Missing Madeleine
Come join us...there's more inside you cannot see as a guest!

IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

View previous topic View next topic Go down

IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  frencheuropean on Sat 16 Mar - 18:54

EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

By Dr Martin Roberts
15 March 2013


IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

The other evening, while watching TV, my daughter, who is fast approaching the age at which I first met her mother, unwittingly struck a pose that reminded me of that much earlier, pre-nuptial encounter. In the intervening period Miss R. has, from time to time, been described as sharing a resemblance with one or other of her several aunts (all on her mother's side) but not, at least as far as I can recall, with her elder brother (well they're boy and girl, right?).

So much for our family history which, strange to relate, is not uniquely reminiscent of our family history.

Toward the end of the film 'Madeleine Was Here' (from the 40' mark), the McCanns are pictured being entertained at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Washington, where founder and President Ernie Allen, describing the centre’s purpose and imaging techniques, alludes to genetic considerations in the reconstruction of photographs. He draws attention to those specific facial characteristics of Madeleine McCann that were taken into account in the process of rendering her infant image into that of a six-year-old. Most of the traits (e.g., jaw-line, mouth and dimples) originate with her mother. But she has 'Gerry's nose.'

NCMEC generated, as we know, a variety of photographic templates, including one distinctly darker in both skin tone and hair colour, and with striking green eyes. They were generally considered a good stab at what would have been Madeleine's altered facial appearance. Nowadays of course Madeleine is nearer ten. Children can change dramatically in so little time that a more up-to-date impression of the missing youngster, as produced by Scotland Yard, was no doubt not only welcomed by the family but approved by them as, by all accounts, the Met. liaised with them over its production at the time, and Kate at least was prepared for her satisfaction with the image to be made public. As The Guardian (25.4.2012) explained:

'Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, worked closely with the Met to produce the new image of their daughter.'

'"Kate says she can see Madeleine's brother and sister Sean and Amelie in it as well as something of herself," said the family's spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.'

Well now. I look at my daughter and see echoes, primarily of her mother. (For the record, the balance of resemblance between my son and myself is greater, although he also bears some facial hallmarks that are his mother's). Kate McCann looks at a contrived photographic likeness of her daughter and sees something of herself, plus something of each of her other two children – Madeleine's brother and sister. But nothing of Gerry. Not even his nose (you know, the one she'd previously been told about by Ernie Allen).

Still, never mind Daddy's nose. Daddy still knows best.

'Daddy, what's the difference between a grass snake and a snake in the grass?'

'You'll discover that when it bites you, son.'

According to today's redtops:

A "historic opportunity" for press reform could be "squandered" following the end of cross-party talks into regulation, the father of missing Madeleine McCann said.

Gerry McCann said David Cameron was faced with a "binary choice" between newspaper barons or the victims of press intrusion.

Apparently the Prime Minister intends to 'bring the matter to a head by forcing a vote in the House of Commons on Monday,' a move which has 'prompted campaigners to accuse Mr Cameron of a "shameless betrayal of victims of press abuse."'

For Gerry McCann the recommendations of Lord Justice Leveson didn't go far enough. Nevertheless, he and other victims of gross press misconduct were 'prepared to regard them as the minimum acceptable compromise.'

"We want our politicians to protect us (he wails), to stand up for the ordinary victims instead of siding with the wealthy and powerful. On Monday, it comes down to a binary choice: the newspaper barons or the people they abused in search of profit."

Here we have the celebrated father (correction: father of a much talked about child) advising the citizenry at large, including the Prime Minister, exactly how the latter should proceed. (Thank you Mr McCann. Next).

Rather more interestingly his monologue identifies a series of what, for him and no doubt others of his campaigning associates, are reprehensible behaviours:

Squandering an opportunity. The shameless betrayal of victims. Siding with the wealthy and powerful. The abuse of people in search of profit.

There seems to be more than a modest projection of self involved here. Just what class of snake might we be looking at?

As we are reminded, 'when the Leveson report was published in November, Mr McCann said if its recommendations on press regulation were not implemented, giving evidence to the inquiry would have been "almost useless."'

Almost, but not quite. Which begs the question of what useful purpose was fulfilled? The chance to lie under oath was not it exactly, although it doubtless contributed to the overall result. It was certainly not an opportunity squandered.

For politicians to "do the right thing" according to Mr McCann, whose authority stems from nothing but being the unapologetically negligent parent of a missing child, who courted the press in the first instance and whose mobile 'phone was not 'hacked' (unless it was an overly inquisitive 'journo' who deleted a clutch of McCanns' stored messages in error) they should accept in full the suggestions for a new regulatory system.

Mick Philpott probably feels the same way, except no-one's bothered to ask him. Perhaps because he has not personally experienced the effects of siding with the wealthy and powerful (like Tony and Gordon, for instance). Should the Philpotts be found guilty of the crime with which they are charged then the world will doubtless view this as a shameless betrayal of the victims. They are not unique in that. Nor in the abuse of people in search of profit; a bigger house in their case. But what do you do if you're living in a big house already? Turn to politicians for protection (again), I suppose.

Meanwhile Mr McCann's equally unapologetic wife has said she 'hoped it (the Leveson Inquiry) would mark the start of a new era for the press, urging Mr Cameron to "embrace the report and act swiftly".' (Edited to add, 'in case that other f***ing Portuguese tosser succeeds in getting us inside a courtroom').

