Leveson Enquiry 23/11/11 - McCanns to give evidence

Kate McCann, "Headline said, it was her blood in parents car - totally untrue"

Gerry McCann, "Madeleine's DNA was not recovered from our hire car"

But the forensic reports disagree with both of them !!!



Processo pdf10 page 121-122 [2615-2616]

Ex.mo Sr. Coordenador de Investigacao Criminal

Serve a presente para proceder à juncao de um relatorio de exame laboratorial efectuado em Inglaterra, escrito em lingua inglesa e traduzido para portugues, entregue a esta policia no dia 04 de Setembro de 2007 pelo oficial de policia ingles Struart Prior.

Este relatorio laboratorial diz respeito aos exames efectuados a duas recolhas de vestigios, uma atras do sofa da sala de estar do apartamento 5A e outra na bagageira do veiculo utilizado pela familia MCCANN, em regime de aluguer, a partir do final do mes de Maio do corrente ano.

Em qualquer destas recolhas (amostras) foi encontrado ADN cujos componentes tambem se encontram no perfil de MADELEINE MCCANN.

No tocante aos vestigios recolhidos atras do sofa todos os componentes confirmados de ADN coincidem com os componentes correspondentes no perfil de ADN de MADELEINE MCCANN.

Na amostra recolhida na bagageira do veiculo, 15 dos componentes de ADN identificados coincidem com os componentes correspondentes no perfil de ADN de MADELEINE MCCANN, este de 19 componentes.

Portimao, 11 de Septembro de 2007
O Inspector,

(Joao Carlos)



translation:

In each of these samples DNA was found, the components of which were also found in the profile of Madeleine McCann.

As regards the samples collected from behind the sofa, all of the confirmed DNA components coincided with the corresponding components of the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann.

In the sample collected from the luggage boot of the car, 15 of the DNA components that were identified coincide with the corresponding components of the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann, which is composed of 19 components.

Stella wrote:I would like to have seen an Inquiry dedicated just to phone hacking myself.

Then on a seperate note, one for each of the following, photographers, journalists and newspaper editors.

To lump them into one pot is a big mistake in my eyes.

\
True, but its more cost effective to allow all those truely aggrieved to come on and speak except you ended up getting disingenuous cases wasting Inquiry's time and taxpayer's money..

The mccanns should have been allowed on at all. They were the biggest offender of making use of the media machinery for their agenda and should know better negatives about them come with the turf.

Levi wrote:Snip
The McCanns said that they HAD been sent a photograph of the girl in India but they did not claim it was the Daily Mail who had sent it to them did they? They had already told the authorities that the girl in India was not their daughter but the Mail picked up the story and went ahead with it anyway. Do you see how this is NOT the McCanns or Clarence lying now?

I plead guilty
I was using it as a shorthand, to save bandwidth and space, and but it turned out to look like sloppy thinking.

The full story involves the whole of the India sighting and Mitchell's filmed interview in which he stated that DNA and photographs had been sent, compared and found not to be those of Madeleine Beth McCann.

Mitchell, who speaks for and on behalf of he McCanns, or at least did so at that time, and was paid for doing so, can be said to be their mouthpiece and what he says can be assumed to come from them or be said on their behalf. Only once, to my knowledge have the McCanns publicly tried to distance themselves from anything he has said.
(There is speculation on another thread that his apparent disappearance might be in some way connected with this story.)

What he, and therefore the McCanns said, was that DNA had been taken from the hapless girl in India, and compared with the known DNA of Madeleine. It must then have either been profiled there and the result e-mailed back, or the original material sent back to the UK and profiled in the UK. We must assume that Madeleine's DNA profile is on record in the UK.

Similarly the photograph must have been taken by a known person, probably connected with the Local Police, under proper conditions, properly documented, and sent back to the UK, either electronically, or through the post, for comparison with known photos of Madeleine.

In the first case the parents would have been told of the result, and in the second case it is inconceivable that the McCanns would not have been involved.

The subsequent articles in the press and Mitchell’s statements and probable involvement in and control of the wording of what went out, were therefore done with the full knowledge of the parents.

Your point about the Mail not actually having contacted them before printing the story may well be correct. But he could have said that about any of the other newspapers and on-line agencies who handled the story. That is not how it works, as we know. That is why they pay Mitchell for handling it all.

So yes, what Gerry said was possibly and indeed probably factually accurate in that specific and narrow sense, but in the wider sense, with the implication that that the whole story was made up, which formed much of the context of his evidence, and that they had no knowledge or involvement in it at all they are stuck. Either there was a photo and DNA, or there was not. Either there was a girl and a sighting, or there was not.

