and that sniffer dogs had been brought in to comb the resort, while border police in Portugal and Spain had been alerted to her disappearance.
He denied reports that the windows to the apartment had been forced open, while another spokesman said a set of French windows had been left unlocked.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/04-05-07-Times-Transcript.htm
No Alfie, pay attention. Facts ...News of the world had money which they gave to 'charities' NOT FUNDS! this was donated by the public for VARIOUS CHARITIES not FUNDS.. when the NOW closed it gave all the money to A FUND without consulting the public who donated the money. Now I feel quite disgusted at this. The FUND is not a charity they should have handed it o to a charity or refused it!It is a FACT that if you say you are DISGUSTED by someone's actions that it is a CRITICISM:
Unadulterated prejudice ... we all know there was no forced entry ... and third party statements from distraught relations don't cut the mustard.
Because unlike 3 police forces they have vowed never to give up looking for her - got a problem with that?
Prejudice; forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person
My opinions on this case have been formed based on the facts as they have emerged. I had no opinions about the McCanns prior to that. How could I have had? I'd never heard of 'em. I don't have any strong opinions about them now, unlike some, who seem to have them on such a high pedestal they're practically out of sight. 8(0(*
I believe three generations of the Needham family have recently returned from Greece where they were checking out a lead that may have been Ben. That's what you call real searching for your loved one....and it doesn't take a massive fund.Why are they soliciting funds from the public? Isn't Kerry's book being used to fund the search? What, pray, is the difference?
I believe three generations of the Needham family have recently returned from Greece where they were checking out a lead that may have been Ben. That's what you call real searching for your loved one....and it doesn't take a massive fund.
The mccanns have achieved a lot more than the Needhams as regards searching...well done to them
Really? What have they achieved? Has Madeleine been found?That's not how you measure achievement..Has Ben been found?
Much of what you post is based on exactly the type of misinformation and myth prevalent in the press at the time which was subsequently proved to be a tissue of lies.
The fact of the matter is that the mistaken path taken by the initial investigation has been discarded by the present SY and PJ investigations.
I'm sorry if you don't like it but that is the fact of the matter.
You would not devalue your argument by fatuous statements such as that in your last sentence if your argument was capable of standing up to scrutiny.
Just wondering did April Jones parents meet the pope? go on Oprah? go jogging and blogging.. I heard they were and still are distraught....
It is a FACT that if you say you are DISGUSTED by someone's actions that it is a CRITICISM:
"the expression of disapproval of someone or something on the basis of perceived faults or mistakes".
Why do you have a problem with accepting that you are both critical and sceptical of the McCanns? Shouldn't you be deeply proud of yourself and your on-going actions against this couple that you find so incredibly loathesome?
The fact that you find it important enough to take time out of your happy life to call me names and set me into a /category, says more about you than me.
The McCANNS COURTED THE PRESS FROM THE BEGINNING- for PR reasons in my opinion.
The fact that you find it important enough to take time out of your happy life to call me names and set me into a /category, says more about you than me.fortunately your opinion...nor mine ..is of any importance whatsoever
The McCANNS COURTED THE PRESS FROM THE BEGINNING- for PR reasons in my opinion.
'Wonder' no more - AFAIK they didn't go jogging - but Paul Jones did find it helped to go for long walks up the surrounding hills a lot. I suppose as long as he never broke into a jog - that's OK with you?
Why would they want to meet the Pope - they weren't Catholics?
Also - if we are making comparisons - it would appear that April's parents did not spend the whole night out and about searching for their daughter on the day she was abducted. Nor did they join in with the following searches. An unforgiveable sin apparently.
They also set up a fund - not a charity.
Like Kate - Coral has also said she will always carry the guilt of knowing that she allowed her little girl to be in a situation where an abductor was able to take her.
Unlike the rest of us - Coral Jones actually knows Kate McCann - and believes and supports her - along with other parents of abducted children - like Sara Payne and Kerry Needham.
I often wonder how 'sceptics' square that extremely inconvenient fact with their own completely opposite beliefs?
The April Jones fund was given charitable status so you are wrong Benice it was a charity. I believe it has now been wound up with the remaining monies given to local causes. But while it was functioning I believe it was used to pay for search teams. Another difference to the Madeleine fund is April's parents were not directors of the fund.
As to Carol 'knowing' Kate McCann I believe she's met her on a few occasions, a bit like saying Teresa May knows Kate McCann just because they've met. I may be wrong but I don't think either Sara Payne or Kerry Needham have met Kate so I'm sure have no more knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance than us.
The April Jones fund was given charitable status so you are wrong Benice it was a charity. I believe it has now been wound up with the remaining monies given to local causes. But while it was functioning I believe it was used to pay for search teams. Another difference to the Madeleine fund is April's parents were not directors of the fund.
As to Carol 'knowing' Kate McCann I believe she's met her on a few occasions, a bit like saying Teresa May knows Kate McCann just because they've met. I may be wrong but I don't think either Sara Payne or Kerry Needham have met Kate so I'm sure have no more knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance than us.
also - The official April Jones Fund was established by Machynlleth Town Council, and more recently, a Charitable Trust - independent of April's family but run in accordance with their wishes.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/april-jones-fund-benefit-local-2548092
I'm not disputing the fact that it eventually changed to a Charitable Trust - but it did start as a Fund as far as I can see.
IIRC it is not possible to set up a charity in one persons's name. I presume this also applied in April's case.
I notice that one of the 'conditions' is that it was run in accordance with the family's wishes - so the fact that they were not 'officials' of the charity makes little difference IMO.
The major difference is that Aprils's case was solved and so the Jones family were able to wind up the charity.
If Madeleine's case is ever solved, then no doubt the McCanns will be doing the same.
Re the Fund. I took that info from BBC news (Wales). No mention of a charity.
