PORTUGAL POLICE REVIEW MCCANN CASE/Daily and Sunday Express

Oldartform wrote:

pennylane wrote:Why is the Express "comments" section now blotting out the McCanns name with asterisks????

Don`t know, but something in the air has changed for them to be allowing comments at all - amazing.

Comments now whooshed.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/307078/Portugal-police-review-McCann-case

Did anyone get a screensave of the comments?

If so could they share them here as I think Express on twitter needs to see this.

Someone has been busy with the Mail comments - loads of pro McCann but all sound as if they`re written by the same person. Seems the mods have been busy too, deleting all the posters expressing doubts.

Clarence Mitchell states;
"'They clearly hope that it will lead to the case being reopened in due course."Due course?? Why not NOW? immediately? Urgently?
A child is missing! Time is of the essence.

He maddens me!

grrrrr the mirror today have a small bit at the bottom of the page saying kate and gerry cleared in 2008 of involvement

An inexcusable error of fact.

Still, readers of rags like that tend to prefer pictures to words.

The Sun had 9 comments in all....pro McCanns , so goodness knows how many they deleted. One Poster behind the times wondered why the Reward wasn't advertised.....no one bothered to tell him the NOTW is defunct

I was in a café today and so got a read of the paper Express. The James Murray article was on page nine, at the bottom, taking up about 1/4 of the page. The top 3/4 of the page was about Charlotte Church's priest being phone hacked!

Iris wrote:I was in a café today and so got a read of the paper Express. The James Murray article was on page nine, at the bottom, taking up about 1/4 of the page. The top 3/4 of the page was about Charlotte Church's priest being phone hacked!

Good.....about James Murray I mean LOL Charlotte Church made a Statement on T.V. saying how distressed she and her Mother were at finding they
were being hacked. Rupert Murdoch settled privately with her and she received £600.000.. With Ofcom investigating whether James Murdoch is fit and proper to be in charge of bskyb I expect both Father and Son to resign from the Board of Newscorp . I have been checking the Papers, no more news on the Russian bribes re Posters.

It's a far cry from the Glory Days when they were all over page one.

Iris wrote:It's a far cry from the Glory Days when they were all over page one.

Yes, I just wonder if Kate has put on hold her second novel. I seem to recall the mention of a Trial date in April, if that is true they must be getting nervous knowing there is more chance of Madeleine being dead than alive and they certainly can't justify a claim that their health was affected.

Iris wrote:It's a far cry from the Glory Days when they were all over page one.

I'm waiting for the day when they make it all over page one again and in every paper on the planet. Not long to wait now...

The End Is Nigh wrote:What Countries don't have an Extradition Treaty with the UK?

Well l know that canoe boat couple have just had their home in Panama reposessed so the Mcs could buy that for a song.....?

The Express today have just one lonely "Have your comment" sitting there.........

WHAT WOULD REALLY BE A HUGE STEP.....

17.03.12, 6:00pm

would be if Mr and Mrs **** and their Tapas friends agreed to do a police reconstruction - something they felt was pointless up to now.

And Mrs **** might also find it helpful to the police if she answered the 48 questions she refused to answer...

Then there might be a huge step in the right direction....otherwise it is all PR 'spin'.....

Why would they just leave this one on there??

Lillyofthevalley wrote:The Express today have just one lonely "Have your comment" sitting there.........

WHAT WOULD REALLY BE A HUGE STEP.....

17.03.12, 6:00pm

would be if Mr and Mrs **** and their Tapas friends agreed to do a police reconstruction - something they felt was pointless up to now.

And Mrs **** might also find it helpful to the police if she answered the 48 questions she refused to answer...

Then there might be a huge step in the right direction....otherwise it is all PR 'spin'.....

Why would they just leave this one on there??

Morning Lillyofthevalley, maybe they havn't noticed it yet. Is there any News in the DE today?:

The thing that worries me about these reviews is this:-

Portugal's Correio da Manha newspaper reported that the PJ officers have not found any new leads that point to Madeleine's whereabouts and so will not formally reopen their investigation.

Do we know for definate if this is the criteria that has to be met before the case is re-opened? I thought it was a significant piece of new evidence that would trigger the rre-opening - such as new DNA results etc.

If the criteria is that the new evidence must point to Madeleine's whereabouts then the case will never be re-opened and we are all wasting our time and money. Those responsible for her disappearence are hardly going to put forward the location of the body are they - unless they are to make a full confession which I would have thought - body or no body - would be enough to re-open the case.

NoStone wrote:The thing that worries me about these reviews is this:-

Portugal's Correio da Manha newspaper reported that the PJ officers have not found any new leads that point to Madeleine's whereabouts and so will not formally reopen their investigation.

