How much do you think Clarence Mitchell really knows?

I often wonder about CM and what exactly he really does know of the 'disappearance' of Madeleine.

I wonder just how close he has become to the McCanns, is it purely spin or has he become a close confident?
Could he know a whole lot more than he is letting on, or does he believe whole-heartedly that the little girl was abducted ... surely not?

I wonder how he will stand if and when the truth eventually comes out, cos he's gonna look rather silly then (well more silly than he does already.)

Perhaps it's just the money he likes but how on earth could you happily represent someone for years if you didn't believe in what you were saying?

He is taking a back seat now I know, I wonder if he has had enough, could he be the person who finally breaks?

bristow wrote:I often wonder about CM and what exactly he really does know of the 'disappearance' of Madeleine.

I wonder just how close he has become to the McCanns, is it purely spin or has he become a close confident?
Could he know a whole lot more than he is letting on, or does he believe whole-heartedly that the little girl was abducted ... surely not?

I wonder how he will stand if and when the truth eventually comes out, cos he's gonna look rather silly then (well more silly than he does already.)

Perhaps it's just the money he likes but how on earth could you happily represent someone for years if you didn't believe in what you were saying?

He is taking a back seat now I know, I wonder if he has had enough, could he be the person who finally breaks?

The question for me is rather - did he stumble upon the truth or was he told from the outset?

He's definitely up shit creek without a peddle if the shit hits the fan on this case. He wont ever break because of his involvement in the cover up. At most if push comes to shove he might act as witness against them (to protect himself) if it comes to that.

I don't think Clarrie cares what the truth is (or cared in the beginning). Like a true "PR guru" he simply wants to get his side of the story and that side ONLY. Mind he has dug himself into a massive hole on this one. Who is the story, Clarence, Kate & Gerry and running a very late fourth - Madeleine?

Of course Mitchell knows the score. He would have been briefed before his assignment. He is spinning the McCanns story not for the McCanns but more to save a few prominant people from being exposed. 007 had a licence to kill, CM has a licence to lie, twist and distort.

"Your mission is to do whatever it takes Clarence, just keep it all well away from our front door. Look after us and we will look after you. Fear nothing.".

The McCanns have, I would say, secrets that could take them all down. That is why Gerry is so cocksure. He knows if they go down they all come tumbling down with them. It could be possible that if the heat becomes too much the McCanns just might get buried along with their secrets. A double suicide? A car crash? A lunatic anti with a slasher? Suffocated under a mixture of piles of 10 pound notes and litigation writs? It could be organised. Mitchell must be a tad worried too.

I bet a contigency plan has already been drawn up. But I bet it's not drawn up by the same person who diligently swung the abduction senario in to action. They lost the plot quite early on. I actually can see the abduction theory as Mitchell's brainchild and that is why he goes the extra mile to defend it. Maybe he is trying to save his own arse as well as all those on Team McCann involved in this seedy drama.

In my eyes Mitchell stands as guilty as them all.

Gillyspot wrote:I don't think Clarrie cares what the truth is (or cared in the beginning). Like a true "PR guru" he simply wants to get his side of the story and that side ONLY. Mind he has dug himself into a massive hole on this one. Who is the story, Clarence, Kate & Gerry and running a very late fourth - Madeleine?

I don't think Clarrie was all that clever, made loads of mistakes. On the occasions that something particularly subtle came from him, I think he was directer by a much better media manipulator. But Clarrie had the advantage of being expendable.
Just think what Peter Mandelson would have made of this, a far classier performance. But he wasn't at Gordon's side until 2008. Quite a surprise when the Prince of Darkness was summoned from Brussels to support and advise the PM. I have a feeling he was advising him much earlier than that, GB needed all the help he could get.

Dear clarrie, the little boy from Frien Barnet, North London...Had quite a bumbling start to his career and famous for falling asleep at 3am during a TV broadcast. He and others in a similar role only get involved for 2 reasons 1) If it will give them publicity & exposure to enhance their career 2) making money. Thats it really. It matters not what the subject is so long as it meets the criteria of 1 and 2. Its the same with Max Clifford

I think he sees his job as an advocate (dutch job, like a lawyer and barrister in one person). He does not need to know the truth. His job is to represent his clients and to bring across their version of events. He probably does not want to know the real truth, and will not ask the Mccanns for it, in order to do his work and to be able to keep his hands "clean".
Thing is, our societies have legal counsil and their rights like client confidentiality for a good reason, it does not mean anyone else who helps a person under attack (rightly or wrongly) also has these rights. If he as much as suspects the Mccanns are not truthful, he should at the very least quit his job. If he stays on he is accountable as well.

