Cowards

The Sunday Times has printed an apology re the alleged withholding of the efit pictures.

Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times

Published: 28 December 2013

In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

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

kitti wrote:The Sunday Times has printed an apology re the alleged withholding of the efit pictures.

Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times

Published: 28 December 2013

In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

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

"....We apologise for the distress caused." It sounds to me like Carter-Ruck became involved because the McCanns suffered "distress" over the E-Fits.

Looks like another good use of the Find Madeleine fund to shut up anyone who dares to say anything bad about the pair. Problem is the damage has already been done. Nobody will see this apology, and if they do, they will see right though it as another scheme by Carter Ruck to keep the lid on any naysayers. Better to print this simple apology than shell out a huge settlement.

So what is the ST apologising for, exactly?

The fact that the e-fits weren't suppressed for five years ...
Turns out they were suppressed for approx one year.
One whole year, when a child is missing?
That's still suppressing vital information and obstructing justice whichever way you slice it.
And isn't it awfully convenient that, once the case had been officially shelved, the e-fits found their way into the hands of those who could have done with them a lot earlier?
As for the whole report being passed to the Met in 2011 - let's not forget that the cops had to write to the 'fund' before they got it. Why didn't the 'fund' offer it up voluntarily? And why did the McCanns threaten Mr Exton with legal action if he put this 'hypercritical' report into the public domain?
(Last two questions are rhetorical, btw).

Looks like the McCann lawyers shimmied over to the ST office to give out some Christmas greetings.
And shake the Insight Team members warmly by their throats.
Nothing to do with the Lisbon trial starting up again. Or those pesky accounts. Ho no. What was I thinking of. Must have had too much plum pudding.

And in other news ... McCann lawyers and PR reps will probably spend the New Year rearranging a few more deckchairs on the Titanic.
And now the weather ......

So there blaming Leicester police and the PJ first off all.


Then the MET.


Thank god for SY for showing these efits .


Still doesn't take away the FACT that the Mccanns had the efits and STILL didn't produce them to the world in 2008...5 years....to show them and help find their daughter...when it suits them they go ahead and do what they like, why not then ?



Yet again blaming other people.

Why threaten to sue Exton and co then, if these efits are so "innocent"?

At the end off the day...THEY, the Mccanns had these efits......they could off shown them in 2009....but they chose not to.


'Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund'.... Whats that all about?


'Madeleines fund'!

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/q71/s720x720/1517402_669351536462223_1252171757_n.jpg



Why didn't the mccanns put the e fits in Kate mccanns book?

kitti wrote:https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/q71/s720x720/1517402_669351536462223_1252171757_n.jpg



Why didn't the mccanns put the e fits in Kate mccanns book?

It would have been counter productive apparently.

Because Jane SAW the real abductor and he had dark hair, I guess. Kate "firmly believes" or at least did until SY told her otherwise, that Tannerman was the real guy so posting an efit of one who did not have long dark hair might confuse people?

the real reason I suspect is it would have been too ironic even for her to include an efit of her husband as the suspect - plus it would bring up a lot of questions around the timeline, where Gerry was at 10, etc.

Sorry kitti, l didn't read this thread earlier and you'd already bought this news here before l started one it. Oops! X

almostgothic wrote:So what is the ST apologising for, exactly?

The fact that the e-fits weren't suppressed for five years ...
Turns out they were suppressed for approx one year.
One whole year, when a child is missing?
That's still suppressing vital information and obstructing justice whichever way you slice it.
And isn't it awfully convenient that, once the case had been officially shelved, the e-fits found their way into the hands of those who could have done with them a lot earlier?
As for the whole report being passed to the Met in 2011 - let's not forget that the cops had to write to the 'fund' before they got it. Why didn't the 'fund' offer it up voluntarily? And why did the McCanns threaten Mr Exton with legal action if he put this 'hypercritical' report into the public domain?
(Last two questions are rhetorical, btw).

Looks like the McCann lawyers shimmied over to the ST office to give out some Christmas greetings.
And shake the Insight Team members warmly by their throats.
Nothing to do with the Lisbon trial starting up again. Or those pesky accounts. Ho no. What was I thinking of. Must have had too much plum pudding.

And in other news ... McCann lawyers and PR reps will probably spend the New Year rearranging a few more deckchairs on the Titanic.
And now the weather ......

It sure is. What were McCanns doing once they received that Exton report and efit I wonder. Not turning it over because of course the report was damning and highly critical of them, although no one says in what way. I wouldn't want the report out there either, they are so paranoid lest anything get into the papers that hasn't been run thru the pink filter, and this kind of info would have been a press feeding frenzy; that they don't need.

But how damning WAS this report? of whom or what?

Was it damning of their stupidity in neglecting their children? Or their stupidity and arrogance in telling the cops lies to protect themselves from appearing to be neglectful rather than telling the truth so the investigation could get on with their job?

Or was it highly critical of their story in a way that made them appear to be suspects?

If the latter is the case I am surprised the report wasn't destroyed entirely.

So the cops had to have a letter FROM the Fund to get the report. SY writes to the FUND to get a permission slip. that doesn't sound like the Met and Kate 'n Gerry are working closely together on a basis of trust.