Sunday, April 29, 2012

#McCann Case : Digital Spy Pick Up On The Fact That It Was Kate McCann Who Foiled Their Plans - It Was She And She Alone Who Changed The Direction Of The Investigation Bringing In The Cadaver Dogs Making Them BOTH Arguidos !


Apologies for the delay but earlier in the thread we were discussing when the PJ's investigation changed direction following the alerts by the British dogs. It was late July/early August 2007.

During his testimony on the first day of the injunction hearing, Inspector Ricardo Paiva the Police Liaison Officer stated that Kate McCann called him when Gerry was away and she was crying. "She said she had dreamt that Madeleine was on a hill and that we should search for her there. She gave the impression that she thought she was dead – it was a turning point for us. That is when we decided to send the specialist dogs in. British police informed us about how they could detect the scent of death." The land was searched but nothing was found.

Ricarado Paiva ' The Turning Point Was The Dream '


A second officer, Ricardo Paiva, said Portuguese police were suspicious of the couple's 'merchandising' operation in the months after Maddie disappeared. The Madeleine Fund they set up sold wristbands and T-shirts publicising the case and used the money to support the search.

Mr Paiva said they should have faced prosecution for leaving their children alone, saying: 'People have been arrested for far less - even in the UK.'
Former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral wrote a book accusing the McCanns of covering up their daughter's death

Kate #McCann : Her Words From Her Book 'madeleine'

#McCann Case : #Panorama Discussion Taking Place On Digital Spy.

Andy Redwood has made a lot of people that were fencesitters make a decision. Scotland Yard have made one big mistake with this latest McCann PR prank. Eyes are now WIDE open and Tom Watson is digging into why Cameron buckled to the McCanns and their backers News International!


#McCann Case:Passionate Blogger Seeking Truth Hits Mainstream Media !

Dirty Des gets the message out there via Sean Hyland, not his words you understand but Sean's .  The police investigation concluded Maddie died in the apartment and the McCanns simulated an abduction...great shame the 'vile troll' did not get the paedophile allegations out there also....but maybe next time !


29th April 2012

By Tracey Kandohla

AN INTERNET troll warned over vile messages about Madeleine McCann’s parents last night boasted: “The only way to shut me up is to jail me or kill me.”

Sean Hyland, 50, was cautioned last year over hateful remarks he made about Kate and Gerry McCann and their spokesman.

But when we confronted him he vowed to carry on with his campaign of sick comments.

The steel worker insisted he was “no conspiracy nut” but he could face fresh police action if he continues with his messages.

Hyland posted offensive comments and also left messages on the answerphone of McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell.

He branded the dad-of-three “a defender of kiddie killers”, “a pathetic pervert”, “a prat” and doctors Kate and Gerry “quacks”.In one online message he threatened: “We’re not reactive, we’re proactive, we’re attacking you.”

And in another Hyland wrote: “I think the messages I left 4 Clarence Mitchell on his answerphone have rattled him.”

Mr Mitchell, from North Finchley, London, first reported the malicious communication to his local police.

A McCann source said: “It is vile abuse, very upsetting for all concerned, and must be stopped. Thankfully, the police are now involved.”

Scotland Yard officers asked for help from colleagues in Humberside who cover the area where Hyland lives.

A Met spokesman said: “The matter was dealt with by way of a first instance harassment warning being served on the suspect a month later.

“As yet, no further action has been taken.”

A Humberside Police source said: “There has been a formal complaint and he has now been warned.”

But in the week Scotland Yard detectives reviewing the case claimed Madeleine might still be alive, Hyland continued his rantings.

He said: “I’m still convinced Clarence Mitchell is lying on behalf of Kate and Gerry McCann.

“My theory is the child died and her parents are involved in hiding her body and they are using the Government and taxpayers’ money to evade justice.
The McCanns repulse me, Clarence Mitchell is a liar and the only way to shut me up is to put me in jail or kill me.

“I’m not the sharpest knife in the block but I’m not the village idiot. I am no conspiracy nut.”

Kate, 44, and Gerry, 43, face the agonising fifth anniversary of their daughter’s disappearance from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on Thursday.

The couple, from Rothley, Leics, are convinced their daughter, who would be nine, is still alive.

Mr Mitchell said: “The matter is in the hands of the police and I cannot comment.”

#McCann Case :Ellis O' Hanlon Rant - Coward That She Is Avoids Paedophile Allegations Held Back From The Investigation By Baggott.!