We know that the Indian Police say there was no sighting and no girl. Mitchell, and therefore the McCanns say there was.

Each is capable of independent verification. So far as I know there has never been any.

Well if the Indian police denied any such sighting, then who got the alleged DNA/photo? The Indian police would not have any reason to deny the sighting if it happened, I doubt they are the slightest bit interested and I imagine in a country that large and with the social conditions that exist that there are probably loads of disappearing kids and not that high on the agenda. I see no reason for them to deny it, so therefore I doubt it even happened.

The McCann fraternity have every reason to want there to be sightings, because it adds credibility to Madeleine still being findable, however, even after they had dismissed an alleged photo they offered no proof at all that such a "sighting" had ever taken place. There was no detail disclosed to my knowledge that made that particular story valid.

The problem with a half told story is that you either have to fill in the gaps or dismiss the whole thing, as it makes no sense - rather like a joke without a punchline....

"Knock, knock"

"Who's there"

(deathly silence)

See? It doesn't work!

candyfloss wrote:

candyfloss wrote:I hadn't realised that Matt Baggot Chief Constable of Leics Police had written a letter in Sept 2007, followed up with another, to the media to voice his concerns and ask for restraint. Do the police normally do this with the media??

Numbers 54 and 55 GM witness statement.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/interactive/2011/nov/23/gerry-mccann-witness-statement-leveson-inquiry

And now we have this..................... do the police really write to the media to stop stories or is it just in this case ...............



Even police chief's pleas failed to stop false stories

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/police-chief-s-pleas-failed-stop-false-stories/story-13941877-detail/story.html?mid=5393

I wonder. I also wonder if it's standard practice for top lawyers to go around visiting news editors on behalf of their clients - asking them not to print stories because their clients say they're not true? Is this common, does this go on all the time? 0r is it just in this case?

Here's a reminder about the McCann's former lawyer manipulating the press and setting the stage for the Leveson enquiry.

This bile shows why we need a privacy law

17 May 2011:


Angus McBride:


Cases like the McCanns show the base motives really driving the press assault on privacy laws
The fact is, the press has not earned the right to unfettered freedom of expression. I am reminded reading Kate McCann's deeply moving book
that on their return from Portugal, having been declared suspects in
their daughter's disappearance, Gerry and Kate McCann asked me to visit
newspaper editors to explain that there was no truth in any of the
allegations made in the more scurrilous parts of the Portuguese press,
and that the material was the product of vindictive leaks. I explained
to each editor that uncorroborated evidence from a sniffer dog and inconclusive DNA
(which could have been attributable to any member of the family) found
in the boot of a hire car driven by the McCanns created not even a prima
facie case.


It is fair to say that a number of the editors
listened carefully and subsequent reporting reflected the fact that they
understood that to report the allegations would be immoral, scurrilous
and damaging to the efforts to find Madeleine McCann.


Others,
however, listened coldly and made it quite clear that commercial
pressures trumped completely the rights of these two tragic parents and
their daughter. I was told that this "whodunnit" mystery was one of the
biggest stories in years ("alongside Lord Lucan and Shergar") and that
the truth of what had taken place was not going to get in the way of
that line of reporting because that is what the public wanted, as
evidenced by sales increases. Bile-infested internet comment on the
McCanns was fuelled by this early reporting, and continues to this day.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/17/privacy-law-mccanns-press-assault

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Well if the Indian police denied any such sighting, then who got the alleged DNA/photo? The Indian police would not have any reason to deny the sighting if it happened, I doubt they are the slightest bit interested and I imagine in a country that large and with the social conditions that exist that there are probably loads of disappearing kids and not that high on the agenda. I see no reason for them to deny it, so therefore I doubt it even happened.

The McCann fraternity have every reason to want there to be sightings, because it adds credibility to Madeleine still being findable, however, even after they had dismissed an alleged photo they offered no proof at all that such a "sighting" had ever taken place. There was no detail disclosed to my knowledge that made that particular story valid.