Quote
A fund set up in memory of murdered five-year-old April Jones has given around £80,000 to almost two dozen local charities and groups.
The fund was formed just days after April disappeared while playing near her home in Machynlleth, Powys, on 1 October, 2012.
Her former school is among 23 beneficiaries of the donations from around the world.
End quote.
No mention of paying for search teams. Could you provide a cite?
You can attempt to play down how well the mothers of other abducted children know the McCanns as much as you like. The fact is that they all believe and support the McCanns. If there is evidence to the contrary - I would like to know what it is. I've never seen any.
The idea that they don't know the McCanns any better than the rest of us is pure 'wishful thinking' on your part IMO Faith.
Not what you said -
Re the Fund. I took that info from BBC news (Wales). No mention of a charity.
Quote
A fund set up in memory of murdered five-year-old April Jones has given around £80,000 to almost two dozen local charities and groups.
The fund was formed just days after April disappeared while playing near her home in Machynlleth, Powys, on 1 October, 2012.
Her former school is among 23 beneficiaries of the donations from around the world.
End quote.
No mention of paying for search teams. Could you provide a cite?
But there is no mention of a charity in that cite I gave you. It's described as a fund. I've now been made aware that charitable status was acquired at some later date - which I have accepted.
I can't see what your problem is Faith?
You were replying to a post by jassi. Not sure where I became involved.
Sorry Faith my mistake.
http://www.countytimes.co.uk/news/117460/missing-april-jones-fund-to-be-registered-as-a-charity.aspx
As to the Neddhams, Sara Payne and April's family having any more idea what the McCanns are really like or indeed the veracity of their abduction tale than you or I perhaps you'd tell us how ?
Not the first one this morning Benice.
As far as I know all the above have been in contact with the McCanns - to what extent we don't know - except that as Coral Jones and Kate joined forces to launch the Child Rescue Alert System - imo that would involve spending quite a lot of time together.
As the obvious experts on the subject of child abduction - from the parents perspective - and having observed the McCanns for 8 years, it would appear that none of them have come to the same conclusions as sceptics have. I would have thought no-one would be better qualified to spot a fake than those parents.
Pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that publicising contact with the McCanns would be avoided by other mothers of abducted children - due to the load of abuse they would inevitably be subjecting themselves to from those conducting a venomous h.a.t.e campaign against the McCanns.
I’m Kate McCann’s worst nightmare. She’s had 6 years of hell. I’ve had 22. It must have been hard meeting me
Says KERRY NEEDHAM, whose son Ben is missing

Suffering ... Kerry Needham has spent 22 years searching for her missing son Ben Ross Parry
By ANTONELLA LAZZERI
published
2 years ago
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/4913188/kerry-needham-on-meeting-kate-mccann.html
Thank you Anna. I know Kate initially turned down the chance to meet Kerry. Do you have the rest of the article ?
I'm afraid that is all that was on it, Faith, as the link, but I will have a look and see what I can find.
Thank you Anna.
'Wonder' no more - AFAIK they didn't go jogging - but Paul Jones did find it helped to go for long walks up the surrounding hills a lot. I suppose as long as he never broke into a jog - that's OK with you?
Why would they want to meet the Pope - they weren't Catholics?
Also - if we are making comparisons - it would appear that April's parents did not spend the whole night out and about searching for their daughter on the day she was abducted. Nor did they join in with the following searches. An unforgiveable sin apparently.
They also set up a fund - not a charity.
Like Kate - Coral has also said she will always carry the guilt of knowing that she allowed her little girl to be in a situation where an abductor was able to take her.
Unlike the rest of us - Coral Jones actually knows Kate McCann - and believes and supports her - along with other parents of abducted children - like Sara Payne and Kerry Needham.
I often wonder how 'sceptics' square that extremely inconvenient fact with their own completely opposite beliefs?
Here you are, Anna.
I’m Kate McCann’s worst nightmare. She’s had 6 years of hell. I’ve had 22. It must have been hard meeting meSays KERRY NEEDHAM, whose son Ben is missing
THEY are the mothers in two of the highest-profile child abductions ever.
But when Kerry Needham came face to face with Kate McCann she was lost for words.
Kerry says: “What possible words of comfort could I ever offer her?
“Could I say it gets any better? No. What advice could I give her? What could I tell her to do that she hasn’t done already?
“Meeting me must have been very difficult for Kate — she has had six years of hell, I’ve had 22.
“I must be her worst nightmare because I prove her situation could go on for years.
“The only thing I could say is to never stop searching and never give up. I haven’t, and I won’t.”
Kerry’s 21-month-old son Ben was snatched on July 24, 1991, as he played in fields outside a farmhouse his grandfather was renovating on the island of Kos, Greece.
Kerry, then a young mum aged 19, was at work in a local bar.
Despite a huge global manhunt, Ben has never been found. He would now be 23.
Kerry met Kate — whose three-year-old daughter Madeleine was abducted from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal on May 3, 2007 — at a Downing Street reception to mark International Missing Children’s Day.
Next week a book, called simply Ben, detailing Kerry’s heartbreaking search for her son and the effect it has had on her family will be published.
Kerry says she has wanted to write a book for years, but adds bitterly: “When we approached publishers, they didn’t want to know because they said there was no ending.”
In the flesh, Kerry is much prettier and younger-looking than pictures portray her.
Gone is the short-haired teenager who was photographed looked bewildered after Ben went missing.
Now she is a middle-aged mum desperate for a happy ending that never comes.
Speaking at her home in Sheffield, Kerry says: “Not knowing destroys you, it’s a never-ending nightmare. But if I knew, I could cope.
“If Ben was alive but didn’t want to know me, I would have to deal with that — just as long as I knew. He could be married with kids and may not remember me at all.
“I’ve rehearsed what I would say if I saw someone I thought could be him.
