Internet increasingly connected to violent abductions

On international missing persons’ day, PJ data revealed a break in cases that were registered in Portugal, in its vast majority with a positive outcome. But internet-related sequestrations with sexual abuse are worrying

by Pedro Sousa Tavares

A growing number of minor sequestrations – with associated sexual abuse and violence – are being connected to the expansion of new communication technologies, like the internet and mobile phones. Girls in their early adolescence, aged between 12 and 15, are the preferred targets of these digital era predators.

“They are caught at a phase in their lives that is psychologically complex: they are now women yet, but no longer children, either”, the president of the Portuguese Missing Children Association (APDC), Patrícia Cipriano, explained to DN. “They have a natural appetence to speak with older men, because youngsters of their age are more immature, and the person on the other side knows full well what to say in order to captivate them.”

In 2009 alone, she says, the association accompanied the families of two girls aged 13 and 15, that were sequestered in this manner, both at the beginning of this year. “One of them had already been taken to France. The other one was abused and aggressed by an alcoholic, with previous offences”.

The most recent case, which was publicised only days ago by the Polícia Judiciária (PJ), also involved a 13-year-old student who – apart from being sexually abused – was photographed and filmed by her aggressor, who posted the images on the internet.

“When a girl is on the internet, she may think she’s talking to another girl of her age, but there may be an adult man on the other side”, DN was told by Pedro Carmo, joint national director of the PJ. But this kind of sexual predator, he warned, despite “often being associated to the more violent situations”, is not the only motive for concern.

“There is not one [aggressor] profile, but various”, he explained. “A major part of the sexual crimes are committed by other minors”, the senior officer explained.

Over the last few years, both the authorities and civil associations have performed information actions in schools, with the students and with the families. Avoiding to give away sensible information to strangers, like name and address, is a basic advice. Another one is to refuse any encounters, or, as a last resort, to carry them out in public and with company.

Concerning International Missing People’s Day, the United Nations alerted, yesterday, to a raise in the cases of involuntary disappearances, involving the actions of a third party.

But in Portugal, according to Pedro Carmo, namely concerning minors, the cases almost always refer to voluntary ‘flights’ that “generally end up well, with youngsters returning home or being tracked down”. School results “below the expectations” or the temptation of “music festivals” contribute to the summer being more fertile in these situations.

According to PJ data, this year alone, over three thousand disappearances were reported. But only 10 persons – six adults and four children – remain in this situation. Among the cases involving minors, the joint national director detailed , “there are two” – Madeleine McCann and Rui Pedro – that remain without conclusions.

Since June, Portugal is one of the few countries with a quick abduction alert system. But so far, this mechanism – which contemplates the broadcast of warning on televisions and radios -, has not been activated yet: “It’s an exceptional tool, for exceptional situations”, Pedro Carmo explained.

Rui Pedro’s family has not given up yet

The appearance, in the United States, of Jaycee Lee Dugard, 18 years after her abduction, has brought “some encouragement” to the family of Rui Pedro, the 11-year-old boy that disappeared in 1988, who is one of the rare unsolved cases of missing children in Portugal.

“It’s true that the news brought the family and the mother [Filomena] some encouragement and hope, even more so because they were the same age when they disappeared”, Carlos Teixeira, the godfather of the boy who would be 22 years old now, told DN. “But it was also an example of how there can be some ingenuity by the police in the investigation”, he added.

Until today, Rui Pedro’s family continues to believe that there were little explored leads, like the possible involvement in the case of the “last witness who saw him”, a 23-year-old man who was heard at the time.

“The chances that Rui Pedro is alive may be minimal, but they exist”, the uncle said. “Dealing with that uncertainty is one of the difficulties in disappearances”.

source: Diário de Notícias, 31.08.2009

Mark Hollingsworth Investigates The McCann Files

 

'Portuguese Reality Ends Far from Trafficking Networks'

Paulo Cristóvão, Portuguese Association of Missing Children

Correio da Manhã – In 2009, 3 thousand reports were made to the PJ of missing persons in Portugal. How do you characterize this reality, in the International Day of the victims of this type of crimes?

Paulo Pereira Cristóvão – I specially emphasize, the one thousand reports of minors that were made. It is a reality that in most cases, is resolved, because the disappearances are the result of family problems, relationships, or others, solved in a maximum of 72 hours.

The effectiveness of police work is important in this resolution rate?

The Portuguese reality is happy one, since it almost always ends up far from the international trafficking networks. The role of the media is essential, and the Portuguese Association of Missing Children has sought to clarify the youngsters, giving them mental tools to sort out problems on their own.

Are all the disappearances of children highly publicized?

Not all the families of missing children can have 'spin-doctors' on their side, but the majority of cases are given notoriety .

in Correio da Manhã

McCann Case: Foreign Office Secrets

English Government cuts with the McCanns

What was left was to act at a political level and Alistair Clark, Gerry's friend from the times of the University of Glasgow - the first in International Relations and the second in the Faculty of Medicine - was the perfect contact.

Alistair, with whom the CM wasn't able to contact up to the closure of this edition, is today a professor in an university in Belfast, Ireland, and also an assessor to the English Labour party Government. Gordon Brown was at the time the Treasury Minister and the candidate to Tony Blair's position.

The support given by Gordon Brown started with the press advisement, sending the couple the one who is today his right arm in Downing street, Clarence Mitchell.

The Ambassador John Buck, meanwhile, was the director of the Central Office of Information of the British Government [link: http://www.coi.gov.uk/], to witch it belongs the Media Monitoring Unit, then directed by Clarence Mitchell and in the direct dependency of the Prime Minister's Cabinet.

The route that the PJ investigation has taken in the last month has left Gordon Brown's Cabinet apprehensive and the Prime Minister has decided to cut his direct connection to Gerry McCann.

translated from Correio da Manhã, 14 September 2007

Foreign and Commonwealth Office on Clarence Mitchell

Mr. Morley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether Mr. Clarence Mitchell was seconded by his Department to act as an official spokesperson for the family of Madeleine McCann. [202007]

Mr. Jim Murphy: Clarence Mitchell was seconded to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from the Central Office of Information (COI), for a period of 25 days in May 2007 to provide assistance with the media to the family of Madeleine McCann. He resigned from the COI in September 2007.

On this matter from FOI news in March 18th 2009:

Sensitive e-mails concerning the hunt for missing child Madeleine McCann will remain secret for fear of offending the Portuguese authorities who were tasked with finding her.

A request for the disclosure of 13 e-mails and one letter, which were written in the two months after Madeleine went missing, was refused by the Information Commissioner.

The Foreign Office had dealt with the original request which had asked for copies of communication between the then Ambassador to Portugal John Buck and the Portuguese police. Some information was supplied immediately and another batch was released after the requester called in the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to hold an appeal.

