The importance of SKY in this case

by HelenMeg 12.10.14 16:47

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

25 May 2007 - McCanns' First Interview with Ian Woods, Sky

This interview is worth watching again - it is absolutely amazing to watch the Mc Canns answer the questions put to them by Ian Woods. I would love to see an analysis of this.

Anyway it got me thinking how SKY has been so important with relation to this case from the very beginning. Martin Brunt was calling Jenny Murat on the 'phone anbd giving advice to Robert regarding lawyers - imparting that he had knowledge that the police were going to play games with false leads (this is there for all to see in a transcript of the call he made).

From the beginning it is clear SKY had some inside knowledge of the case - and have influenced the case during the 7 years it has been ongoing. This implies that Rupert Murdoch has a great interest - probably for a number of reasons..

If anyone has any ideas about this close link then please add them...

by GrizzleyBear 22.10.14 16:36

Praise to this journalist for his investigations and courage to face the consequences. British journalists and their editors should show some courage and integrity and start reporting instead of propagandizing!

by Guest 22.10.14 17:01

Gerry @ 6.06

"We cannot.. you know... grieve... (pause, oops)... one.. we did grieve, of course we grieved.. but ultimately we need to be in control so we can influence and help in any way possible".

Interesting.

by noddy100 22.10.14 17:27

For 3 weeks in this is incredible

by Guest 22.10.14 17:51

When asked if he had a message for other parents he goes on a self-justifying ramble.. at no point does he say "don't do what we did".

by palm tree 22.10.14 18:09

I wonder who they wanted to influence and then help?
IMO, they wanted to influence then help the PJ, until the pj started to think something was not right, then they stopped helping and ran
IMO

by PEANUT66 22.10.14 18:26

No way after a couple of weeks, would a normal couple behave like this. I had my ex husband snatch my daughter and believe me I was in "BITS" for months, and I knew where she was. This behaviour is not normal...imo They are lying.

by Dont Make Me Laff 22.10.14 19:00

PEANUT66 wrote:No way after a couple of weeks, would a normal couple behave like this. I had my ex husband snatch my daughter and believe me I was in "BITS" for months, and I knew where she was. This behaviour is not normal...imo They are lying.

same here Peanut66 - its not normal...

I have just watched and listened to the link again [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

and this is my take

RIght from the off KM goes into "script mode" and when asked why were 3 young children were left alone, she can't give an answer and as GM takes over her eyes say it all

I would love to see these THOUSANDS of messages from people who have said they would do exactly the same thing! Yet still he doesn't answer the question properly - He LIES by telling us that it was no different from dining in your garden ? if so, then why the need to check "regularly" ?

Do you blame yourselves? - GM sits like a stuffed shirt! and allows KM to say the first few days were difficult. (FIRST FEW DAYS? I would not be sitting there doing that interview in the fist place, I would be out searching for my child)
IMO the reason GM doesn't want to say "Don't do what we did, no matter how safe you feel" is because he would have to admit he was wrong and that is beneath him.
His comment "we (plural) try to rationalise things in our head (singular) and we were on a very safe resort says he is trying to tell us that they were right to do what they did. At lease KM has the good grace to admit that they were in the very least Naive, however her comment in her bewk where she rambles on about not wanting to leave 3 kids on a beach in eye shot for less than a minute to take some ice creams off Gerry does not square with leaving 3 kids out of site for any length of time.

Neither does her comment in the 1st interview when asked had she been racking her brain about someone watching the apartment - She says No, but later goes on to tell the world that after the abd****n (cant say that word) she had been wondering if someone had been watching her family.
Drifting towards negative thoughts. KM says in the EARLY DAYS/first FEW days...
hang on...They are only 3 weeks in wtf does that mean?
Can not greive.one..... ???
Influence (brain leak) not just Amalie and Sean but the investigation

Ref going back to UK - KM says Not without Madeleine, but as we all know she did go back (after being made a suspect) and THIS WORRIES ME - GM said it was because of his work commitments, yet KM could have easily refused to leave and given up her job to continue the search for MBM (I would have)
Was she bullied into getting out of PDL? but that's another dilemma for the forum
Ref KM stupid reply to the question ref cuddle cat. how did that start? she clearly wasn;t listening (probably reviewing something either she or GM had just said and hoped it hadn't been noticed) I will need to review this in more detail to see if I can pin point anything (a bit disconcerting when the cameraperson zooms in to whom ever is talking... would be nice to see the overall NON zoomed in footage)
GM - "so many people are helping to find Madeline" (yes there are Gerry and they are trying to unravel your and your friends lies to get to THE TRUTH about what happened to her)

KM's statement that they are likely to travel to some places in Europe now contradicts her previous statement that she WILL NOT LEAVE WITHOUT MADELEINE
Ref strength question,"After a week or so you looked broken and who could for/blame you? what happened to bring that about?
NEITHER of them seem to be able to answer, until KM "its true isn't it (looking at GM) who takes over
What the FkUC HOW does an overdraft compare with a missing child?

I am sure I will be corrected, so am happy to receive comments