I wonder what he knows about the Costa Concordia whom he is representing at the moment. I see the latest allegations are the company had ordered the Captain into shallow waters as a publicity stunt, it had been done numerous times before with other captains. Also they now say there maybe unregistered people on board.

I agree with Willo, he would have been fully briefed before departure to PDL. His task was to steer people up false paths, so he had to know which path to avoid in the first place.

I am as certain as I can be that Clarence Mitchell knows EXACTLY what happened to Madeleine. this is not a man who cares much for the 'truth' - just 'his truth'. Never forget, this is the man who was a campaign co-ordinator for both the Conservatives and Labour!

he lies with all the teeth in his mouth and that's a fact!

He may be like defence barristers, who have to have a policy of "suspending disbelief" in order to speak up for murderers, paedophiles and so on. But he does look like a man with a nasty secret, he's aged about 15 years in less than five years. His hair is falling out and his eyes are disappearing into bags and furrows.

juliet wrote:He may be like defence barristers, who have to have a policy of "suspending disbelief" in order to speak up for murderers, paedophiles and so on. But he does look like a man with a nasty secret, he's aged about 15 years in less than five years. His hair is falling out and his eyes are disappearing into bags and furrows.

Exactly so, juliet... and who does that sound like? Kate McCann also looks as though she has aged a good fifteen years in four!

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Exactly so, juliet... and who does that sound like? Kate McCann also looks as though she has aged a good fifteen years in four!

What a pity Madeleine was not allowed to age even 4 years in the last 4.

PeterMac wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Exactly so, juliet... and who does that sound like? Kate McCann also looks as though she has aged a good fifteen years in four!

What a pity Madeleine was not allowed to age even 4 years in the last 4.

Yep PeterMac, spot on, and that is precisely why I'm still here and won't be giving up! RIP Madeleine.

rainbow-fairy wrote:

juliet wrote:He may be like defence barristers, who have to have a policy of "suspending disbelief" in order to speak up for murderers, paedophiles and so on. But he does look like a man with a nasty secret, he's aged about 15 years in less than five years. His hair is falling out and his eyes are disappearing into bags and furrows.

Exactly so, juliet... and who does that sound like? Kate McCann also looks as though she has aged a good fifteen years in four!

After every session with the desperate duo, I'd have to hurry home and drown my sorrows in a big way. Either that or jump of a cliff. Actually, someone posted (some months ago) before and after photographs of the T9. Even Rachel M looks as if she's aged ten years. Clarrie certainly if you compare his face from 'before and after' - looks as if he's been through the mill. Can't be his conscience!

tigger wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:

juliet wrote:He may be like defence barristers, who have to have a policy of "suspending disbelief" in order to speak up for murderers, paedophiles and so on. But he does look like a man with a nasty secret, he's aged about 15 years in less than five years. His hair is falling out and his eyes are disappearing into bags and furrows.

Exactly so, juliet... and who does that sound like? Kate McCann also looks as though she has aged a good fifteen years in four!

After every session with the desperate duo, I'd have to hurry home and drown my sorrows in a big way. Either that or jump of a cliff. Actually, someone posted (some months ago) before and after photographs of the T9. Even Rachel M looks as if she's aged ten years. Clarrie certainly if you compare his face from 'before and after' - looks as if he's been through the mill. Can't be his conscience!

Definitely not his conscience, tigger Do you have a link to that topic, I'd love to look at it. Ta.

Re: Photographs and memories
happychick on Tue Sep 06, 2011 4:04 pm



The before and after photographs. Quite astounding! Crime doesn't pay in the beauty and youth stakes!

I can't get the photographs to copy and paste. Must learn! Must try harder!
Can anyone else?
Still post 6/9 on Photographs and memories. On page 23!