Author Topic: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?  (Read 39567 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Carana

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #120 on: June 08, 2013, 01:11:53 PM »
Russell O’Brien checked his own daughter at 9.30 and found she had been sick. Jane returned to the apartment to be with her daughter, and Russell went back to the table. Russell would later fall under suspicion too, because of those few minutes he spent away from the table.
 
Finally, at 10pm, it was Kate’s turn to check the apartment. She only became alarmed when she reached out to the children’s bedroom door and it blew shut. Inside the room the window was open, the shutter was up and Madeleine’s bed was empty. Kate quickly searched everywhere and ran back down the hill and into the restaurant: “Madeleine’s gone, somebody’s taken her” or “Madeleine’s gone, someone’s taken her.”
 
Gerry stood up. “She can’t be gone.” “I’m telling you she’s gone, someone’s taken her.”
 
It was reported that Kate had said “They’ve taken her,” as if it was someone that she knew. She did use those words, but only later, back in the apartment, in her despair, as she said: “We’ve let her down. They’ve taken her.”
 
Matt went down to the 24-hour reception at the bottom of the hill to raise the alarm. The call to the police went in at 10.15. They arrived 55 minutes later. It is widely believed among the Portuguese media, and perhaps the police too, even now, that the McCanns called Sky News before they called the police. For the record, Sky News picked up the story from GMTV breakfast television, at around 7.30am the following day.
 
There was a latch lock on the sliding glass window, and the McCanns thought, but could not be sure, that they had locked it at the start of the holiday. They would later discover it was common for cleaners to open the shutters and windows to give the rooms an airing, so there was no way of knowing whether the window was locked that night or not and no forensic trace to indicate where and how an abductor had gone in and out. They could easily have used the front door, perhaps even had access to a key.
 
In the McCanns’ minds now, there is no doubt Jane Tanner saw their daughter being taken, but there was so little time to talk in the first few days that it was not until Jane saw the description of Madeleine’s pyjamas in the media, around Monday or Tuesday of the following week, that she told them the little girl she had seen was wearing the same design: pink top and white bottoms with a floral design.
 
While searches began, Gerry was worried about Kate, as she was so distraught and kept talking about paedophiles, saying Madeleine would be dead. He tried to be reassuring, but of course he was thinking the same things.
 
It all came pouring out of him at 23.40 – from his phone records – when he called his sister Trish in Scotland ranting and raving semi-coherently on the phone about Madeleine being taken, and Trish kept trying to get him to calm down. A sharp contrast with the way he would be later, particularly in public, once he had regained his self-control.
 
The detectives from PJ arrived at about 1am. By 3.30am they had gone and there was no police action at all, or none visible to the McCanns.
 
Four times that night they put in calls via the British consul; four times the message came back from the PJ, a message that the McCanns would never forget: “Everything that can be done is being done.”
 
One of the PJ officers had put on surgical gloves and begun trying to dust down the bedroom, but his powder was not working properly. He tried to take the McCanns’ fingerprints for elimination, but that didn’t work either. It all had to be done again the next day.
 
The twins slept on like logs, just as they always did at home, though even their parents were fleetingly worried – had they been sedated by an abductor? – that they should be quite so comatose. The Ocean Club gave them another apartment, but the McCanns did not want to be alone, so the twins were taken to the Paynes’ apartment, and Kate and Gerry went there later too, to try to rest.
 
They got up at first light and went to search alone on the open scrubland beyond the resort, wandering around, calling Madeleine’s name. It was cold and lonely – there was no answer.
 
Gerry had asked the departing PJ detectives at half three about contacting the media to make an appeal. One of the officers had reacted with surprising agitation, waving his hand emphatically: “No journalists! No journalists!” That, of course, was not quite how it worked out.
 
For many weeks, the McCanns enjoyed a good relationship with the Portuguese police and were treated to regular updates and a flow of information via the family-liaison officers sent out by Leicestershire police. The problem with the three Leicester officers was that they didn’t have a word of Portuguese between them.
 
The first public indication of police thinking came at the end of June when the magazine Sol published a story about the McCann group, casting doubts on their evidence and claiming they had undertaken a pact of silence. It was the first time the McCanns’ friends had been named in public, but Sol’s journalist Felicia Cabrita had their names and phone numbers and details from their witness statements. She had called them all, and at least one other witness, Jes Wilkins.
 
