Sunday, 22 May 2011

Kate McCann: I always wanted to write down the truth, really, for my three children.


Kate McCann: I always wanted to write down the truth, really, for my three children.

So, you thought it was important that your three children knew that you "couldn't make love to Gerry"? And that they would appreciate being able to read about your very vivid imaginings about what a paedophile might be doing to Madeleine? If Madeleine were to turn up at some time in the future, I'm not sure that she would appreciate being reminded, if she had been abducted by a paedophile and somehow had managed to live and escape.

Do your children really need to read what you have written on page 129 of your book?

"I asked Gerry apprehensively if he'd had any really horrible thoughts or visions of Madeleine. He nodded. Haltingly, I told him about the awful pictures that scrolled through my head of her perfect little genitals torn apart"

That sounds almost twee. And it reads like you're talking about a child's expensive material possession being damaged. I can imagine adoring relatives, leaning over a crib and making gushing remarks about a baby's "perfect little fingers and toes," but who would talk about the baby's "perfect little genitals."? If an examining physician were to lean over and coo about the child's "perfect little genitals," wouldn't alarm bells be raised? Is this how you imagine, Kate McCann, that the readers will be persuaded that you are a loving mother? You have visions of "perfect little genitals."? Well, I may be just an internet nutter, but I'm appalled beyond words to describe my disgust.

Kate McCann: I guess the reason, well the trigger reason, why I actually...why it became a book and why it was published, was because we have to fund the search for Madeleine and the fund was running low. So, we had to raise money.

You also need to raise a bob or two for the costs awarded against you for the legal action in trying to get Gonçalo Amaral's book banned, costs to Carter-Ruck and costs for the upcoming libel action against Gonçalo Amaral.

Kate McCann: If I'm honest (And why wouldn't you be? And what would you be saying if you weren't being honest?) I suppose I was hoping that we'd have more public support, really, but because we were at such a low ebb, and things couldn't have got any worse than they were in September 2007, I suppose I'd hoped that someone would come forward and publicly show support or basically , you know, say what they felt about certain bits of information that were appearing in the media.

I really can't make very much of that vague waffle. The question to which Kate McCann may have been responding may have been edited, but if she is still talking about why she wrote and published the book, which I assume she is, then this is just a load of waffle.

"More public support."? In terms of money? As soon as the fund was set up, the money rolled in: pensioners sent donations from their meager income and schoolchildren made and sold cakes. Or is Kate McCann referring to more recent times when the fund was running low and Gerry sent out begging letters to people who had previously given very generous support, people like JK Rowling? Did the rich sponsors not come up with the goods, then?

What does how things were in 2007 have to do with the fund running low, publishing the book and being at a low ebb at an unspecified time? Kate just knew she had to get in a mention of how bad they felt when they were made arguidos by those nasty sardine-munching Portuguese cops?

And when was it she had hoped this person would have come forward and "publicly shown support." September 2007? Around the time she decided to write and publish the book, and it didn't happen? As a response to Gerry's begging letters to rich supporters who would publicly have thrown a great wad of cash their way and no one did, so she had to get the book written?

Kate McCann sounds like she desperately needs to cover a few important details, but they're all kind of thrown into a cognitive blender and have come out as information mousse. She thinks that no one came out and said what they felt about "certain bits of information that were appearing in the media."? What bits of information? When? When they were made arguidos? Who would she have wanted to make this public display of support? A politician? A journalist? Does Kate McCann have a specific "someone," in mind here and she's telling that "someone," how let down she felt?

I just don't know what Kate McCann is waffling on about there.

Gerry McCann: We have proceedings underway against Gonçalo Amaral. That's all we really want to say about it.

Oh dear! Does that mean they're going ahead with the libel action? I wonder what their legal representative, Isabel Duarte, is advising them on this. Since three judges, sitting at the Lisbon Court of Appeal decided that "The contents of the book do not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs," (Guardian 19/10/2010) I would have thought the McCanns would have reconsidered pursuing this action. Do they seriously think that a lower court will ignore the deliberations of the Court of Appeal and decide that Amaral's book does breach their rights?

