A VERY QUICK FIRST SCAN OF 'LOOKING FOR MADELEINE'

I am wondering-  if there could be reasons for the apparent discrepancies why don't they take a lie detector and publicly explain what the reasons could be.   Wee Kelly's sofa would surely be available??????

Is there any mention of Rocky in the book?  

Tony the "black beast".        Never heard anything like it in me life guv.  ha ha ha.   Another pair need to jog on, keep on jogging, cos who cares what their opinions are?

Did the authors ask TM "what do you want us to write"?

I bet Bren Ryan has a story to tell if she could.

Authors Summers and Swan reply to critics of their book about Madeleine









The best-selling authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan have responded to criticisms that their new book Looking for Madeleine, published today (September 11), amounts to a pro-McCann ‘whitewash’ rather than the first in-depth, independent and objective analysis of the disappearance and search for the little girl. The criticisms come from people who reject the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted.


In their first interview with the media in Portugal, the authors told me they had in the past tackled controversial subjects, “but never have we encountered this degree of intense reaction to a book even before it has been published. It underlines, we think, why authors who do our kind of intensive investigative work needed to tackle this story.”

How, I asked, did they decide on this subject in the first place?

“In May 2012, readers may recall, the UK’s Scotland Yard released an age progression image of Madeleine as she might have looked if still alive. Robbyn was watching the news with our own young daughter, who is a little older than Madeleine McCann, and whose middle name happens also to be Madeleine.  

“Her interest was piqued by hearing her own name, and she asked: ‘What really happened to that little girl? Do her parents really believe she is still alive?’  

“And – this really got us: ‘How long would you look for me, Mummy?’ Robbyn realised she didn’t have good answers, and we started tentatively digging. We starting a first scan of the massive police dossier, read Kate McCann’s published account - and took on board the voluminous criticism and analysis of the case, and of the McCanns themselves, that was available online.  

“We soon realised as we talked to people from all walks of life that many, many people seemed to suspect there was something wrong with the parents’ account and – and we started to think we could bring something to this almost unique story by drilling down to the best evidence. Our publisher agreed. That’s how it started, and here we are more than two years later.”

The authors are adamant they have not been influenced  at any stage or in any way by the McCann family or anyone close to the investigation. “As you will see in the Notes section of Looking for Madeleine, we felt at the outset that it was only right to advise Madeleine’s parents and London’s Metropolitan police that we planned to investigate with a view to a book.

“We had a single meeting with the McCanns and one with the Met – both of them early in our research. The parents, and then the police, made only one request of us – a fair one given the parents’ hope and the Met’s working thesis that Madeleine may still be alive –  that we do nothing that might hinder or interfere with the ongoing investigation. We have been careful to abide by that request.”

How much cooperation did they get from Kate and Gerry McCann during their research and writing?  

“We have been totally independent of the McCanns – and we emphasise this, given the torrent of internet innuendo to the contrary even before Looking for Madeleine was published.  

“An initial meeting aside, a meeting at which Madeleine’s parents made no attempt at all to influence our thinking, there was no cooperation. The parents believed we should work independently of them, and we would not have wanted it otherwise.”

Since the couple began working on the book, both the Portuguese Polícia Judiciária and the Metropolitan Police Service have moved from ‘reviewing’ to renewed investigation and so they have had no more information from either force than was “ethically correct.”  

However, they said they have had senior contacts with former senior law enforcement officers in both countries and these have served as a valuable guide to the early investigation, and to some degree to what has been going on more recently.  

The authors said that before they started their research they had no opinion on whether Madeleine had been abducted or not. And after two years of non-stop work, they have an opinion but not a definitive one.

“We were open - and still are - to anywhere the evidence might lead us. When Madeleine vanished we were deep into the research for our previous book, on the September 11 attacks. That also involved reading many tens of thousands of documents, travel, etc. So, like millions of others, we only had the blurred impression gained from the welter of media coverage and the torrent of rumour. It is only now after looking at every angle that we can justify expressing an opinion. We do that in Looking for Madeleine.”

Anthony Summers and his wife Robbyn Swan think the most likely scenario is that Madeleine was indeed abducted. There is a “cogent skein of evidence” pointing to the notion that she was a carefully selected target, very possibly of a paedophile.”

Does the book contain any real revelations? In other words have Summers and Swan uncovered any previously unknown facts that bring us closer to understanding what really happened to Madeleine?

“Looking for Madeleine is shot through with new information and analysis. In particular, we obtained information not seen publicly before that throws vivid new light on the activity and modus operandi of the intruder who perpetrated at least one of the child sex attacks in the period preceding Madeleine’s disappearance.  