The information had been handed to Cabrita by the police – she says she acquired the material through good journalism, which in a sense it was – and her source is widely believed by her colleagues to have been the former head of the inquiry, Goncalo Amaral.
 
The PJ appointed an official spokesman, Olegario Sousa. He was apparently plucked from his day job – he was a chief inspector on the art-robbery squad – because he was the only one who spoke decent English. He was never directly involved in the investigation and was rarely told much of what was really going on.
 
Initial suspicion focused on Robert Murat, who made himself busy with police and journalists from the first day, offering his services as an interpreter, as he spoke both languages and lived across the road from the Ocean Club with his mother at the villa Casa Liliana. In fact, the man Jane Tanner had seen carrying a child was walking straight towards the Murat villa.
 
Murat later said to me that he told the PJ the press were suspicious of him, and they told him not to worry and to keep away from the press and work for them instead. He had signed papers to become an official interpreter and even sat in during the witness interview of Rachael Oldfield.
 
Leaving the police station in Portimao one evening, a week after becoming an official police interpreter, Murat became aware he was being followed. Shortly after that he was arrested and interviewed himself and made an arguido.
 
Murat always denied he was out the night Madeleine disappeared, but three of the McCann group claimed at the time they had seen him and still insist they were right. I was told there was at least one new independent sighting of Murat out on the night of May 3.
 
Bizarrely, the McCanns believe they were inadvertently responsible for encouraging the PJ to take them seriously as potential suspects, as it was them bringing in a South African “body finder”, Danie Krugel, that led to search dogs being used. The PJ agreed to work with Krugel, and an officer from the UK National Policing Improvement Agency was called in to advise on a search based on Krugel’s findings. It was agreed the British would supply some specialist equipment for spotting disturbed soil and also some search dogs, including one trained in human-remains detection (HRD) and one trained to detect the scent of blood.
 
Ultimately, only those who were there and involved know exactly what happened, but the McCanns wonder just how the search dogs were presented to the PJ and what claims were made for their success rate and infallibility.
 
All British policing techniques are meant to be practised uniformly by every force across the country and defined in written policy created by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). But the ACPO was unable to produce for me any policy relating to search dogs.
 
Gerry was initially optimistic at the prospect of the searches by these supposedly elite British dogs and techniques. The dogs then went on to search the apartments of the McCanns and their friends. A line-up of cars were also called in by the police, including the cars owned or used by Murat and the Renault the McCanns had been using, which they had hired on May 27.
 
Those who told me about the dogs’ searches say they involved little objective science. It has been suggested that the HRD dog was treated differently in the McCanns’ apartment than in the others. The dog kept sniffing and running off and it was called back on several occasions. Eventually it “alerted”, meaning it went stiff and stayed still.
 
Then the blood dog was called in and directed to the area where the other dog had alerted. Eventually this dog alerted in the same place – behind the sofa in the lounge, which is where the trace of blood was supposedly found.
 
The cars were lined up, not in a controlled environment, but in the underground public car park opposite Portimao police station. Again the dog was led quickly from one car to the next until he reached a Renault with “Find Madeleine” stickers all over it. The dog sniffed and moved on to the next car, but was called back. The dog was taken around the McCanns’ car for about a minute, as opposed to the few seconds devoted to the other cars. Then the dog went rigid, an “alert”, and the doors and the boot were opened. It was this that led to the recovery of some body fluids that the PJ suspected would contain traces of Madeleine’s DNA, and which led to the supposed revelation that her body must have been carried in the car.
 
The role of such dogs is normally intended to find a body or remains. Without any subsequent discovery the alerts amount to little more than an indication – or worse: in one recent case in Wisconsin a judge concluded that similarly trained dogs were “no more reliable than the flip of a coin”, after hearing evidence that they were wrong far more often than they were right. The McCanns’ lawyers are in touch with the defence lawyers in that case. The PJ had never attempted to obtain a “control sample” of Madeleine’s DNA. That had been left to the McCanns, who had found traces of her saliva on the pillow of her bed at home in Rothley and provided that DNA sample to the Portuguese police.
 
Whatever the public’s perception – based on a slew of news stories – at this stage there is no published evidence that Madeleine’s DNA, or any trace of her blood, has been recovered from the apartment or the car. Any suggestion to the contrary appears to be misinformation from the PJ. Some Portuguese journalists and, apparently, some members of the PJ believed the UK’s Forensic Science Service (FSS), based in Birmingham, had been deliberately delaying the tests. There are some who suspect the involvement of the British secret services.
 