“I wouldn’t say, ‘Hi, I think I’m your mum’, because I fear that could frighten him off.
“Instead I would say, ‘I think I know someone who knows you’, then try to get as much info as possible.
“My theory is that Ben was taken to be sold for adoption.
“Child trafficking is a huge issue — it happens an awful lot more than people realise.”
Kerry is also realistic enough to know that Ben may not be alive.
She says: “All I’ve ever wished for is an ending and if that was the case, at least that is an ending. But I’m still full of hope.”
Kerry believes she will find Ben one day because she has “an overwhelming feeling he is still alive”.
She says: “I just feel it... call it a mother’s instinct, whatever.
“I believe that if Ben was dead, a part of me would know and this driving feeling to search would stop.
“But it never goes. Every day I wake up and think, ‘Right, what next? What can we do now?’ ”
Kerry and her family — particularly her daughter Leighanna — have paid a high price for that search. In her book, Kerry reveals that five years after Ben went missing she embarked on a drink and drugs binge that lasted four months.
During that time she left Leighanna — only a toddler then — with her parents.
Kerry cringes at the memory, admitting: “I know, how could I? How could someone who had lost their first child then leave their second?
“But I truly believe if I hadn’t done that, I wouldn’t be here now — I was ripping myself apart.
“I had tried suicide several times and had a recurring dream where I would find Ben with strangers, grab him and run, run, run through the streets of Kos.
“Then I got to a police station and I was begging them to believe the baby was Ben but they wouldn’t.
“They demanded I give the baby back — then I would wake up.
“When we moved back from Kos, I did Ben’s room up with Winnie the Pooh wallpaper and began to hear a baby cry.
“Over and over again I would hear Ben crying. I would often wake up lying on his bed and not remember how I got there.
“No one deserves to live like that — I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy.”
Kerry also had to deal with the attention Ben’s abduction brought.
She says: “Everywhere I went, people would point and stare.
“People came up to me in the street and one woman even said, ‘You’re Ben Needham’s mum. I don’t know how you’re still here’.
“That made me feel terrible — as if I should have killed myself.
“I was riddled with guilt for leaving Ben, for not being able to find him... I lost myself.
“Then, when I was 24, I started working at a nightclub. For the first time in years, I was just Kerry — not Ben Needham’s mum.
“People didn’t treat me differently, they didn’t look at me with pity, they weren’t judging me... I started partying after work and taking amphetamines. Drink and drugs helped with the horrible, crushing pain that never went away. I’m not proud of it, but I believe that, in a way, it saved me.”
Kerry finally came to her senses when Ben and Leighanna’s father, Simon Ward, rang to tell her his dad had just died.
She says: “I thought, ‘What am I doing? I have a daughter’.
“I went to my parents’ house and Leighanna ran up to me, saying, ‘Mummy, Mummy’.
“She literally saved me. I had something to live for, something to get up for, someone to make me feel like I WAS a good mother.”
Sitting listening to her mum talk is Leighanna, a pretty, blonde girl who looks remarkably like Ben.
Now 20, she reveals that, at times, growing up in Ben’s shadow has been difficult.
Leighanna says: “I didn’t have any freedom, as you can imagine. Mum wouldn’t let me out of her sight.
“I just wanted to be a normal teenager but I couldn’t, I always had to come straight home at 6pm.
“I understood, of course I did, but at times it felt oppressive.
“Even now, if I go out I have to text Mum several times saying who I am with and where I am.
“But I don’t mind because I know that if I don’t, she will be going out of her mind at home.”
There are lots of photos of Ben dotted around Kerry’s home.
Leighanna looks at one and smiles, saying: “It’s strange, but I have always felt like his older sister because the only images of him I know are of him as a baby.”
Leighanna, a trainee accountant, now helps her mum with the ongoing search for Ben, using social media to spread the word about her brother.
She says: “I’ve known about Ben since I was tiny.
“When I started going for job interviews, they sometimes asked, ‘Do you have any brothers and sisters?’ And of course I had to say, ‘Well...’
“It’s little things like that that make you realise what a strange situation we are in.”
Kerry looks at her daughter with a mixture of pride and sadness.
She says: “I don’t want to grow old like this, never knowing. It kills you.
“I hope there is an ending soon as I don’t want Leighanna to have to live with this for another 20 years.
“I want her and me to have some sort of normal family life — the life we’ve never had.”
Ben, by Kerry Needham, will be published by Ebury Press on May 9, £16.99. Also available as an ebook.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4913188/kerry-needham-on-meeting-kate-mccann.html
Thank you Anna. I know Kate initially turned down the chance to meet Kerry. Do you have the rest of the article ?
As happens quite often, courting the media has a sting in the tail or should that be tale?
People tend to forget that the only reason the Press get involved in these events is to pay the mortgage. I have yet to meet a Press reporter who does what he does out of some sense of moral necessity.
In many cases this need to sell their story tends to influence the story itself or at least the way in which it is reported. Bad news, someone's misfortune and sensationalism will always sell more newspapers so will attract a larger fee...a fact of life unfortunately. The lies printed by the Daily Star namely, "Maddie found in Ireland" and "Maddie found in Greece" being classic examples.
Cop out.
The press in the uk are about 90% behund the Mccann family and always have been. Some reported some stories frm abroad which were not favourable, but all in all it has been a positive press over the years.
The press in the uk are about 90% behund the Mccann family and always have been. Some reported some stories frm abroad which were not favourable, but all in all it has been a positive press over the years.
I can only presume that you are not familiar with the Leveson Enquiry.
Quote from Leveson report.
In his submissions opening Module One of the Inquiry, David Sherborne, Counsel for the Core Participant Victims, described the press treatment of the McCanns as a 'national scandal': not merely had they suffered the personal tragedy of the abduction of their daughter, they were subjected to a barrage of press reporting which could only be fairly characterised as a diatribe. Clearly, therefore, it is appropriate to take the experience of the McCanns as a 'case study' warranting further examination for the light it throws on the culture, practices and ethics of the press. Their case is also highly illuminating in the context of the action, or rather the inaction, of the PCC.
unquote
Leverson.
