1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

McCanns and the British Media (aka McCann Media)

Madeleine's Fate - A Web Of Lies



Five days later after being reported in the Portuguese Press the Great BBC Reports:


The friends who were on holiday with Madeleine McCann's parents when the girl went missing are to be reinterviewed by police in the UK.


The group of seven will be questioned next week by Leicestershire Police, with Portuguese detectives present.

Four-year-old Madeleine disappeared from her family's holiday apartment in the Algarve last May.

[Yes, while the Parents dined with friends 120 meters away, leaving the little 3 (almost four) year-old girl alone with her two siblings of 2 years-old]

Her parents, who deny any wrongdoing, remain arguidos or formal suspects. They will not face questioning.

[They did break the Law in Portugal, by abandoning and exposing their daughter and the twins to danger- Article 138 of the Portuguese Penal Code, and this news article is wrong: they might be questioned if the new interrogations of the Tapas friends gives the PJ reasons to advance to that stage at the inquest, it's on the rogatory letter.]



Small team


Madeleine disappeared days before her fourth birthday, during a family holiday in the resort of Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, on 3 May last year.

The seven friends dined with Kate and Gerry McCann on the night of Madeleine's disappearance.

[The famous pact of silence:“We have a pact. This is our matter only. It is nobody else’s business”, says David Payne.]

One of the group, Jane Tanner, has already told the police she saw a man that evening carrying a child, close to the family's apartment.

[First he didn't have a face, no hair nothing aka Eggman; then he was tall, white, Nordic/tourist like, walking towards one side of the street, no face yet, carrying a blanket/bundle aka Bundleman; later on he was shorter, dark, Mediterranean like, walking towards Murat's House,no face yet, carrying a child in pink pyjamas aka Bundleman version 2 and even later on Gail Cooper's suspect was a Mediterranean man, odd, scary, with big teeth, almost a George Harrinson Look a Like mixed with a Stereotyped bad man as News of the World said in their exclusive story: A Beast! Surprisingly, Jane Tanner, who until now had stated that she never saw the man's face: "Jane, from Exeter, Devon, said: “He had his face turned away and it was dark." arrived to the conclusion that this was the same man she saw on the 3rd May last year. Even more surprising is that Jes Wilkinson and Gerry McCann who stated to have been on the same street, at the same time never saw Jane Tanner or a man carrying a blanket/bundle/child.]

The BBC's Steve Kingston in Madrid said he understood that a small team of Portuguese detectives will arrive in Britain next Monday.

[In Madrid, why not in Portugal?]

He added: "The Portuguese detectives will not conduct the interviews - but instead watch as officers from Leicestershire Police put a list of questions agreed in advance through the Home Office."

[We know that since the first time rogatory letters were mentioned last year!]


The questioning of the McCanns' friends will begin on Tuesday and should be completed by the end of the week.

[Sources, please? Could it be 24 Horas, Jornal de Noticías, Diário de Noticías, Correio da Manhã, Lusa news agency, a blog, a judicial source?]


Police interviews are also planned with relatives and advisers who were with the McCanns during the early days of the investigation.

[Justine Mcguiness, etc... Hope the PJ doesn't forget the Método3 agency and their methods, the Sky news journalists who framed Murat on International TV, Clarence Mitchell who Launched a similar to the Police man hunt in Portugal, etc.. etc...]

Separately, lawyers for the couple have requested that two dozen other witnesses be interviewed, including staff from the Ocean Club complex and several British holidaymakers.

[Obviously, Team McCann had to have a last word, spin, whatever... Why re-interv
iew the Ocean Club Staff and holidaymakers if they were all previously interviewed by the Judiciary Police? Are we to expect new Photo-fits or new odd ball suspects?]

A small update:

A spokeswoman for the British force said: "Leicestershire Constabulary will be coordinating the execution of the request for mutual legal assistance made by the Portuguese authorities."The Portuguese authorities have asked that the contents of the request and the way it is being executed be kept confidential so as not to prejudice their ongoing investigation.

The McCanns' family spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said: "Kate and Gerry and their friends have long expected this visit by Portuguese police officers and it comes as no surprise that some reports in the Portuguese papers in the last few days have been speculating about the arrival date."

[Speculating? The dates are from the 7th of April to the 11th.]


