Madeleine McCann PRESS Revisited! No news isn't always good news!

Happy 2015. Thanks for the messages, good AND abusive :-)

My first blog of the year is an OLD post I made to some long-forgotten Forum, prior to the UK Press 'love-in' with the McCanns after the Portuguese first 'shelved' the case.

I had LONG forgotten about it, until someone emailed it to me and I was struck by the unnerving fact that little has changed!

=======================================================================

Dear Mr. Editor……… I’m quite sure that you are very busy, organising your hacks and other staff, clearing away space on the front pages of your newspapers to make way for tomorrows joyous headlines, not to mention the inevitable ‘’pull out and keep’’ 10 page insert guide, explaining the tragic chain of events that have had to be endured by Saint Gerry & Kate of Rothley:-

“Bungling/Boozy/Inept/ Sardine Munching Porto Plods finally admit defeat!!”.......... “The agony goes on for our Kate &; Gerry” and “Vindicated at last!!”,

Just some, I am CERTAIN, of the headlines that we will all be reading about in the next couple of days. Readers will then be subjected to innumerable column inches over the coming weeks, with poignant articles from Richard Madeley, Amanda Pearson, Carol Malone et al, explaining how they had all ‘been there’ for our illustrious golden couple, supporting them in their hour of need, joining forces to combat and admonish those ‘vile evil whisperings’ that were emanating along the corridors of certain internet forums and blogs.

No doubt, celebs’ agents are already in negotiation with tabloid editors, all lining up to prepare their clients to express their solidarity by way of ‘exclusive interviews’; “as a parent myself, I can’t imagine what hell they have had to go through………by the way, my new book, which is out this Monday……………………….”

Who knows?. Almost certainly an OBE or two will be in the pipeline, especially if the McCanns are allowed to take credit for the European ‘AMBER ALERT’.

Clarence Mitchell will almost certainly be given greater impetus, either directly or otherwise, to organise the Government’s Media Monitoring Unit, to clamp down and to CLOSE down those websites and bloggers that influence sufficient numbers of people to be potentially detrimental to New Labours diktats, (as he did the MIRROR Forum).

Tony ‘Glenda’ Parsons, will undoubtedly have accrued sufficient soundbites to keep his Mirror column going for the next 2 years.

But, Mr. Editor, just before you fall asleep at night in your bed, having finished the proof reading to your simpering, sycophantic, subservient homage to the McCann's PRESS releases, please give a little thought to the following:-

Irrespective of what the Portuguese announce on Monday, the 20th July, there are a number of serious issues and questions which, FAR from being answered, have actually never been ASKED.

It may very well please you and whoever is dictating your editorial policy to perpetually vilify and BLAME the Portuguese authorities, their police or even their subjects for every aspect of the Madeleine McCann tragedy, but that would not explain, in any way, the following:-- The suspicions surrounding the McCanns and their possible involvement in the disappearance of their daughter arose, NOT because the Policia Judiciaria were inept and clueless, but because the McCanns made inaccurate statements, from the outset. Inaccurate statements about their movements, the movements of their friends, inaccurate statements about the state and condition of how they found the apartment and the shutters, inaccurate statements about what they discovered and discussed.

We know that they made inaccurate statements because what they said directly contravened and countered what the other stated, as well as what some of their friends stated. And they can’t ALL have been correct.

Inaccurate statements, lies or omissions?

Likewise, it wasn’t the ‘bungling Porto plod’ who strongly suspected or suggested that Madeleine may have died in the apartment. It was a couple of British dogs. Specialist canines, who have a LONG and proven history and success rate in determining and locating the precise areas of residual tissue and and materials relating to cadavers. Specialist dogs who are currently proving to be both CRUCIAL and instrumental in unraveling the ongoing horrors being unearthed at Haut de la Garenne in Jersey.

Not, I am sure, that you will give much credence or space to their findings in Portugal, but HOW would you propose to explain away the dogs behaviour in Praia da Luz, in the apartment, on Kate McCanns clothes and belongings? Having a bad day? Inconclusive? The fact that it is not wholly admissible in a Court of Law?

And what about that car boot sample?

The Birmingham FSS, the acknowledged, finest Forensic science laboratory in the world?  Martin Brunt is STILL on the Sky News website video, reporting a “100% DNA Match to Madeleine McCann”. Was he misinformed? Contaminated sample? Mistaken Process? Total fabrication? We may never know, especially given that the British authorities are fighting to ensure that particular aspect of this case remains secret. (Have you ever asked yourself why?, Mr. Editor, or are you simply not permitted to question Mr. Mitchells rhetoric?)

Are you also, Mr.Editor, going to lambast those bungling, inept, incapable LEICESTERSHIRE police, who were also widely reported as concurring, and in some cases even SUGGESTING, that Madeleine died in the apartment on that first night in May?

“ Licentious, lackluster, Leicester Police loonies!” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it, does it Mr.Editor?

 Friends in high places? Curious RICH associates and backers, underhand Government assistance? Prime Ministerial blessings, chats and advice? Papal divine intervention, European and world leaders hob-nobs?. It’s all there Mr. Editor. Enough material to sell a billion Sunday journals. So why no interest?

You see, Mr. Editor; I don’t really know what happened in Praia da Luz in May of last year. I don’t know why, how or when. I wasn’t there. Neither were you. We can only listen to those that are either close to, or aligned to, the proceeding in question. It boils down to who and what you want to believe.

