"Mr McCann, 39, gave the interview alone in October, without his wife Kate, after being approached by the magazine. "
The above is with respect to the Vanity Fair interview. He also goes on to say that , "it is all MY fault. Kate and I should never have gone out to dinner." That is very odd phraseology. Why wouldn't he say it was all OUR fault? I'm wondering if this also ties in with the May 2nd theory -- it was his fault because he left crazy Kate with the children. It is interesting that as early as October, shortly after the 100% belief in each other's innocence, that Gerry gave this interview alone. It's also interesting that it is not going to be released until now (and potentially after charges have been brought). Was Gerry planning his exit strategy back then?
Does anyone know when this VF article is meant to be published? It doesn't appear to be in the February issue.
On another note, Blackwatch notes Vanity Fair contributor Michael Wolff as being connected to Editorial Intelligence. I don't know if that means anything significant, or not. He does appear to be interested in all things internet, so it may just be an unrelated, and uninteresting, coincidence.
‘There was a scheduled board meeting of Madeleine’s Fund today. We have reached a new longer- term phase in the search for Madeleine and we have reviewed how effective our Fund has been in pursuing its objectives. We agreed to continue our funding of the investigation to find Madeleine and we have decided to look at further media opportunities to support our search. To that end, we have invited two new directors to replace the two who stepped down, for business and personal reasons, We, together with Kate and Gerry McCann, extend our thanks to Esther and Phillip for their hard work and continuing support. We welcome Edward Smethurst and Jon Corner to the board to lend their expertise in commercial law and media.”
ENDS[/quote]
Damn fund becomes more entangled each day. I suspect there is a MAJOR investigation going on. If they have been asked questions about their accounting, then having Smethhurst on the board is highly dubious. His boss is coordinating the McCann defense team and the McCanns PR. Any questions asked of the fund will be shared with Clarrie and passed on to the McCanns.
Now that we're nearing the end, I see the ardent McCann fans are getting really nasty. Those of us who have protested about the McCanns' hideous exploitation of the love and kindness of millions of strangers across the globe in order to cover up for their willful disregard for their child's life are now being accused of being a 'baying mob', revelling in 'triumphalism'. How dare they?
The baying seems to be coming from the other side - why are they so disappointed that this couple are so obviously guilty? is it that they were hoping somehow they'd feel they'd won something if they weren't? would it have given them a sense of triumph? why?
I don't feel any triumph and I have no idea how to 'bay' - The McCanns' story have been catastrophic for their entire extended family and for Madeleine McCann the worst of all possible tragedies.
Joined: 15 Jun 2007 Posts: 3317 Location: In Villa DeFarge for the Trial
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:12 am Post subject:
**FUND NEWS**
Fund Update
Statement from the Board of Madeleine’s Fund- Leaving No Stone Unturned 09 January 2008
BEGINS
‘There was a scheduled board meeting of Madeleine’s Fund today. We have reached a new longer- term phase in the search for Madeleine and we have reviewed how effective our Fund has been in pursuing its objectives. We agreed to continue our funding of the investigation to find Madeleine and we have decided to look at further media opportunities to support our search. To that end, we have invited two new directors to replace the two who stepped down, for business and personal reasons, We, together with Kate and Gerry McCann, extend our thanks to Esther and Phillip for their hard work and continuing support. We welcome Edward Smethurst and Jon Corner to the board to lend their expertise in commercial law and media.”
ENDS
Philip Tomlinson is a retired solicitor and Coroner
I really am going to bed after this, but blimey, Jon Corner is on the board now is he. Well perhaps this explains the, 'I know, let's make a film' angle. If they'd had a friend whose expertise was merchandising I really think they might have launched a 'Maddie doll'. Can you imagine the uproar?
Whatever, I think they're frustrated that we aren't triumphant. I have always thought that the majority of "antis" didn't really see this as an "us vs. them" type game, although that seems to be something that motivates some pros. Most "antis" are here because they couldn't make sense of what they were seeing and hearing in the early days, and just knew that something wasn't right. I think most of us weren't sure what had happened, but, because of what they themselves had said and done, were fairly sure that the parents were somehow involved.
Every time a gruesome detail gets closer to being confirmed, the "antis' become more subdued, if anything. We see posts of sadness, and sickness in pits of stomach. I haven't seen anything like "triumphant" -- the strongest emotion expressed seems to be anger, and lots of it. No one on the "anti" side wanted to be proven right -- all of us would have danced in the streets if it was discovered that Madeleine had wandered up to Avignon and had managed well for herself.
p.s. why aren't you tucked up in bed?
Edited to add: Oh, I see you're going off now - night, night!
Just catching up on today's posts and would like to put my 2 cents in regarding a few things.