Ellis O' Hanlon, one can almost imagine the spittle at the corners of her mouth as she thumped out her venom, her little McCann piece chapter and verse . However, O'Hanlon is a coward as are ALL British journalists. What the nation is waiting to hear is this , why, when we have a missing child and when paedophillia allegations were made against Dr. David Payne who was on holiday with Madeleine at the time of her 'disappearance'  by another doctor, a good friend of the McCanns no less, were they held back from the Portuguese investigation for several months by none other than Matt Baggott ????

O'Hanlan, I very much doubt has read the police files for if she had she may also question why Dr.David Payne late at night, May 4th, rang child abuse in England replacing the receiver after only 100 seconds!

O'Hanlon is not a journalist she is not even a reporter she just wants a little piece of Maddie fame.

O'Hanlon deluded in her assumptions, clearly has not followed hackgate nor does she know much about the Leveson Inquiry, she has picked up snippets from the internet and twisted them into what I can only describe as one of her pre-menstrual moments, otherwise she would know of the allegations made by Max Mosley that Murdoch has been blackmailing politicians  and police officers for years and that MP Tom Watson intends to write to each and everyone of them about threats from News International this week.

The likes of Ellis O' Hanlon, well aware that if the paedophile allegations became public knowledge through mainstream media would finish the McCann's and the fund raising would be over. Ellis O' Hanlon is nothing but a fraud and I wonder how she can live with herself printing only half truths to defend the indefensible. Madeleine is clearly NOT her priority or the possibilty she may have been an abused child.

Paulo Sargento reconstruction that proves abduction impossible, of course the McCann's are suing him for it !

LINK to a graveyard of FAKED Abductions . Parents who have killed their children, hid their bodies and then cried abduction , wasting police time. It is happening ALL too often. LOOK at their little faces, LOOK into their eyes and THINK !

O'Hanlon, had she done her homework would also be aware of the British diplomat who also suspected the McCanns and noticed how they refused to help the Portuguese police !

Ellis O'Hanlon's rant

It wasn't so long ago that a Panorama documentary on Madeleine's disappearance would have brought the anti-McCann lobby out in force. Instead the Kate and Gerry-baiters were relatively quiet all week, having perhaps found another grieving family to torment in the meantime, or another conspiracy theory with which to fill their time.

Or it could simply be that they're flummoxed by the latest developments in the case. As Panorama reported last week in the run-up to the fifth anniversary of the little girl's disappearance from a holiday complex in Praia da Luz, not only has a year-long Metropolitan Police investigation come down firmly on the theory that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger, it also claims to have good reason to believe she is still alive, even releasing an artist's digital impression of how she might look today, as she approaches her ninth birthday.

This wasn't the narrative which those convinced that the McCanns had something to do with their daughter's disappearance -- the ones who still post videos on YouTube full of cod psychological analyses of the couple's body language to a sinister musical accompaniment, or who leave messages on Twitter peppered with vile, unsubstantiated allegations -- had geared themselves up to expect. For now, no doubt, they remain bunkered in, regrouping, planning the next attack.

It shouldn't take them long. Portuguese police have already refused to reopen the case, dismissing as "mere speculation" claims from Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, who headed up the team of 28 detectives and seven civilian support staff, that their review of 40,000 pieces of evidence had turned up nearly 200 previously unexplored lines of inquiry, meaning that, in all likelihood, the case will remain in suspended animation, files gathering dust, Madeleine forgotten.

That's the atmosphere in which rumours flourish. Already there are mutterings about the stg£2m cost of the review of evidence, and insinuations of political interference, not least allegations that UK Prime Minister David Cameron was only pressurised into authorising a new inquiry by News International, thereby neatly segueing into another of the chattering classes' latest obsessions, that of the Leveson Inquiry. Panorama trawled through that cesspit, too.

It shouldn't be too hard for the conspiracy theorists to use it all to come up with a new excuse to reignite the anti-McCann fuse.

Which is incredible, when you think about it. Five years on and the most thorough investigation of the evidence -- involving, in Det Chief Inspector Redwood's words, "turning every single piece of paper over and interpreting and analysing what is contained within them" -- has concluded that all those pulp fiction scenarios involving an unstable mother killing her own child and a controlling father disposing of the body, with both then colluding in an incredibly effective manipulation of an entire police force and the world media, were nothing but the poisonous fantasies which Madeleine's parents always said they were.
Yet the reaction has been so muted that it feels as if this is just another day at the office for the obsessives. Having invested so much time and emotional energy into demonising the McCanns, it's as if they're still reluctant to give up, much less apologise for the hurt that they caused to a family at its most vulnerable.