I am reminded of Herman Goering. He once stated, “it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy”

How right he was. I realised just how right he was when George Bush convinced the majority of his people that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11, just before he embarked on the massacre of an estimated 600,000 Iraqi men, women and children, just so that Halliburtons could procure the rich oil fields; (FAT lot of good THAT did with the current oil price, but I digress.)

What I particularly, personally,  hate about THAT atrocity, is that the British went ahead and held his hand while he did it. Only at least Blair gave the British people SOME credit. He knew we wouldn’t buy the 9/11 angle, so he made up the WMD’s story, inventing documents, dossiers and ‘intelligence’ as he went along. “Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy”

Charles de Mendez? We would know for sure, exactly what happened to him, poor chap, were we to examine the countless surveillance video of the event. Except, for some reason, we can’t. Because the tape is apparently damaged or lost, or the cameras malfunctioned or were facing the wrong way or were broken or vandalised. Or all of the above.

And of course, when Neil Mackay sensationally reported in 2003 that “senior members” of the Labour Government were being investigated for “paedophilia and the "enjoyment" of child-sex pornography”, as part of the infamous ’Operation Ore’, Tony Blair very quickly and effectively served a D.A. NOTICE on the press and media, banning details of these matters being reported. A ban that still stands today.

A sublime example of how a Government and its press can lie, mislead and fool its people. “Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy”

So, you see, Mr. Editor. You will have to forgive me if I choose not to believe a single word that your paper publishes on the Madeleine McCann case. You will have to excuse me if I do not join in the rejoicing and celebrations when the illustrious couple are exonerated , nor contribute to their inevitable NEW fund to help them “find their daughter”.

Because, although it may be ultimately true that there is insufficient evidence to prove the culpability of the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, there is most definitely AMPLE and OVERWHELMING evidence that the authorities of this country do not wish for the truth to ever come out.

BUT; if there IS a god, and the leaders who presided over this debacle and cover up ever have to stand and atone before him, then rest assured that their minions:- the paltry, gutless, servile cowards who spread their lies and diktats in their respective newspapers, will have to atone also.

That would be YOU, Mr. Editor.

Perhaps you’d care to dwell on that point before you fall asleep tonight.

That, and the image of a precious, angelic and innocent little girl for whom, with your able assistance, Justice was denied.

Godbless, Madeleine. Wherever you may be.

Madeleine McCann and the POWER of the PRESS

I am forever being asked about why Journalists do NOT take a greater interest in the Madeleine McCann case; about why some Media ‘hotshot’ doesn't take up the mantle and pursue the whole case with a thorough tenacity in the hope of unearthing some concrete facts, or "expose the truth".

Or even reporting on those facts and areas where the truth that is known is different to the one being reported and perpetuated in the Media.

As much as I have always lambasted the British Media for their reticence when it comes to certain aspects of the McCann case, (and shall continue to do so), I feel that I should at least offer SOME defence to those many hard-working journalists without whose professionalism and dedication, much of the injustice that goes on in this world would remain hidden.

The answer is surprisingly, and bizarrely, simple. 

Money.

Journalists do NOT, have not and never will, control what gets publicised, printed or broadcast. 

EDITORS and program commissioners do. 

That is, a newspaper editor will work to a certain criteria, invariably advised, or encouraged, by that journals proprietor, and will instruct his hacks to pursue certain stories and look for certain angles relating to that criteria.

Conversely, he may also buy in from a freelancer, if the story meets with that criteria or is along the lines of the story policies of the newspaper in question. 

It is a universally accepted fact of life that most Media is very much driven by the celebrity culture, so stories and pictures of that nature will always take precedence over anything else.

I do not do very much work for newspapers, thankfully; (not least because I can't write copy very well; or indeed write at all, like MOST bloggers!); most of my work having been in the Television Documentary/Current Affairs genre. 

However, I have been commissioned in the past, (along with the company for whom I predominantly work with), to produce investigations for a number of mainly Sunday publications, and occasionally we have also submitted investigations to the mainstream print media where we think them appropriate or suitable for the publication at hand. 

In other words, those outlets that might BUY the story.

I well remember undertaking a long term, intricate, investigation relating to the once renowned owner of a Premier League football club, whose other business interests and projects abroad were questionable, to say the very least.   

We unearthed some fascinating, relevant and pretty sensational material, well researched and well backed up, involving many potential victims, quite a few of whom were British, who stood to lose a lot of money. 

The investigative article was copy written, signed off by the papers’ Lawyers, sealed and delivered, and was due for publication that particular Sunday. 

72 hours before publication, Michael Jackson had the temerity to up and die!!!; meaning that pretty much every newspaper for the subsequent 3 weeks was full of stories relating to very little else.

Although we still received payment, the investigation never DID get fully published, (although some aspects of it were reproduced by Sports columnists).

The bottom line is that, no matter HOW amazing the story; how utterly incredible, mind-blowing or "news-worthy" it may be, like every other commodity in the world, it has to have a market. 

And if editors and commissioners do not want to PAY for the material, (or are advised not to buy in or publish stories of a certain nature), then it never gets to see the light of day.

And even if the market exists, and a story is purchased/commissioned, its publication can very much be dependent on what other ‘newsworthy’ events take place. At the end of the day, there are only so many column inches to fill!