A few facts about the India sighting. The story broke in an India paper/website one Saturday night a couple of months ago, and someone also broke the news on this forum. The UK media did not say a single word anywhere about it, not even a sniff. Then 5 days later on the following Thursday, all the red tops had the story all at the same time...Sun, Mirror, Mail etc. They were sitting on this story for 5 days before allowing the UK public to know about it. Someone somewhere gave the media the green light to publish this story on the Thursday obviously. We had been discussing the story for 5 whole days by this time

Everyone connected to India denied the story, from police to, I think, some government officials. Even Sky news were saying they did not publicise the story because their 'contacts' in India were saying the story was not true, think it was Ian Woods. Then we get CM saying the opposite, the Indians had a girl and the mccanns were waiting for a photo and DNA. For a start, considering you can send a photo to anyone in the world in less than 60 seconds why after 5 days are they waiting for a photo from the police? You would know for pretty sure if it was Maddie or not by her eye and the birthmark on her left knee. And if there was any chance this could be their daughter, why are they not flying over there straight away? They would have known by the sunday if the girl was credible

After this the story went dead, totally. Nobody from either side has said another word nor confirmed who was lying, nothing. CM has disappeared and appears not to be their spokesman since this episode, though he got lavish praises non stop at the LI on Wednesday

A note of the mccanns from other sightings. The one in belgium which at the time was deemed to be credible. Instead of going to Belgium the mccanns decided instead to go on holiday to Spain!

And when the PJ had the couple and little blond girl sighting in a petrol station in PDL a few days after Maddie went missing, kate got really irritated on having to go to the police station to look at the CCTV images to identify if she thought it was Maddie

I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.....

Just to add, I didn't highlight the bits in red they're highlighted (in blue) in Angus McBride's original article. They are links to other articles defending the Mccann's. There's even a link promoting "Kate MCann's deeply moving book" You couldn't make this up!

How benevolent of Angus McBride & Kingsley Napley to publicly defend the McCann's like that and all for FREE! Such goodwill, such charitableness towards two suffering souls; bless, restores one's faith in the system *sarcasm*

It just goes to show it's not all about the money.

The comments on the article makes for interesting reading, especially the highest rated ones.

In Video (thanks hideho) regarding Kates Diary Gerry said that Kate didn't keep a diary/journal until a couple of weeks after Maddie went missing, Yet I seem to recall Kate writing
'read stories with M S & A and gave them treats of milk and biscuits' - words to that effect not exact, but included M in them (as Kate wrote) I recall her writing non de script things such as 'brushed teeth ' blow dried hair' odd random's that you just would not write about because it is normal to brush your teeth everyday, If Gerry is correct in saying the Diary was 'started a couple of weeks after' It is making me think the the talk of her writing 'm' in her diary was added in after , unless Im confusing it with the statements? I just can't seem to keep up with it all.

jd wrote:
This is good aiyoyo and needs to be addressed with the correct authorities

On another note "we felt that having News International helping in that, and ultimately where I think the media have helped in this situation, of galvanising the public, having them reengaged with us and Madeleine, is what tipped the balance"....isn't this saying they wanted the media and the public which totally contradicts what they were complaining about in the LI"

What is even more perplexing is why do they need the media to help them re-engage the public with them and Madeleine?
Why do they constantly want particularly the UK people reminded to help them look out for Madeleine?
Why dont they get off their skinny lying arse and return to PDL for the search?
Also how far did they imagine the UK media would reach? Maddie disappeared in another country, what good is UK media reminding the UK people - is she supposed to be found in UK?

If they want to engage the public for the search they should do international appeal? 
If they only want money off the UK public then I suppose engaging the UK public should suffice.

aiyoyo

I think the reason is that the UK is still by reason of nationality, the most likely still to donate. The word is out now that there is another side to the thesis of "abduction". Gerry's global agenda unfortunately also spread the word about Forums discussing Madeleine's disappearance who had differing opinions. The UK is a better option to succumb IMO to the plea for help.

When Gerry first announced his "global agenda" I was dismayed to think that he would be able to draw on the sympathy and possible funds he would achieve. It obviously hasn't worked out as he thought it would hence his need to keep a high profile here.

Father of 7/7 victim snubs the press inquiry 'hijacked by celebrities'

‘I am worried that as a result of this
inquiry and any knee-jerk reaction the Government will impose overly
restrictive codes of practice on solid, important journalism,’ he said.

What a sensible statement, it worries me too Sir as it's happening already with a certain couple.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066410/Father-7-7-victim-snubs-press-inquiry-hijacked-celebrities.html#ixzz1elYMSHvL





R

JD wrote:

"And when the PJ had the couple and little blond girl sighting in a petrol station in PDL a few days after Maddie went missing, kate got really irritated on having to go to the police station to look at the CCTV images to identify if she thought it was Maddie"

That is interesting JD - Do you have a reference or link for that?

bristow wrote:Father of 7/7 victim snubs the press inquiry 'hijacked by celebrities'

‘I am worried that as a result of this
inquiry and any knee-jerk reaction the Government will impose overly
restrictive codes of practice on solid, important journalism,’ he said.