However, a number of documents were not released by the Foreign Office and these were examined by officers from the ICO.

The documents were not released by the Foreign Office primarily on the grounds that they were covered by the Section 27 exemption (International Relations) and that the public interest test rested in favour of non-disclosure.

In the appeal the requester recognised that the documents would be covered by S.27 but argued that the public interest was in favour of their release.

The complainant said the release was in the public interest in order to uphold public confidence that British authorities do everything possible to help find missing children, reassure people the authorities keep in close contact with the police involved in the search and ensure public funds are used effectively to help find missing children.

But the Commissioner said in his decision that the disclosure would offend the Portuguese authorities.

He went on to say: “..even now, to disclose full information about the then ambassador’s communications with the Portuguese authorities then, on a balance of probabilities, substantial damage to the international relationship would result.”

He added: “The Commissioner is mindful of the need for the UK authorities to be seen to be worthy of trust by their foreign counterparts in Portugal and elsewhere in the world.

“He sees significant risk that disclosure of confidences or of other sensitive material would have damaging implications for any possible further developments on this matter and any relevant future investigations in Portugal or elsewhere in the world. This would not be in the best interests of the McCann family, including Madeleine, or of other UK citizens travelling to Portugal or elsewhere outside the UK.”

The Commissioner ruled that the S.27 exemption was engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in the release of the information.

Full decision - PDF document

Editor’s note: The clear indication from this judgement is that the ruling was made because of the content of the documents. Had the documents been congratulating the Portuguese authorities it is hard to imagine they would have caused “offence” and so therefore could have been released because they would not have put at risk our international relations. The inference has to be that the few documents that have not been released are perhaps less than complimentary about the local authorities. But of course we will now never know. The lesson for Foreign Office staff might be that the more provocative their views the less likely they are to be released.

Related: McCann Case: Freedom of Information Act on John Buck former Ambassador

McCanns...

....Hijack another tragedy?

«Kate and Gerry McCann said today: “Once again this shows that children can sometimes disappear off the radar only to be found years later alive.

“It emphasises that we should never assume that someone is not alive without any evidence to support this. We should never give up

“This case only makes us more determined to find Madeleine. She is out there somewhere and somebody knows where.” »

«The parents of Rothley girl Madeleine McCann have said the reappearance of a girl missing in California for 18 years has given them renewed hope.

Gerry and Kate McCann's spokesman said the news about Jaycee Lee Dugard gave them hope Madeleine would be found.»

«Clarence Mitchell said: "They are extremely pleased. It strengthens their determination never to stop looking for Madeleine."»

* «Their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, added: "Jaycee's case underlines statistics which say the younger a child is when she is taken, the more likely she is to be cared for and kept alive over an extended period."»

from teletext, mirror , breakingnews.iol.ie & * mirror [28.08.09]

Statistics:

From Polly Klaas Foundation [US]

99.8% of the children who go missing do come home.

• Nearly 90% of missing children have simply misunderstood directions or miscommunicated their plans, are lost, or have run away.
• 9% are kidnapped by a family member in a custody dispute.
• 3% are abducted by non-family members, usually during the commission of a crime such as robbery or sexual assault. The kidnapper is often someone the child knows.
• Only about 100 children (a fraction of 1%) are kidnapped each year in the stereotypical stranger abductions you hear about in the news.
• About have of these 100 children come home.

Kidnapped Child Homicide Statistics
Additionally, in 1997 the Attorney General of Washington State conducted a study focussing on missing child murders.

The most important information pertains to children who were kidnapped by violent or predatory abductors (approximately 1 in every 10,000 reports of a missing child -- about 100 US children per year.) For these children, "in 74 percent of the cases the victims were dead within three hours after abduction."

This information supports current law enforcement procedures to immediatly launch a widespread search for a missing child, in case the kidnapping is one in that small group. But it is incorrect to assume that 74% of all kidnapped children are at risk of being killed if not found within 3 hours.

You can download the Executive Summary of that report here in PDF format, Abduction - Homicide Study
More Information on Missing Child statistics at NMEC
Find The Kids : Missing child statistics PDF

Hum...

The Real Politics Always Wins

 

Gordon Brown & Moammar Kadhafi at the G8 summit on July 10, 2009 in L'Aquila, Italy

by Frederico Duarte Carvalho

The English prime minister, Gordon Brown, agreed on the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi, the secret agent that was detained in Scotland over the Lockerbie attack, with the Libyan leader, Moammar Kadhafi. The conversation took place in Italy, during the G8 summit, six weeks before the release was officially announced by Scottish justice minister Kenny MacAskill. Nevertheless, the latter asserts that he decided everything by himself, without any pressure from Her Majesty’s central government, or fear of economical reprisals – like, for example, the concession of Libyan oil exploration to BP -, and justified the release as a “compassionate action”, as the prisoner presented a medical prognosis of only three months to live.

Despite the guarantees from the illustrious Scottish minister, there is no lack of evidence that, behind the scenes, much was discussed. In a letter that was written by Gordon Brown [video] on the same day that al-Megrahi was set free and that has now been publicly disclosed, the English prime minister reminded the Libyan leader that, when they spoke in Italy, it was requested, in case the Scottish justice opted in favour of the release, that there would be no kind of manifestation of popular rejoice whatsoever in Libya, out of respect towards the victims’ families.

Not a word was said in the sense of requesting the release, but no word was said in the sense of preventing it, either. Gordon Brown, himself a native of Scotland, by recognising that the release might occur and therefore caring to ask for contention in the celebrations – a useless action, as could be verified -, ended up supporting the Scottish minister’s decision.

All of this is public and all of this was intuited. Nevertheless, what is not as public, is last week’s news in the “Sunday Times” where it is revealed that, if the Libyan agent hadn’t desisted on a judicial appeal – the condition that was necessary for his “compassionate” release -, then one of the pieces of evidence that the Scottish justice would have to appreciate was a document dated of 1989, that was produced by the US secret services, and which detailed Iran’s movements in commissioning, from Syrian terrorists, a terrorist attack as retaliation over the shooting down of a civil Iranian airplane by a missile that was fired from a North American plane carrier, five months before Lockerbie. A shot that had allegedly been accidental. In retrospective, the USA never blamed the Iranians or the Syrian agents, because one year later, in 1990, father Bush needed to guarantee the neutrality of these two countries when he invaded Saddam Hussein’s Irak during the first Gulf war. Libya, a bit further down the map, would later appear as the favourite target for the blame over Lockerbie.

By looking at history through this last prism, it is easier to understand why Kadhafi knew that al-Megrahi would be released and why he didn’t take Gordon Brown’s request for contention seriously. Meanwhile, al-Megrahi claims his innocence and, during the alleged three months that he’s left to live, intends to write a book, telling the whole truth.

