Public inquiry into the McCanns lies to MPs in PR Scam

Public inquiry into the McCanns lies to MPs in PR Scam

Introduction

If it is shown beyond all reasonable doubt that a witness has misled a Parliamentary investigation into fact, should that witness have to be re-questioned to remove or substantiate the misleading statements?

This blog will conduct a public inquiry to establish fact from fiction and opinion in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It will continue until such time as the MainStreamMedia and relevant authorities wake up to the importance of resolving some of the issues in this case.

House of Commons inquiry

On Tuesday 10th of March 2009, in the House of Commons, the Culture, Media and Sports Committee conducted an inquiry into press standards, privacy and libel.

Witnesses: Mr Gerry McCann, Mr Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns Media Adviser and Spokesman, and Mr Adam Tudor, Carter Ruck, Solicitors, gave evidence.

Gerry McCann was allowed to make an opening statement. Given that he stated: “our family has been the focus of some of the most sensationalist, untruthful, irresponsible and damaging reporting in the history of the press”, It beggars belief that he started by issuing a McCannspin.

“I am Gerald McCann, the father of Madeleine, who was abducted in Praia da Luz on 3 May 2007”.

Gerry McCann is complaining about journalists not checking the facts and not sticking to the facts. Is this a factual statement “Madeleine, who was abducted in Praia da Luz on 3 May 2007”?

Fact: Knowledge or information based on real occurrences.

Untrue: Not according to the facts.

Opinion: A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof.

It is safe to say it is a fact that Madeleine has disappeared.

It is not a fact to state Madeleine was abducted.

At best claiming that Madeleine was abducted is just an opinion expressed by the McCanns.

It follows that competing opinions may be expressed by people other than the McCanns.

According to the Timesonline Parents checked sleeping child every half-hour - but still she was abducted

“The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing,” she said. “Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.”

The McCanns claimed it was a fact that there had been a break-in. However "Mark Warner management denies shutters smashed
“Mark Warner management denied there were signs of forced entry at the flat claiming instead that roller shutters had been slid up and the bedroom window opened.”". The police said that this had occured from inside. Later, much later, Clarence Mitchell admits that there was no break-in. Why did the McCanns claim that there had been a break-in? They fed this line to family, friends and the media. They stated it as a fact. It is a fact that what the McCanns claimed to be a fact is an untruth. Given that the abduction theory rested upon the alleged break-in, it is submitted that the abduction theory falls when the alleged break-in element is removed as being without foundation in fact.

Gerry McCann: "Madeleine, I believe, was made a commodity and profits were to be made". He was, of course, referring to and criticising the media. However, it was the McCanns themselves who were the first to regognise that Madeleine was a commodity and that there was money to be made by turning it into a business. For example, Welcome To the Madeleine Online Store.

Gerry McCann: "I think the most damning thing of all of this and the most damaging aspect of all the coverage which Kate and I cannot forgive is the presentation that there is a substantial body of evidence that suggests that Madeleine is dead when there is no evidence in fact to suggest she has been seriously harmed".

Here we have the McCanns who presented their version of events to the media, the alleged break-in and the alleged abduction, when there is no evidence in fact to support them as being truth. And then complaining when the media chooses to offer a different version of events. Given that at least 76% of child abductions are carried out by a family member or relative or friend, and only 24% by a stranger, with these odds in favour of the McCanns being in some way involved it is difficult to see how they can be so harsh in their judgement of the media. There is a worrying arrogance expressed by Gerry McCann that only their version of events should be believed and published.

(To be continued)