Paulo Sargento: Maddie: The paradox of the Portuguese press

Maddie: The paradox of the Portuguese press

By Paulo Sargento
Tuesday, 29.06.09
Translation by Nigel Moore

Today, in Loures, a protocol was signed between police and judicial authorities and other public and private institutions with the aim of putting into operation an alert system for missing children, using a network based on the rapid and effective dissemination of information relevant to the recovery of those children.

Contrary to what one would expect, taking into account the relevance of the theme, the event was not given the publicity it deserved. Very little media space was devoted to it or even made reference to it.

However, two organs of the general daily written press, with different profiles (a more popular one, with a tabloid inclination, and a less popular and more politically correct one) echoed the "news" of the British tabloid "The Sun" with news which constituted a sort of requiem for shameful news campaigns, and whose central theme was the subject of appeals made to the European Court of Human Rights and Amnesty International. I refer to the alleged investigations that two private detectives (retired British police) are undertaking, on behalf of the McCanns, into a 64-year-old British citizen, Raymond Hewlett, who is subject to chemotherapy treatment for throat cancer which is in its terminal phase. Now, it is known, that neither of the two detectives have a search warrant from any institution, of any European state, to carry out such procedures. Also, it is known, that the citizen had already been investigated by the Portuguese judicial police (as recorded in the process) and was discarded as a suspect. So what interest does this citizen have for the Maddie process? The answer to this question lies in all processes of life which make the dying, suddenly, prominent, to the extent that they can be simultaneously safe scapegoats and eternal guardians of "bad secrets."

The news on this citizen has decreased significantly. Because in recent days there has appeared another potential suspect who, by chance, is a prisoner in the British Isles. The piece of news that the two above-mentioned Portuguese newspapers cited, was already out of date by reason of a new set of suspects (one for each day of the week, as suggested, with appropriate irony, by the journalist Duarte Levy) refering to a hypothetical and unconfirmed investigation of the van which was owned by Mr. Raymond Hewlett. According to the two detectives, the investigation of the van is vital because they could find "a single hair or a clothing fibre (which) could provide the breakthrough for which all are desperate." Before continuing, who are "all" those who "are desperate"? Secondly for what motive would they dismiss the forensic evidence found in the grey Renault Scenic, two years ago, that they will now value from this blue "Dodge" van? Thirdly, it does not seem that the archiving of the Maddie case has now ceased, at least not up to the date of writing this post.

It was, therefore, for me, a disappointment to see that two major Portuguese newspapers did a copy/paste from this piece of news (which no longer was before it came into being) without confirming the information provided by the tabloid which, in its own head office, would have to justify some of this information. It would have been good if these two newspapers had given precedence, today, to the good news about a new and faster recovery system for missing children, instead of translating the last notes of a requiem for the announced deaths of inconsistent theories or, even, the absurd.

Since they spoke of hair and fibre, I'm waiting to see what the tabloids will say about certain fibres, of a certain "textile" lost in the Maddie case, which within a few days will be the subject of public scrutiny...

See you soon
-----
Paulo Sargento: Câmara de Comuns

The McCann documentary, analysed by forensic psychologist Paulo Sargento
by astro   9 years ago  
Of the pretence reconstitution of the facts of the 3rd of May 2007, when Maddie disappeared, there's no more than a few minutes. Then, one can see a happy family

by Hernâni Carvalho

Kate McCann saw the open window. Thus starts the McCanns’ documentary. To tell you the truth, the window was opened by Kate herself, as proved by the lophoscopic (fingerprints) analyses that were made by the PJ on the windows of apartment 5A, at the Ocean Club, in Praia da Luz. Thus starts the documentary that SIC broadcast lat Tuesday.

From the pretence reconstitution, we saw, all in all, less than five minutes. But we saw a happy family. A perfect one. Kate paints with the twins, she takes them to watch the chicken, the ducks and the horses. She peels potatoes and greets Gerry when he arrives after a day of medical consults. To be certain, we even saw Maddie’s father’s patients. Kate was also a doctor, part time, but now all she does is to care for the children. Life as it is for perfect, complying parents.

Now, the McCanns protect the twins. When half of the world was searching for Maddie, the twins’ faces could be seen. Even on the day that they landed in England, after leaving Faro with State honours, without having been subject to any inspection at the airport, like it happens to everyone else. The McCann documentary is a television making work of art. Concerning the coherence of the facts that were broadcast, that’s another issue.

'Tvmais' saw the McCann documentary in the company of forensic psychologist Paulo Sargento. And we registered his comments.

Paulo Sargento: As was expected, the announced reconstitution by the McCanns resulted in an image laundering attempt, that in my opinion is disastrous.

In truth, they didn’t dare to call this production a “reconstitution”…
P.S.: Yes, but they suggested that this was a documentary that would provide new clues.