Cowing down to the mccanns.
I wonder if Leverson would like to provide the evidence of abduction ?
Meanwhile benice, can you remind me of any press conference or media opportunity in this country when the mccanns were questioned as to their version of events, and not heralded/controlled by thge media manipulator himself, Mitchell ?
Actually, Stephen ... the Drs McCann are not the story. Madeleine is.
Now that at long last Madeleine McCann's disappearance is being investigated by two professional policing bodies, you will note that the Drs McCann have become almost invisible.
Leverson.
Cowing down to the mccanns.
I wonder if Leverson would like to provide the evidence of abduction ?
Meanwhile benice, can you remind me of any press conference or media opportunity in this country when the mccanns were questioned as to their version of events, and not heralded/controlled by thge media manipulator himself, Mitchell ?
LOL - so you think Lord Justice Leveson and the legal team representing all of the victims of the press - are also part of some massive conspiracy - where everyone has to do what the McCanns tell them to do.
Hilarious!
Actually, Stephen ... the Drs McCann are not the story. Madeleine is.Really.
Now that at long last Madeleine McCann's disappearance is being investigated by two professional policing bodies, you will note that the Drs McCann have become almost invisible.
Hardly hilarious.
Levers on showed his limitations by believing the mccanns with no evidence to back it up.
Now remind me when any press conference or media event in the last years in this country, when the mccanns accounts of events were questioned ?
Something tells me I will have a long wait. %£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#
At least you've got that right. I shan't be replying because:
1. You consistently refuse to answer any of my questions
and
2. I'm too busy laughing at your belief that Lord Justice Leveson was 'cowing down' to the McCanns.
Really.
Can you remind me of how much mccann talks about herself in the book compared to Madelerine ?
At least you've got that right. I shan't be replying because:
1. You consistently refuse to answer any of my questions
and
2. I'm too busy laughing at your belief that Lord Justice Leveson was 'cowing down' to the McCanns.
Of course, Leveson cowed down to the McCanns. No serious questions were asked of them and the conclusions were already decided long before the inquiry ended. Sloppy work by all involved.
Hmmm ... another one to add to the list ... £4%4£ ... Leveson was innit too.
Hmmm ... another one to add to the list ... £4%4£ ... Leveson was innit too.
Are you still a believer in the early press stories such as ...
Daily Express ~ 'McCANNS ARE LYING'
Sunday Express ~ McCANNS 'ARE HIDING A BIG SECRET'
Daily Mirror ~ McCANN FRIENDS 'CHANGE THEIR STORY'
Daily Express ~ 'SYRINGE FOUND IN MADELEINE'S APARTMENT'
Evening Standard ~ 'CORPSE IN McCANN CAR'
Daily Express ~ Madeleine DNA PUTS PARENTS IN THE FRAME
If like the rest of the world you have discounted the lies churned out by a 'source close to the investigation' and replicated in the British press for home consumption ... do you have an explanation for your extraordinary antipathy towards Madeleine McCann's parents.
They have worked how unwise it was to leave the children in the apartment ... so you must be basing your opinion on something which has really annoyed you for eight years ... the way Gerry pulls his ear, or the press coverage?
Of course, Leveson cowed down to the McCanns. No serious questions were asked of them and the conclusions were already decided long before the inquiry ended. Sloppy work by all involved.
Are you still a believer in the early press stories such as ...
Daily Express ~ 'McCANNS ARE LYING'
Sunday Express ~ McCANNS 'ARE HIDING A BIG SECRET'
Daily Mirror ~ McCANN FRIENDS 'CHANGE THEIR STORY'
Daily Express ~ 'SYRINGE FOUND IN MADELEINE'S APARTMENT'
Evening Standard ~ 'CORPSE IN McCANN CAR'
Daily Express ~ Madeleine DNA PUTS PARENTS IN THE FRAME
If like the rest of the world you have discounted the lies churned out by a 'source close to the investigation' and replicated in the British press for home consumption ... do you have an explanation for your extraordinary antipathy towards Madeleine McCann's parents.
They have worked how unwise it was to leave the children in the apartment ... so you must be basing your opinion on something which has really annoyed you for eight years ... the way Gerry pulls his ear, or the press coverage?
Of course, Leveson cowed down to the McCanns. No serious questions were asked of them and the conclusions were already decided long before the inquiry ended. Sloppy work by all involved.
Leverson showed his naivety by believing the fairy tale of the mccanns.
Do you like fairy tales too ? 8)--))
The Leveson Inquiry was a sham, just as the failed prosecution of journalists involved in payments to public officials was.
So who instructed this 'sham' to take place and on whose behalf? Who would this 'sham' benefit?
So who instructed this 'sham' to take place and on whose behalf? Who would this 'sham' benefit?
These headlines were not lies! They presented the information from the investigation, although the headlines, as in most of the press, were dramatic and were confirmed by the police files when they were released.
1.The police believed and most probably still believe that the McCanns were lying from the beginning.
2.I believe that the headline about the parents "hiding a big secret" was the opinion of a former policeman, speaking from experience.
3.I don't see how an article about the friends changing their story reflects badly on the parents.
4.As for the syringe, I have no idea what that was about.
5. Corpse in car and DNA story came from the investigation.
The problem was that the McCanns did not want any kind of information about the investigation that showed them in a bad light to come out and that is why they sued all and sundry. Of course, the British press caved in because of the libel laws at the time, it was much easier just to settle out of court.
Unfortunately, for the parents, they did not realise that the police files would be made public, in accordance with the law, and they believed that they would be the only ones with access.