It would also take a very brave editor or commissioner to publicise anything that would derogate the McCanns at the moment. After all, they have all danced to Clarence Mitchell’s tune for some time now; some publications slavishly reproducing Clarence Mitchell's every utterance without even checking or corroborating his assertions with other sources, (as has been exemplified in the INDIAN "sighting" for instance). 

As far as I’M concerned, it would make a very interesting story, examining how or why it was that Clarence Mitchell declared to the British media that they, (Team McCann), were liaising with the Indian authorities and awaiting DNA results from them relating to a GIRL who has been potentially identified as Madeleine McCann in India, before then discounting the whole episode after Kate and Gerry had apparently seen a photograph of the girl in question and had thus concluded that it WASN’T Madeleine after all;  whilst at the same time the INDIAN authorities were completely refuting any claims that such an event occurred at all;- No liaising. No DNA tests. No sighting. No apprehension of individuals. No photograph. No girl!

(Of course, it would be an equally interesting story, to my mind, examining how exactly the McCanns could be so sure they could identify their daughter from a photograph taken 4 years after they had last seen her, but I digress).

But what would such a story prove, anyway? NOTHING; other than that Clarence Mitchell jumped on an, apparently, fabricated bandwagon in order to further the interests and exposure of his clients? 

It wouldn't be the first, second or tenth time............after all, it's what he's paid to do.

Additionally, to make such a story gel anyway, one would have to ask Clarence Mitchell a few rather probing questions. And anyone who has ever had to deal with Clarence knows that Clarence doesn’t DO questions. He only makes statements. And Press releases. Which, infuriatingly, are faithfully reproduced by the British Media, sans question, time and again.

But WHY oh WHY I hear you all ask!?

Well, partly because this isn’t a story, ostensibly, ABOUT a scheming, manipulative, astute, morally devoid PR mogul, or even a story about the vagaries or failings of Madeleines’ parents. 

It’s about a little girl. A cute, sweet, helpless and totally innocent little girl who has been missing for several years now. It is impossible, not to feel a wave of sympathy, heartfelt empathy and pity, especially anyone who has ever been a parent. 

And it is THOSE people to whom the Media pander to and cater for. 

It is patently wrong, erroneously assumed, that the majority of people who know of Madeleine McCann, believe that her PARENTS were somehow complicit in her disappearance. 

Online ‘Polls’ and opinion forums might suggest that most people believe there is more to the Madeleine McCann case than is covered in the newspapers, but that is a FALLACY. 

It IS true that the majority of people who look beyond what the newspapers and TV report, beyond the drivel fed to them by Clarence, which gets duly regurgitated; and actually study the Portuguese Police documents which are available online, or read other intelligible writings on the case in the form of some forums, blogs and publications; THEN begin to formulate different opinions on the matter and start to consider that there may be more to the case than at first seems.

But, sadly, those people are still very much in the MINORITY. 

Everyone knows the name Madeleine McCann, who she is and what purportedly happened to her. VERY FEW people know the names Jane Tanner, David Payne or Rachel Oldfield, much less what parts THEY had to play in the case or what their Police statements contained. 

Because unless they are given reason to question the newspapers or televisions in front of them, they have neither the desire, need nor inclination to know.

Of course, there is also ANOTHER, very good reason why the British Media don’t wish to publish anything that remotely paints the McCanns in anything other than a perfect light.

Actually, it’s approximately a MILLION reasons.

Pounds Sterling! 

For THAT is the sum, duly coughed up by Richard ‘Dirty’ Desmond, proprietor of  the Express Newspapers, to Kate and Gerry McCann and their ‘Tapas’ friends for reproducing material that was originally published in the Portuguese Press, based on apparent leaks from the Policia Judiciaria. 

THAT was deemed, (inexplicably, in many people's opinion), to have been LIBEL, although, bizarrely, the case never went to Court which, had it have done, it would have proved much less expensive for the Newspaper Group where the McCanns would have received only a fraction of what they subsequently did. 

More importantly, the Newspapers’ Lawyers could have fallen back on the age old defence to Libel- that it can not be Defamation when the statements are true, or that the statements made were done so in good faith and belief that they were true; assertions that would have been validated to a certain degree with a cursory study of the Portuguese Police files.

The Express never actually accused the McCanns of anything. They merely reported that the PORTUGUESE were accusing them and actually lambasting the Portuguese in the process, rather than libelling the McCanns and their friends.

For some reason best known to themselves, the McCanns never saw fit to sue the Times, the Telegraph, The Guardian, The Independent or The Observer, as well as all the Mirror, the Sun, The Daily Mail and other newspapers and Journals for publishing exactly the same material!

It would, for instance, be potentially far more remunerative and way more effective had they chosen to sue SKY News, for Martin Brunt’s famous declaration concerning the “100%  DNA match to Madeleine McCann”, as apparently evaluated from samples removed from the McCann’s hire vehicle, where he clearly asserted that such results were indicative of their complicity in their daughters disappearance.

Some newspapers actually published infinitely more sensational material, much of which is STILL available to read online now.  

I have previously written about how Richard Desmond acquired the Newspaper Group in the first place, after making a sizable Labour Party donation, shortly before being deemed by the self same Party to be a “fit and proper person”, in accordance with Newspaper ownership regulations and requirements!