And did they do that?
P.S.: No. Right away because neither the actors served the purpose nor the reconstitution of the night when Maddie disappeared is even complete. They only used one actress to play the inconsistent role of Jane Tanner.

Maybe there’s another documentary in waiting…
P.S.: That’s could be it… Notice that Matthew Oldfield played himself, very briefly, and Gerry McCann was counselling and little more. It’s bizarre that the documentary occupies itself with the reconstitution for less than one tenth of its total length (50 minutes).


What do you say about Jane Tanner’s testimony?
P.S.: Hardly credible. The alleged abductor walks slowly, in an excessively lit area (under the street lamp), for Jane not to be able to remember any trace of his face. And yet, she remembers difficult details like the colour of the trousers, the jacket and the type of shoes.

And the statements from five persons who saw the “ugly” man?
P.S.: It’s interesting that the man was only seen by English people, and almost exclusively during the day.

The Smiths saw him at 9.50 p.m.
P.S.: Yes. But on a location and walking into a direction that were opposed to those that were mentioned by Jane Tanner. What’s even more curious is the fact that the witness mentions that “he doesn’t look like a tourist”, carrying “a little girl with long blonde hair”. This is impressive. A little English-looking girl, being carried away by a person who didn’t look like a tourist. The so-called ugly man. Adding to the fact that he was only seen by English people, during the day, wearing a black jacket (not a brown one, like Jane mentions), he appears too early in the story. The first testimony dates from the 29th of April and one of the detectives speaks a lapidary sentence: “Someone watched the apartment for a week or more”. Well, if Maddie disappeared on the 3rd of May and the McCanns arrived on the 28th of April…, this is called a FRAUD!


In the documentary, there is a new piece of data. Gerry, Kate and Matthew admit that they didn’t even enter the children’s bedroom and they say it was too dark to be see clearly whether Maddie was there or not.
P.S.: That’s where Gerry betrays himself. He states that when he looked into the room, he remembers thinking how beautiful Madeleine was and how much he loved her and how proud he was to be the father of three beautiful children. Gerry says that he felt that when he “looked into the bedroom”. Just watch the documentary again.

Nevertheless, the detectives say that they are hopeful…
P.S.: Detectives don’t operate on hope. Detectives work with hypothetical-deductive methods, based on evidence and indications.


At least, we now know the McCanns’ everyday life?
P.S.: Not even that. It’s daily life that is TOO NORMAL for someone who has suffered one of the most devastating blows that a human being can suffer: the loss of a daughter. Everything smells artificial and plastic. The relationship with the twins, the phone call with Jane Tanner, Gerry’s professional routines, Kate waiting for him… All in all, an old, well-known strategy of promoting the image of a happy family, which in this case, becomes grotesque. Just notice Gerry McCann’s sentence: “We’re a family, a happy family, but incomplete…” As much as we want to, not everything is what it seems to be!


source: Tvmais, 13.05.2009, paper edition

Remember also they were visited by social workers.
The mccanns described it as they invited them over for a chat and a cup of tea rather than the more damning the social workers visited because they lost one child due to self proclaimed neglect and as a result the social workers visited to see if the children were at risk from neglect in the home.
Something which would have condemned them in the public eye.

Also after the social workers visited and did whatever they needed to do, the press stopped showing the faces of the twins, insted their faces were now pixellated.

Children on the at risk register or are part of a criminal investigation as victims or as perpetrators are banned from having their faces shown and in some cases banned from any form of identification such as a relation committing a crime and pictures are shown of said perpetrator and any children in the photo are pixellated or blurred out.
Victims of sex crimes are also not identified especially if victim of a close relative such as a parent where surnames are redacted to prevent identity of the child.

In this case, the mccanns had used the twins as photo opportunities to portray their innocence and new found parenting skills, especially after being told the twins were no longer welcomed at the creche and now the mccanns had to rely on friends and relatives to babysit whilst they went swanning off around the world.

I do not know  what rules the mccanns had to follow after the social workers visit, nor do i know what other sanctions were laid down or how many other visits the social made.
The mccanns mentioned one as they suspected or know that one would be made simply because they claimed alleged neglect by leaving their children home alone.
The would not mention any further visits as that would damage their reputation and reduce donations.

No mention is made either of social workers visiting the other tapas 7 members as they too claimed they left their children home alone each night although managing to not lose a child due to alleged paedophile abduction.

Social workers are forbidden from disclosing any information they got from the group as a whole to the general public including media.
Privacy is first and foremost in relation to the privacy of the children.

Since Maddie became a ward of court the mccanns are no longer legally responsible for her nor can they make decisions for her or on her behalf, it all has to go to court for permission.