These headlines were not lies! They presented the information from the investigation, although the headlines, as in most of the press, were dramatic and were confirmed by the police files when they were released.
1.The police believed and most probably still believe that the McCanns were lying from the beginning.
2.I believe that the headline about the parents "hiding a big secret" was the opinion of a former policeman, speaking from experience.
3.I don't see how an article about the friends changing their story reflects badly on the parents.
4.As for the syringe, I have no idea what that was about.
5. Corpse in car and DNA story came from the investigation.
The problem was that the McCanns did not want any kind of information about the investigation that showed them in a bad light to come out and that is why they sued all and sundry. Of course, the British press caved in because of the libel laws at the time, it was much easier just to settle out of court.
Unfortunately, for the parents, they did not realise that the police files would be made public, in accordance with the law, and they believed that they would be the only ones with access.
Read Montclair's response.
Then tell me in the last 6 years in this country, when the mccanns version of events has been questioned in the press or in news conferences ?
Not for a millisecond did I expect the post directed to you to receive a response ... if you, as you appear to be, are in agreement with Montclair's rather confused and shaky understanding of the libel laws which bind the press as well as everyone else ... why on earth would I care to enter into discussion with either of you?
1. Yes, no doubt the PJ did suspect them from the start. But is it normal professional police strategy to blab to tabloids in they way the did, do you think?
2. "Hiding a big secret" was the opinion of a former UK cop wondering why the T7 were not engaging with the media (aside from JT re Tannerman). Quite apart from the judicial secrecy laws which he may not have been aware of, he was being a bit naive, IMO, particularly when any word uttered could be distorted in a negative way to provide a sensational headline.
3. "Changing their stories" can be taken to mean that they were about to "spill the beans" against the McCanns. If there is any element of truth in that, it might well have been that they would happily agree to rogatory interviews in which they could provide more detail and correct media smears.
4. The "syringe" story was pure invention. I haven't even found a potential tenuous link to a half-myth on that one.
5. "Corpse in car and 100% DNA" - yes, that did come from a PJ leak. And it turned out to be that the PJ didn't know what they were talking about.
There was also the "Gerry not the father" rubbish splashed all over the papers, and many more.
I have no idea whether the McCanns had been told that the files would be made accessible to the media. I suspect so as a few comments made by some of the T7 tend to make me think that they were aware that what they said could be made public. That said, the files were supposed to be made accessible to the media (i.e. for the perusal of responsible journalists adhering to a code of ethics) - they were not supposed to be splashed unredacted all over the Internet for every Tom, Dick and Harriet.
Your 'reasoned' approach is to back the mccanns 100%.
Regardless of the fact that the persons responsible for Madeleine's disappearance have yet to be determined.
All you clearly show, is BLIND FAITH and nothing more, and every action you undertake on here, reflects that fact.
You appear to confuse the press misinformation prevalent from 2007 with fact, if that keeps you content, who am I to burst your bubble.
I was referring to the years after the libel hearing.
No would you care to give examples of where the mccanns have been asked pertinent questions about their account of events, in newspapers and conferences , in the UK , in intervening years ?
There was so much misinformation and downright propaganda doing the rounds in 2007 that it was impossible for people to to evaluate precisely what the real story was.
John Stalker is always quoted on his 'suspicion' about the silence of the McCann friends but for some reason or other the sceptics never read beyond the headline ... in the same article he continues ...
**snip
The sad fact is that we still have a missing girl and I believe the investigation will be focusing on the theory that she is dead.
The likeliest scenario is that her abductor panicked when he realised the attention the case was creating and killed her days after snatching her.
My fear now is that unless we find her body or her killer strikes again we will never know what really happened to that tiny child.
My instinct, based on years of policing similar cases, is that we are looking at an abduction where the child was targeted in the days before her disappearance.
On the night she vanished it is likely that her abductor simply spotted his opportunity and struck while he could.
I have been horrified by the abject failure of the Portuguese detectives to adhere to basic principles of policing.
The investigation does not seem to have taken a step forward from where it was in the first week after she went missing. I cannot believe that the Portuguese only sent selected DNA samples to the forensic science lab in Birmingham.
There is absolutely no sense in that whatsoever. To fully evaluate poor-quality DNA traces, as we believe these were, forensic experts need to see the whole picture.
In the past, when I have dealt with traces of bodily fluids, it is very difficult to establish how they got to be where they were.
All DNA is highly transferable and that is the most likely explanation for the alleged traces found in the McCanns' hire car and on her mother's clothing. Robert Murat, the other suspect, was seen close to the apartment the day after Madeleine disappeared and freely admits having helped police as a translator.
If he was in that apartment, or anywhere near it, ther is no doubt he would have transferred some of Madeleine's or the twins' DNA on to his clothing.
I don't believe for one minute that Kate and Gerry McCann or their friends are capable or guilty of having murdered the four-year-old.
All the criticism of Kate and Gerry and their friends has been completely out of order. They are extremely intelligent and articulate people and, just because they have never visibly cracked in public to the extent that they are beaten, does not mean that they are guilty of anything sinister.
Yes, they have had more doors opened for them than other people would have in similar circumstances, but their main aim is to discover what happened to Madeleine. That should be the aim of all concerned.
But my gut instinct still forces me to wonder: What is the secret that the Tapas Nine are so carefully hiding?
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/6oct7/EXPRESS-28-10-07.htm
I was referring to the years after the libel hearing.
No would you care to give examples of where the mccanns have been asked pertinent questions about their account of events, in newspapers and conferences , in the UK , in intervening years ?
Is it worth pointing out that this article was published long before the files were released. It would be interesting to hear what Stalker thinks now.
Also four years, £10m and thousands of man hours later and SY appear to know no more than the PJ in those first few months.