In a way, that's not so surprising. The campaign to indict the McCanns for the death of their own daughter was fought largely over the internet, where normal decencies rarely apply. Indeed, the plight of the McCanns could almost stand as a metaphor for the rise of social media as the predominant mode of public discourse.

There's a familiarity, even an intimacy, to online conversation which encourages strangers to feel that they have an investment in stories which actually belong to other people. Kate and Gerry were not only the ultimate victims of cyber bullying, but one of its original casualties too, tried and found guilty in the International Court of Twitter, itself only one year old and in its technological infancy when Madeleine went missing. Every gesture, every word, was magnified with an almost Truman Show-style intensity.

In truth, it seems highly unlikely that Madeleine will ever be found alive, regardless of last week's optimistic headlines. Most children abducted by strangers are killed within hours of being taken. There's also the fact that sniffer dogs detected the scent of death in the McCanns' holiday apartment, strongly suggesting that Madeleine may have died that very first night. Sniffer dogs are not 100 per cent reliable; the evidence of their noses only an indicator which needs to be confirmed by other means. But the bathetic title of last week's Panorama -- Madeleine: The Last Hope? -- said it all.

Until that question mark is removed from the story, there will always be room for the malicious to mislead casual observers into continuing to cast suspicion on the McCanns.

The only consolation for Madeleine's parents is that the growth of the internet has been so swift during the lifetime of their ordeal that the cyber bullies now have so many other victims to pick on that they must necessarily have less energy left over to hammer Kate and Gerry.

For those intent on attacking the media, though, there may be other lessons to learn. The then chief constable of Leicestershire Police, Matt Baggott, has already told the Leveson Inquiry into press standards in the UK that he knew at the time when Portuguese police officers were briefing against Kate and Gerry McCann that they were doing so on the basis of a misinterpretation of the DNA evidence, but decided that it was wiser not to put reporters right, even privately.

Baggott acted entirely as the high-minded media monks, shuddering with distaste at any whisper of secret contact between the ladies and gentlemen of the press and the appointed agents of the state, would wish him to act. But the result was that a family was put through hell unnecessarily. It can only be hoped that Leveson does not throw the baby out with the bathwater and end up making it harder than ever for journalists to do their job, just so that an artificial aura of purity can be maintained.

#McCann Case :Ian Horrocks Was Keen To Fit Up Barry George.

There is not one piece of hard evidence linking Barry George to the murder of Jill Dando.

No credible forensic evidence, no DNA, no fingerprints, no CCTV footage.

No conclusive witness statements. The best ones available are something along the lines of, "I saw him in the area a few hours before she died."

No confession - not even a retracted one.

No evidence that George was planning to kill Dando or had any kind of grudge against her.

No motive.

No murder weapon or anything linking George to it.

No evidence that he had the mental capacity necessary for such a crime. He is in the bottom 5% in the U.K. when it comes to intelligence.

Photographs of Jill Dando in magazines found in George's flat had not been ripped out and were just a few out of hundreds of newspapers found there.

The so-called vital evidence withheld at the retrial was a microscopic particle of gunpowder residue found in George's coat taken by police officers searching his flat over a year after Dando was killed.

When both the flat and the coat had been cross-contaminated not least by armed police. The search team, who recovered the jacket, had not worn forensic clothing whilst searching George’s flat. One of the officers who was present, and who had handled the jacket, had handled ammunition whilst wearing the same clothing. The vehicle in which the clothing was taken away had not been sampled and the Metropolitan Police have been forced to admit that proper forensic procedures were not followed, and at one point George's clothes were taken out of their protective bag and stored in a firearms cabinet, where it could've been contaminated with - shock, horror - gunpowder residue.

The Forensic Science Service have declared that a single particle of Firearms Discharge Residue is no longer considered to have any value whatsoever as admissible evidence.

The case against Barry George was pathetically weak - not even close to reasonable doubt, let alone "beyond any".

Defence solicitors are hardly to blame. The blame lies squarely with the Metropolitan Police for being so keen to get an easy collar on a high profile murder case that they ballsed up the investigation, and with the CPS for allowing such a flimsy case to go to court.

And they have the GALL to smear the Portuguese police !

#McCann Case : Inside The Twisted Mind Of Ian Horrocks.

