The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Tony Bennett on 06.04.11 17:23

THE LETTER

--- On Wed, 6/4/11, Craig Cooper wrote:

From: Craig Cooper renegadepictures
Subject: Picture Still Request
To: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Date: Wednesday, 6 April, 2011, 15:43


Dear Tony

My name is Craig and I work for a TV production company called Renegade Pictures.

I am contacting you in regards to a request I have which I hope you may be able to help with. We are making a programme for the BBC about Parenting with our presenter Cherry Healey, who herself is a new mother.

The documentary is following different women and their approaches and the different styles of parenting and is positive and non-judgemental in its outlook.

As part of the show we have filmed with a mother who has a protective style of parenting. The sad cases featured in the press of children like Madeleine McCann and Jamie Bulger have made her understandably nervous of letting her children out of her sight and we are sure many others must feel this way.

To illustrate this point we would very much like to use a still of Madeleine and were wondering if you could supply us with a preferred photo that you would like us to use to talk about her disappearance.

Thanks again for your time and I hope you are able to help with my request.

Kind Regards,

Craig

Craig Cooper
Production Co-ordinator

Cherry....

T: 020 7449 3251 F: 020 7586 7153 M: 07708 759 038
Renegade Pictures | Unit 5, 6 Erskine Road | London | NW3 3AJ

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

REPLY

Hallo Craig,


Thank you for your request.

I am sorry, we cannot help as The Madeleine Foundation is a group that expressly questions the McCanns' assumption that their daughter was abducted. We think there may be other explanations for her disappearance and our website is clear on that point.

We do however campaign on issues of children being left defenceless on their own, as happened in the Madeleine McCann case, and more generally on child neglect issues.

You may recall that Dr Gerald McCann claimed that he had spoken to a Social Services official who was said to have stated that leaving children over a minute's walk away, and where they couldn't be seen, and checking on them every half-hour, was 'well within the bounds of responsible parenting'. He never identified who said that and we doubt if it is true. It is contradicted by the N.S.P.C.C. and every child welfare organisation in the country, whose websites all insist that the rule is: "Never leave young children on their own".

Indeed, we have sought to change the law on this so that leaving children under 12 on their own without reasonable excuse becomes a separate criminal offence. We think this is the best way to deter parents from leaving children on their own and exposing them to all manner of risks.

If you wish to contact the McCanns for a picture of Madeleine to illustrate the need to protect vulnerable young children, their contact details are:

email: investigation@findmadeleine.com
Tel: 0845 838 4669

Or you can contact their spokesman Clarence Mitchell via the Editor of 'The Sun' at 020 7782 4100.

Yours sincerely

Tony Bennett
Secretary
The Madeleine Foundation

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13970
Reputation : 2144
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by lj on 06.04.11 18:41

McCann and parenting do not belong in the same sentence or even in the same show, unless to show what is NOT parenting.

Maybe they can discuss Gerry's parenting prize remark about their view of parenting:


"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"

Gerry

lj

Posts : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Guest on 06.04.11 20:05

That's a very odd letter Tony. First off, what sort of film company are they that they can't even research who they are writing to. Secondly, if they wanted Madeleine's photo, there are literally hundreds out there on the net. why ask you? Finally. surely if they were using Madeleine's photo and were talking about her disappearance, shouldn't they have contacted the McCanns?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by aiyoyo on 06.04.11 21:27

candyfloss wrote:That's a very odd letter Tony. First off, what sort of film company are they that they can't even research who they are writing to. Secondly, if they wanted Madeleine's photo, there are literally hundreds out there on the net. why ask you? Finally. surely if they were using Madeleine's photo and were talking about her disappearance, shouldn't they have contacted the McCanns?

I thought so too - that they were odd writing to MF.
Could well be he'd mistaken MF representation, but that only indicates they are hopeless if they havent at least researched the subject they wanted to feature.

Also if they want to feature different style parenting albeit without being judgmental as they claimed, shouldnt they ask the mccanns for permission instead of taking it for granted by asking for photos.