In fact, both the PJ’s national director, Alipio Ribeiro, and another PJ official, Carlos Anjos, have both said openly that the police have failed to establish a perfect match. The PJ found several specks of what they believe to be blood in apartment 5a, including one sample that someone had apparently tried to wash off.
 
They found a trace of body fluid – that is, not blood – in the boot of the Renault and a tiny trace of blood in the Renault’s key fob. Some forensic tests were carried out at the PJ’s own laboratories in Lisbon, where tests on samples related to Robert Murat were also made. The tests on the traces that were potentially the most significant came to the FSS. One sample was said to have produced DNA that was similar to Madeleine’s. An exact match would be 20 out of 20 bands, this sample was said to be similar in 15 out of 20 bands. But in reality, that result was meaningless, as any family member could produce the same match.
 
Some journalists were told that more advanced tests were being carried out on the smallest blood traces – tests called low copy number profiling, which could produce DNA findings in the slightest of samples. They were a slow process, but did not normally take more than two weeks.
 
In late November, PJ officers and forensic experts came to meet police and FSS experts in the UK, amid claims the PJ were still waiting for further results. Leicestershire police have apparently paid for all the forensic tests being carried out in the case by the FSS – they are the client in the case, not the Portuguese. The PJ have used this as evidence that the British are suspicious of the McCanns too – even the McCanns think the British police doubted them for a while, until the forensic results emerged – but you might think the PJ would have wanted to be in control of their own forensic findings.
 
I heard that a PJ officer had been surprised to find a member of MI5 at a UK meeting about the case, and this made him suspicious that shadowy forces could be at work. The Sol journalist Felicia Cabrita mentioned the “mysterious Clarence” – Clarence Mitchell, the former government PR officer turned McCann spokesman – and I was told there was suspicion too about another government official, Sheree Dodd, who had acted as a PR officer for the McCanns briefly in the early days – had she come out from MI6 to help dispose of the body?
 
These theories might seem preposterous, but for those involved in the case in Portugal, they fitted a pattern in which the Portuguese government and in turn the PJ had felt the heavy weight of diplomatic pressure from the UK – a pressure that the police and the journalists very much resented, with its implication that the police were not doing their job properly. This could be one reason why the PJ were so ready to suspect the McCanns.
 
There seemed to be no doubt that the PJ really did think the McCanns had done it. I was outlined a scenario in which Kate had come back to the apartment and found that Madeleine had fallen from the sofa and hit her head – hence the blood – and cleaned up and hid the body somewhere in the apartment, and perhaps had not even told Gerry until the next day.
 
The police could not answer all the questions, of course. They were almost as unanswerable as they were unimaginable. Where would they have hidden the body? How would they have got it into the car 24 days later, and where would they have taken it? What kind of people would they have to be – what borderline personality disorders must they both share – to keep that to themselves for six months, maintain a facade in front of everyone they knew, and at the same time not hiding away but going out to ask the world to help find Madeleine?
 
I know the McCanns believe the PJ were oversold the value of the dogs. It was after the dogs came out that the PJ’s attitude towards the McCanns changed and it became harder for the McCanns to obtain a briefing meeting. They were disturbed when the press began reporting that the PJ knew Madeleine was dead. Finally, after pressing for a meeting, one was arranged for Wednesday, August 8, three days before the 100-day point after Madeleine’s disappearance.
 
When they arrived at the station in Portimao the couple were separated and both interrogated. Kate especially was given “the third degree”. Gerry broke down and cried, pleading with the PJ to share any evidence that Madeleine was dead. “It’s coming, it’s coming,” he was told.
 
The interviews caused the couple “incredible emotional distress”. But they agreed, if they had been guilty, they probably would have cracked and confessed at that point. The police said there would be no more briefings. The next time they saw the McCanns it would be across the table, for formal interviews.
 
What was doubly dispiriting, of course, was that while the PJ treated them as suspects, they were no longer looking for Madeleine. I was told the PJ had “abandoned the abduction theory”. It was open season now on the McCanns. The publicity was wretched.
 
The British press were not blameless either, often lazily repeating allegations and sometimes repeating them despite emphatic denials from the McCann camp. If you read the blog sites on the internet you would discover an even darker, nastier tone. The McCanns and their holiday friends were swingers, apparently. That allegation was even made on the Portuguese equivalent of the BBC by a former PJ detective, Jose Barra da Costa. When I checked with him, he said he had been told by a friend in the UK who happened to be a police officer. No doubt that officer had plucked it from the internet. It is not true.
 