A book always comes in handy, but it’s not Justice. Not even for al-Megrahi, who will thus never prove his presumed innocence in court. It reminds me of the story about the English couple, that was authorised to leave Portugal through the airport’s VIP room, when all of the evidence was enough to place them under preventive custody. Later on, the PJ inspector who wanted to arrest them was removed from the investigation, and, coincidentally, it was ensured that the English prime minister would sign the Lisbon Treaty. The PJ inspector resigned and wrote a book where he told the whole truth. But it was not enough for Justice to be accomplished.

The real politics won.


source: Para Mim Tanto Faz, 26.08.2009

Leonor Cipriano's Former Lawyer Sees Lawsuit Archived

The Public Ministry of Odemira archived the process against the lawyer of Portimão, João Grade dos Santos [Leonor Cipriano's former lawyer], charged with having transported to the local jail 4.45 grams of amphetamines and 0.15 grams of ecstasy.

The drugs were found on the 17th April 2008 in one of the travel bags of one of his clients, the inmate Annette Emerlcih. This one was detained by drug trafficking and confirmed the request to the lawyer - who became known for his defense of Leonor Cipriano - to bring her the bags, whose content the lawyer didn't know. João Grade, who knew the decision before yesterday, lamented to the CM, the "excessive and unnecessary noise" made about the case. "I already knew that I was important, but not this much!"


in Correio da Manhã

The Maddie Case Files

In an effort to gather all the valuable & precious work done by so many translating the DVD process, analysis, theories, etc. concerning the Madeleine McCann case, a new forum was created: The Maddie Case Files.

All are welcome to visit, to contribute with material and to use it as a reference.

It's a work in progress.

Unmasked blogger Rosemary Port to sue Google for $15m

Outed blogger Rosemary Port blames model Liskula Cohen for 'skank' stink

Google revealed identity of blogger Rosemary Port, who now plans to sue Web site

By George Rush

Sorry seems to be the hardest word for the blogger who anonymously scorned a model as a "ho" and a "skank," igniting a legal and media maelstrom.

Speaking out for the first time since a court order forced Google to reveal her identity, blogger Rosemary Port tells the Daily News that model Liskula Cohen should blame herself for the uproar.

"This has become a public spectacle and a circus that is not my doing," said Port, whose "Skanks in NYC" site branded the 37-year-old Cohen an "old hag."

"By going to the press, she defamed herself," Port said.

"Before her suit, there were probably two hits on my Web site: One from me looking at it, and one from her looking at it," Port said. "That was before it became a spectacle. I feel my right to privacy has been violated."

The pretty 29-year-old Fashion Institute of Technology student added that she's furious at Google for revealing her identity, so much so that she plans to file a $15 million federal lawsuit against the Web giant.

"When I was being defended by attorneys for Google, I thought my right to privacy was being protected," Port said.

"But that right fell through the cracks. Without any warning, I was put on a silver platter for the press to attack me. I would think that a multi-billion dollar conglomerate would protect the rights of all its users."

In her suit, she'll charge Google "breached its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity," said her high-powered attorney Salvatore Strazzullo.

"I'm ready to take this all the way to the Supreme Court," Strazzullo said. "Our Founding Fathers wrote 'The Federalist Papers' under pseudonyms. Inherent in the First Amendment is the right to speak anonymously. Shouldn't that right extend to the new public square of the Internet?"

"I feel proud to live in a country where you're not persecuted for your opinions," Port said. "That right has to be protected.

"Even though people are now taking shots at me on the Web, I believe those people have a right to their opinions - and their anonymity," said Port, who is slated to appear on ABC's "Good Morning America" tomorrow.

A Manhattan Supreme Court judge forced Google to unmask Port, rejecting Port's claim that blogs "serve as a modern-day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting" and shouldn't be regarded as fact.

The surprising decision, though, seems to have only increased the bad blood between the two women, who knew each other from Manhattan's fashion scene and reportedly quarreled after Cohen badmouthed Port to her ex-boyfriend.

Port's lawyer, Strazzullo, accused Cohen of being an attention-seeker who invited commentary by posting provocative pictures of herself on the Internet.

"The pictures she posted are more scandalous than any words," Strazzullo charged. "Ms. Cohen loves the spotlight. She brought this notoriety on herself. Then she used a PR circus to defame my client."

Cohen's lawyer, Steven Wagner, shot back that the model never sought the media spotlight - and might have thought twice about filing a suit if she'd known what would happen.

"The idea that Liskula brought this on herself is repulsive. It's shameful. It's like saying she had it coming," Wagner said. "We never contacted the press. If we had thought for a minute that the Google case would have brought more attention to the anonymous blogger's site, we never would have started it."

Wagner also denied that Cohen posted suggestive pictures of herself - and said Cohen proved as much in court. The raciest shots, taken at a private party, showed a fully clothed Cohen apparently simulating sex with a fully clothed man. (Cohen did post a slightly saucy shot of herself on all fours inside Cipriani's.)

"Does posting that give someone the right to call her 'a psychotic, lying whore'?" asked Wagner. "Her business was affected by the anonymous blogger's site, which had many hits before a client of Liskula brought it to her attention. I know how heartbroken she was."

Despite Cohen's victory in prying Port's name out of Google, the model has told her lawyer she does not want to go ahead with her $3 million defamation suit against Port.

"What this blogger did ought not to be condoned or forgiven. But my client is walking away from it," the lawyer said. "She's said, 'It adds nothing to my life to hurt hers.' Liskula has offered her forgiveness. But even after she has been forgiven, [Port] has no interest in redeeming her soul."

On the advice of counsel, Port wouldn't discuss why she created her blog - nor would she apologize, since it could expose her to further litigation.

"She'd be incriminating herself," Strazzullo said. "Maybe if an olive branch was extended by Ms. Cohen's team, if they agreed they wouldn't litigate, maybe she would apologize."

Unmasked blogger Rosemary Port to sue Google for $15m

By Mike Harvey

Google is to be sued for $15 million (£9 million) by an anonymous blogger who was unmasked by the internet search company.

Rosemary Port said that Google had failed to protect her right to privacy when the company obeyed a court order to reveal her name after she used her blog to accuse a former Vogue model of being a "psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank".

Liskula Cohen, 36, won a landmark case in a New York court last week, forcing Google to disclose the online identity of Ms Port, 29, a Fashion Institute of Technology student, who created her "Skanks in NYC" blog a year ago using Google's Blogger.com program.

Legal experts said that the ruling stripped away some of the anonymity provided by the web, making people who post offensive blogs, videos or tweets more responsible for their anonymous statements.

In the UK, bloggers who operate behind the cloak of anonymity have no right to keep their identities secret, the High Court ruled in June. In a landmark decision, Mr Justice Eady refused to grant an order to protect the anonymity of a police officer who was the author of the NightJack blog.