I also wrote about how a cynical old bastard might start thinking that such a Charitable gesture as to donate a Million quid to Team McCann, from a man who made a sizeable chunk of his fortune engaged in Pornography and salacious gossip/celebrity magazines, could be indicative of him returning some kind of ‘favour’ to those in VERY high places who had perhaps furthered his Empire!

Alas, I shall just say that the fact that there are many, many stories STILL available to read in the online editions of virtually every print media publication is very telling; stories which go into great detail about subjects over which the McCanns have thus far spent a fortune in legal fees in trying to suppress!

Sometimes, when I complain to my colleague and close friend; a man whom I regard as one of the very finest Investigative Journalists of the past 20 years, about how clearly there is so much more to the McCann case than now gets published or mentioned, he nods approvingly and in full agreement. Alas he always says the same thing:- 

That he is sure that there IS more to the case; that there is clearly a huge question mark and a certain amount of suspicion over some of the McCanns behaviour and actions, along with those of their friends; that the whole case IS worthy of a sustained, elaborate and highly intensive study and investigation. 

BUT. 

No one wants to pay for that investigation, and as yet, no-one appears interested (or willing),  to pay for the publication of its findings. 

He always adds that if he were a millionaire philanthropist, he’d like nothing more than to dedicate his time and resources to fathoming its secrets. 

Until then, he concludes, he has 2 kids to feed so he produces material for which he knows he will receive payment!

And that is the sentiment echoed by many journalists and producers. A sentiment I saw first hand whilst suffering the ignominy of working on a Flagship documentary program for a mainstream Television broadcaster, who, at the same TIME were also producing a most fawning, sycophantic homage ‘documentary’ to the McCanns.

Of course, a FAR more pertinent question would be, who is dictating the Editorial policy of the mainstream press and broadcasters? 

I have come across murmurings of D-Notices, but I don’t personally believe them. 

I’m pretty sure that there is nothing that has been suppressed, or whose publishing has been negated, on the strength of one of those mysterious decrees that emanate from Downing Street, once in a while. 

That's NOT to say, however, that newspaper and Media coverage of the Madeleine McCann case isn't greatly influenced by certain Mandarins; slavish devotion to Clarence Mitchell and his Press Releases, bizarre 'news' gatherings and conferences rather suggesting that is IS.

I believe, quite simply, (for whatever reason), that at an Editorial level, it has been agreed that until anything of any real consequence, that can be substantiated, comes to light concerning any major discrepancy or deviation from the facts of the case as asserted by the McCanns; then they will desist from producing any accusatory stories and, at the same time, concentrate on pandering to the “flowers and balloons” brigade! 

After all, those newspapers that published extracts from Kate’s book, ‘Madeleine’, saw their sales figures increase! (Although in the case of the EXPRESS, I’m pretty damned sure they didn’t make a return on their £750,000 investment for the serialisation rights! Ah well. Suck it up Desmond. Those favours must be nearly all paid back now!).

It may seem difficult to believe that Newspapers would adopt such a ‘group policy’ but rest assured that it can and DOES happen. 

I well recall the occasion of a very famous and very popular ‘Nice Guy’, footballer who was engaged in an extra-marital affair that was well known about in the offices of every newspaper, and would have provided many, many pages of salubrious gossip, pics and speculation for days had they have published it.

The reason they didn't , is because this footballers SON was very sick with a condition that was thought at the time he might not recover from; and whilst such a heart wrenching fact would ordinarily give greater ‘human interest’ impact and impetus to the story, it was decided that publishing it would put a huge, unfair burden on the footballers WIFE, Mother to the child in question.

Even though years have since passed and  the child actually survived and got better, the story has never been published.

Just one of many true stories that would have made the front pages of EVERY newspaper for a few of days, had not the Editors collectively elected NOT to publish. 

Does that mean that Editors and proprietors have a heart? Not a bit of it! At least, not when it comes to a scoop! But in the instance of the errant footballer, there could have very well been a public backlash along with the huge wave of sympathy for the betrayed wife and Mother of a very sick child that just might have spectacularly backfired in the faces of the Newspaper publishing the story.

Which brings us back to the Madeleine McCann case.

As I write this, there are families in the UK who are planning on undertaking CAMPING trips around Europe in order to try and raise funds for the 'Madeleine fund'. There are children who are doing odd jobs and fundraising, along with contributing their own pocket money on a weekly basis.

Parents and Grandparents, sponsoring ballons, lighting candles, holding fetes, fairs and jumble sales to raise money for their chosen cause; helping to "find" Madeleine.

They subscribe to forums and websites that advocate and  preach divine intervention, spiuritual worship and mystical pratices.

These are decent, respectful and caring individuals who are touched and moved by the story of a missing girl and her, (apparently), heartbroken parents.

These are people who have read Kate’s book, or who have come across any one of a number of ‘Tribute’ websites or Facebook pages, dedicated to “looking for Madeliene”. 

These are people who have read the heart-wrenching words of the tabloid columnists, heard the impassioned pleas of the daytime TV presenters and Breakfast News anchors. They have absolutely NO reason to believe anything other than what they read or hear.

More relevantly, irrespective of whatever else is published relating to Madeleine McCann, they will purely and solely believe their chosen creed, buying into ONLY the scenarios they have adopted.

To illustrate this, a POLL, conducted in America in 2003 concluded that 70% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was complicit in the 9/11 attacks in New York. 