He added: "I am not in a position to confirm any dates or give any details about the re-interviewing of the friends and all matters will have to go to Leicestershire police.

[" No reference should be made to any inconsistencies or contradictions": read bellow: press guidelines/spin]

"However, Kate and Gerry and their friends welcome the police interviews. The friends are more than happy to co-operate fully, as are Kate and Gerry, although in this case Kate and Gerry will not be interviewed.

["It shall be made clear that the McCanns are not to be requestioned (...)at this time": read bellow: press guidelines/spin]

"This has not been requested but Kate and Gerry would have agreed to answer any questions had the police wished to put anything to them.

[Why answer now, but not in September?!]

"There were some reports from Portugal last week that police were not going to question Kate and Gerry because they thought they would not co-operate. This is utterly ridiculous and completely baseless.

[Is Clarence Mitchell saying that the Public Prosecutor Magalhães e Menezes from the Portuguese Public Ministry and the Judge Pedro Frias are liars?]


"Kate and Gerry and their friends see this as an important chance to help the police.

[No comment.]


"We hope that the police will realise there is no evidence to link Kate and Gerry with Madeleine's disappearance in any way and that they will be rapidly eliminated from the inquiry and the arguido status, which was imposed too hastily as the head of the Portuguese police admitted, will be lifted as soon as possible."

[Firstly, the arguidos status was asked by the McCanns lawyers, Carlos Pinto de Abreu and Rogério Alves, when they refused to answer all the questions by the Portuguese Police. Secondly, Alípio Ribeiro, National Director of the Judiciary Police, and not head of the Portuguese Police (there are several Police forces in Portugal) said as well:

"I don't see that as predictable [changing coercion measures on the couple], even though it is a decision that is for the Public Ministry to make, which has accompanied the entire investigation because its direction belongs to them. It is obvious that they will evaluate the situation, but I don't see a need for that, at the moment." September 10, on RTP

"All the investigation lines will remain open. There will only be conclusions drawn at the end. At this moment, it would be speculation and none of us wants to prompt speculation because that would hurt the investigation. This is not an easy investigation." October 10, during a press conference

"The rogatory letter to interrogate the McCann's friends is ready and will travel to England with a team, within days. [...] The investigation lacks a connecting point." October 21, to 'El Pais' ]


The Official British Press & Media Policy for reporting the McCanns Case:

(Or the instructions and restrictions given to the media as to the context of reporting and the limitations on what the public needs to be told)


The Portuguese police are here purely to observe the process. The interviews will be carried out by Leicestershire police.

The reason for these reinterviews are to be stated as either 'clarification of', 'going over previous' or 'tying together earlier' statements. There is to be no suggestion in the analysis that there have been inconsistencies or contradictions, although reporters may allude to these briefly in discussions with news anchors that the Portuguese are unclear about some of the timelines. All and any such references to contradictions must be referred to as 'alleged'.

The Jane Tanner interview snippet from Panorama can be shown, but not dissected. No reference should be made to any inconsistencies or contradictions in her statements or the evolution of these statements from her original description of the abductor to the police. No suspicions should be raised or inferred with regard to any of the friends.

It shall be made clear that the McCanns are not to be requestioned. If absolutely necessary, the phrase 'at this time' may be added, but should be avoided if possible.

ALL reporting must emphasise the McCann's denial of any wrongdoing and all references to Madeleine must state that she is four, or was about to turn four at the time of the disappearance.
Any outside broadcasts from Leicestershire at the time of the questionings must attempt, wherever possible, to source quotes from the McCann's spokesman. If not, a preprepared statement will be made available to the reporter on scene and this must be used as part of the report.

How's that for free press??



9 comments:

  1. According to timelines, and JT's 'sighting' we can only assume the 'abductor' was busily breaking out of the apartment with Madeleine as Gerry stood chatting to JW. There is no other way if we go with their version of events. GM says he felt with hindsight the abductor was in the apartment when he did his last check (tho this doesn't tally with other accounts of that time when he apparently went to the toilet, into his bedroom etc...where was the abductor then? surely he'd have bumped right into him but anyway I am digressing) So the version of events we have at this moment. Abductor was likely already in the apartment when Gerry did his check, Gerry then bumps into JW and chats out the front of the apartment (presumably another reason why we have the lastest, in through open door, out through shutters theory) JT apparently sees the abductor taking Madeleine as JW and Gerry chat at the front.