“As important, we obtained detailed information on an incident in Praia da Luz that may suggest one of the phoney “charity collectors” may have had a sexual motive. This episode, in particular, coupled with analysis of the overall jigsaw of testimony, contributes to a new understanding of a possible abduction scenario.

“Another key element is the first ever in-depth interview with Brian Kennedy, the wealthy benefactor who throws light on the McCann’s private investigation effort. And much, much more.”

As to the serious doubts about independence and objectivity expressed before the book’s publication, especially by critics who totally reject the abduction theory, the authors responded: “The notion of criticising authors about a book even before it has been published may speak volumes about the biases of those levelling the criticisms

http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/authors-summers-and-swan-reply-to.html?spref=tw

So, these pair didn't become interested in this case until 2012? And now they are experts on it? They say they have found "new evidence" Anyone know what this new evidence is?

How much contact did the authors have with the Media Monitoring Unit though?

Lots of get outs in that interview.

BlueBag wrote:How much contact did the authors have with the Media Monitoring Unit though?

Lots of get outs in that interview.

Bluebag, they met with Gerry and Kate McCann!!!

How did the word "haters" get past a serious editor? I can't believe it's used in the book at all, let alone throughout its content. It must be like watching a trashy talk show, a la "Ricki Lake," circa 1995.

Reviews on Amazon:

I would give you a zero star if possible. Have you two sold your souls to the devil? Disgusting and disgraceful.

I waiting for the publication of this book with anticipation only to be sadly disappointed , this author to my mind has plucked random ideas out of the air with no evidence to substantiate them, I feel he decided the parents innocent of involvement prior to writing the book and set out to prove that ignoring well established facts about the case. Very poor

This book promised to be 'the first independent, objective account of the case'.

I received the kindle edition this morning and was hoping to find at least some exclusive revelations from the authors, who apparently nearly won a Pulitzer for a previous book. They must have worked harder on that than on this.

They seem to have used their team of interns to copy and paste article after article from newspaper websites and blogs while rehashing Kate McCann's own book.

The authors declare their allegiance to the McCann cause right up front and hammer home their point of view at the beginning of most chapters.

'Speculation that the McCanns played a role in their daughter's fate, the authors demonstrate, is unfounded.'

'The authors.. have not seen a shred of evidence to indicate that Gerry and Kate McCann, any member of their holiday group.. were at any stage - guilty of malfeasance of any kind in connection with Madeleine McCann's disappearance.'

'There was never the smallest shred of fact or evidence to inculpate Maddie's parents in any way at all'.'

'Despite there being no evidence of any wrongdoing on the McCanns' part their critics proliferated.'

Yes, yes, Anthony, we get the picture. We understand that if there had have been sufficient evidence, the McCanns would have been charged by now.

And the lawyers could no doubt wave this through, thus enabling you and your publishers to profit at the expense of a missing child.

But seriously, Mr. Summers.. No questions? Not one?

If you want a partner book to Kate McCann's, this is for you. But if you want to learn anything interesting, save your cash.

The definitive account won't be written for a while yet.

Snipped from Sallypelt's post 8.22 page 3 of this thread:

"
The best-selling authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan have responded to criticisms that their new book Looking for Madeleine, published today (September 11), amounts to a pro-McCann ‘whitewash’ rather than the first in-depth, independent and objective analysis of the disappearance and search for the little girl. The criticisms come from people who reject the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted.


In their first interview with the media in Portugal, the authors told me they had in the past tackled controversial subjects, “but never have we encountered this degree of intense reaction to a book even before it has been published. It underlines, we think, why authors who do our kind of intensive investigative work needed to tackle this story.”


IMO what this level of criticism shows is that we are in the age of the internet where the "silent majority" can at last have a say. 

sallypelt wrote:

“In May 2012, readers may recall, the UK’s Scotland Yard released an age progression image of Madeleine as she might have looked if still alive. Robbyn was watching the news with our own young daughter, who is a little older than Madeleine McCann, and whose middle name happens also to be Madeleine.  

“Her interest was piqued by hearing her own name, and she asked: ‘What really happened to that little girl? Do her parents really believe she is still alive?’  

If this incident actually happened I will eat my crash helmet. I mean, I can't even begin to remember how often, as a ten year old, my interest in the news stories of the day was piqued by hearing mention of my unused forename.

Pull the other one summersandswann, it does indeed have bells on it.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

sallypelt wrote:

“In May 2012, readers may recall, the UK’s Scotland Yard released an age progression image of Madeleine as she might have looked if still alive. Robbyn was watching the news with our own young daughter, who is a little older than Madeleine McCann, and whose middle name happens also to be Madeleine.  