SEVENTY PER-CENT!!! Actually believed that the now deposed and deceased former Iraq leader had direct involvement in the New York atrocities, according to a Poll conducted by the Washington Post!

How can that be?? 

Simple. 

Because President Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, along with OTHER members of that administration suggested such links existed in the Months leading up to the so called; ‘War on Terror’.

And those suggestions were duly replicated with alarming regularity in the American Press.

And those citizens elected to believe them.

In fact, many took great PRIDE in believing them, and still DO, even though, of course, not only is there not a single shred of evidence to suggest that such links ever existed, but that the CIA has since confirmed that such links never DID exist.

Tony Blair, tasked with having to prepare the British to buy into the same war, chose a similar tactic.

Firstly, he presented a DOCUMENT, said to be an intelligence document detailing the Military capabilities of Saddam Hussein and the threats he posed to the West as well as countries in the Middle East.

Even when this document was shown to be a plagiarised academic Thesis from a Californian Historian, people STILL elected to believe its veracity and turned a blind eye when this 12 year old dissertation was used, verbatim, to justify the British Government involvement in the invasion of Iraq.

Along with the other, infamous, ‘dodgy document’ AKA ‘sexed up dossier’, which cited that Hussein not only has Weapons of mass destruction, but that Iraq could launch a chemical or biological attack within 45 minutes. 

Or, at least, that’s what the document stated once Blair/Campbell persuaded his old friend John Scarlett at the Joint Intelligence Committee to make some amendments. (For which Scarlett was subsequently rewarded with a Knighthood by Blair in 2007!!).

But I am digressing again!

The point I am trying to make, is that not only do people BELIEVE what they read, but they also either consciously or SUB- consciously elect to continue BELIEVING in something, even when contradictory evidence to what is being asserted exists.

It SHOULD, (citing the IRAQ War example again), have set off huge alarm bells in the consciousness and consciences of the British people, once it was made public that the so called ‘Military capabilities’ intelligence document  fabricated. 

Even MORE so when Hans Blix, the weapons inspector in Iraq, immediately prior to the invasion, was stating that there didn’t appear to be any weapons to be found.

No matter. Even though there was plenty of evidence, substantiated evidence, to suggest that the Iraq war was all based on a lie, people instead elected to either ignore or dismiss it choosing to believe the headlines of the Tabloids and the bulletins from Sky and the crass, Fox news.

Even, after it became glaringly obvious what the real purpose of the Iraq war was; when the first actions of the invading troops across the border from Kuwait was to secure the OIL pipes; when Oil production and sales from Iraq itself were co-ordinated and controlled by HALLIBURTONS, the American company once chaired by the man who STILL held substantial shares in them.

DICK CHENEY!!

If you ever needed to present as proof, the stupidity, gullibility, disinterest, naivety or indifference to the TRUTH, as exhibited by Nations and their people, then HERE it is:-

That the Vice President of an invading Imperialist Country marches into Iraq, and, using the company that he once LED, (and which he still has links to), secures that Countries’ highly lucrative oil production, whilst telling the world with a straight face, that we were engaged in a WAR on TERROR!. 

(Sentiments echoed by, of course, ‘Nu Labour’).

Impossible to believe that anyone could get away with that?

Well, it is very telling, is it not, that subsequent to these obvious truths and facts, both Bush AND Blair were voted back into power for a further term of office; the people very clearly either choosing to believe the ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ fable, or caring little either way what the REAL truth was.

And if the vast majority of the people are willing to IGNORE, or remain indifferent to, the irrefutable evidence that proves that the loss of an estimated 1 to 1.5 MILLION human lives in Iraq was all built on a LIE...........

.......... then what chance justice for a 3 year old girl who disappeared under circumstances that were very clearly fabricated?

Godbless Madeleine McCann, wherever you may be............

Happy Birthday Madeleine McCann

It remains to be seen whether or not the British Government performs yet another U turn on their decision to fund the Metropolitan Police’s New Scotland Yard “review” of the evidence relating to the case of the missing girl, Madeleine McCann.

David, “call me Dave” Cameron has just announced that he is asking the Met’s finest to “bring their expertise to the case”. Or as Britain’s finest journo’s opine:

”Scotland Yard Hunt’s for Maddie” and

“Yard to try and bring Maddie back”.

As I currently write this, I understand that there are huge reservations and not an inconsiderable amount of discomfort amongst certain Senior Officers about this proposal. Ostensibly, because it means tying up much needed resources and manpower on what is, effectively, a VERY cold case.

I would also suggest that quite a few of those reservations are held by bemused officers who will also be wondering how on earth such a review can possibly take place, given that it is going to require MORE than their “expertise” in negotiating certain ‘aspects’ of the case.

Aspects that have categorically NO place in Team McCann’s agenda.

Aspects that unequivocally NEVER get mentioned in the British Press, nor are ever uttered from the mouths of its senior Media figures.

Aspects that have no place in the sentiments or thoughts of the wealthy business figures who have bankrolled many of the McCanns exploits and sojourns around the world in their quest to “find” Madeleine.

Aspects that have probably never even crossed the sycophantic leanings of the innumerable celebrities, pop stars, writers, TV presenters and public figures who have tied their ribbon on the Madeleine McCann cause.

Those aspects being the Portuguese aspects.