He ruled that Richard Horton had no “reasonable expectation” to anonymity because “blogging is essentially a public rather than a private activity”.

Ms Cohen claimed that Ms Port had anonymously posted photographs and “defamatory statements concerning her appearance, hygiene and sexual conduct that are malicious and untrue".

The New York Supreme Court ruled that Google must reveal the identity of the blogger.

Judge Joan Madden rejected Ms Port's claim that the blogs were a "modern-day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting" and should not be treated as factual assertions.

After the court ruling Google turned over the e-mail address and IP addresses from each time the blogger had logged on to the blog, allowing Ms Cohen to discover the identity of her tormentor.

She said she was relieved to discover that the woman who created the blog was not someone close to her and decided not to continue with a defamation suit. The blog was deleted in March.

Google said that users of Blogger.com agree to a privacy policy that allows the company to share personal information if required by legal action.

"We sympathise with anyone who may be the victim of cyber bullying," Andrew Pederson, a Google spokesman, said.

"We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order.

"If content is found by a court to be defamatory, we will, of course, remove it immediately."

Ms Port told the New York Daily News that the model should blame herself for all the publicity.

"This has become a public spectacle and a circus that is not my doing. By going to the press, she defamed herself," Ms Port said.

She added that she would sue Google for failing to protect the rights of its users. Her attorney, Salvatore Strazzullo, said that Google would be charged with breaching "its fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity".

"I feel proud to live in a country where you're not persecuted for your opinions," Ms Port said. "That right has to be protected.

"Even though people are now taking shots at me on the web, I believe those people have a right to their opinions — and their anonymity," she told the Daily News.



in New York Daily News & the Times Online

Newspaper ‘investigates’ McCann detectives

A British national newspaper claimed this week that the private investigators employed by the McCanns had done little to look into a new witness report. According to the Daily Mail, the detectives only made preliminary inquiries before announcing their ‘significant’ developments in the search for Madeleine.

Dave Edgar, the lead investigator, had appealed for help in finding the ‘Victoria Beckham lookalike’ who a British tourist approached as she looked agitated near a marina in Barcelona three days after the disappearance of Madeleine. The team then released an e-fit of the woman they believed would now be in Australia.

The Mail revealed that before doing the press conference they had failed to speak to anyone working at the restaurant near where the Australian woman was seen.

Neither had they asked whether there was CCTV footage of the woman. It was also claimed that they were not aware of the Australian yacht that was docked in the marina that night and only found out when British journalists informed them of the development.

The investigators were hired by Kate and Gerry McCann after Portuguese authorities closed the investigation last year.

The McCanns’ spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said: “The private investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance is being conducted entirely professionally and thoroughly under the direction of Dave Edgar.

“Upon receipt of the new witness information, two members of the investigation team travelled to Barcelona to conduct preliminary inquiries during a brief initial visit.”

Expenses

Meanwhile, British police have revealed that they have spent nearly £750,000 looking into the disappearance of Madeleine.

This follows the revelation that from 2007 to 2008 Leicestershire police spent £548,477 on their part of the search. In February, the Home Office said if any local police had extra costs for a government event, its authority can ask for ‘special grant support’ from the Home Office*.

Some of the cost has been reimbursed by the Home Office with a grant of £525,069.

Also this week, Kate and Gerry McCann were said to be devastated after leaflets suggesting they are responsible for their daughter’s disappearance were distributed in their hometown.

Around 10,000 copies of the publication, Ten Reasons to suggest Madeleine McCann was not abducted, were posted in Rothley, Leicestershire and the surrounding area.

The leaflet said that the McCanns’ version of events of the night Madeleine disappeared is a ‘sheer impossibility’ and that it is more likely Madeleine died in the apartment and the parents then covered up the death.

The leaflets have been posted around the village by an organisation called The Madeleine Foundation, whose members are calling for the case of the missing girl to be reopened.

The leaflet was delivered to homes in the street where Kate and Gerry McCann live with their two young children Sean and Amelie but not to their house.

Clarence Mitchell said: “We do not wish to dignify the actions of the so-called Madeleine Foundation with any response. We do feel it is important, however, to make the general public aware that the foundation has no connection whatsoever with our family or those helping us find Madeleine or any law enforcement agencies.”

Do you have a view on this story? Email us at editor@algarveresident.com

ONLINE POLL
Do you think the £750,000 UK police have spent on the Madeleine McCann investigation is money well spent? vote link (on the left)

in The Algarve Resident

*Leicestershire HMIC Major Crime Inspection Report July 2008 | Download PDF file (303 K )

More info at Home Office (Press releases and Documents)

Gonçalo Amaral to self-publish his book in the UK

Gonçalo Amaral

Gonçalo Amaral, the former coordinator of the Madeleine McCann investigation, has contacted the editor of his book, “Maddie: The Truth About The Lie”, seeking to recover its copyright, with the ultimate purpose of publishing the book in the UK himself.

Based on the criminal investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine, “The Truth About The Lie” has sold over 200 thousand copies in Portugal, and has been translated and published in several countries, like France, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Spain and Belgium (Flemish).

A documentary that is based on the book was broadcast by TVI in Portugal and reached an audience of 2,2 million viewers, was sold and broadcast in other countries, like Spain and Denmark, where it generated added interest in the case.

"The Truth About The Lie" has not been published in the UK, where no editor seems to be willing to risk upsetting the McCann couple.

Similarly, the documentary has not been broadcast by any British television channel.

Many British citizens have been forced to search for, and watch, the documentary on the internet, in order to access factual information that has otherwise not been made available by the UK media, in general.

State of Affairs: Again the Justice Forgotten

Opinion Article by Judge Rui Rangel

What can the Portuguese expect from the electoral programs of political parties in the area of Justice, for the next term? More of the same or almost nothing.

I have written about the election program of the PS in the area of Justice. In it I did not find any novelty, other than the repetition of mistakes of the past, giving continuity to the the work of this legislature. Definitely, Justice is not fundamental to the PS, which explains why, on the program already announced, there isn't a single reference to this sector.

But the scenario is no different if we look at the intentions of the PSD. So far we can only speak of intentions, because their program is not yet public. In its substance, there is only a difference of style: the Justice was inserted in the electoral program, the same happened in the programs of CDS, CDU and BE, which is very little.

For the PSD, everything seems to be done in closed offices, for people who think that they think Justice well, that assume that one of the paths to follow is the continuous (un)judicialization [ex.decriminalization] of the Justice acts. The PSD, in its election program, should say, clearly, what did the PS do wrong, which reforms they support and which ones they will not follow, if they become the Government. Only in this way can the truth be spoken to the Portuguese and politics gain credibility. Only then one can realize the ideological differences, if any, between the PS and PSD.