In regards to the stolen wallet. Since Gerry mentioned that money was taken, could it be to explain where a recent withdrawal of cash went. If there was something he needed to purchase and didn't want it to be traced, this would explain to police where the sterling from his last bank withdrawal went. He seems like the type to be too cheap to just throw away the Euros that he couldn't spend so they were left in the wallet. He may have then just put the wallet in the post himself. It has already been noted that there are no pictures of him that day so therefore, there were no press around him during that trip.
I was looking back on the blog to read about the wallet caper and noticed something else interesting too. He mentioned that there was very little press in Prai De Luz around the 24th of June (only a couple of people down by the church) and that they had been respecting their privacy for the past 52 days as they had requested with only a few minor instances. So when people ask how they could move a body unnoticed with all the press coverage...well he pretty much answered that question in his blog...there were no press around them for at least the first 52 days. And why did he know where the only press people were? Was he checking?
Someone posted a youtube link of CM on SportsTalk and while I couldn't believe that he actually did suggest that people send money directly to the McCanns, something caught my notice too. When he was asked about them leaving the children alone, CM stated that they made a mistake on "the night" not every night but on "the night". Strange way to phrase that answer. And after the interviewer said "but they left them every night didn't they?" CM didn't answer that question until he was asked again later in the interview in which he did finally admit they had done it every night.
Good morning, all. I´ve been listening to the wonderful Jon Gaunt interview of CM, thanks to hlkat´s contribution with the youtube link. I´m glad to have heard it myself. It was nice to hear CM tying himself in knots about/clarrifying the movie project but I did find his insistance on "we need every penny to keep this going" rather unattractive.
[quote]They were criticised in Portugal for circulating pictures of Madeleine and revealing the distinctive fleck in her eye, which police said could have put her life in danger.
He admitted the plan was risky but that "in terms of marketing, it was a good ploy". [/quote]
From the Vanity Fair interview.
That just took my breath away. Was it best of 3? Heads - potentially my childs life ... tails marketing ploy.
If you really thought that your child was alive and you stood the merest hint of a chance of getting her back alive would you really announce something that could get her killed because it was a good marketing ploy?
[quote="hlkat"]Just catching up on today's posts and would like to put my 2 cents in regarding a few things.
In regards to the stolen wallet. Since Gerry mentioned that money was taken, could it be to explain where a recent withdrawal of cash went. If there was something he needed to purchase and didn't want it to be traced, this would explain to police where the sterling from his last bank withdrawal went. He seems like the type to be too cheap to just throw away the Euros that he couldn't spend so they were left in the wallet. He may have then just put the wallet in the post himself. It has already been noted that there are no pictures of him that day so therefore, there were no press around him during that trip.
I was looking back on the blog to read about the wallet caper and noticed something else interesting too. He mentioned that there was very little press in Prai De Luz around the 24th of June (only a couple of people down by the church) and that they had been respecting their privacy for the past 52 days as they had requested with only a few minor instances. So when people ask how they could move a body unnoticed with all the press coverage...well he pretty much answered that question in his blog...there were no press around them for at least the first 52 days. And why did he know where the only press people were? Was he checking?
Someone posted a youtube link of CM on SportsTalk and while I couldn't believe that he actually did suggest that people send money directly to the McCanns, something caught my notice too. When he was asked about them leaving the children alone, CM stated that they made a mistake on "the night" not every night but on "the night". Strange way to phrase that answer. And after the interviewer said "but they left them every night didn't they?" CM didn't answer that question until he was asked again later in the interview in which he did finally admit they had done it every night.
[quote="Middlemarch"]"Mr McCann, 39, gave the interview alone in October, without his wife Kate, after being approached by the magazine. "
The above is with respect to the Vanity Fair interview. He also goes on to say that , "it is all MY fault. Kate and I should never have gone out to dinner." That is very odd phraseology. Why wouldn't he say it was all OUR fault? I'm wondering if this also ties in with the May 2nd theory -- it was his fault because he left crazy Kate with the children. It is interesting that as early as October, shortly after the 100% belief in each other's innocence, that Gerry gave this interview alone. It's also interesting that it is not going to be released until now (and potentially after charges have been brought). Was Gerry planning his exit strategy back then?
Does anyone know when this VF article is meant to be published? It doesn't appear to be in the February issue.
On another note, Blackwatch notes Vanity Fair contributor Michael Wolff as being connected to Editorial Intelligence. I don't know if that means anything significant, or not. He does appear to be interested in all things internet, so it may just be an unrelated, and uninteresting, coincidence.[/quote]
Isn't it the one that is doing the rounds today, Middlemarch?
Do I read this right, that the Fund's Board shrunk to the hard core of supporters (already somehow implicated, I guess...)?
I mean, Smethurst was already the coordinator of their strategy, legal/PR. He has to know about Metodo's methods (or role...). And Jon Corner was, of course, very close to them in critical moments.
|