What a sensible statement, it worries me too Sir as it's happening already with a certain couple.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2066410/Father-7-7-victim-snubs-press-inquiry-hijacked-celebrities.html#ixzz1elYMSHvL

R

I also agree with this gentleman.

dragonfly wrote:In Video (thanks hideho) regarding Kates Diary Gerry said that Kate didn't keep a diary/journal until a couple of weeks after Maddie went missing, Yet I seem to recall Kate writing
'read stories with M S & A and gave them treats of milk and biscuits' - words to that effect not exact, but included M in them (as Kate wrote) I recall her writing non de script things such as 'brushed teeth ' blow dried hair' odd randoms that you just would not write about because it is normal to brush your teeth everyday, If Gerry is correct in saying the Diary was 'started a couple of weeks after' It is making me think the the talk of her writing 'm' in her diary was added in after , unless Im confusing it with the statements? I just can't seem to keep up with it all.

I certainly agree that it's hard to keep up with everything. I thought that the diary was started as soon as Madeleine "disappeared" to show her (when she was found) how hard her parents had worked to find her. Stop sniggering at the back there! Another suggestion methinks that they knew she hadn't just wandered off and wouldn't be found within a day or two.

It looks though as if Kate was keeping a diary prior to 3rd May judging by all the mind-bogglingly dull details in the book as to what they did - and of course there's nothing unusual about that.

Marian wrote:It looks though as if Kate was keeping a diary prior to 3rd May judging by all the mind-bogglingly dull details in the book as to what they did - and of course there's nothing unusual about that.

Who on earth goes on holiday with 3 kids and writes a diary about how they brushed their teeth, had some milk etc?

AskTheDogsSandra wrote:

Marian wrote:It looks though as if Kate was keeping a diary prior to 3rd May judging by all the mind-bogglingly dull details in the book as to what they did - and of course there's nothing unusual about that.

Who on earth goes on holiday with 3 kids and writes a diary about how they brushed their teeth, had some milk etc?

AskTheDogsSandra, who writes of such things? A parent who did sod all with their children that holiday but help brush teeth and pour supper milk, oh what about the night time story, bless.

No exciting times in the rock pools hunting for shells. No brushing sand from between toes after a cold paddle. No rosey cheeks and cries of glee.

No just bung them in a creche all day then bung them into bed all night, anything so you don't have to waste your "me" time on three children, perish the thought.

Daisy wrote:I know the Daily Mail comments page probably isn''t the best way to gauge public perception but as an indicator to how the majority are feeling, it's a pretty useful tool.

Take a look, and this is despite the heavy censoring/moderating. (I've already failed 3 attempts at getting a comment published)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065102/Leveson-Inquiry-Kate-Gerry-McCann-arrive-evidence.html#comments

Well that didn't take long. All comments on this article have now been whoosed! down the memory hole they go! Replaced with this simple llittle message: "Sorry we are unable to accept comments for legal reasons."

Daisy, I made two attempts to post comments on the Mail article, but neither made it.

My comments were in no way libellous, they merely queried politely feeling 'mentally raped' by the publication of the stolen diary and yet later publishing a book with info about your missing daughters genitals, your troubled sex life etc.

The only way you could comment was by clicking the red and green arrows to indicate your like/dislike of the existing posts. And the pro McCann posts were getting lots of dislikes.

I've no problem with a delay in your post going up while the moderators/lawyers consider it, but my post wasn't libellous, I'm sure yours wasn't Daisy, and this total censorship is so scary. No paper wants to be hit with a big libel award especially with falling circulation for mostl papers but if papers are careful they won't get awards against them. they might get a C-R letter but they won't take it to court when they know (a) the case is bogus and (b) their clients will have to answer questions.

This sentence from the Leveson inquiry by GM is rather puzzling. I have read and re-read it and it is rather odd......................


6 A. Yeah, I mean I think there were two elements. The

7 reporting quickly became highly speculative, and often

8 stories -- for example, there must have been "McCann

9 fury" on the front page of many newspapers over that

10 summer that would quote an unnamed source or friends,

11 and unless our phones were hacked, which I don't think

12 they were, then these were made up because they were

13 simply not true.

Xavier wrote:JD wrote:
"And when the PJ had the couple and little blond girl sighting in a petrol station in PDL a few days after Maddie went missing, kate got really irritated on having to go to the police station to look at the CCTV images to identify if she thought it was Maddie"
That is interesting JD - Do you have a reference or link for that?

Is this the bit you are looking for ?
p.92 "It was seven-thirty by the time one of the PJ officers drove us away from the police station. Angela Morado came with us. Ten or fifteen minutes into our journey, the police officer had a call from his station. He said something to Angela, who explained that he’d been ordered to return us to the police station straight away. He wasn’t allowed to tell us why. Already driving at quite a scary speed, he suddenly swung the car into a U-turn, floored the accelerator and drove us at a life-threatening 120mph plus back towards Portimão. I cannot overstate how terrifying this was. Had Madeleine been found? Please God. Was she alive? Was she dead? Gerry and I clung on to each other for dear life. I was crying hysterically and praying for all I was worth.
Back at the police station we endured at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol-station shop. We weren’t told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn’t. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated."