Do we know for definate if this is the criteria that has to be met before the case is re-opened? I thought it was a significant piece of new evidence that would trigger the rre-opening - such as new DNA results etc.

If the criteria is that the new evidence must point to Madeleine's whereabouts then the case will never be re-opened and we are all wasting our time and money. Those responsible for her disappearence are hardly going to put forward the location of the body are they - unless they are to make a full confession which I would have thought - body or no body - would be enough to re-open the case.

Morning NoStone,

I think the PJ made the stipulation that it would not re-open the case "unless new evidence" was found. to me this means either Madeleine's body or
firm evidence about her whereabouts. Obviously if the McCanns were found to have been accomplices in Madeleine's disappearance, that would also
be sufficiant to re-open the case.

Trouble is, how independent can SY be? I believe the PJ think the McCanns guilty , even if SY came to that conclusion, are they going to be able to
publsh their findings?

Panda wrote:

NoStone wrote:The thing that worries me about these reviews is this:-

Portugal's Correio da Manha newspaper reported that the PJ officers have not found any new leads that point to Madeleine's whereabouts and so will not formally reopen their investigation.

Do we know for definate if this is the criteria that has to be met before the case is re-opened? I thought it was a significant piece of new evidence that would trigger the rre-opening - such as new DNA results etc.

If the criteria is that the new evidence must point to Madeleine's whereabouts then the case will never be re-opened and we are all wasting our time and money. Those responsible for her disappearence are hardly going to put forward the location of the body are they - unless they are to make a full confession which I would have thought - body or no body - would be enough to re-open the case.

Morning NoStone,

I think the PJ made the stipulation that it would not re-open the case "unless new evidence" was found. to me this means either Madeleine's body or
firm evidence about her whereabouts. Obviously if the McCanns were found to have been accomplices in Madeleine's disappearance, that would also
be sufficiant to re-open the case.

Trouble is, how independent can SY be? I believe the PJ think the McCanns guilty , even if SY came to that conclusion, are they going to be able to
publsh their findings?

Hello Panda,

I worry that this - no new leads pointing to Madeleine's whereabouts - is being spun. The othr worry is that there is repeated reference to the PJ having primacy in the case. Does that mean that unless the PJ decide to re-open - all the Met will do is an end of review report saying there are no ne or univestigated leads that leaad to Madeleine's whereabouts!1 Sorry but I still dont trust the process as after a year - the Met should have been knockingg on a few more doors than that of Mondeo 3 before now. Your not going to glean new evidence if you dont re-interview the main players again and flush out the discrepancies, conduct a reconstruction and do more pro-active investigation on the ground as Pat did. Going over the files time and time agaaiin will just lead to ever decreasing circles concluding in nothing! IMO!

NoStone wrote:

Panda wrote:

NoStone wrote:The thing that worries me about these reviews is this:-

Portugal's Correio da Manha newspaper reported that the PJ officers have not found any new leads that point to Madeleine's whereabouts and so will not formally reopen their investigation.

Do we know for definate if this is the criteria that has to be met before the case is re-opened? I thought it was a significant piece of new evidence that would trigger the rre-opening - such as new DNA results etc.

If the criteria is that the new evidence must point to Madeleine's whereabouts then the case will never be re-opened and we are all wasting our time and money. Those responsible for her disappearence are hardly going to put forward the location of the body are they - unless they are to make a full confession which I would have thought - body or no body - would be enough to re-open the case.

Morning NoStone,

I think the PJ made the stipulation that it would not re-open the case "unless new evidence" was found. to me this means either Madeleine's body or
firm evidence about her whereabouts. Obviously if the McCanns were found to have been accomplices in Madeleine's disappearance, that would also
be sufficiant to re-open the case.

Trouble is, how independent can SY be? I believe the PJ think the McCanns guilty , even if SY came to that conclusion, are they going to be able to
publsh their findings?

Hello Panda,

I worry that this - no new leads pointing to Madeleine's whereabouts - is being spun. The othr worry is that there is repeated reference to the PJ having primacy in the case. Does that mean that unless the PJ decide to re-open - all the Met will do is an end of review report saying there are no ne or univestigated leads that leaad to Madeleine's whereabouts!1 Sorry but I still dont trust the process as after a year - the Met should have been knockingg on a few more doors than that of Mondeo 3 before now. Your not going to glean new evidence if you dont re-interview the main players again and flush out the discrepancies, conduct a reconstruction and do more pro-active investigation on the ground as Pat did. Going over the files time and time agaaiin will just lead to ever decreasing circles concluding in nothing! IMO!