Ah well! I guess the McCanns will just keep on doing what they've been doing: think that if they repeat something often enough, shout as loudly as they can, like small, spoilt childen, they'll get their own way. One of these days, somebody's gonna shut them up. And please God make it soon! I still think a reconstruction would put paid to their fairy stories! Maybe the Scotland Yard team and the Portuguese police will jointly request it. They really should. And like lots of other internet nutters, I am eternally optimistic that justice will be done one of these days for Madeleine.

Somebody do something to shut up that pair of lying eejits!


Anonymous said...

Excellent Anna, thank you.
You are an internet star!

Anonymous said...

the circus drags on still further

I can't help feeling it will soon be out of their control, though

"if you give them enough rope......."

Angelique said...


Yes - a very good article - It sounds very much as though Kate and Gerry are running out of steam if they can't even answer a question properly. I wonder what these bits of information are too.

Is this a subtle plea to someone for help. Don't they have his/her phone number. Things must be getting bad.

Anonymous said...

I am so bored with these two I wish Cameron either covers it up or sends them to the moon..either way enough already.

The maid will play a vital role if she is called and not been 'got at' in the libel suit..she cleaned the apartment Monday and Wednesday..she saw cots in seperate rooms on Wednesday.. McCann when asked denied a cot was in the 'parents' room ..Payne put in his tuppence worth and went as far as to say he believes the McCanns had three cots in their apartment. Which brings me to believe Monday when the cleaner was there IF she is asked she will confirm BOTH cots were in the room the McCanns claim they slept in...there would be no harm in moving cots around BUT McCann denied it ! staging I call that..just working in a little piece now.

Anonymous said...

Looking through the files it was Stephen Carpenter who introduced Murat to was Stephen Carpenter who introduced McCann to some local chap called 'Dave' McCannn it seems was asking for keys to empty properties in the that maybe had a fridge connected ! They should be locked up for a very,very long time.BUT it aint gonna happen.

AnnaEsse said...

Anonymous, I think the children slept in the room that has been designated as Kate and Gerry's and Kate and Gerry slept in the twin beds in the other bedroom. Hence, there was none of Madeleine's DNA in the bedroom which was said to be where she had slept.
In the Vanity Fair interview "Unanswered Prayers," Gerry said that when they discovered that Madeleine had gone, the twins were asleep on one bed and on the other was only Cuddle Cat and Madeleine's pink blanket. No cots mentioned!

AnnaEsse said...

Anonymous, suppose the McCanns and their friends had been scouting out the area around Praia da Luz, or maybe just the Ocean Club, with a view to buying a shared apartment. They do all seem to enjoy the sports. They would have perhaps had the keys to a few properties which they were evaluating as possible purchases.

su said...

you know that when i read that bit about her perfect genitals i thought hey wait a minute.
this is food for a pedophile.
the most bizarre idea arose which of course has no validity but it is what her writing created.
what if this child is still alive and in the hands of pedophiles, high ranking pedophiles and each time a comment like this is made - then the bidding goes up and she gets moved along.

why else would you write this?
surely someone close to kate who read this manuscript would have said hey love leave this out, it does you no favours.

odder than odd.

Anonymous said...

I think this isn't food for pedophiles, this is food for the general public and especially for the twins. They and we all have to believe Madeleine was taken by a pedophile, the best scenario for the McCanns. Kate's book is a disgusting piece of propaganda for the pedophile theory. Madeleine is dead and the McCanns know why and how she died, they know the truth, the truth that will put an end to their own life. All IMO of course.

Anonymous said...

Ye GADs. Her book lets a very big cat out of the bag and the mysterious person is mysterious no more!

Anonymous said...

If nothing else, by keeping their story in the public eye, and as high profile as possible, they are ensuring that if they should ever come to trial for neglect, or anything more serious, it will be impossible to empanel a jury that does not have prior knowledge of the case. If they had been formally charged, and then gone on to do what they have done, it would be subjudice. I don’t understand Ket’s reluctance to answer questions, I don’t understand why the dna from the human decomposition fluids found in their car hasn’t been actions, and I don’t understand why social services have left them alone.