PeterMac wrote:

Xavier wrote:JD wrote:
"And when the PJ had the couple and little blond girl sighting in a petrol station in PDL a few days after Maddie went missing, kate got really irritated on having to go to the police station to look at the CCTV images to identify if she thought it was Maddie"
That is interesting JD - Do you have a reference or link for that?

Is this the bit you are looking for ?
p.92 "It was seven-thirty by the time one of the PJ officers drove us away from the police station. Angela Morado came with us. Ten or fifteen minutes into our journey, the police officer had a call from his station. He said something to Angela, who explained that he’d been ordered to return us to the police station straight away. He wasn’t allowed to tell us why. Already driving at quite a scary speed, he suddenly swung the car into a U-turn, floored the accelerator and drove us at a life-threatening 120mph plus back towards Portimão. I cannot overstate how terrifying this was. Had Madeleine been found? Please God. Was she alive? Was she dead? Gerry and I clung on to each other for dear life. I was crying hysterically and praying for all I was worth.
Back at the police station we endured at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol-station shop. We weren’t told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn’t. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated."

Thank you PeterMac. Interesting. I am not sure how it has been interpeted by JD that Kate was "really irritated" though.

[quote="Xavier"]

PeterMac wrote:

Xavier wrote:JD wrote:
"And when the PJ had the couple and little blond girl sighting in a petrol station in PDL a few days after Maddie went missing, kate got really irritated on having to go to the police station to look at the CCTV images to identify if she thought it was Maddie"
That is interesting JD - Do you have a reference or link for that?

Is this the bit you are looking for ?
p.92 "It was seven-thirty by the time one of the PJ officers drove us away from the police station. Angela Morado came with us. Ten or fifteen minutes into our journey, the police officer had a call from his station. He said something to Angela, who explained that he’d been ordered to return us to the police station straight away. He wasn’t allowed to tell us why. Already driving at quite a scary speed, he suddenly swung the car into a U-turn, floored the accelerator and drove us at a life-threatening 120mph plus back towards Portimão. I cannot overstate how terrifying this was. Had Madeleine been found? Please God. Was she alive? Was she dead? Gerry and I clung on to each other for dear life. I was crying hysterically and praying for all I was worth.
Back at the police station we endured at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol-station shop. We weren’t told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn’t. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated."[/quot



Thank you PeterMac. Interesting. I am not sure how it has been interpeted by JD that Kate was "really irritated" though.

could this be what jd meant? admittedly, bored and irritated are not quite the same in context but there are similarities, the quote comes from Amaral's book:
There is footage of a girl looking like Madeline in one gas station. The parents are informed and Kate is asked to return to Portimão to see if it is Madeleine or not. Instead of being full of hope, Kate looks bored for being forced to return to Portimão and seems angry at the speed of the police car which startled police officers.

Thanks for that Invinoveritas. So Amaral DID meet the McCanns during the investigation. Interesting, as it has been reported that as co-ordinator he did not meet the McCanns at all.

Xavier wrote:Thanks for that Invinoveritas. So Amaral DID meet the McCanns during the investigation. Interesting, as it has been reported that as co-ordinator he did not meet the McCanns at all.

I didn't know Amaral hadn't met the McCanns during the investigation but nowhere in that quote does it say it was Amaral in the car with Kate. He may have just been reporting what his officers had told him.

Xavier wrote:Thanks for that Invinoveritas. So Amaral DID meet the McCanns during the investigation. Interesting, as it has been reported that as co-ordinator he did not meet the McCanns at all.

The quote is from his book and does not at all imply that at this moment that he had had contact with the Mccanns, it is taken from the records, as to he having met and engaged with the Mccanns, yes he did, very useful links apart from this site are here :

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id137.html

and:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/index.htm

there is so much information in the two links, take your time to read them

Anna wrote:

Xavier wrote:Thanks for that Invinoveritas. So Amaral DID meet the McCanns during the investigation. Interesting, as it has been reported that as co-ordinator he did not meet the McCanns at all.

I didn't know Amaral hadn't met the McCanns during the investigation but nowhere in that quote does it say it was Amaral in the car with Kate. He may have just been reporting what his officers had told him.

of course he wasn't 24 hours a day in action, he was quoting from the records, there is nothing wrong with that, he was coordinating