From the other parties of the parliamentary arch (CDS, CDU and BE) come vague ideals, generalities, petitions of faith, defense of blind principles, no specific and objective idea to give another dimension to justice and efficiency. More guarantees, resources to exhaustion, to absorb the gains of the winning party or to take the effectiveness of the decision, cheaper costs and the increase of the free service of Justice.

One thing that all parties have in common: the public disclosure of intentions, only for the purpose of being right in photo. But of good intentions, as they say, the hell is paved.

In practice, all care very little to Justice. This is always overlooked or treated in a disorderly way, despite all the studies indicating that it is the reform that is missing to make Justice serious and effective. Without it, the country loses in seriousness, in image and in competitiveness. The discouragement will continue to take care of us and Justice will continue to be a promise postponed.The overall picture does not look good for citizens and businesses.

A new Justice, with effectiveness and that helps to dignify Portugal, is not compatible with old parties and exhausted ideologies. The Civil society must be more demanding with the parties.

in Correio da Manhã

Note: I post this opinion, which I totally agree with, because many believe that with the change of the Portuguese Socialist party the McCann Case will have a different outcome. I don't agree with that, unfortunately we cannot rely in a left or right wing government to do Justice, nor we should, Justice as in the sense of legal Justice, should be carried out by the proper institutions and persons who were delegated and entrusted to do that specific work without any kind of political interference. The Madeleine McCann Case is no longer a case at the hands of any Police or Ministry - Portuguese or British, it's a case that is now at the hands of the Civil Society, and that means all of us. Only from the actions of concerned and proactive Citizens, in Portugal and in Britain, can the case have a different outcome than the current archival.
Expect more on this issue.

José Socrates - Gordon Brown: 2 P.M's, same B.S.

by our friend HetroLusitano

«All we are saaaaaying, is, give TRUTH a chance;
All we are saaaaaying, is, give the INVESTIGATION a chance!
Sing along folks...
Maybe one day we can all sing "Arguidos Para Sempre"...»

Couple defend Madeleine leaflet

A NOTTS couple who delivered leaflets in Clifton about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have defended their actions.

Grenville Green and his wife, Helene Davies-Green, have been campaigning on behalf of the Madeleine Foundation.

The pressure group has repeatedly claimed Madeleine was not abducted and their leaflet presents evidence gathered by the Portuguese police about her disappearance.

The pensioners from Nuthall have also dropped leaflets in Rothley, Leicestershire, the village where the McCanns live.

Mrs Davies-Green said: "We're not trying to upset anyone or stir anything up, we just want people to look again at the case."

Leaflets about Kate and Gerry McCann posted in Rothley were taken down by neighbours.

Following the leaflet drop, Mr and Mrs McCann issued a statement through their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, in which they said: "We do not wish to dignify the actions of the Madeleine Foundation with any response at all."*

*(yet they did, in their own official site and via their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell)

in This is Nottingham

Madeleine Foundation supporter Grenville Green, from Nottingham, taking news of the booklet: 'What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann?' to residents and shopkeepers in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire.

After reading the booklet over the Christmas holidays, and being convinced that Madeleine McCann was not abducted as the McCanns have claimed, Grenville bought 100 booklets from the Madeleine Foundation. He has been touring Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire on his Triumph Bonneville America bike to promote the booklet. Amongst the places he has visited have been Leicestershire Police Headquarters and the McCanns' home village of Rothley.

Grenville said: "My wife and I have had a very good response wherever we've been. Most people appear to doubt the McCanns' version of events and have eagerly snapped up the booklet. I am amazed at the amount of government help that this couple has had, given that the Portuguese police had good grounds for making them suspects in the disappearance of their own daughter".

Biography: Grenville Green (59) was widowed and brought up three boys, including his Downs Syndrome son Stephen, on his own. He remarried in May last year and currently campaigns for carers' rights. In particular he is asking that the Carers' Allowance, paid by the government to full-time carers, should be increased to the same level as the national minimum wage.


Source: The Madeleine Foundation

Pictures courtesy of The Madeleine Foundation. top left: Mr. Anthony Bennett, Secretary of The Madeleine Foundation with Mrs. Davies-Green; top right & bottom left: Mr. Greenville Green.

The Argentinean “McCanns”: Sofia Herrera’s father was detained

The story of Sofía Yasmín Herrera, 3 years old and 8 months, is similar to the one of Madeleine McCann of almost four years old who disappeared in Portugal in 2007. Sofia was with her parents and mysteriously disappeared on the 28th of September 2008 from a camping site in the touristic town of Rio Grande, Argentina. The similarities with the 'Maddie Case' and with the controversial 'McCanns', grew on the other side of the world. The contradictions of Sofia's parents statements arouse suspicions since the first day. In cases like this, usually the close circle around the victim has and should be always investigated.

Sofia Herrera’s father was detained as ordered by the judge because he contradicted himself during the reconstruction of his daughter’s disappearance. In addition at the magistrate’s request, the camping’s caretaker where the girl was last seen was also detained. The reconstruction started last Wednesday and ended yesterday. Today, the judge will hear the detainee’s statements.

Nearly a year after the disappearance of the child, Sofia Herrera, the Justice of Tierra del Fuego [lit. Land of Fire] arrested the father of the child. The caretaker of the camping John Godall, the place where the girl was last seen, was also placed in a police cell waiting a forthcoming statement questioning.

The arrests came after the reconstruction of the disappearance, which began Wednesday and ended yesterday. “It was the second reconstruction, with all the players who were there at the last moments the girl was seen; because, during the various statements, several differences were detected between the stories. Thanks to this new diligence, we could detect some serious incongruences in some of the things that were said relative to the time and space, which caused a shift in the case”, confirmed a prosecution source who intervenes on the case to Pagina/12.

At the moment Fabian Herrera is accused of "hindering the investigation" and the caretaker Alberto Urrutia, for the alleged "abduction" of the child.

Sofia was last seen on September 28, 2008. During the investigation psychiatric experts, the Supreme Court of Justice, Buenos Aires police, federal police and even a forensic team of Cordoba [Argentina’s Cordoba ] intervened on the case.  Last night, after eleven months without Sofia, the judge Eduardo López ordered the arrest de Herrera, while, at the request of the plaintiff’s attorney (Francisco Ibarra) the same was done with Urrutia. Although the crimes against them are different, both men were arrested after the second reconstruction of the events.

The site of the reconstruction: the campsite John Godall Rio Grande (Tierra del Fuego).
The time: between last Wednesday and yesterday.

The intention: to determine the time (the hours) and the exact place where each player was just before the disappearance.

 
The players: the child's mother (María Elena Delgado), Fabian Herrera (the father), Paloma and Silvio Giménez (friends of the couple Herrera), their two sons and the caretaker Urrutia; these were all people who were camping at the time of Sofia's disappearance.