You are missing the point. The Media do not have a right to ask questions of The McCanns regarding the disappearance of their daughter, and nor did The Leveson Inquiry. The McCanns were not and never have been On Trial. And Trial by Media is totally unacceptable.
Dont kid yourself !
They know sooooo much that you dont know about ... as proved by their actions.
Soz, I cant tell you which actions. Some on here know, but you will have to work it out, yourself.
Cos I aint telling you.
Dont kid yourself !
They know sooooo much that you dont know about ... as proved by their actions.
Soz, I cant tell you which actions. Some on here know, but you will have to work it out, yourself.
Cos I aint telling you.
I am not missing any point at all.
Why should anyone take the mccanns version of events to be the truth, when the nature of the crime is to be determined.
Or would you rather everyone fawn to the mccanns and believe every word they said ?
I am not missing any point at all.
Why should anyone take the mccanns version of events to be the truth, when the nature of the crime is to be determined.
Or would you rather everyone fawn to the mccanns and believe every word they said ?
Trial by Media is totally unacceptable.
Would you rather that people base their opinions on discredited and false information promoted by the press than on the few facts which are in the public domain?
That was a rhetorical question in case you failed to notice.
So if the media was to find out through investigative journalism that people have committed serious crimes, that would be wrong, and I am talking in general here.
As to trial by media, it has happened since the invention of the 'media' and you're naive if you believe , it will go away.
and pray tell me, why should anyone believe the mccanns story, when they are contradictions in their accounts of events ?
Hence The Leveson Inquiry. Trial by Media has to stop. Too many innocent people are tainted by this. Who is innocent or guilty is the remit of The Courts.
I agree in a way with that Eleanor, but how do you propose to stop people talking about/discussing stuff? In a way the press is just an extension of the public discourse. The worse possible scenario is a world in which we muzzle the press.
How do you know it is going to stop ?
and as I said, if investigative journalism reveals criminal activities,are you prepared to say that journalists should not engage in that?
I agree in a way with that Eleanor, but how do you propose to stop people talking about/discussing stuff? In a way the press is just an extension of the public discourse. The worse possible scenario is a world in which we muzzle the press.
Fine if they can Prove what they are saying. Otherwise they will have to take their chances with The Laws of Libel. As some of them discovered.
It is already much better under control. Most of the more responsible Media Outlets are now refusing to accept comments.
So if the media was to find out through investigative journalism that people have committed serious crimes, that would be wrong, and I am talking in general here.
As to trial by media, it has happened since the invention of the 'media' and you're naive if you believe , it will go away.
and pray tell me, why should anyone believe the mccanns story, when they are contradictions in their accounts of events ?
Would you rather that people base their opinions on discredited and false information promoted by the press than on the few facts which are in the public domain?
That was a rhetorical question in case you failed to notice.
So if the media was to find out through investigative journalism that people have committed serious crimes, that would be wrong, and I am talking in general here.
As to trial by media, it has happened since the invention of the 'media' and you're naive if you believe , it will go away.
and pray tell me, why should anyone believe the mccanns story, when they are contradictions in their accounts of events ?
Fine if they can Prove what they are saying. Otherwise they will have to take their chances with The Laws of Libel. As some of them discovered.
It is already much better under control. Most of the more responsible Media Outlets are now refusing to accept comments.
I think the fact that the majority of responsible newspapers find it impossible to allow comment on Madeleine McCann's case or any related story because of the tawdry comments certain to be posted is an utter disgrace.
There are responsibilities which go hand in hand with the right to freedom of speech; the relentless self congratulatory campaigns have taken that right away from the general public when it comes to publishers having to make sure they stay within the law in their comments sections.
Really very sad.
Does that include the mccanns, their friends or associates, attacking others using the media, via 'sources close to the McCann's'. ?When did that happen Stephen?
%£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#
Does that include the mccanns, their friends or associates, attacking others using the media, via 'sources close to the McCann's'. ?
%£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#
so you would support Brunt investigating Brenda Leyland
Please cite any evidence you may have and/or occasions when the people you have mentioned have lied about people and libelled them ... thanking you in anticipation of your first provision of a requested cite.
There are retrospective reports from many journalist who were on the ground in Praia da Luz and who bitterly regretted the copy which they sent back to their editors.
The retiring editor of the Daily Express noted that a regret of his career was printing what the journalists were gathering from their sources regarding Madeleine McCann's disappearance. Although accepting that it was his job and theirs to sell newspapers, which Madeleine McCann's name did in abundance.
Hindsight is indeed an exact science and newspaper professionals have accepted that they perpetrated dreadful calumnies against the parents of a missing child.
The clincher I think may have been when they had sight of the FSS files and not the misunderstood interpretation of them. Nobody likes being taken for mugs ... and they were collectively taken to the cleaners!
Wonder why there are those even today who have not quite grasped the reality of that situation.
**snip
But he is contrite about the sad episode that ended with Express Newspapers being landed with one of the most expensive legal bills in newspaper history – the coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Hill's paper and its three other titles, the Daily Star, Sunday Express and Daily Star Sunday. He says: "I did too much on the story. I accept that."
Too much wasn't the only problem though. There were also the stories that suggested Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, might have been complicit in her disappearance, which in its apology Express Newspapers admitted were "seriously defamatory".
Asked whether he regretted libelling the McCanns, he replies: "Of course I do. And I insisted on apologising on the front of the newspaper when it became clear that it was a complete fabrication. We gave them £500,000. It doesn't redound to my credit but it did help them to continue the search."
Leaking stories
So why did it happen? "It was a huge story, and every adult in the country had an opinion on it. I admit it helped to sell the paper. There were many factors involved, such as the way Maddy's parents sought publicity in an unprecedented way.
"All the way through, our principal focus was on 'what's happened to Maddy?' The Portuguese police and British legal sources were leaking stories that implied the McCanns were guilty in some way. We were not to know that the Portuguese police were ineffectual and, in some cases, corrupt."