For, if there IS to be a review, then it cannot possibly take place without incorporating the Portuguese Police findings.

And as much as Team McCann and the British Press, (and clearly to a degree, the British AUTHORITIES), like to assert that the Portuguese closed the case by concluding that the McCanns, (along with Robert Murat), were CLEARED of any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a thorough scrutiny of that final report reveals a rather different picture.

For the report clearly notes a number of issues which are worthy of mention and indeed, further evaluation. In fact, as I have pointed out previously, I often wonder if in fact, whether the Press or the Authorities have actually read the report at all, or have in fact read a DIFFERENT report.

From day one, this whole case has been beset with innuendo, supposition, conjecture, opinion, and theory, some of which is definitely conspiratorial. But the Police, IF they carry out a review, are going to have to address and explain away some FACTS that the McCanns and their supporters are going to find rather unpalatable.

Like the FACT that the ONLY, tangible evidence that Madeleine McCann was ever abducted originates from Jane Tanner.

And if they are going to try and validate and support Ms. Tanner as a credible witness, then they are going to have to try and explain not only WHICH of the MANY differing eyewitness accounts she and Team McCann assert to be genuine ARE, in fact, genuine:- (egg man, bundle man, spotty man, Robert Murat, hippy-man, paedo-man, FEMALE-man, god-knows –who- else –man), but also explain why ALL of the others are NOT.

More importantly, (and I don’t profess to be a Scotland Yard ‘expert’), but if one is to conclude that Tanner is LYING, (and she clearly is unless she wishes to insist that ALL of her estimated 9 or 10 different descriptions are correct); then one would have to conclude that the evidence for an abduction is, NONE.

A Scotland Yard man of merit would then have to further read the report, together with all the Portuguese reports, statements, documents and contemporaneous notes. And he would have to explain away the clear “inconsistencies” in the witness statements made by the McCanns and their Tapas friends, as clearly pointed out in the report that Team McCann asserts to be the one that puts them in the clear. Inconsistencies surrounding their movements, their observations, their positions at any given time, what they witnessed, what they saw.

In order to clear this inextricable confusion and mess up, perhaps the Yard’s “expertise” can coerce the McCanns and their friends to undertake the essential reconstruction that the Portuguese could NOT persuade them to take.

Another ASPECT that the Yard are going to have to contend with are the use of Enhanced Victim Recovery Dogs. Eddie & Keela’s findings in the McCann apartment and their vehicle and on many of the personal possessions of the McCanns are well documented.

It is a very simple matter for Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns to glibly refute their findings, explaining away their “unreliability” and inadmissibility as evidence by pointing to a case in the United States where such evidence was successfully challenged by a top US Lawyer.

Bit tricky to do the same thing when such dogs have made well documented, irrefutably PROVEN contributions to many Scotland Yard cases, not to mention hundreds of OTHER Constabularies all over the UK and elsewhere Worldwide.

Best NOT ask the dogs, eh Gerry?

Equally, perhaps the Yard can procure those DNA samples that were initially reported as being a “match” to Madeleine McCann, and explain why eventually, the FSS at Birmingham, (a department now facing closure) and who have for many years been Universally acknowledged as being “the BEST in the world”, eventually decided, (after much delay and confusion), that the material in fact, was “not identified to pertaining to anyone specific”.

Perhaps the man at the Yard can exercise his expertise and cast some light on that blue holdall that Martin Brunt NEVER mentions anymore.

No! I jest a little.

What I REALLY want the Met’s finest to do is ask Kate McCann exactly WHAT it was that was shown to Kate at her interview. As the final report clearly states:

“Kate Healy was not immediately made an arguida, but merely interviewed voluntarily as a witness. Only after her interview was she made an arguida, that is, after she was confronted with concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination”

 “...concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination” ???

Concrete FACTS, Kate? Gerry? Mr. Mitchell? It can’t be brushed off as “scurrilous, unhelpful speculation” by those bungling Porto Plod. It’s right there. In black and white. In the report.

The report that Team McCann so vehemently wave in the faces of anyone who dares to doubt their version of events. You can’t pick and choose the good bits, Clarence, and dismiss the rest as hogwash.

I don’t personally care about the McCanns. I honestly don’t know what they did or didn’t do. In the great scope of things, it matters little.

I don’t even admonish or criticise them for systematically leaving their children unattended, an act that would obviously contribute to Madeleine’s disappearance, were an abduction genuine.

Why not? Because I believe that the fact that their children were alone has absolutely NOTHING to do with Madeleine being missing.

I’d so love for Madeleine McCann to walk home tomorrow; to confound the world and be found, safe and well. But that can’t surely happen. Because if we have to hold on to some vestige of common sense and sanity in this case, then we have to accept the findings of those dogs, no matter what Kate says. (Actually, Kate you’re right. The dogs DID want to please their handler, Martin Grime. Pleasing him is exactly the premise on which they function. For which they get a reward and a pat on the head. Pleasing their handler is ALL they know. That, and the scent of cadaverine or blood).

We HAVE to give serious consideration to the truth that Madeleine died in Portugal, four summers ago. We have to do so, because the Portuguese investigated and believe so. It’s clearly documented in their reports, even if that ‘final report’ doesn’t quite specify so, but merely proffers it.