I am not sure if this also limits what information they get since they are no longer her legal carers.
They may now be restricted to getting the same info that we the public get.
They may be allowed to make announcements to the public and appeals after they seek the courts permission.
In effect they may be like us, interested bystanders.

Once the twins reach 18 and become adults, they may decide to speak out for themselves rather than have their parents speak on their behalf.

I suspect that their coming of age may be something kate and gerry, and i suspect kate more than anything dread.
Up till now the twins have been effectively gagged by their parents.
They are restricted on what they can see and hear in the home, probably restricted on what they can see and do on their computers and phones.
I will bet the twins have been active online  seeking out info about themselves (everyone does this) their parents, the tapas 7 and Maddie and the case in general.
Searching out info their parents haven't told them.

The mccann may have reason to fear the twins coming of age.
The can no longer restrict what they can see and hear, nor can they stop the twins from talking out in public.

This may be the time that kate told us about in relation to pressing a button and they would ALL be together.
This tells us that kate knows Maddie is dead as this the only way they could all be together, otherwise she has committed murder and suicide leaving Maddie as an orphan.
No innocent parent would ever contemplate committing murder or suicide if their missing child is alive and could be found at any moment.

Kate's own words and behavior tell us the truth.
I wonder what the twins will do?

Hobs wrote:Since Maddie became a ward of court the mccanns are no longer legally responsible for her nor can they make decisions for her or on her behalf, it all has to go to court for permission.

I am not sure if this also limits what information they get since they are no longer her legal carers.
They may now be restricted to getting the same info that we the public get.
They may be allowed to make announcements to the public and appeals after they seek the courts permission.
In effect they may be like us, interested bystanders.

I think that rather depends on the QC and/or presiding Judge - in this case Tim Scott Q.C. and Mrs Justice Hogg..

The complete High Court Hearing, 07 July 2008
Address by Tim Scott Q.C. to the High Court of Justice on 07 July 2008, In open court: International Family Law Group [excerpt]

Proceedings were started in this Court by a summons dated 17 May 2007. The sole purpose of the proceedings has been to call upon the extensive powers of the High Court to require assistance to be given in the search for a missing child. It is of course quite routine in the Family Division for such Orders to be made. For example in an appropriate case (though not this one) an Order can be made against a mobile phone company to produce the call record of a phone. It was never the parents' wish that the proceedings should become adversarial.

On 22 May 2007 an Order was made by you [4] in very wide terms requiring any person on whom the Order was served to disclose to the parents' solicitors any information which might assist in identifying Madeleine's whereabouts. The Order contained a clause entitling any person served with it to apply to discharge or vary it.

Among the bodies on whom the Order was served was the Leicestershire Constabulary, who immediately expressed doubts as to whether the Order was intended to or could properly extend to them. In due course the parents’ solicitors issued a further application seeking clarification of this. On 02 April 2008 you gave directions which were intended to lead to a hearing at which this question would be resolved. This is that hearing.

As the preparations for this hearing advanced, it became clear that the Leicestershire Constabulary and other law enforcement agencies, while personally sympathetic to the position of the McCann's objected on principle to the disclosure of at least the great bulk of the information in their possession. They raised a number of legal arguments relating among other matters to the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of police investigations. Both the Serious Organised Crimes Agency and the Attorney-General intervened in the proceedings in order to advance their own arguments on issues of public policy.

It became clear that if today's hearing proceeded on a fully contested basis a number of areas of law of great interest to lawyers would have had to be considered. However Gerry and Kate McCann are not lawyers and so far as they were concerned the legal proceedings were moving further and further from the only matter which concerns them: the search for Madeleine. The proceedings were in danger of becoming a distraction from rather than an aid to that single goal.

Also there have been two recent developments which have greatly affected Gerry and Kate's views on these proceedings. The first is that the Leicestershire Constabulary has now agreed to release an important, though limited, part of the information which they have been seeking; I shall come back to that. The second is that, as has been widely publicised, it is expected that Gerry and Kate's status in Portugal as arguidos or suspects will be lifted soon. When that happens it is hoped and expected that a substantial further amount of information will be released.

Since Gerry and Kate have always wanted to work with all law enforcement agencies on a cooperative basis, they decided to withdraw the application against the Leicestershire Constabulary. We therefore come to Court today to ask you to approve an Order which all parties consent to.
....................

In my view, the only reason the McCanns made Madeleine a ward of court was with the intention of getting their hands on information relating to the PJ investigation and the UK case coordinators assigned to assist the PJ.  This all happened before they had any idea the PJ files would be released into the public arena once the case was archived.

I doubt they were fully conversant with the implications of the ward of court status. As regards Madeleine's future being the sole responsibility of the court, what did/does that matter - they knew/know Madeleine will never return.

The got 81 pieces of information back out of 11,000.
The information they got back was information their lawyers had received via calls from the public, a net gain of zero.