A recent comment on Twitter points up the issue of concern:

The Sun reporter @sunnewsreporter
@glitter_brain just because something is in a police file does not allow us to use it without fear of being sued, unlike things said in court.

Where are those politicians when you really need them? Just like the Banks – offer you an umbrella while the sun's shining – take it back inside when it rains.







frencheuropean
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Number of posts : 1187
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2009-11-02

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  frencheuropean on Sat 16 Mar - 19:26

I didn't know what a "beholder" was. I found the explanation in wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beholder

frencheuropean
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Number of posts : 1187
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2009-11-02

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  interested on Sat 16 Mar - 19:36

frencheuropean wrote: I didn't know what a "beholder" was. I found the explanation in wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beholder


Ha, Ha, Good One "frencheuropean" - LOL!!

interested
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Number of posts : 2428
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2011-10-22

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  Panda on Sat 16 Mar - 20:27

Well done frenchperson, I was just thinking "beholder" as someone who sees something .

Panda
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Female
Number of posts : 30555
Age : 59
Location : Wales
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2010-03-27

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  Not Born Yesterday on Sat 16 Mar - 20:46

I would have thought that Dr Roberts just meant as in the expression beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/beauty+is+in+the+eye+of+the+beholder.html

Not Born Yesterday
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Female
Number of posts : 6697
Age : 103
Location : Over the hills and far away
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2011-10-09

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  matthew on Sat 16 Mar - 20:55

Excellent
..the sun reports of 6-8 british cleaners(minus D Webster?)...(im sure this is a shot across the bows)Gerry's appearance y'day was a little out of character..the smugness was evidently gone & was replaced with a more serious look & tone to that wailing,whiny voice he posseses

The tweeter does show us how very very important it is to the McCanns that the last place they want to be...if the choice is left in their hands...is a court of law,then it becomes ..open season,anything goes...unless Levesson's min requirements can be upheld


matthew
Golden Poster
Golden Poster

Male
Number of posts : 967
Age : 44
Location : holywell
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2011-03-10

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  T4two on Sat 16 Mar - 20:58

Dr Roberts is patently angry, or rather, still angry; perhaps even angrier than he was when he wrote the article before this one. The source of Dr Robert's anger is one Dr Gerald McCann and to a lesser extent, Mrs McCann, a pair of nondescript doctors lovingly referred to by the UK media as Kate and Gerry. These people are famous notorious for having taken 3 infants on holiday and come home with just two - having 'lost' their eldest child ostensibly whilst out boozing with their equally obnoxious friends. I hope that Dr Roberts is not the only one angered by McCann's latest performances as a hacked off media 'victim' who wasn't even hacked - I hope that there are hundredsthousands who are equally pi**ed off; no - I hope there are millions. Roll on the court hearing with Dr Amaral - he's the only one who can put a stop to this farce in the foreseeable future.

T4two
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Male
Number of posts : 1689
Age : 68
Location : Germany/England
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2009-09-14

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  Panda on Sat 16 Mar - 21:14

'Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, worked closely with the Met to produce the new image of their daughter.'

'"Kate says she can see Madeleine's brother and sister Sean and Amelie in it as well as something of herself," said the family's spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.
NBY I think Dr Martin is referring to what Kate beheld.....note she didn't behold Gerry in the new image.

Panda
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Female
Number of posts : 30555
Age : 59
Location : Wales
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2010-03-27

Back to top Go down

IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

Post  winjoy on Sat 16 Mar - 23:07

Panda wrote:'Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, worked closely with the Met to produce the new image of their daughter.'

'"Kate says she can see Madeleine's brother and sister Sean and Amelie in it as well as something of herself," said the family's spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.
NBY I think Dr Martin is referring to what Kate beheld.....note she didn't behold Gerry in the new image.

Panda, KM thinks herself so beautiful (and important, and a mega celebrity) that she wouldn't be able to recognise that her daughter had her husband's nose which, as Dr. Robert's said, sadly detracted from the child's beauty.

winjoy
Rookie
Rookie

Female
Number of posts : 130
Location : The Garden of England
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2013-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  Panda on Sun 17 Mar - 4:41

winjoy wrote:
Panda wrote:'Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, worked closely with the Met to produce the new image of their daughter.'

'"Kate says she can see Madeleine's brother and sister Sean and Amelie in it as well as something of herself," said the family's spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.
NBY I think Dr Martin is referring to what Kate beheld.....note she didn't behold Gerry in the new image.

Panda, KM thinks herself so beautiful (and important, and a mega celebrity) that she wouldn't be able to recognise that her daughter had her husband's nose which, as Dr. Robert's said, sadly detracted from the child's beauty.
Hi winjoy, I don't remember seeing many photos of Amelie , as long as she hasn't inherited her Dad's voice , she can always have a nose job later on.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, who is the fairest of us all , I'll give you a clue, my name begins with K.

Panda
Platinum Poster
Platinum Poster

Female
Number of posts : 30555
Age : 59
Location : Wales
Warning :
0 / 1000 / 100

Registration date : 2010-03-27

Back to top Go down

Re: IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER by Dr Martin Roberts-15/03/2013

Post  Sponsored content Today at 20:02


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum