We read that Gerry McCann thought of the BBC programme "These programmes have been useful in going over many of the facts and, I believe, emphasising that Madeleine was abducted and is still out there somewhere"
Did you draw the same conclusion as Gerry over the programme ?
Source: http://www.findmadeleine.com/
2007-11-22 08:44:48 · 17 answers · asked by 17pdr 4 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Naturally he'd say that.
PS - When Gerry's home movie, which just happened to be made on the day when other's suggested he may have been doing something nasty with his Renault in Spain, it showed him driving at 141 to 144 km/h - breaking the speed limit. Just when Mitchell thought there'd be nothing incriminating on the video!
And throughout, not one request for prayer, anger at Madeleine's supposed abductors, rage at what could be happening to her or has happened to her... absolutely nothing to suggest that any of them want that poor child found.
2007-11-22 10:41:50 · answer #1 · answered by mini metro 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
I felt that the programme was pretty much well controlled by "Team McCann" to promote their PR campaign which is focussed on diverting attention away from what really happened on that night. It wasn't a good example of investigative journalism. Everything in the programme was controlled by the McCann lawyers and Clarence Mitchell who almost certainly restricted the output. Tellingly, no mention was made of the unfortunate pawn in the saga, Robert Murat. Why wasn't he allowed to express his voice along with the other arguidos in this case?
2007-11-22 11:04:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Gerry needs to step back and look at the way team McCann present themselves. I think a more low key approach might help and soften peoples attitude toward them. Clarence Mitchell's repeatedly aggressive rebuttals just do not strike the right note. Whether they are innocent or guilty I don't know, but they seem hell bent on presenting themselves in the worst possible light. I mean, all those obviously contrived hand holding photo opportunities etc. etc..
2007-11-22 10:29:43 · answer #3 · answered by ketkonen 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
"Emphasising that Madeleine was abducted"??? Why emphasise that? And does that mean he wants us to ignore all other possibilities?
2007-11-22 11:46:56 · answer #4 · answered by threepenny53 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I thought it was amazing that Kate was still saying 'did I do wrong' and seemed to still think that there was nothing wrong in leaving her children alone in an apartment in a foreign country.
Jane Tanner was a mass of contradictions - saying that it was a cold night and she had to wrap up but at the same time thinking it weird supposed abductor had heavy clothes on! She was lying - almost trying to conceal a nervous smirk.
2007-11-22 09:43:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 3⤋
no
he would say that wouldn't he?
that is the story he wants us to believe yet there is no evidence to support the claim, which seems surprising, unless you could the very dodgy and biased testimony of a friend of the mccanns most likely under the influence of considerable amounts of booze....
2007-11-22 08:55:47 · answer #6 · answered by Tequila.... 7 · 11⤊ 3⤋
Didn't someone notice that Clarence was the producer! Says it all really. Bless that child.
2007-11-22 09:55:30 · answer #7 · answered by MADDY 4 · 8⤊ 2⤋
All the time Madeleine McCanns name is in the press or on the telly she's not being forgotten.
2007-11-22 09:20:11 · answer #8 · answered by Tabbyfur aka patchy puss 5 · 4⤊ 7⤋
Gerry and Kate left their child alone, anyone that could do that concerns me. Them having expensive lawyers and PR people concerns me even more. They are educated and middle class white people so if they are hiding anything we shall never know.
2007-11-22 08:55:39 · answer #9 · answered by drewpeecock 2 · 14⤊ 5⤋
No i did not draw anything from Panorama.
I'm still no further forward in Knowing what happened.
2007-11-22 08:52:27 · answer #10 · answered by Agent Zero® 5 · 16⤊ 3⤋