POLICE have finally admitted Madeleine McCann was abducted four years ago.

Are there really people out there who actually believe this garbage solely because it was "in the paper".....and the Daily Star at that????

The Leveson inquiry should add this fabrication to the agenda.

interested wrote:
The Leveson inquiry should add this fabrication to the agenda.

Now that would be ironic - Leveson himself used the "A" word as if it were fact. Truly appalling behaviour by a prominent member of the Judiciary. I bet Gerald had a good smirk about that in private.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:Just told hubby about this, he has just said is the Daily Star is taking the p*** hoping to get some sort of reaction out of Scot Yard, they're stiring the pot!!!iho

my hubby has just said the same more or less earlier but his words were too oh give it a rest too

The Cops have no evidence of an Abduction.That is a fact.The daily star will have you believe the moon is made of cheese if it sells a few more papers.

It's always about the bloody parents isn't it? Never about Madeleine.

Not Madeleine.

Not the Twins.

Who raises them?

If the "Police" really had this evidence, why didn't they hand it over to the GOVERNMENT, after all they (we!) are the ones that are bloody well paying for it. I want to see it if my taxes are paying for it! Why should the Daily Star get it, to make money out of, when we have paid for it???!!!

That's of course, if there IS any new "evidence", which I do not believe for one nanosecond. Didn't the Daily Star also claim that Elvis' Cadillac was on the Moon?

mariang wrote:Having met briefly and spoken to a reporter from the uk press (quite by chance) the above reporting is not what they all share as the truth...

Come on, you're anonymous, they're anonymous. Spill!

I would love to corner one to get the inside scoop.

There should be a 'what journalists really think' blog, with the inside scoop on what is really going on behind the news.
There are all these dodgy dealings, such a blog would make a fortune from advertising!

Loopdaloop what a great idea. I remember several people on the old Mirror forum who said they knew of journalists (well, people who write for newspapers) who were not buying the official line and were just waiting for their chance to tell the real story. I still believe that one of these days, if I live long enough, we will get to read "what journalists really think".

I have to say I was a tad drunk at the time (and no, I hadnt left 3 children in bed on their own!)..... however once I did hear what his job was......I barraged him with questions re. the madeleine case and his views (much to the groan from my friends)....I started with the 'hacking' case and progressed to the Mccanns and finally dunblane - even gordon brown!He smiled a lot and nodded a lot... I did ask when he thought the papers will start printing the truth...his reply was 'we all have to follow the same broadsheet'- i take this as having to write what they are told to write.....
However, this particular man has not done any pieces on Madeleine and no, he doesnt work for the star newspaper.. not one of the daily rags either!
Poor guy was on holiday here, and was subjected to my questions lol!

Surely SY must see this sort of sh*** written in the papers and ask :
1) Who is responsible for this misinformation ?
2) Why are they deliberately trying to mislead the public ?

duncanmac wrote:Surely SY must see this sort of sh*** written in the papers and ask :
1) Who is responsible for this misinformation ?
2) Why are they deliberately trying to mislead the public ?

We can only hope so duncanmac. This story is just as stupid as the Daily Stars garbage about paedophiles targeting the McCanns' appartment with signs on the wall. (what a classic that was - NOT)

Yes that story was a real cracker - here's a link for anyone who missed it.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/201447/Cops-crack-Madeleine-McCann-codes/

Poor old Antonella in The Sun must have been green with envy that she didn't come up with this first.

Ah well, the way all these daft stories are being recycled, she's bound to come up with it eventually!

It used to be that scandalous stories about those in the public eye were kept out of the mass media. Being connected to someone who was involved in the entertainment industry in the 80s, I know that there was stuff that was known about, but the lawyers wouldn't allow the press to print it, due to the fear of expensive libel suits. People may know the facts, but the general public aren't supposed to know. Our libel laws are bound up with public reputation, and who has the means to fund litigation. It was then, and it is now. The difference is that it used to be about the law, and a judiciary that was separate from state. Now politicians are trying to shape the media, because they are so untrustworthy themselves, and don't want their comfortable lifestyles to be affected. In the past the press wouldn't print a story due to fear of litigation - now they won't print a story due to fear of political involvement, and governments are using public disgust about mass media transgressions as an excuse to impose their own values on the means of spreading information.