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/21/peter-hill-daily-express-madeleine-mccann
Perhaps you should read again.
sky and brunt, took the law into their own hands.
If they suspected Brenda of criminal activity, they should have taken the evidence to the police.
They didn't.
She's dead.
They acted as vigilantes.
The consequences of that are well known.
This is what you posted...
As to trial by media, it has happened since the invention of the 'media' and you're naive if you believe , it will go away.
Do you actually understand what you are posting.....Brenda...Brunt....trial by media
Why are you so angry dave ?
Did I say it was the right thing to do ?
Clearly you approve of it.
Shouldn't the correct course of action be for the press to go to the police first ?
In case you haven't noticed, Brenda is dead.
Brenda was tried by the media....that's the way it is..trial by media is not going to go away...is what you wrote...and that is correct
Trial by media is a necessary evil...tempered by libel law...this will help stop things being covered up
Did I use the word lie in my post ?
NO.
You implied I did.
Now I know what that makes you.
and are you really saying the mccanns, friends or followers have not attacked or slandered others ?
Give me a break
Two easy examples..............
Pat Brown and Amaral.
and also don't lie and say I don't give cites.
I do and /or give my opinion.
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/we-are-in-secret-madeleine-mccann-troll.html
I don't think it is possible to place enough emphasis and abhorrence on the unjustifiably shabby treatment Madeleine McCann's parents have received at the hands of the press.
Thankfully the broadcast media in Britain had a more restrained approach; unlike in Portugal where Sargento, Amaral and Cristóvão made a ubiquitous presence and an easy living from perpetuating the myths and assumptions which they had been instrumental in fashioning. ( botched and inconclusive investigation, books and documentaries etc)
The McCanns are not an abstract ~ they are living breathing people ~ doing their best to bring up their children as best they can ~ while doing the best they can to find their missing daughter.
It is my opinion that their human rights have been systematically abjured by inhumane internet comment which says so much more about those making the comments than those on the receiving end.
They have been charged with nothing … the calumnies levelled at them have been proved to be without foundation … yet there are those who remain unable to comprehend the simple message contained in the press climbdown.
**snip
Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was an "unprecedented climbdown".
The fact that the papers capitulated without a fight suggested that their legal advisers told them they had no chance of winning if the case went to trial, he said.
"This was no journalistic accident, but a sustained campaign of vitriol against a grief-stricken family.
The stories were not merely speculative, but laced with innuendo which continually made accusations against the McCanns on the basis of anonymous sources and without any hard evidence." he said.
"Wild claims, often made by unattributed sources to Portuguese newspapers, were then spun even more negatively by the Express and Star titles."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mccanns-win-pound-550k-payout-and-apologies-for-libels-1.876873
I don't think it is possible to place enough emphasis and abhorrence on the unjustifiably shabby treatment Madeleine McCann's parents have received at the hands of the press.
Thankfully the broadcast media in Britain had a more restrained approach; unlike in Portugal where Sargento, Amaral and Cristóvão made a ubiquitous presence and an easy living from perpetuating the myths and assumptions which they had been instrumental in fashioning. ( botched and inconclusive investigation, books and documentaries etc)
The McCanns are not an abstract ~ they are living breathing people ~ doing their best to bring up their children as best they can ~ while doing the best they can to find their missing daughter.
It is my opinion that their human rights have been systematically abjured by inhumane internet comment which says so much more about those making the comments than those on the receiving end.
They have been charged with nothing … the calumnies levelled at them have been proved to be without foundation … yet there are those who remain unable to comprehend the simple message contained in the press climbdown.
**snip
Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was an "unprecedented climbdown".
The fact that the papers capitulated without a fight suggested that their legal advisers told them they had no chance of winning if the case went to trial, he said.
"This was no journalistic accident, but a sustained campaign of vitriol against a grief-stricken family.
The stories were not merely speculative, but laced with innuendo which continually made accusations against the McCanns on the basis of anonymous sources and without any hard evidence." he said.
"Wild claims, often made by unattributed sources to Portuguese newspapers, were then spun even more negatively by the Express and Star titles."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mccanns-win-pound-550k-payout-and-apologies-for-libels-1.876873
You are of course only telling half of the story.
The press did indeed do what they do best: reproduce material found elsewhere with minimum consideration and effort.
But at the same time they always printed every word the McCanns wanted them to. Every paper did so, including Express and Star.
Oh ... I see ... the Drs McCann were perfectly happy with newspaper stories in which they were accused of selling their daughter to pay off their debts ~ were involved in wife swapping ~ all with the underlying beat that they were responsible for their daughter's death.
How they and their family must have appreciated all that!!
Get real ... Lyall.
Nothing justifies fabricated tales like that ... and if it was so easy for the Drs McCann to have the press eating out of the palm of their hands as you have metaphorically stated ... why was it necessary for them to go to court to get the newspapers who were defaming and libelling them on a daily basis to desist?
Every cloud has a silver lining. The "Drs Mccann" received at least £1.3 million compensation from the newspapers for articles written therefore enabling them to fund the search. They further recieved another £0.5 million from the Sun which serialised their book.
I'm not saying the papers simultaneously gave them great support for philanthropic reasons, of course the reasons were also financial. That's why they didn't just stop when asked.
But why didn't the McCanns use the PCC from August? Why was it 2008 before they used the courts?
The press were perhaps getting mixed messages for that reason. The position wasn't as black and white as you're claiming.
The 'silver lining' hardly compensates for the ruination of of one's character, the effects of which can be measured today by those who have never heard about the FSS report, but have heard all about body fluids slopping around the non existent wheel well of the Renault.
I doubt there is more than a handful of people who believe that, bit drama queenish of you if I may say so. Not good or clever to gild the lily.