“Her interest was piqued by hearing her own name, and she asked: ‘What really happened to that little girl? Do her parents really believe she is still alive?’  

If this incident actually happened I will eat my crash helmet. I mean, I can't even begin to remember how often, as a ten year old, my interest in the news stories of the day was piqued by hearing mention of my unused forename.

Pull the other one summersandswann, it does indeed have bells on it.

Now I know why stories like this didn't catch my attention as a kid - my parents invented my middle name themselves and I've never heard of anyone else sharing it.

sallypelt wrote:

I received the kindle edition this morning and was hoping to find at least some exclusive revelations from the authors, who apparently nearly won a Pulitzer for a previous book. They must have worked harder on that than on this.

Nearly won a Pulitzer eh? Reminds me of that time I nearly won the 100m sprint at the Olympics. It was only not being there and not being able to run 9.80s that separated me from the gold medal.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

sallypelt wrote:

“In May 2012, readers may recall, the UK’s Scotland Yard released an age progression image of Madeleine as she might have looked if still alive. Robbyn was watching the news with our own young daughter, who is a little older than Madeleine McCann, and whose middle name happens also to be Madeleine.  

“Her interest was piqued by hearing her own name, and she asked: ‘What really happened to that little girl? Do her parents really believe she is still alive?’  

If this incident actually happened I will eat my crash helmet. I mean, I can't even begin to remember how often, as a ten year old, my interest in the news stories of the day was piqued by hearing mention of my unused forename.

Pull the other one summersandswann, it does indeed have bells on it.

Of course they could always have told their little un that The Met are investigating Maddie's disappearance and left it at that. 

sallypelt wrote:

BlueBag wrote:How much contact did the authors have with the Media Monitoring Unit though?

Lots of get outs in that interview.

Bluebag, they met with Gerry and Kate McCann!!!

They said they met them once and Gerry and Kate did not try to influence them.

But what about pink persons?

plebgate wrote:

Of course they could always have told their little un that The Met are investigating Maddie's disappearance and left it at that. 

It does make one wonder what the correct parental response to difficult questions about the news stories of the day should be. If my daughter asks me what's going on in Syria, am I failing as a father if I don't compile a comprehensive intelligence dossier obtained solely from personal research and interviews with primary sources? 

BlueBag wrote:

sallypelt wrote:

BlueBag wrote:How much contact did the authors have with the Media Monitoring Unit though?

Lots of get outs in that interview.

Bluebag, they met with Gerry and Kate McCann!!!

They said they met them once and Gerry and Kate did not try to influence them.

But what about pink persons?

Or the McCanns thought let them get on with it. If it's negative we'll just sue them for the profit they made.

Have the Met. asked them what reasons there could be for the apparent discrepancies?

I tried to leave feedback supporting  the latest review - it was indeed helpful to me as it has saved me wasting 6.99 on a book that contains nothing that is supported by the police files.
However, Amazon seems to require me to leave my full name, and I am not comfortable doing that as a French person, now citizen of the UK , it is an unusual name and I still live in hope of being selected for the jury when the fraud case comes to trial at the Old Bailey...

"An initial meeting aside, a meeting at which Madeleine’s parents made no attempt at all to influence our thinking,"

I can't believe this.

Unless K&G already knew what their thinking was (ie. they had a remit).

Are they saying Gerry never mentioned the dogs?

BlueBag wrote:

"An initial meeting aside, a meeting at which Madeleine’s parents made no attempt at all to influence our thinking,"

I can't believe this.

Unless K&G already knew what their thinking was (ie. they had a remit).

Are they saying Gerry never mentioned the dogs?

They are prize winning writers, supposed to have done extensive research and claimed to be objective, how can they rely on K&G to tell them anything or take their account at face value?

The fact that they were evasive about the meeting, also taking a defensive stance for themselves and Mcs about the meeting means there is more than meet the eyes.  Think the opposite, when the writers say this it means the opposite.   They are doing a pinky?

I have been in here for three days now trying to fight this book.A very long thread was removed by the authors and another replaces it yet they allow us to remain. Anyone wanting to come along ? https://www.facebook.com/pages/Anthony-Summers-Robbyn-Swan/108905915872218

Nina wrote:I have been in here for three days now trying to fight this book.A very long thread was removed by the authors and another replaces it yet they allow us to remain. Anyone wanting to come along ? https://www.facebook.com/pages/Anthony-Summers-Robbyn-Swan/108905915872218

I tried posting this " So, in the title, we have the very first lie "The first independent investigation...".  I think Richard D Hall did it first. " and tried to leave a link to his documentary.  But it seems I am blocked from doing so.  Same on the Sun website.  Anyone else having this trouble?   Seems like A link to Richard's documentary is unwelcome in some places.