I am more convinced than ever that News International are behind the McCann missing person fraud. We now know for a FACT , the SUN , McCann's along with News International bullied David Cameron into reviewing the case. Theresa May on the otherhand would not budge or touch the couple with a bargepole. Max Mosley also knows for a FACT that Murdoch's company have blackmailed MP's and police officers.Tom Watson will this week write to MP's and ask them if they have been threatened by what can only be described as the Mafia.

Anything that comes from Scotland Yard has no credibility whatsoever, they have through hackgate been proven beyond any doubt to be corrupt and as Bob Quick pointed out well known for destroying evidence.

Barry George an easy way out for Ian Horrocks , just look at the mess to try and frame an innocent man , smacks of Robert Murat !

#McCann Case : #Cipriano - Prosecution unveils horror of girl’s death - Mark William Thomas For His 15 Minutes Of Fame Has Tried To Connect This Horrific Crime With Madeleine Who Died In The McCann's Apartment!

Prosecution unveils horror of girl’s death

Joana Cipriano, the seven-year-old who mysteriously vanished from her Figueria home last September, was allegedly murdered in horrific fashion in order to conceal an incestuous act, unintentionally witnessed by the child, between her mother and uncle, prosecution lawyers have charged.

This is the conclusion that the attorney general’s office have revealed in a 200-page-long charge sheet.
According to the report, the child’s head had been repeatedly bashed against a wall, crushing her skull and causing the child’s death, her dead body then dismembered and frozen for some days before being thrown into a nearby pigsty to obscure evidence.
The motive, as had been previously suggested, was triggered after Joana unsuspectedly walked in on her mother and uncle’s incestuous act that was taking place in the family’s living room and threatened to tell her stepfather, António Leandro, with whom she lived and regarded as her father.
Recent investigations have also revealed that Joana could have been the victim of ongoing sexual abuse, committed by more than one individual, after traces of blood and semen were detected in items of the child’s underwear by current forensic investigations.
A source quoted by Correio da Manhã and reportedly closely linked to the case, has confirmed that ‘the case will reveal many surprises’ that ‘could happen at any time’.
The child’s grandmother, Florinda Domingos, mother to João and Leonor Cipriano, has also stated that, in her opinion, if any of her children were responsible for the murder ‘it would be João’ (the uncle) ‘and probably because of drink and drugs’, proceeding to describe him as always having ‘been a naughty boy’, and that she had never seen her daughter (Leonor, Joana’s mother) ill-treat her granddaughter.
If the prosecution were to prove their charges, the accused will face between 16 months and 25 years of imprisonment. Initial reports suggest that the two accused could be sentenced to between eight and 12 years imprisonment of found guilty, though prosecution lawyers will be pushing for maximum punishment, which would be a 25-year jail term.

Saturday, April 28, 2012

#McCann Case: The Truth Of The Lie by Gonçalo Amaral - The Book The McCanns Tried To Ban And Failed - It Contains Paedophile Allegations Made By A Friend Of The Couple That Would Close Their Fund Overnight !


IT’S CARNIVAL SUNDAY. In the distance the shots of the hare hunters can be heard, resounding above the low-growing vegetation of the Barrocal.

On waking, I decide to stay at home. Recently, I’ve had no wish to go out, to go walking or to meet people. I yearn instead for peace and silence. That morning, the sun was shining, promise of a lovely day: but in the afternoon, the rain began to fall, ruining the fête and the parades.

From the window I admire the Algarve countryside: the pink and snowy-white of the almond trees contrasting with the blue of the sea that is glimpsed in the distance. Suddenly, the ringing of the telephone – more and more unusual of late – brings me out of my lethargy; I have to face reality.

From the receiver, a friendly voice, swinging between anger and sadness, asks me:

- How are you? Have you heard our national director’s interview?
I reply no and wonder what the clearly perceptible anxiety of my questioner is due to.

- He says we were precipitous. That placing the couple under investigation was premature….I wonder what’s come over him. He totally validated that decision. What is he intending to do? End the investigation?

He is alluding to the investigations undertaken after the disappearance of a little English girl of nearly four years of age during the night of May 3rd to 4th 2007, at the Ocean Club, one of the many tourist complexes in the village of Luz in Lagos, Portugal. She was called Madeleine Beth McCann and she was sleeping in a bedroom in the apartment block, beside her sister and her brother – twins aged 2 years. During this time, their parents were dining a hundred metres away with a group of friends and holiday companions. This news story was the beginning of a criminal investigation, unpublished in Portugal and, I think, in the rest of the world. Even so, the case benefited from unprecedented international media coverage.