After finishing the first stage of the judicial reconstruction and because of the alleged inconsistencies between the statements of Herrera and his friend Giménez, on Wednesday, Judge Lopez made a confrontation between the two. “Since the beginning of the case, Delgado, Paloma and Herrera had different contradictions in their statements. Silvio Giménez was the only one who in nine witness’s statements has always said the same thing”, told this newspaper a source of investigation.

During the confrontation, Giménez said the same that he had reported in September 2008, while Sofia's dad “did not remember well all the facts because I was very nervous”, assured to Pagina/12 his wife .

According to a preliminary report of the (second) reconstruction, Herrera kept repeatedly “forgetting” about the day when his daughter disappeared. For example, at the moment of establishing with his body the distance that separated him from Sofia, in the last time he saw her, the man replied that “it was not more than 20 meters”. However, measurements taken at the camping site yesterday by the Buenos Aires police officers determined that, between the place Herrera said he was and the space where his daughter supposedly was there were more than 180 meters. Between the testimony and the diligences, there was almost two “cuadras” [measure – one cuadra= 80 meters by 80 meters] of difference.

A few days ago, psychologists from the Supreme Court of Justice determined that “the report of one of Giménez’s children – the six-year-old boy who said that he saw Sofia as she climbed into a car – is not a lie, but contains several inconsistencies, fissures, and basically is not accurate”, confirmed the prosecutor source. Therefore, according to the lawyer, from “the statements that were taken today (yesterday) it could determine that the last place where the little girl was seen, was very close to the house of Urrutia”, the camping’s caretaker.

The man lived in a kind of small house that is located in the building that has been under concession by the municipality to a Río Grande taxi cooperative, and he is in charge of the place’s maintenance and security. The employee’s case is different from that of Herrera, because to the investigators, Urrutia is directly related to Sofia’s disappearance.

According to the data that has been established, the detention order was issued right after the psychiatric evaluations and the measures that were taken over these days, that led lawyer Ibarra to request the judge to detain Urrutia, as well as to close the camping where the events took place. In previous statements, Urrutia had said that “he had been in the province for a year only”, that the day in question “there were no other families or people at the camping” and that he didn’t “see any suspicious vehicles in the area”, and neither did he see Sofia.

Subnotes

The Madeleine Case

Madeleine McCann, who had three years, disappeared on May 3, 2007, while on vacation with her parents and siblings in Praia de Luz, Portugal. The case was investigated by the British and Portuguese police, and remains unresolved. The Investigators from Portugal consider to today the girl's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann (doctors), as suspects.

A member of the Portuguese Judiciary Police said that the parents "continue a strategy of disseminating new information almost daily through the media," which "aims to harm the investigation and take it in the wrong paths."

The parents, meanwhile, hold a public campaign and hired detectives to find the girl. A couple of weeks ago, at a press conference they presented the sketch of a a woman who they consider suspicious.


in Pagina/12 (Argentinian Newspaper) here & here

Sunday Express Faces PCC Investigation

 Sunday Express 16th August 2009

The ‘Sunday Express’ is to be investigated by the Press Complaints Commission after Madeleine Foundation Chairman Debbie Butler was the subject of a front-page headline in that paper on Sunday 16 August, falsely describing her as ‘The McCanns’ Stalker’, writes Tony Bennett, former Solicitor and Madeleine Foundation Secretary.

The complaint was lodged on Wednesday 19 August. The Press Complaints Commission regulates the press in the United Kingdom and has the power, effectively, to discipline newspapers which do not report any issue both fairly and accurately. They have been described as relatively toothless, and Press Complaints Commissioners are of course mostly senior figures in the newspaper industry who are in effect voluntarily regulating themselves. But they do have the power to order newspapers to print retractions, corrections and apologies.

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint to the Press Complaints Commission was set out as follows:

From: Tony Bennett
To: Press Complaints Commission
Wednesday 19 August 2009

Dear Sir, I act for Miss Debbie Butler in the matter of her formal complaint to you about the contents of Sunday's front-page article: "The McCanns' Stalker". This is a complaint under the Press Complaints Commission code and a copy is being sent to Scott Langham at the Press Complaints Commission for immediate action.

A summary of Miss Butler's complaints is as follows: The 'Sunday Express', like all other newspapers, has a duty under the Press Complaints Code to be fair and accurate. Against those benchmarks, here are the complaints about the Sunday Express article that Miss Butler now makes.

For the record, her address is [withheld] :

1. Describing Debbie Butler as a 'stalker' in respect of one leaflet drop in Rothley and nothing else was neither fair nor accurate. Making it a front-page leaflet with a picture clearly exposes her to risk of unfair attack. What she has done is distribute a factual leaflet. There is absolutely no course of conduct by her in relation to the McCanns that could remotely be described as 'stalking'.

2. Describing '10 Reasons' as a 'hate leaflet' (one villager was quoted as saying the leaflet was 'drumming up hate' and the 'Sunday Express' described it as 'highly inflammatory') was grossly unfair and grossly inaccurate, especially as the 'Sunday Express' did not explain the contents of the leaflet

3. The 'Sunday Express' deliberately chose the worst photograph they could take of her to portray her as 'a hard cow', which she was not. That was manifestly unfair

4. Neither Debbie Butler nor anyone else in the Madeleine Foundation sent a leaflet to Brian and Janet Kennedy. We do not know where she lives. This was therefore inaccurate.

5. It was not a 'late-night' leaflet drop. It took place between 3pm and 6pm. That was also therefore inaccurate.

6. The leaflet drop did not involve 10 people, it involved 3. That was also inaccurate.

7. Dr Gerald McCann was allowed to get away with describing the leaflet as 'despicable lies'. The 'Sunday Express' made no attempt to inform its readers that the content of the leaflet was the truth and that the McCanns had never rebutted any of the claims made in either '60 Reasons' or '10 Reasons'. This was grossly unfair and inaccurate. The leaflet was not 'lies' nor 'despicable lies'. It was the truth.

8. Debbie Butler was described in the 'Sunday Express' article as 'a single parent family with two children'. A more accurate description would have been 'a successful Kent businesswoman' - a fact which the reporter was made well aware of. The mere description of her as 'single parent' was unfair.

As remedies, Debbie Butler seeks:

1. A full retraction on the 'Sunday Express' front page of the description of her as 'The McCanns' Stalker'

2. A fulsome apology.

3, A payment of compensation which she tells me, if awarded, she would like to be paid in full to ChildLine.

Yours sincerely
Tony Bennett
Secretary
The Madeleine Foundation

Daily Star, 15th August 2009

SECOND COMPLAINT TO THE PRESS COMPLAINTS COMMISSION

From: Tony Bennett
To: Press Complaints Commission
Thursday 20 August 2009

Dear Sir,I make an additional complaint about the ‘Sunday Express’ as a result of the undertmentioned events which took place yesterday.