What is even more bizarre is that he said he's making this programme for BBC, more so he should have known MF is not mccann's website. If he represents a foreign media maybe the mistake may be more comprehensible.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Kololi on 06.04.11 22:52

candyfloss wrote:That's a very odd letter Tony. First off, what sort of film company are they that they can't even research who they are writing to. Secondly, if they wanted Madeleine's photo, there are literally hundreds out there on the net. why ask you? Finally. surely if they were using Madeleine's photo and were talking about her disappearance, shouldn't they have contacted the McCanns?

I wondered the same - sounds a tadge fishy doesn't it.

Kololi

Posts : 677
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-01-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by PeterMac on 06.04.11 23:01

If M. is Ward of Court, does not Mrs Justice Hogg rightly control matters like this ?

PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by The Shelfstacker on 07.04.11 1:07

You all make very good points, but I was also struck by the sheer presumptive nature of the letter. As if there was already prior agreement to help with making the programme: we "were wondering if you could supply us with a preferred photo that you would like us to use".

Like Kololi, I am not convinced that the letter-writer's motives were not ulterior. Sadly the BBC's history of engagement with the Madeleine Foundation serves only to illustrate the point.

Three days into two weeks annual leave and too much time on my hands. I'm suspicious of everything! Maybe I should go back to work...

The Shelfstacker

Posts : 122
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Angelique on 07.04.11 1:34

I think it was a Fishing trip.

It is not possible that they have not heard about the McCanns website. There cannot be anyone with a modicum of intelligence that would not realise, especially to promote a BBC programme, that they would need permission from the McCanns to use a photograph of Madeleine - didn't they copyright her ? Even so common sense should have sent them directly to the McCanns.

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by aiyoyo on 07.04.11 3:38

Nonentity wrote:You all make very good points, but I was also struck by the sheer presumptive nature of the letter. As if there was already prior agreement to help with making the programme: we "were wondering if you could supply us with a preferred photo that you would like us to use".

Like Kololi, I am not convinced that the letter-writer's motives were not ulterior. Sadly the BBC's history of engagement with the Madeleine Foundation serves only to illustrate the point.

Three days into two weeks annual leave and too much time on my hands. I'm suspicious of everything! Maybe I should go back to work...

Definitely Fishy. Which film maker would be naive enough to risk libel with the mccanns without first seeking permission?
The mccanns were so high profile and notorious for suing people left right centre - who in UK hadn't heard of them and their notoriety? They were all over the front pages and their website and fund widely advertised.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by PeterMac on 07.04.11 7:51

First rule of the McCann case :
Nothing is as it seems
Second rule
If it does turn out to be as it seems, you have probably not yet got all the facts

PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Hard facts

Post by Gooseygosling on 07.04.11 8:12

The use of facts is that which is replicated acts that can be proved.

I cannot get to the point Jane Tanner did in the time she says in flip-flops. Tried it and cannot do it.

Is there an art to it, and if so can 20 people please walk uphill as to this gradient and this distance at this place and record the time and distance please. When empirically you can tell the distance over time, then you can add risk.

Renegade Films might want to do such a reconstruction of pedantics. I would encourage them to provide validity.

Renegade films and this page is on another page in full by a bored housewife, or housewives as they cannot search for they do not know how to get off their 'ass'. To search is to look for an object or information physically by energy expended and with no conflict of interest in cognition ordering of the act.

Good parenting and bad parenting is in knowing a child can be dead in 60 seconds.

Or be unknowing of an act a person or persons would engage in by unknown hazards.

[quote]Dead in 60 SECONDS.[/quote]

Gooseygosling

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Out of visual sight

Post by Gooseygosling on 07.04.11 8:34

@PeterMac wrote:First rule of the McCann case :
Nothing is as it seems

Second rule
If it does turn out to be as it seems,

you have probably not yet got all the facts


Renegade Films who I am going to ring have stated that Mrs Bulger was not in sight of her child.