During Kate’s interviews with the PJ in September, just before she was declared an arguido, she was separated from her lawyer, and he was presented with a long list of factors pointing to her guilt, including entries from her entirely innocuous diary and a passage they believed she had marked in a Bible (which in fact had been given to her and marked by the original owner).
 
The PJ also told the lawyer there was a 100% DNA match with Madeleine in the car and showed him a document that appeared to prove it. Possibly, this was the document showing Madeleine’s control sample of DNA. The McCanns feared even their own lawyer thought they were guilty. Kate was asked by the PJ to explain the dog alerts by her car. “You’re the police,” she said. “You tell me.” Kate asked the PJ: “Are you trying to destroy our family altogether?”
 
Gerry was asked the same questions the next day but could not answer. (Sometime earlier a Leicestershire officer had said to him, just stick to what you know.) Why did the dogs only alert next to material belonging to the McCanns? The officer was brandishing the dog-handler’s report. And then: “Your daughter’s DNA, your daughter Madeleine McCann, how do you explain that?” “Show me that report,” Gerry asked. “No. This is the report that matters – with the dog.” Of course, they could not produce a DNA match because there wasn’t one.
 
The McCanns took heart when Goncalo Amaral was forced to step down after making public criticisms of them and the Leicestershire police – he had made the criticisms in a phone call to a journalist contact, not suggesting the comments were private or off the record.
 
The McCanns hope that Amaral’s replacement, Paulo Rebelo, a more sober, conservative character, will take a wide view of the inquiry. He is said to have stopped leaks to the press, and has been locked away on the upper floors of the station in Portimao reviewing the evidence with a team of officers.
 
Meanwhile, the McCanns are back home trying to recover some kind of normality. How long can you put your life on hold? They have the twins to think of. Gerry has gone back to work half-days, and has finally told the British Heart Foundation he plans to go ahead with the research fellowship they awarded him, a week before he was accused of being involved in his daughter’s death. He had told me, weeks ago, about the six-figure grant and how it meant almost nothing in terms of professional advancement, but might one day help in the prevention and treatment of heart disease.
 
He had prepared the application in his own time, working evenings and weekends.
 
In other circumstances it would have meant the world to him but, right now, he had other things on his mind.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id96.html

Offline Puffin

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #121 on: June 08, 2013, 01:15:05 PM »
Don't expect me to react with some supposed Portuguese equivalent Carana revealed me..
I don't want you to react, I was just wondering what this was all about, nothing sinister, just curiosity. 
Truth is the property of no individual but is the treasure of all men.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Offline faithlilly

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #122 on: June 08, 2013, 01:16:34 PM »
@ Carana

First error Smith claims the McCanns were separated on the 4th for question when Kate herself has told us Gerry sat behind her in her interview. Now who could have told him that ? And while judicial secrecy was still in place too ?

Gerry was obviously the supplier of much of this article.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2013, 01:23:43 PM by Faithlilly »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #123 on: June 08, 2013, 01:17:04 PM »
I don't want you to react, I was just wondering what this was all about, nothing sinister, just curiosity.

You might like to read this.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

Offline Carana

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #124 on: June 08, 2013, 01:19:14 PM »
From the above article is what I find to be an interesting (on-topic) comment.


Finally, the PJ called. They told the McCanns they would be made official suspects – arguidos. The McCanns had noted the change of mood in Portugal, especially among the PJ, and the increasing viciousness of the Portuguese press. Some of the stories seemed so incredible and far-fetched – Kate, for instance, disposing of Madeleine’s body, or Madeleine’s DNA being found in the car the McCanns had hired three weeks after Madeleine disappeared – that I at first assumed they were the fanciful inventions of an unfettered press. I soon realised how well they reflected the thinking of the PJ. More recently I have discovered the stories were being fed to the press by the PJ, from the highest ranks. So much for judicial secrecy. One Portuguese journalist told me that segredo de justica – secrecy of justice – was like the speed limit. Everyone knows the law; nobody keeps to it.




Offline Puffin

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #125 on: June 08, 2013, 01:22:17 PM »
You might like to read this.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html
Thanks, DCI, but I know the sorry story of Michael Cook.     8((()*/
Truth is the property of no individual but is the treasure of all men.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #126 on: June 08, 2013, 01:26:05 PM »
Poor chap beaten senseless denied a toilet, left in his own excrement, a questionable judicial decision. 