A 'Sunday Express' journalist telephoned Debbie's ex-husband and under false pretences obtained his address. He was then door-stepped.

The journalist then fired a series of questions at him, like: "Do you have a comment to make on your ex-wife stalking the McCanns?" "Is she mentally stable?" "Aren't you worried about the childrens' welfare?" etc. etc.

Debbie is on cordial terms with her ex-husband who helps out with child care and odd jobs that need doing in the house etc. He has computer/I.T. expertise and helps out with that when needed. I'm told by Debbie that her ex-husband basically said he did not want to get involved in talking to the press and was not willing to give a view on what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

However, he did say a couple of things to the journalist, and I note them here for the record..

Debbie's ex-husband asked why they had printed such a bad picture of Debbie in the 'Sunday Express' and why they had apparently chosen the worst one. The answer from the journalist, verbatim, was: "The editor told me he wanted her portrayed as a hard cow".

Asked about Debbie's campaign about Madeleine and his views on it, he said: "I will say this. Her father is a policeman and if she says anything, she gives you the facts; that's the way she was brought up".

It was the 'Sunday Express' who led with a front-page headline: 'The McCanns' Stalker' and of course its sister paper 'The Star' who branded the Madeleine Foundation leafleters in Leicestershire as 'sickos'.

The 'Sunday Express' is clearly putting resources into planning a further personal attack on Debbie.

Yours sincerely
Tony Bennett
Secretary
The Madeleine Foundation

CORRESPONDENCE WITH STEPHEN RIGLEY, NEWS EDITOR, SUNDAY EXPRESS

From Tony Bennett, 19 August 2009

Dear Mr Rigley, Thank you for having a word just now. You informed me that Martin Townsend, the News Editor was currently away on holiday and that you were now in sole charge of editing the newspaper in his absence. Please see this complaint which we tried to forward to the Sunday Express last night. I should be glad if you could inform me as soon as possible what action you propose to take in response to Debbie Butler's complaint against you. The Press Complaints Commission has already been informed.

Sincerely
Tony Bennett for Debbie Butler

From Stephen Rigley, News Editor, Sunday Express, 
20 August 2009

Dear Mr Bennett, Thank you for your correspondence, it has been forwarded to our legal department who will deal only through the PCC.

Stephen Rigley
News Editor Sunday Express
stephen.rigley@express.co.uk

Surrey Police arrests Five men over attempted murder of Portuguese cyclist

Five people have been arrested over the attempted murder of a cyclist in Surrey.

Filipe Nunes David, a 39-year-old Portuguese man living in Epsom, was attacked while riding in nearby West Ewell.

He suffered severe injuries, including a fractured skull, and remains in a critical condition in St George's Hospital, Tooting. Surrey Police are treating the attack as attempted murder.

A force spokesman said: "This morning, officers from Surrey Police executed warrants at a number of addresses in Ewell.

"Five males, three aged 16, one aged 18 and one aged 20 have been arrested and taken to Woking and Staines police stations."

The incident is being investigated by Surrey Police’s Major Crime Investigation Team and a stretch of Cox Lane including the junction with Pemberley Chase and the junction with Hogsmill Way has been cordoned-off to allow forensic work to be carried out.

It is believed an altercation of some kind may have taken place before Mr Nunes David was chased and detectives are following several lines of inquiry to establish a motive.

House-to-house enquiries are taking place and police are keen to speak to anyone who may have witnessed the attack or who was in the area between 9pm and 10pm last night.

DCI Maria Woodall, who is leading the investigation, said: “This was a savage attack which has left a man fighting for his life and we are determined to identify and catch those responsible.

“I am appealing to anyone with information that could help us to contact police or call Crimestoppers anonymously. In particular, we are keen to speak to the driver of a black car, possibly a Nissan, which was seen on Cox Lane shortly after the attack took place.

“We are also working to piece together more information about Mr Nunes David – both his history and his movements on the day of the attack – and have released a photograph to help jog people’s memories. Do you know Mr Nunes David? Did you see him yesterday?

“A dedicated phone line has been set up and people who have any information can contact police on 0800 096 1233 or, if they are calling from abroad, on 0044 207 158 0197.”

East Surrey’s Neighbourhood Superintendent Kul Verma added: “Understandably people in the local area will have concerns in the wake of this attack, but I would seek to reassure them that we have deployed significant resources to this investigation and officers from their Neighbourhood Team will be out today speaking to members of the community.”


sources via google

Maidstone mum in justice campaign for Madeleine McCann

A Maidstone woman is leafleting homes across the UK to try and get the investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance re-opened.

by Helen Fairley

Mum of two Debbie Butler, 45, is the chairman of the Madeleine Foundation, a group set up in July 2008 to call for justice for the missing youngster.

Madeleine McCann went missing from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal on May 3, 2007 while her parents and friends dined near by.

The foundation has caused controversy by distributing a leaflet, which gives “10 key reasons which suggest she (Madeleine) was not abducted” in the Leicestershire street where Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann live.

Ms Butler denied targeting the McCann’s and said the information in the leaflet had come from the police reports into the disappearance.

She said: “I just want the information to be in the public domain.

“I am compelled to continue until I get justice for this little girl.”

Read the full interview in this Friday's Kent Messenger.


in Kent Messenger

3 Arguidos Forum News

The current situation with 3 Arguidos Forum is as follows:

Co-administrator, jjp, has resigned from the forum because he was unable to agree with the direction it was taking and for personal health reasons.

Currently, Photon, the other co-administrator is on holiday.

Currently, Beowulf is, for personal reasons, able to manage only the technical side of the forum and not the day-to-day issues.

One global moderator has resigned from the forum completely due to the issues and a number of others have asked for their accounts to be de-activated till the problems are resolved. These others will re-consider their positions when the issues are resolved.

No other, available moderator felt able to take on the considerable burden of administration of the forum.

Though no representation has been made with regard to the Bennett/Butler campaign and its potential legal implications for the 3 Arguidos Forum, a number of posters and others (some with verified legal qualifications) have expressed strong feelings that there may be a threat to the forum.

Without any current Administration and with a limited moderation team (due to holidays and other personal issues) it was felt that the safety of the forum should be the priority.

The forum remains secure - no data has been removed - it is simply not accessible at the moment due to being disabled.

Do the McCanns really want to find Maddie?

Their daughter Maddie had been abducted, said Kate and Gerry McCann since May 2007. Wrong, says the Madeleine Foundation. The parents themselves were guilty of Maddie's death. But the investigations against them were systematically undermined. By the British government.