Therefore putting the case of children left unsupervised with medically trained practioners who left children with 1. a monitor, as an electrical devise recording sound only, and one that 2. was faulty as did not perform to the said task. And all children left out of visual sight in a building that was deemed 'safe'. James Bulger was safe because he was held by his mother and seen by his mother. Each on merit is of compare and contrast.

One can leave a pet but not a child. I know the risks to both. But one sometimes considers risk to be less than it is.


This IS information in the public domain. Mrs Bulger never left her son James out of sight.

He was enticed by children in the shop, by her side, in her sight by children. This in seconds. She did not leave James. She did not make a choice.

She had to bear the worst. She as all mothers do know that when a child or person is missing the grim face of the policemen tell you to expect the worst. It is a face I hope I never have to see amongst the people I know.

Mrs Bulger cannot be classed in any way as to the cases of other children as James is not missing. His fate is known.

He was killed by two children then of ten. This in Liverpool, and that as the city is the only connection as to why use the two cases.

Let us be clear. Mrs Bulger did not loose sight of James. He was little and beside her and they as true facts did engage him and take his hand. It is on cctv.

Best ask Mr Thompson and Mr Venables on the motives and acts of abduction as they were experts in their field even as children.

James Bulger was abducted and for a reason. We known because people saw him as he was enticed away.

They saw James, his face, and his clothing in plain daylight. He was identified as James Bulger due to the daytime and the cloths he wore as to that child and not any other child.

It was not termed a sinister or odd act.

Child do play with other children.

Adults do carry their children. The facts are that such a man did. It is in the facts in Leicester Police hands of such a man. Jane did see a man carrying a child, but we do not know what this child wore as that has not been clarified. YET. A tourist who she knew.

On merit one cannot use geographical locations due to city as to cases specific. Each missing person is at risk of harm by their own agency or the agency of others.

Gooseygosling

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Janice Moore on 07.04.11 8:44

Mrs Bulger did lose sight of James. Long enough for him to be enticed and led away to his brutal death. It possibly only took a few seconds but she did lose sight of him otherwise she would have seen him being enticed and would have stopped him going.

Janice Moore

Posts : 5
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-03-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Guest on 07.04.11 9:25

Hi Janice Moore and Gooseygosling, welcome to the forum

welcome2

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Guest on 07.04.11 9:55

I agree. This invitation is not legit, but yet another set up and would kindly explain to them that you are not interested in being part of anything that tries to put the McCann's and Denise Bulger into the same catergory.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by pennylane on 07.04.11 10:15

By their own admission Kate and Gerry McCann left 2 year old twins Sean and Amelie, and 3 year old Madeleine alone to fend for themselves in a holiday let, 5 nights in a row and went out dining and drinking with friends.

If the BBC are willing to portray the McCanns outrageous neglect and reckless endangerment of their 3 minors as merely "a different style of parenting' and the show goes out of it's way to do so in 'a positive and non-judgmental way,' then that is very alarming indeed, and will no doubt contribute to the endangerment of more children's lives!

This invitation may well be bogus, as some here believe, especially when one considers the dangerous aspect of presenting the McCanns reprehensible treatment of Madeleine and the twins during their holiday in PDL in a "positive" light. sad

pennylane

Posts : 2529
Reputation : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by aiyoyo on 07.04.11 11:41

In order for Renegade Films not to mislead the public they should research and find out WHO from Social Service advised the mccanns their style of parenting (by leaving them alone in the dark in a foreign country) is still within the responsible bound of parenting.

It would be interesting to see how Renegade Films plans to cover the the mccanns' style of parenting.
I doubt the mccanns are going to approve. Its bringing the mccanns back into the limelight without any glory and the mccanns are not going to agree until there in money in it.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Debate on this of comparison

Post by Gooseygosling on 07.04.11 12:23

At this present moment I have all my prayers for the Denise, and of her beloved son who died James.
In the papers it says of the new life of the men now who tortured, killed and stole her son. Men who now are invisible and so they should be.