Only the British Media refer to the Policia Judiciaria as “bungling”, “inept”, “Porto plod” and “sardine munchers”. Prior to this case they were considered globally, rather like our OWN finest Police Force, as being amongst the best in the world.

We also have to consider it so because it has been documented that Leicestershire Police ALSO advised of their belief that Madeleine died in Portugal.

I haven’t yet seen any tabloid headlines calling THEM useless. Not yet, anyway.

Kate’s book will, without a doubt, throw up HUNDREDS of yet MORE inconsistencies and contradictions. Not contradicting the Portuguese Police or other observers, but contradicting herself. When you tell so many untruths, it’s so hard to remember what you said in the first place.

Of course, it’s entirely possible that this “review” will never take place at all. At least, not in the form that it should.

Because now, I believe the case of Madeleine McCann to be at a most crucial crossroads. I believe that the outcome of this “review”will either decide that a historically unprecedented number of people are going to be subjected to some accusatory probing and be eternally embarrassed, including at least ONE ex- Prime Minister, by virtue of the Yard finding that the McCanns DO have something to hide, as purported by the Portuguese; OR.

OR.

The Government cut the Portuguese out of the “review” all together, meaning that the Britain’s finest Police Force will have to find in accordance with what they believe themselves. Or, rather, what they are told to believe.

And this case will continue to be a tragedy for us, one and all.

Happy Birthday, Madeleine, wherever you may be.

NO Truth of the Lie in the UK.... by Spudgun

Goncalo Amaral has announced that he intends to market his book, on which the Lisbon Courts lifted a BAN recently, in the UK.

His book, ‘"Maddie - A Verdade da Mentira" - 'The Truth of the Lie", is an account of the investigation over which he presided, in the hunt for the missing girl, Madeleine McCann.

Despite the books obvious popularity, especially in Mr. Amaral’s home Country PORTUGAL,( as well as many other Countries), after a successful, contrived Court action by the McCanns, it was eventually banned in September 2009.

I, (along with many others, I am sure), wish Mr. Amaral all the luck in the world.

Sadly, however, he is going to NEED it........................

For I truly believe that this book, along with copies of the DVD Documentary which was based on the book, will NOT see the light of day here in the UK.

For if they DID, they would produce a rather unique and untenable set of circumstances, for publishers, the MEDIA, for the very laws of Libel and for the ESTABLISHMENT itself that has resolutely thus far sought to protect the McCanns at every turn.

For if we cast our minds back to MARCH of 2008, we find that the EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS dared to repeat what Goncola Amaral and the Portuguese Media had suggested: That Kate & Gerry McCann were involved in the disappearance of their daughter.

For daring to do so, it cost them £550,000 paid to the McCanns in an “out of Court settlement”(not to mention Court costs which would have been at LEAST equal to this amount).

They THEN paid a further £375,000 to the ‘Tapas 7’ for repeating SIMILAR allegations, which in turn they nicely ALSO donated to the McCanns. (SORRY, the “Find Madeleine” fund).

For those who do not KNOW anything about the owner of the Express newspaper group, they may perhaps suspect nothing untoward in this apparent climb down and substantial payment by the Newspapers the ‘Daily Express’, ‘Sunday Express’, ‘Daily Star’ and ‘Sunday Star’.

For those who DO know "Dirty Des", however, this course of action simply beggared belief!

I have never met Express Newspapers Proprietor, Richard Desmond. I know many that have and feel confident I know SOME things about him.

I know that he is extremely forthright and has a notorious temper.

His well known ‘party piece’ is an impersonation of Adolf Hitler singing a chorus of "Deutschland über Alles"

He is alleged to have once locked a senior Executive in a cupboard. He denies throwing a chair at the head of one of his own senior executives but admits, "I pushed the chair."

He also denies that he once ordered an executive to stand on the boardroom table, pull his trousers down and call himself a "cunt" because he was late for a meeting.

There are certainly many who have had dealings with him, who attest to having been on the receiving end of just that foulest of expletives.

He has accumulated quite a wealth, partly due to his publication of soft-Porn titles, starting with Penthouse. It was the beginning of a magazine empire that went on to include such salacious names as Asian Babes, Readers' Wives and Big Ones to name but a few.

Although he has since SOLD these titles, he still runs his own soft-core Pornography channel on Satellite/Cable TV, as well as now owning the ‘Channel 5’ TV channel.

He greatly enjoys his reputation of being a man who takes no prisoners, of behaving like an underworld gangster.

According to ‘Private Eye’, just within this past week, in a meeting with executives with ‘Endemol’, designed to negotiate a deal to screen the now defunct ‘Big Brother’ Reality show, he offered them a “pittance” for permission to screen it on Channel 5.

He violently smashed his glass down on the table and called them “Fucking Wankers” when they refused his offer. (Funnily enough, exactly the same terms he used on Executives when trying to negotiate a purchase of the ‘Telegraph’ newspaper some years ago).

As the Eye pointed out, he notoriously exhibits “tight-fistedness” and “foul-mouthed thuggery”.

You get the picture?

Now try and align these traits and characteristics with someone who, without a single Court appearance, threw up his hands, took out his wallet and coughed up well over a MILLION Sterling for doing no more, (and in some cases, much LESS), than what many other Newspapers, magazines and media outlets had ALSO already done, which was to merely report on the allegations that were emanating out of Portugal.