By Karin Leuthold

The approach of the "Madeleine Foundation" is clear and simple: Its members do not believe the version of the McCanns, they do not believe that their daughter Maddie was abducted on 3 May 2007 by an unknown from her bedroom in the Portuguese holiday resort. They believe, rather, the child was dead and they suspect that Kate and Gerry McCann have something to do with her death.

The "Madeleine Foundation" has "search for the truth" written on the banner. Their view of things coincides precisely with that of the deposed Portuguese chief investigator Gonçalo Amaral.

The organization will not rest until the parents would be held to account, is stated on its website. 20 minutes Online spoke with Vera Steinke, the German representative of the 'Madeleine Foundation'.

 

Vera Steinke with the German edition and Tony Bennett with the English edition of '60 Reasons'

20 minutes online: Ms. Steinke, what is the motivation of the "Madeleine Foundation" to work on behalf of the little girl?

Vera Steinke: We say quite simply that the British people have a right to a fair presentation of the facts and analysis, which lead to only one conclusion: namely that no kidnapping can have happened. In the case of missing Madeleine, we have the example of an unusual pair, who are suspected of a serious crime, but are supported by the British Government and the British press by its massively one-sided reporting.

You claim that the McCanns would be supported by the British government? Why?

Unfortunately, this is still today the big question. There is only conjecture and speculation but nothing concrete. It is clear that from the beginning a massive intervention and support by the British government took place, well above and beyond what is normal (usual). It would seem as if it was not just about the disappearance of a little girl.

About what, then?

There are two facts, that are worth mentioning here: one is the current spokesman of the McCann family, Clarence Mitchell, a former government spokesman, who, on the instructions of Prime Minister Gordon Brown, took on the media work for the parents in September 2007 - shortly after they were declared suspects. On the other hand, the Portuguese investigator Gonçalo Amaral has been removed from the case, after the Summit in 2007 and a conversation between Gordon Brown and his Portuguese counterpart José Sócrates - precisely at the moment when he had developed a critical attitude towards the parents.

Gonçalo Amaral has not been working on the case since the autumn of 2007. He is disseminating through the Internet the theory that Maddie is dead and that by the hand of the parents - as a result of an accident or a crime -. Why does he not get more attention?

It seems that forces in the British government are preventing this case from being investigated objectively and in all directions. Only one theory is allowed, namely that of the parents, of the alleged abduction, although no evidence exists. Gonçalo Amaral had to give up the case, when he officially declared the parents suspects, after the sniffer dogs had found clear evidence.

What does your organization do specifically, in order to help in resolving the matter?

Because the members of the "Madeleine Foundation" are not investigators, they cannot do anything in this direction. You can, however, by actions - such as petitions, try to request the British Government to reconsider the case, for example for neglect and violation of oversight duty of the parents. The distribution of leaflets in Leicester and the surrounding area a few days ago, for example, has caused a lot of stir in the British press.

Do you think that the case will be opened again?

The parents seem in any case not to be interested in a resumption of the case. This in turn raises a further question: Why not? Parents, whose child has disappeared, should have the biggest interest in the clarification of such a case.

in 20 Minuten Online

Madeleine Foundation in BBC East Midlands


The McCann's Answer in findmadeleine.com
18th August Re: 'Madeleine Foundation'

We do not wish to dignify the actions of the so-called 'Madeleine Foundation' with any response. We do feel it is important, however, that the general public are made aware that the 'Madeleine Foundation' has no connection whatsoever with our family or those helping us to find Madeleine, including law enforcement agencies or child welfare NGO's (non-governmental organisations). We also strongly believe that the actions of this organisation do not have Madeleine's best interest at heart; if anything, the organisation is hindering all our efforts to find Madeleine and achieve justice.


Madeleine Foundation Leaflet in PDF here

Google Forced to Unmask Identity of Anonymous Blogger

A former Vogue Australia cover girl has won a landmark court battle to reveal the identity of an anonymous blogger who called her a "skank" and an "old hag".

Model Liskula Cohen sued Google in January in the hope of forcing the company to reveal the person responsible for allegedly defamatory comments on a blog called Skanks in NYC, which was hosted by Google's Blogger service.

"I would have to say the first-place award for 'Skankiest in NYC' would have to go to Liskula Gentile Cohen," the anonymous blogger wrote.

"How old is this skank? 40 something? She's a psychotic, lying, whoring, still going to clubs at her age, skank."

Cohen, who is actually 37, believed the posts were defamatory but was forced to take action against Google in order to unmask the blogger's identity before she could take further action.

On Monday in the US, Judge Joan Madden (PDF document) ruled that Cohen was entitled to sue the blogger for defamation and, in an unprecedented move, forced Google to provide the blogger's name.

The name will presumably be revealed in court. It is unclear when the matter will return to court.

The tall, blonde Canadian, who is based in New York, has modelled for Giorgio Armani and Versace and appeared on the cover of the Australian edition of Vogue.

But Cohen's modelling career ground to a halt in January 2007 when a man stabbed her in the face with a broken glass, requiring her to get 46 stitches, the New York Post reported.

The man, who was sent to jail, became angry after she objected to him stealing a bottle of vodka from her table.

“I’m tall, I’m blond, I’ve been modeling for many years, and people get jealous,” Cohen said in her defense. “If I had to deal with everyone who is jealous, I wouldn’t have time to do anything else.”

Judge Madden rejected the claims by the blogger's lawyer that the comments were mere opinion or "trash talk", and that only factual assertions could be considered libellous.

"The thrust of the blog is that the petitioner is a sexually promiscuous woman," Judge Madden wrote in her judgment, noting that the comments were run alongside photos of Cohen in suggestive poses.

The blog, which was shut down in March, was almost entirely devoted to slagging off Cohen. It contained just five entries, all of which were published on August 21 last year.

"I really hope it's not somebody I know," Cohen told the New York Post.

"I'm a human being. I bleed. I have feelings. When I saw that blog, it was awful. All I can say for this person is, I really truly hope that they have more in their life than this."

Cohen's lawyer, Steven Wagner, told reporters that he hoped the decision would send a message that the internet was "not a free-for-all".

Anne Salisbury, the lawyer for the blogger, warned that the ruling would open the "floodgates" for anyone who has been the subject of a nasty comment online to take legal action.

A Google spokeswoman said: "We sympathise with anyone who may be the victim of cyber bullying. We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order."

This also means that Google will have to reveal the identity of the blogger in question; an important move that will set a precedent for future cases such as this one.  However, as we all know, the internet is full of offensive comments and broad negative statements of all kinds. On the upside, this decision will make people think twice about posting offensive posts and comments about someone, as they’re no longer protected by a shroud of anonymity. On the other hand, it might trigger a flood of similar lawsuits, perhaps for trivial reasons, which can in turn have serious implications on everyone’s online privacy.

What do you think? Was judge’s Madden decision the right one? Please voice your opinion in the comments.

sources: Sydney Morning Herald and Mashable