Daily Star Editor 'sorry' for McCann distress - BBC News

So if the British press were being fed stories from the Portuguese police, why hasn't anyone looked Into it, properly, after all, it was still under the Portuguese secrecy act....



Was their a bent police officer or....

good afternoon,
i watched that interview,
yes he did aplolgise....very tongue in cheek!
especially when he pointed out that the mccanns waited 4 months to kick up a fuss.
that it was only lawyers poking their noses in that prompted them to sue!

When they started mentioning dead bodies and cadaver scent THATS when they sued.

So, come the denouement, will they have to pay back every penny obtained in damages?

what a grand thought tein!

WHERE'S THE GRUESOME TWOSOME'S PINK PIMPING PR PIMP - CLARENCE MITCHELL?

Surely he is of the utmost relevance where the McCanns and the Press (and I'll bet the UK police) are concerned. This man is responsible for feeding the UK media a mountain of McCann stories, and they regularly obliged him word for word.

My guess is a lot of important people don't want him at the Leveson Inquiry answering any questions, because he was the sleazy main instigator, and was (and still is) working for the Government.

according to the report in the telegraph
quote: We stood up and said 'Yes, we got it wrong, there's the money for the marketing fund, let's try and find Madeleine McCann, the poor little girl, let's put it on the front page and apologise properly'."

so according to Desmond he KNEW it wasn't a charity, it was a marketing fund, presumably all the other newspapers were aware it wasn't a charity so why the devil do they always say it is a charity

The End Is Nigh wrote:So, come the denouement, will they have to pay back every penny obtained in damages?

Yes, I would have thought so, TEIN. And that knock on the door could come tomorrow, next week or in 18 years time. Some of those responsible for the death of Stephen Lawrence are now in the nick. Those responsible for the disappearance of Madeleine McCann's corpse should not be resting on their laurels...

pennylane wrote:WHERE'S THE GRUESOME TWOSOME'S PINK PIMPING PR PIMP - CLARENCE MITCHELL?

Surely he is of the utmost relevance where the McCanns and the Press (and I'll bet the UK police) are concerned. This man is responsible for feeding the UK media a mountain of McCann stories, and they regularly obliged him word for word.

My guess is a lot of important people don't want him at the Leveson Inquiry answering any questions, because he was the sleazy main instigator, and was (and still is) working for the Government.

He was on Channel 4 news tonight talking about the enquiry and defending the McCanns decision not to sue The Daily Star for 4 months.

http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/120112/clipid/120112_LEVESON_12

LJC wrote:

pennylane wrote:WHERE'S THE GRUESOME TWOSOME'S PINK PIMPING PR PIMP - CLARENCE MITCHELL?

Surely he is of the utmost relevance where the McCanns and the Press (and I'll bet the UK police) are concerned. This man is responsible for feeding the UK media a mountain of McCann stories, and they regularly obliged him word for word.

My guess is a lot of important people don't want him at the Leveson Inquiry answering any questions, because he was the sleazy main instigator, and was (and still is) working for the Government.

He was on channel 4 news tonight talking about the enquiry and defending the McCanns decision not to sue The Daily Star for 4 months.

http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/display/playlistref/120112/clipid/120112_LEVESON_12

OMG.... speak of the devil.... yuk!

I missed this interview tonight on channel 4 news, so thank you very much LJC x

I noticed Channel 4 news conveniently missed out the part from the Leveson inquiry where Desmond said that the Portuguese police believed Madeleine died in the apartment and did not believe the McCanns story, and that's where the press got their information, and he added that a lot of people in the UK were sceptical of the McCanns, from the many conversations he'd had in pubs (or words to that effect), and he compared it with many peoples disbelief that Princess Diana's death was an accident...

So once again... a very selectively cut excerpt!

That's no problem. I had to smile though when Clarrie said the reason they did not take legal action for 4 months was because they were too busy looking for Madeleine. Everybody associated with this family love to use the word looking. He could have said they were too busy dealing with matters to do with Madeleine, which I can imagine they were actually, although surely all lawyers need is the green light and they do the donkey work. Surely there is never a good time to do anything when your daughter is missing. Surely if newspapers are printing lies about you, you would take action as soon as possible.

Clarrie also said they were trying to keep the media onside because the media are helpful in the search but that eventually enough was enough and they had to take action. Isn't that a contradiction to what he said about them being too busy because they were looking?

I think actually the latter explanation is the most truthful. They were loathe to fall out with the papers in the beginning and decided to tough it out, until they snapped over it.

LJC wrote:That's no problem. I had to smile though when Clarrie said the reason they did not take legal action for 4 months was because they were too busy looking for Madeleine. Everybody associated with this family love to use the word looking. He could have said they were too busy dealing with matters to do with Madeleine, which I can imagine they were actually, although surely all lawyers need is the green light and they do the donkey work. Surely there is never a good time to do anything when your daughter is missing. Surely if newspapers are printing lies about you, you would take action as soon as possible.

Clarrie also said they were trying to keep the media onside because the media are helpful in the search but that eventually enough was enough and they had to take action. Isn't that a contradiction to what he said about them being too busy because they were looking?

I think actually the latter explanation is the most truthful. They were loathe to fall out with the papers in the beginning and decided to tough it out, until they snapped over it.

Well they were either too busy looking or they weren't! Surely by that logic, they should have no time to sue anyone, as she is still missing! Why did they suddenly become NOT too busy to search four months later? It makes no sense as an explanation. There should have been no change in their busy-ness!!!! Child is still missing but they're not busy looking anymore??? Idiot.

LJC wrote:That's no problem. I had to smile though when Clarrie said the reason they did not take legal action for 4 months was because they were too busy looking for Madeleine. Everybody associated with this family love to use the word looking. He could have said they were too busy dealing with matters to do with Madeleine, which I can imagine they were actually, although surely all lawyers need is the green light and they do the donkey work. Surely there is never a good time to do anything when your daughter is missing. Surely if newspapers are printing lies about you, you would take action as soon as possible.

Clarrie also said they were trying to keep the media onside because the media are helpful in the search but that eventually enough was enough and they had to take action. Isn't that a contradiction to what he said about them being too busy because they were looking?

I think actually the latter explanation is the most truthful. They were loathe to fall out with the papers in the beginning and decided to tough it out, until they snapped over it.

Yes Mitchell was laughable and contradictory, although he was given too much leeway as usual, and the extracts shown omitted the most anti-mccann bits. Still poor old Clarence's mantra sounded decidedly worn out and repetitive.

Perhaps in the early days when the UK press became 'very hurtful and unhelpful,' TM procrastinated a good while before suing, just to insure they could win and have a nice juicy windfall? I wouldn't put anything past them. Even being behind some trashier stories themselves in order to bury the deeply embarrassing and true ones! After all Clarence was Govt/MMU, and as such would be a master of dirty tricks.