Still, the Drs Mccanns must have been happy with the welcome injection of million plus funds to aid the search, 'even if'''they felt their characters were marred to a stranger population who read the papers
I doubt there is more than a handful of people who believe that, bit drama queenish of you if I may say so. Not good or clever to gild the lily.
Still, the Drs Mccanns must have been happy with the welcome injection of million plus funds to aid the search, 'even if'' they felt their characters were marred to a stranger population who read the papers
25000 Facebook members & a daily perusal of the constant stream of tweeters on #mccann would disagree with you on that.
25000 people think this? I don't believe you. And I am sure you have no proof.
But, what if they did?
What does it matter?
It matters not a jot. Many people think aliens control their minds. Enough said. My shift calls.
You just aren't going to accept that the press were way off line in the unprecedented systemic character assassination they undertook on the McCanns.
Nothing short of sadistic when taking their status into account.
Easy to remember headlines such as ~ PARENTS' CAR HID A CORPSE - Portuguese police ~ so easy to overlook the retraction made the following day.
Don't excuse the actions of the press ~ they were content with their sales ~ if they were destroying a family in the process ~ so what?
That it took legal action ~ not a polite request to desist ~ rather reveals all.
You just aren't going to accept that the press were way off line in the unprecedented systemic character assassination they undertook on the McCanns.
Nothing short of sadistic when taking their status into account.
Easy to remember headlines such as ~ PARENTS' CAR HID A CORPSE - Portuguese police ~ so easy to overlook the retraction made the following day.
Don't excuse the actions of the press ~ they were content with their sales ~ if they were destroying a family in the process ~ so what?
That it took legal action ~ not a polite request to desist ~ rather reveals all.
Hence The Leveson Inquiry. Trial by Media has to stop. Too many innocent people are tainted by this. Who is innocent or guilty is the remit of The Courts.
They're not infallible either unfortunately.
those of us who understand the justice system understand it is designed to be deliberately infallible because it realises that infallibility is impossible
It must feel wonderful to be you and know everything. 8((()*/
so you don't understand the basic premise of UK justice
Is that a question or a statement i wonder? Statement, so no reply required.
it's a statement...the principle I am referring to is Blackstone's Formulation
it's a statement...the principle I am referring to is Blackstone's Formulation
https://www.facebook.com/groups/TheMadeleineMcCannControversy/
24,640 members
AboutPublic GroupPublic Group
Three successive governments have helped the McCanns conceal Madeleine's untimely death in suspicious circumstances for over seven years. What on earth happened to that poor three year old?
____________________________________________________________________
That is just a snippet of the group's résumé, its raison d'être based mainly on the myths propagated by the (Portuguese) media and ex-lead detective.
Supporters of the abduction theory are not permitted to join in the debate, often finding themselves ejected into the abyss towards the bowels of Facebook.
Of course I accept some papers were out of line , it was obvious at the time. Why didn't they use the PCC or the court earlier?
Christopher Meyer at the time made it very clear to Gerald Mccann what he could do, ie, make a complaint via the PCC or go to the courts. He did neither at the time so that Madeleine's name could be kept in the public eye. A Faustian pact he called it or words to that effect.
Apologies in advance if you respond and I don't reply till tomorrow, I have to run to work.
Mr McCann:-
It's probably fair to put in there that I had a number of conversations with Sir Christopher, primarily because we became friendly with his wife, Lady Catherine, through her work with PACT, so on that first occasion I met Sir Christopher and he broadly asked, "How are the media treating you?" and we were very open and at that point we said, "Considering the interest, not too bad", and we didn't really have too much in the way of specific complaints.
I did have further informal conversations and they also dealt with correspondence from Kingsley Napley over the period, but the gist of the conversations, and most of my dialogue with him, informal rather than written, was that we agreed with our legal advice and we took the best legal advice we could get, that the way to stop this was to take legal action and not to go to the PCC, and I think Sir Christopher agreed with that.
Mr Jay:-
That's a fair summary, Dr McCann. It's what the committee think as well, although Paul Dacre expressed disappointment that you didn't make a formal complaint to the PCC, although Sir Christopher disagreed with Paul Dacre so we have two views --
Mr McCann:-
I think the ultimate thing was we discussed a course of action and our advice, which was given in no uncertain terms, this is legal advice, was that the PCC were not fit to deal with the accusations, the nature of them, the number of them and the severity.
http://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-23-november-2011/dr-gerald-patrick-mccann-and-dr-kate-marie-mccann
C. Meyer
12.31pm: "The PCC made it its business from the very beginning to say, 'we are here to help'," Meyer tells the inquiry. He adds that help was taken up "but only in an ancillary way".
He says that if the McCanns did not want intervention, "You must respect complainants' wishes."
12.32pm: Meyer says in February 2008 he agreed with the McCanns that launching libel actions against newspapers, rather than going to the PCC, was the right course of action.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id402.html
The point being that if the McCanns had taken up the PCC's offer of help in the middle of 2007 they may never have had to resort to the libel courts.
The point being that if the McCanns had taken up the PCC's offer of help in the middle of 2007 they may never have had to resort to the libel courts.
gerald mccann was complaining about the newspapers but didnt want them to stop printing stories, ergo, he had no reason to complain IMO, you dance with the devil you get burnt
Oh indeed as many have found out.
I am still unsure the reason behind the UK press involvement so early. Maddie dis sapeared in Portugal, local people and the police,contrary to what you read from Team McCann and their forum luvvies, were searching for little Maddie- some police were actually 'investigating' as well as searching!
The McCanns were right in there with the 'everybody leaves their children alone while they go out and eat n drink' testimony They never will get away from people being disgusted at the insinuation that this is done regularly by the UK parents.
They tried to point the finger at others to blame for the part they played in Maddies continued disappearance, this also back fired badly in terms of sympathy and support IMO.
They made a lot of money from the 'press'...dance with the devil indeed