Surely there are more important issues to pick out, here, than use of the word "porkies"?

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #127 on: June 08, 2013, 01:28:02 PM »
One Portuguese journalist told me that segredo de justica – secrecy of justice – was like the speed limit. Everyone knows the law; nobody keeps to it.[/i]
Portugueses have a sense of humour, not the British kind, more the Jewish one (especially in the Alentejo).
About respect of McCann case secret of justice, what do you think of the Panorama documentary, Carana ?

Offline Carana

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #128 on: June 08, 2013, 01:31:27 PM »
One Portuguese journalist told me that segredo de justica – secrecy of justice – was like the speed limit. Everyone knows the law; nobody keeps to it.

I remember reading an interview in the written press with a Portuguese journalist (highly likely to be the same person) on this subject. The article doesn't seem to be online, so I can't provide a link.

From memory, I believe it was Damasão from CdaM.

His argument was that if the media fully respected judicial secrecy then Portugal would have no investigative journalism into crimes at all.

On the one hand, that wouldn't seem to be valid as reporting on trials and the post-mortem analysis via accessible files seem to be an important aspect of the freedom of the press in Portugal.

On the other hand, judicial secrecy may account for the fact that there does not seem to be an official police/press relations service.

The media want their stories and will obtain information (or the latest hypothesis) on ongoing cases anyway, one way or another.



Offline faithlilly

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #129 on: June 08, 2013, 01:34:15 PM »
One Portuguese journalist told me that segredo de justica – secrecy of justice – was like the speed limit. Everyone knows the law; nobody keeps to it.

I remember reading an interview in the written press with a Portuguese journalist (highly likely to be the same person) on this subject. The article doesn't seem to be online, so I can't provide a link.

From memory, I believe it was Damasão from CdaM.

His argument was that if the media fully respected judicial secrecy then Portugal would have no investigative journalism into crimes at all.

On the one hand, that wouldn't seem to be valid as reporting on trials and the post-mortem analysis via accessible files seem to be an important aspect of the freedom of the press in Portugal.

On the other hand, judicial secrecy may account for the fact that there does not seem to be an official police/press relations service.

The media want their stories and will obtain information (or the latest hypothesis) on ongoing cases anyway, one way or another.

So we are agreed that no one adhered religiously to judicial secrecy ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #130 on: June 08, 2013, 01:55:51 PM »
This is clear. The secrecy of justice should have been adjusted to the fact the victim was a foreigner, they invented X, but he said nothing or actually what he said sounded as nothing. He was lacking skills (should have be taught by Mr Mitchell).
Journalists have to get informations. All ways are legitimate as long as they don't invent, don't defame, discard if they're not sure, take care of not hampering the investigation, etc. Very tough job.
This supposes highly cultured and educated journalists.

Offline Carana

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #131 on: June 08, 2013, 02:55:50 PM »
So we are agreed that no one adhered religiously to judicial secrecy ?

What exactly was judicial secrecy supposed to cover?

How did so much detail end up in the PT press so soon?

Yes, someone close to the McCanns does seem to have provided details of their experience to the press (possibly more than one person over time), after several months of innuendo that they were somehow involved in her disappearance and that there was no point in searching for her.



AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #132 on: June 08, 2013, 03:20:53 PM »
Poor chap beaten senseless denied a toilet, left in his own excrement, a questionable judicial decision. 

Surely there are more important issues to pick out, here, than use of the word "porkies"?
There are, Ferryman, like not assuming as facts mere accusations. May the "chap" was right, may be not. If you know the truth, send a link. Otherwise this is myth feeding.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #133 on: June 08, 2013, 03:23:43 PM »
What exactly was judicial secrecy supposed to cover?

How did so much detail end up in the PT press so soon?

Yes, someone close to the McCanns does seem to have provided details of their experience to the press (possibly more than one person over time), after several months of innuendo that they were somehow involved in her disappearance and that there was no point in searching for her.

No excuse. Judicial secrecy is absolute.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Carana

Re: Why was peoples personal information sold/given to the press?
« Reply #134 on: June 08, 2013, 03:36:37 PM »
Then you presumably don't approve of "sources close to the investigation" leakng to Felicia Cabrita and her Sol articles, or Tal & Qual, 24 Horas, CdaM and whoever else?