Did false memory syndrome play a part in the McCann case?

[Brietta]

Nothing is certain in law, so, having been caught out,  newspaper was going to go for cheapest , low risk option.
Probably  recouped the costs in increased circulation

I presume you missed the part of the Leveson inquiry which dealt with the media abuse suffered by Kate and Gerry McCann.
The Express Group amongst many others abused the power of the press to libel and defame ... in my opinion they knew they hadn't a leg to stand on as English Law is quite clear on that issue ... therefore you are correct they chose the path of least resistance because the alternative could have been disastrous for them.


The Real McCann Scandal
23 OCTOBER 2008
Brian Cathcart details how the British press set out to systematically destroy the parents of Madeleine

Snip
Error on this scale, involving hundreds of "completely untrue" news reports, published on front pages month after month in the teeth of desperate denials, can only be systemic. Judging by what appeared in print, it involved a reckless neglect of ethical standards, a persistent failure to apply even the most basic journalistic rigour, and plenty of plain cruelty.

No explanation has emerged besides the obvious one: that this was all done to sell newspapers. Seeing the scale of public interest, it looks as though editors were ready to publish stories, and reporters were ready to write them, even when they had no merit whatsoever.
https://www.newstatesman.com/law-and-reform/2008/10/madeleine-mccann-daily-british

[slartibartfast]

I presume you missed the part of the Leveson inquiry which dealt with the media abuse suffered by Kate and Gerry McCann.
The Express Group amongst many others abused the power of the press to libel and defame ... in my opinion they knew they hadn't a leg to stand on as English Law is quite clear on that issue ... therefore you are correct they chose the path of least resistance because the alternative could have been disastrous for them.


The Real McCann Scandall
23 OCTOBER 2008
Brian Cathcart details how the British press set out to systematically destroy the parents of Madeleine

Snip
Error on this scale, involving hundreds of "completely untrue" news reports, published on front pages month after month in the teeth of desperate denials, can only be systemic. Judging by what appeared in print, it involved a reckless neglect of ethical standards, a persistent failure to apply even the most basic journalistic rigour, and plenty of plain cruelty.

No explanation has emerged besides the obvious one: that this was all done to sell newspapers. Seeing the scale of public interest, it looks as though editors were ready to publish stories, and reporters were ready to write them, even when they had no merit whatsoever.
https://www.newstatesman.com/law-and-reform/2008/10/madeleine-mccann-daily-british

I liked the bit in the link where it says...

Brian Cathcart is a director of Hacked Off...

[Brietta]

I liked the bit in the link where it says...

Brian Cathcart is a director of Hacked Off...

Brian Cathcart is also an expert on journalism and ethics which makes it worthwhile to give his opinion some consideration, at least I would have thought so.

[slartibartfast]

Brian Cathcart is also an expert on journalism and ethics which makes it worthwhile to give his opinion some consideration, at least I would have thought so.

He is a writer with an axe to grind.

[faithlilly]

The Policia Judiciaria certainly thought Mr Smith's addition to his statement was on a par with Mr McKluskey's addition to his after investigating both and finding the evidence proved the contrary.
Who do you know capable of the phenomenon of bi-location else why would you bring the PJ assessment into question?

I shouldn't have to point this out again but here goes......there is not one independent witness who puts Gerry in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting. Further if seven witnesses ( his friends ) gave Gerry an alibi for that time then it would have been very difficult for the PJ to prove otherwise.

[slartibartfast]

I shouldn't have to point this out again but here goes......there is not one independent witness who puts Gerry in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting. Further if seven witnesses ( his friends ) gave Gerry an alibi for that time then it would have been very difficult for the PJ to prove otherwise.

True.

[Robittybob1]

I shouldn't have to point this out again but here goes......there is not one independent witness who puts Gerry in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting. Further if seven witnesses ( his friends ) gave Gerry an alibi for that time then it would have been very difficult for the PJ to prove otherwise.

Arlindo does he talks of 3 couples there and we know the only couple not there are Jane and Russell.

[Brietta]

I shouldn't have to point this out again but here goes......there is not one independent witness who puts Gerry in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting. Further if seven witnesses ( his friends ) gave Gerry an alibi for that time then it would have been very difficult for the PJ to prove otherwise.

In your opinion is that just something else to add to the list of things the Policia Judiciaria got wrong in Madeleine's case?

[faithlilly]

In your opinion is that just something else to add to the list of things the Policia Judiciaria got wrong in Madeleine's case?

I think they had no choice.

[Brietta]

I think they had no choice.

You mean they followed the evidence then, and wrote their final report accordingly.  Bearing in mind they did not have to rely on 'false memory', dreams or pejorative press leaks, having to hand the information which it is reported they had to digitise and coordinate from the dishevelment they inherited. 

[faithlilly]

You mean they followed the evidence then, and wrote their final report accordingly.  Bearing in mind they did not have to rely on 'false memory', dreams or pejorative press leaks, having to hand the information which it is reported they had to digitise and coordinate from the dishevelment they inherited.

No I mean they had nine witnesses who said Gerry was in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting, not independent witness but witnesses nonetheless. Any police force would have had difficulty breaking that alibi.

[Alice Purjorick]

In your opinion is that just something else to add to the list of things the Policia Judiciaria got wrong in Madeleine's case?

Let's start from a new premise.
Everything the PJ did was blx but they only did it for fourteen months +/_ before filing the case for want of evidence.
Everything that OG has done is "polished mahogany and naval brass" , has been for 7 years +/- and continuing for the immediate future even.

Case status............remains unsolved. Or to be precise no one has been charged with any offence wrt the childs disappearance.
Why should that be?

[Robittybob1]

Let's start from a new premise.
Everything the PJ did was blx but they only did it for fourteen months +/_ before filing the case for want of evidence.
Everything that OG has done is "polished mahogany and naval brass" , has been for 7 years +/- and continuing for the immediate future even.

Case status............remains unsolved. Or to be precise no one has been charged with any offence wrt the childs disappearance.
Why should that be?

Logic.  "Everything the PJ did was blx but they only did it for fourteen months +/_ before filing the case for want of evidence." Isn't going to help the case status.  IMO on what you wrote "blx".

[Benice]

I shouldn't have to point this out again but here goes......there is not one independent witness who puts Gerry in the tapas bar at the time of the Smith sighting. Further if seven witnesses ( his friends ) gave Gerry an alibi for that time then it would have been very difficult for the PJ to prove otherwise.

IMO the chances of seven normal people - of even average intelligence, agreeing to lie to the police and  give an alibi to someone who had told them their child was dead and they needed to dispose of the body are NIL imo.     They would all have to have been out of their minds to even consider it IMO.     This is a dead child they were supposedly talking about - not the demise of a pet goldfish.

Common sense please.

AIMHO

[faithlilly]

IMO the chances of seven normal people - of even average intelligence, agreeing to lie to the police and  give an alibi to someone who had told them their child was dead and they needed to dispose of the body are NIL imo.     They would all have to have been out of their minds to even consider it IMO.     This is a dead child they were supposedly talking about - not the demise of a pet goldfish.

Common sense please.

AIMHO

I don't believe some of the friends actively gave Gerry an alibi, some simply didn't appear to remember who went when.