I once commented, ACCURATELY I surmised, (although perhaps tastelessly), that the only way Richard Desmond would willingly part with money to the McCanns was if he were successful in persuading KATE to appear nude in one of his less than salubrious magazines!.

How can it possibly BE, that this fearless GIANT of the Media World, a man who by his own admission likes to challenge the very borders of “acceptability”, not only parted with what was for HIM, an unprecedented amount of money, but also published FRONT PAGE APOLOGIES on all publications, a move described by the Media commentator Roy Greenslade as "unprecedented".

("I think this is an amazing stand-down, a U-turn, by the Express newspapers,") he said.)??

Like so much with the case of Madeleine McCann, perhaps we shall never know. I am certainly in no position to suggest the reasons, and like so much with anything to do with the McCanns and their missing daughter, hard EVIDENCE is a bit thin on the ground.

But there ARE a few pointers, and a few issues which bother me.

When Desmond first announced his intention to acquire the Express Newspapers group, he was ridiculed and lambasted from all sides, his critics asserting that he would never pass a “fit and proper person” test to make such an acquisition.

According to the ‘INDEPENDENT’ (amongst other newspapers), in 2000, within “minutes” of walking into the Express headquarters, Desmond received a call inviting him for a chat with Tony Blair.

Mr. Blair's Labour critics believed and commented that the meeting produced a promise that the Government would not block the acquisition.

Sure enough, in February 2001, the then trade and industry secretary, Stephen Byers, announced that he would not block the Desmond deal.

Richard Desmond promptly gave the Labour Party a £100,000 donation.

Perhaps more importantly for New Labour, Desmond, (an obviously blatant Capitalist), suddenly declared himself a ‘Socialist’, and faithfully printed Blair and Brown propaganda in his newspapers.

I guess that’s the way business and politics work.

But it has always confounded and perplexed me as to WHY, the most resilient, independent, vociferous, FEARLESS publisher, a man who has frequently been referred to as an ‘OUTSIDER’ and as a man who apparently cows down to NO-ONE, should so quietly, almost reverently, bow down under very little, if ANY tangible pressure.

For example, when Desmond was seeking to acquire a LONDON Evening Newspaper, he announced that he would call it the ‘Evening Mail’. This was a big JOKE, on Desmond’s part.

He famously LOATHES the Daily newspaper the Daily Mail, and his declaration of the intended title was merely a prank, a 'wind-up', purely designed to irritate the Daily Mail group.

It worked spectacularly. It was inevitable that Associated Newspapers, owners of the Daily Mail, would object to such a flagrant misappropriation of their trade name.

They issued a writ and TOOK DESMOND TO COURT to prevent him from using that name.

Even though it was a Joke, and no such title, (or indeed nightly NEWSPAPER), would ever have existed, Desmond went to Court and FOUGHT the case!!.

He lost, but thought the case worth it, if only to cause angst and grief for his enemies.

Because that’s exactly the kind of guy he is.

In its front page apologies to the McCanns, the Express Newspapers wrote:-

"A number of articles in the newspaper have suggested that the couple caused the death of their missing daughter Madeleine and then covered it up. We acknowledge that there is no evidence whatsoever to support this theory and that Kate and Gerry are completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance."

About as Clarence Mitchell-esque as one could get. (No doubt Clarenece got to actually write it himself).

But as I pointed out in a previous Blogging, the basic, fool-proof, cast-iron defence in a Libel or other Defamation case, is where the assertions being made are TRUE.

And if the UK is to allow the publication of Goncalo’s book, based on the LISBON Court findings who,( as well as re-establishing Amaral’s right to freedom of speech), declared that as the book was based on Police records, it was essentially a TRUE account!!; then where does that leave Richard Desmond?

Surely, if Amaral’s book can be deemed to be an accurate and TRUE account, then not only is Desmond free to RE-PUBLISH his assertions and accusations relating to the McCanns, copied from the Portuguese Press, but he could technically SUE the McCanns and the Tapas group for his MONEY BACK, based on them PERJURING themselves, could he not?

After all, the News of the World are clearly rubbing their hands in expectation over Tommy Sherridan and his wife, who have GONE ON TRIAL over allegations that they LIED in their £200,000 LIBEL Victory over the Newspaper a few years ago.

However, as much as I would relish such a prospect as seeing Clarence Mitchell make pleading noises with the public for donations to help out Kate and Gerry in their legal plight, it’s never going to happen.


Because underneath all this murky subterfuge, staged propaganda and fabricated garbage put out by the so called ‘Media’, lays an unknown secret.

Or perhaps SEVERAL secrets.........

As I have been wont to say on many occasions, we may NEVER know what happened in Praia de Luz in May 2007.

But what we DO know, surely without question, is that since that fateful night when a little girl was reported missing, Madeleine McCanns parents, (who were subsequently made criminal SUSPECTS in the case), have enjoyed privileges, freedoms, rights, advantages, treatments and PROTECTIONS afforded by the British Authorities, its POLICE, its Celebrity Culture, its Press and Media and, most tellingly, its Politicians and GOVERNMENT.

And to completely usurp that state of affairs with the TRUTH, just because of a decision made by those “bungling Porto Judges” in Lisbon, would be a truth too far. Perhaps for too many people.

I’m sure that Richard Desmond is cursing the McCanns as ‘C***s’, (under his breath of course), as I write.........................