Yes I agree, if both SY and the PJ had reuested a recon, there is no reason why the Tapas 9 would be able to reject ....but it would probably set alarm
bells ringing . If after all this expense SY find nothing to support the McCanns accusation that the PJ were incompetent and that all avenues
were explored, this will go against the McCanns. Their 'abduction' mantra would be consigned to the waste bin, they would have to close the Fund
because they wouldn't be able to claim it was for searching for Madeleine, the Press would lose interest in giving them space , CM would be fired since
they couldn't afford to pay him, or Edgar and the McCanns new found fame would be tarnished. We can all pack up and go home then.

well its the 1st year since madeline went missing that they havent hogged the limelight on the front pages of the papers looking oh so upset . have the papers thought nah we dont need the mcanns pic on mothering sunday - or are they in hiding . mmmmm

cass wrote:well its the 1st year since madeline went missing that they havent hogged the limelight on the front pages of the papers looking oh so upset . have the papers thought nah we dont need the mcanns pic on mothering sunday - or are they in hiding . mmmmm

Morning cass....never thought of Mother's Day being used by the McCanns. They could have asked Jon Corner to take a photo of them entering Church
to pray for Madeleine's safe return with Clarence in the background whispering that on this special day Kate is very emotional realising how much she
misses her 'little friend Madeleine' calling her 'Mummy' in that special way, cue Cher singing 'If I could turn back time' and this is sold to the Press Ass.
for a 'substantial sum'.

afternoon panda , yep i shock that there isnt any pics of them in church today . ive still got the image of them leaving church in the early days all smiles and the yellow ribbons on kates hair i think , grrrr that photo will live with me forever , infact i reccon every paper should show the photo as sad as it is just to show how happy the mcanns was on madelines birthday ,

Panda wrote:

cass wrote:well its the 1st year since madeline went missing that they havent hogged the limelight on the front pages of the papers looking oh so upset . have the papers thought nah we dont need the mcanns pic on mothering sunday - or are they in hiding . mmmmm

Morning cass....never thought of Mother's Day being used by the McCanns. They could have asked Jon Corner to take a photo of them entering Church
to pray for Madeleine's safe return with Clarence in the background whispering that on this special day Kate is very emotional realising how much she
misses her 'little friend Madeleine' calling her 'Mummy' in that special way, cue Cher singing 'If I could turn back time' and this is sold to the Press Ass.
for a 'substantial sum'.

It always creeps me out whenever I hear any adult speaking about any child doing something "in that special way". Yuck.

Iris wrote:

Panda wrote:

cass wrote:well its the 1st year since madeline went missing that they havent hogged the limelight on the front pages of the papers looking oh so upset . have the papers thought nah we dont need the mcanns pic on mothering sunday - or are they in hiding . mmmmm

Morning cass....never thought of Mother's Day being used by the McCanns. They could have asked Jon Corner to take a photo of them entering Church
to pray for Madeleine's safe return with Clarence in the background whispering that on this special day Kate is very emotional realising how much she
misses her 'little friend Madeleine' calling her 'Mummy' in that special way, cue Cher singing 'If I could turn back time' and this is sold to the Press Ass.
for a 'substantial sum'.

It always creeps me out whenever I hear any adult speaking about any child doing something "in that special way". Yuck.

We know Madeleine was a handful , as is usual, older children get jealous when younger siblings get all the attention , after all Madeleine was less than
2 yrs of age when the twins were born. To refer to her as 'my little friend' is also a strange remark. whatever else, I do believe the McCanns loved their children, but as Adults, had poor parenting skills....to make a remark like 'It was our Holiday too' shows their selfishness, as did going out every night.

I don't believe for one minute the McCanns loved their children. The McCanns took their children on a family holiday, dumped them in the creche during the day and left them unsupervised in their unlocked unlit apartment, all but one evening of that so called family holiday. They went out and left their children once again, after Madeleine told them what happened the previous evening. How ironic that Madeleine should disappear that very evening.

The McCanns admitted they never looked for Madeleine, when she went "missing" and they lied through their teeth to save their own skins.
Along with their family and friends, the McCanns set up a fund to find Madeleine and along with their extended family, they used the money from the fund, to assist their finances. The McCanns also didn't cooperate with the PJ and since they were released from their arguido status, they have bad mouthed the PJ at every opportunity. The McCanns have also used a substantial amount of the fund to pay costs when they lost their attempts to get Goncalo Amaral's book permanently banned. The McCanns also had to pay costs, when they made a malicious allegation against Goncalo Amaral, which was thrown out of the court.

I know everything I have just written, has already been written in other posts, but I am just stating why I don't believe for one minute that the McCanns loved their children. In my opinion, parents who love their children, do not treat them in the way the McCanns treated their 3 tiny toddlers.