    So we HAVE to assume from this version that he was busily breaking out with M as Gerry chatted....

    Why did neither he nor JW hear the shutters being broken? Why did they not hear a struggling child - likely to have kicked and screamed? more pre-emptive hindsight that they must have all been drugged? if so why did they refuse to have the twins tested until much later? surely the possibility of drugging must have occured to them early on? You'd have gone through every scenario you could possibly think of very early on so the possible drugging simply must have occured to them. He was literally yards from his daughter being abducted in what in their own words was a quiet, still place (hence the reason they felt ever so safe) so why did he hear nothing? why didn't JW hear anything?

    Again, this puts JT's account into serious doubt, simply put, M simply had to have been taken as GM and JW chatted mere footsteps from the apartment by her own 'timing' of the sighting. Is this why Gerry, who has a handily built in witness to the abduction also claims he didn't see her? Had JW not been there and kept Gerry chatting, and on account of this silent abduction (in their own words the abductor broke out when they realised he couldn't possibly have broken in) Gerry cannot coroborate her story - which imo he was always supposed to - or at least not been on the path when JT passed. He didn't see the abductor but he could have placed JT where she said she was when she said she was.

    If JW did not bump into Gerry and keep him talking there were going to be no witnesses to a silent abduction - IE; nobody to say they were yards away but heard nothing and nobody to put JT's story under scrutiny. Add to that the theory Gerry was supposed to Jemmie the shutters there and then but was stopped by JW..I have long believed that unknowingly JW was the major spanner in the works, the reason for the inconsistencies and quite possibly the key to unlocking all of this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jane Tanner's exclusive interview with The Sun, 20 November 2007
    I DID see man abduct Maddie The Sun

    By ONLINE REPORTERS
    Published: 20 Nov 2007

    MADDIE kidnap witness Jane Tanner yesterday told how she watched the tot being snatched – and insisted she has NO doubt about what she saw.

    In an exclusive interview with The Sun – her first with any newspaper – Jane forcefully hit back at critics who have suggested she is lying.

    Amid sobs, she said: "I DID see a man that night carrying away Madeleine.

    "She WAS abducted."

    Tears welling in her eyes, she went on: "I wake up to that image ever day. Every day I see him there, striding away, carrying Madeleine and I try desperately to remember more detail, what his face was like.

    "I think about it over and over again. It’s horrible.

    "Madeleine was adorable. Every day I hope this is the day we find her."

    Twisting her Look For Madeleine yellow and green wristbands, Jane, 36, then went into detail about the night of May 3.

    She told how she and the other members of the so-called Tapas Nine had been leaving the restaurant at the complex in Praia da Luz to check their children.

    Returning

    It was on one of her visits to see her two daughters that Jane passed Maddie’s dad Gerry, 39. He was returning from seeing his children.

    Seconds later she saw a man cross from left to right in front of her with a child lolling back in his arms.

    Jane said: "It wasn’t unusual to see people with children, even at that time of night. But my attention was drawn to him because the child had bare feet.

    "It was a cold night and I thought that was strange because as a mother I would never have taken my child around at that time without something on their feet or a blanket. All I could see of the child was their legs dangling.

    "The man was about ten to fifteen feet in front of me and was walking quite quickly and I can remember thinking, 'That’s odd'.

    "But that was all, nothing to make me scream out to make him stop. I never at that time thought it could be Madeleine. I’d just passed Gerry so I thought his children were all asleep in bed."

    Jane carried on to her apartment where she found her daughters were fine, so she went back to the tapas bar.

    About 15 minutes later her partner Dr Russell O’Brien checked and found one of the girls had been sick so he asked a friend to fetch Jane.

    It was while Jane was there that Maddie’s mum Kate, 39, went to see her children at around 10.05pm – and found the girl missing.

    Jane said the first she knew was when she looked out of her window and saw the table at the tapas bar was empty. She opened the door and there was commotion.

    She said: "I saw all our friends outside shouting. I opened the door and one, Rachael, shouted at me, 'Madeleine’ s gone!' As soon as she said that the image of that man carrying the child came into my head and I felt physically sick. A feeling of complete horror washed over me."