So any media that causes the case of James Bulger to be compared as to losing sight, that is visual sight, (not a monitor, as a hearing device) for a second and that of a doctor who had to know of risks of vomiting, being hanged by a cord or as the patio door was open being naughty are not ethical. It is in the ethics of PI's if you are a member that certain conditions apply. If you are not they do not. You do not have to make a moral judgement if you are not accountable.

In the case of accountability it comes down to the facts of common sense.

Mrs Bulger did not lose sight of her son as I extolled here. She was in a shop with customers who saw kids. Liverpool kids who could have been his brother.

And oh,if Ms Jane Tanner cannot run and chuck her flip flops at seeing a man and run up the road to see if an injured Madeleine is there when told of her being missing then how can Denise chase what is an act of child meeting child? Why did Jane not on hearing the screams run to where the man had been going, as that was but yards away. It might be she had been there with the man, or she would have found the man at this time, or an injured Madeleine.

These are things I would expect Gerry to challenge as to why when she did not do exactly that. Why?



I have tried to warn off kids seeking Madeleine for the reward who come and peer into kids eyes. It is terrifying. Now what if one of those kids took a child for reasons not known, what would that lead to?

So really if Denise had chased the two who were as seen stagnent and not running as one is holding his hand, that if Thompson, then what would happen to her if she clipped this ten year old round the ear and said 'get off my son'. That is why we mothers and fathers fear the action we might take that leads to us arrested. It also discounts the notion of her not being attentive and therefore challenging two Liverpool lads of ten who were talking to James. Not stealing him, enticing him. They talked to him.

Gooseygosling

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by PeterMac on 07.04.11 12:52

¿ Que ?

PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by The Shelfstacker on 07.04.11 13:31

@PeterMac wrote:¿ Que ?

You and me both.

The Shelfstacker

Posts : 122
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by aiyoyo on 07.04.11 14:34

Nonentity wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:¿ Que ?

You and me both.

Er, mois aussi. Je ne le comprends pas du tout! ¿ Que ?

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Que??/

Post by Gooseygosling on 07.04.11 15:05

Nonentity wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:¿ Que ?

You and me both.

A poster put of the issue of Mrs Bulger being visually distracted as if she had not have been James would not have been murdered as to the seconds of subversive action by two juveniles.

I replied to state the enormity of difference and to state actual seen events instead of speculating on an event that was not seen as to presumptive.


Is that clear. I then stated that the actions of persons who are challenging children who might look as a generalization and seek to see the distinctive fleck in the eye is truly horrendous.
Do you not agree that to have bands of brigands come from the city to places to do just what is not to be done. To not search, but to inspect each child for that eye fleck. PM me if there is issue with this.

My thoughts are with the families who have had children abducted by no fault of their own.

Gooseygosling

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-04-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by The Shelfstacker on 07.04.11 15:44

Gooseygosling, are you by any chance using Google Translate or something similar? I fully understand if English is not your first language but at the moment I am struggling to make any sense of even the gist of what you are saying.

The Shelfstacker

Posts : 122
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Guest on 07.04.11 15:50

I think, and Gooseygosling will correct me if I am wrong, is that in the letter to Tony they put the McCanns and Jamie Bulger in one sentence. I think the point Gooseygosling is trying to make is they are totally different, Jamie was with his mom, and she looked away for a second and he was gone, whereas the McCanns children were left totally alone with no supervision. That's the way I understand it anyway.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 'We need a pic of Maddie for parenting show'

Post by Tigers Eye on 07.04.11 16:03

Gooseygosling

You may not be aware of this but your posts do not make sense in English therefore people are commenting that they do not understand you. If you are using Google translate or similar it is not working and it is not respectful to this Forum if you do not understand this problem, despite your efforts to make a point.

This is a serious debate about a child who in all probability died on May 3rd 2007 so if it's a wind-up, it's not funny.

Tigers Eye

Posts : 22
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-01-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum