Saturday

McCanns launch TV blitz to find Madeleine

By Tracey Kandohla and James Murray Sunday Express

KATE McCANN will take part in a round of heart-rending TV interviews this week appealing for anyone who has knowledge of her daughter Madeleine’s kidnapping to come forward.

The 41-year-old mother has been keeping a low profile for months but has now decided that, after nearly three years, she wants to take a more active part in the effort to find her daughter, who would now be six.

Madeleine vanished from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on the Algarve on May 3, 2007.

Kate will join her husband Gerry for a series of face-to-face interviews with the BBC and ITV.

And in a new move they will also speak to several Portuguese TV journalists who are flying to London later this week to interview the couple.

Kate and Gerry, of the village of Rothley in Leicestershire, hope that emotional appeals broadcast in Portugal could persuade someone to come forward with vital information and have employed a Portuguese press officer to help them get their message over.

The woman press officer is also helping the couple deal with the Portuguese press over their long-running legal battle with former local police chief Goncalo Amaral, who is being pursued for £1million damages over a book he wrote about the case, which has been banned.


Last month Kate travelled to Lisbon to meet her Portuguese lawyers and also gave a brief interview to Portuguese TV, saying she cried every day for Madeleine. It was her first trip back to Portugal in two years.

Both she and Gerry intend to make a ­private visit (announced well in advance) to Praia da Luz in the coming months.

Now that the McCanns’ twins, Sean and Amelie, are at school, Kate is finding she has more time to spend on the hunt for Madeleine.

She works closely with their private investigators David Edgar and Arthur Cowley, who believe the answer to the riddle lies within a 10-mile radius of Praia da Luz.

“Kate has renewed vigour to get involved,” said a source. “She realises emotional appeals from her have a powerful effect and could provide the breakthrough in the case.

“There is a greater awareness now on getting the Portuguese media involved in all the initiatives they do.”

The findmadeleine.com website has been changed to carry a poignant internet appeal which says: “Imagine if she was your child, imagine the pain and grief, imagine if someone like you never came forward.

“If you stay quiet you are as guilty as those who took her.”




A couple of comments from a forum:

How can you decide beforehand that an appeal will be an emotional one when not all previous one's have been ,let alone feel the need to announce it!!How obvious do they get ,talk about staged !!


I wonder if any of the Portugese reporters will ask questions the British ones wont. They probably wont be allowed to.

Unless Kates acting skills have improved in the past two years, I reckon her "emotional appeals" will have the same effect as they had during the summer of 2007.

EXCELLENT QUOTE AT THE END"if you stay quite, you are as guilty as those who took her"So this can be applied to the 48 questions then.

According to Clarence, the lawless villages surrounding PDL don't have t.v.s. Edgar thinks she is being held in a cellar in one of these villages so what's the point of the t.v. appeals? Biggest load of bullcrap I have ever read.

It boggles the mind who supplied the press with that junk and the Press obliged by printing. Fkg unbelievable - How long do they want to play this game I wonder - until their funds run dry or until people stop questioning?

The one piece of vital information I would like to hear is. Have Gerry and Kate requested from either British or Portuguese police to open the case.

In the highly unlikely event that Madeleine is still alive, I hope she never gets to read that her mother had to wait until the twins were of school age before she had enough time to look for her.

-----

Comment in a different forum regarding the banning of Amaral's book:


From the point of view of PT law, there are two constitutional rights 'clashing' in the case of the McCanns' requested injunction against 'The Truth of the Lie' & the DVD that is based on the book: free expression, and personality rights.

A superficial analysis of past cases with a similar situation, apart from other interesting considerations that are beside the point of this thread, will show that judges tend to value personality rights over the so-called freedom of expression - whenever said freedom of expression is clearly abused.

What we seem to have here, though - and others who have read the book will hopefully give their opinion, too -, is a book that recounts an investigation (or the part thereof that the author was active in). A book that goes not one fraction of an inch further than the real investigation that it is based upon.

Furthermore, that investigation was made public at the same time that the book was published. All the data was available to the public.

Does this make any sense: to claim that one is suffering, physically and psychologically, over a book that sums up the facts from a real-life investigation? A book that could easily be compared with the police files, its inaccuracies, mistakes, lies! exposed?

I must have missed out on something, because I never saw that happen.

What I DID see happen were other comparisons. But again, that is not for this thread.

Freedom of expression, freedom of opinion? Absolutely, within the responsible, respectful exercise of adult citizenship.

Trying to censor a book that is based on the factual report of a police investigation, trying to silence an entire theory that was investigated, defended by the police, rendering it illegal? That is more than a mere clash of two constitutional freedoms. That is censorship, and with the dimension that is being exercised by the McCanns through their lawyers, it is a personal persecution and an attempt to destroy a human being.

Anyone who studies, however briefly, previous libel cases that have gone through the Portuguese courts, will realise the sheer abnormality of this claim.