    Minutes later Jane saw Kate. Close to tears, Jane admitted she could not bear to tell her about the man. She said: "At that time it seemed everyone thought Madeleine was hiding.

    I knew that if I told her about the man it would shatter that. I was also hoping desperately that I’d been wrong. Instead I took another friend, Fiona, to one side and told her.

    "Then, at around 11.15, two policemen arrived and I told them. Later CID arrived. They did this thing called a cognitive technique, where they put you back in the moment, and it was then that I remembered the pyjamas.

    "There were pink and white, they were what Madeleine was wearing. I just felt so awful, I felt I could have stopped this from happening. I think of that everyday.

    "I have to live with it forever, that guilt is never going to go away." It has been reported that the man she saw that night was Robert Murat, the first person named as a suspect. But Jane said she simply does not know.

    Jane, from Exeter, Devon, said: “He had his face turned away and it was dark.

    "I’ve done an artist’s impression and want people to look at that and rack their brains as to whether they know him, or if they were on holiday, saw him.

    "Please just ring the Find Madeleine Spanish hotline."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mrs Fenn asked them if they wanted her to phone them, THEY LIED AND SAID THEY ALREADY HAD!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think their story would have actually gone quite smoothly but for the fact Gerry bumped in JW. Think about it, what he did/didn't see, what he didn't hear (I have read accounts of these shutters being noisy in general, never mind being broken out of) how he messed up JT's sighting, how he quite possibly ruined Gerry's chances of breaking the shutters - thereby making the abduction seem unlikely - again, think about it, if that apartment truly had been 'broken into' and doors locked as per the original story a lot less people would have ever doubted them. A broken into apartment would be evidence of an abduction, something sorely lacking. Bumping into him meant hurried changes to the plan that didn't make much sense but it was the best they could do under the circumstances. JT wouldn't have been called into nearly as much question and probably wouldn't have had to give more detail than she originally did, again, creating inconsistencies at best, at worst downright lies. There would have been no witnesses to say she wasn't on the path at the time she stated.

    IMO 99% of the holes in their story originate from a fateful meeting with JW. We'd have (probably) had a locked apartment being broken into, a witness sighting that nobody (unnamed Irish teen notwithstanding as they weren't expecting her any more than they expected JW) could really question and a story a hell of a lot straighter than the one we heard.

    Yep, it's all BS...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gerry and Kate who are the parents of the child didn't show any emotions,were smiling in front of the cameras,went jogging and played tennis the very next day their child was "abducted".....

    ReplyDelete
  6. JW and his wife can be as Pro-McCann as they like, they can claim to be 100% assured of their innocence but whether JW likes it or not he, according to JT's sighting was chatting to Gerry feet away from where the 'abduction was taking place' - if he's heard nothing in such a quiet, still place and he's not seen Jane Tanner tho she claims she saw both he and Gerry chatting, the simple fact remains; he did not see nor hear anything as you'd expect in his close proximity to the scene, that he would.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So if the PJ are on the UK from the 7th to the 11th then the McCanns must know they are going back with the PJ

    http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2008/01/13/mccanns-return-to-portugal-98487-20283623/
    A close friend said the the couple were likely to go back after their "D-Day" of April 11, when their three-month extension is up, and added: "They feel they've waited long enough with this cloud of suspicion hanging over them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hello all, My thoughts on this are, that JW was a spanner in the works and they had to improvise. Funny Tanner cried during the sun interview..on the documentary she spoke on she looked bemused and showed no other emotion, she came over as a liar.
    The way the McCanns have acted throughout is not normal, infact its callous. They said after the Daily Express libel saga that " There was no evidence madeliene had ben SERIOUSLY harmed"!! If as they say she has been taken by a paedophile, how could they imagine there was no harm being done? And do they seriously imagine there would be no harm done when Madeleine woke up with strangers, never to see her family again?
    Its unlikely there will be judicial justice for Madeleine, but that pair have to live with the finger pointing and innuendo, as do the twins Sean and Amelie.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 12:58

    Lorri Campbell can write anything she likes. She is on the McCann team. She was the one who made trouble for Robert Murat. Their arguido status will not be lifted on April 11. Paulo Rebelo is a better investigator than most. I did a bit of research. Thank you for your effort Joana Morais. Your country is great.

    ReplyDelete

Powered by Blogger.