Numerous suggestions were put forward, mixing truth and lies; at the same time as regular information bulletins from the police, a campaign of disinformation was developed with the objective of discrediting the work of the investigators. For me, the investigations came to an end on October 2nd 2007, the date on which there seems to have been a new English ultimatum, incidentally on the same day that the Treaty of Lisbon was being discussed.

Considering the length of time I witnessed that media spectacle, including, at its height, “forcing,” by the McCann family with the disclosure of a photo-fit sketch of the alleged abductor, nothing more could have surprised me....

#McCann Case : McMinute - If Madeleine Is Alive - Who Died In The McCanns' Apartment ?

For Facebook and Twitter:

McMinute VIDEO - If Madeleine is Alive - Who DIED in the MCann's Apartment?

HiDeHo Twitter!/HiDeHo3

HiDeHo Facebook!/profile.php?id=100002389988016


#McCann Case : Maddie Case STILL Without Credible Leads.

by Tânia Laranjo

A few days before the fifth anniversary since Maddie disappeared in Praia da Luz, Algarve, there are no new leads that could enable the reopening of the investigation. The Judiciary Police from Oporto has spent more than one year re-reading the whole process, but nothing was found that could help clarify the disappearance of the English girl.

The "195 leads" announced before yesterday by the British authorities whilst they are reviewing the archived process were not yet officially revealed to the Judiciary Police, as CM found out, because they only are avenues of investigation and not specific facts that may point to the child's whereabouts.

"This is just folklore [nonsense], in the field of the sightings, of the suspicions of mediums and psychics. The abduction thesis is just an opinion from someone who is free to say whatever he wants. And we should not forget that London's police [MET] has to justify the money spent on this investigation. They must give something to the public opinion", said Gonçalo Amaral, the former Judiciary Police inspector that coordinated the case, reaffirming that the investigation at the time followed all the rules.

"Maddie was last seen at 17:30 on May 3, 2007. At that time everything that could be done, was done and we were able to demonstrate that it was materially impossible for the child to have been abducted. Unfortunately we were not able to find her whereabouts".

Relative to the reanalysis of the process in Portugal, Correio da Manhã knows that the Portuguese review is not being done alongside the English review. Although occasionally there might be a cooperation between the two police forces, the objective is to give autonomy to each, so that they do not become contaminated.

In Portugal the reanalysis of the case did not allow to progress more than what was already established during the initial investigation. Nothing indicates that the child is alive.

Correio da Manhã, 27.04.2012

If you wish to leave a comment on the latest NON events of the Maddie case please go to Joana Morais Blog where she has lots more information.

#McCann #FBI #NewsInternational : Tom Watson writes to MPs over alleged News International bullying

We know thanks to PANORAMA one of those bullied by the McCanns, the SUN and News International was David Cameron.So maybe it was not the Government after all protecting the McCanns but MP's blackmailed into protecting them by Murdoch's company. If this should be the case then Madeleine has a very good chance of finding justice.AND we must all give thanks to HideHo for capturing those crucial moments and freezing them in time.

Labour MP unveils plan after Max Mosley offers legal funds for any MP wanting to reveal potential blackmail and intimidation
Labour MP Tom Watson is to ask other MPs about alleged bullying by News International. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images
Tom Watson, the Labour MP who helped uncover the hacking scandal, is to write to all other MPs asking whether they have ever been threatened or bullied by News International.

He is taking the action after Max Mosley, the former Formula One racing boss, announced he was funding legal assistance for MPs to reveal potential blackmail and intimidation against them by Rupert Murdoch's newspaper group.

Mosley,who won £60,000 damages from the News of the World in 2008 over false allegations he had taken part in a "Nazi" orgy, said he was bankrolling the action in an attempt to expose News International's hidden hold on British politics.

Mosley told the Independent that he believes at least 10 MPs may have evidence about News International's dealings with politicians.

He said: "Organisations like Hacked Off are trying to make sure that everything that should be put in front of Leveson will be – and that's particularly important where there have been a large number of cases where News International have set out to intimidate, even blackmail, members of parliament and other people in positions of authority.

"So as far as it's possible to do so, those facts have to be brought to Leveson and I'm trying to help in a modest way. I am making legal advice available."

MPs who are worried about disclosing embarrassing evidence could remain anonymous, Mosley said.

Watson has said that attempts were made by News International to make him drop his investigations into the company. Another Labour MP Chris Bryant said in a Commons debate last year that an associate of Rupert Murdoch had warned him that campaigning on hacking would "not be forgotten".

Mosley told the Independent that he was aware of two other cases in which News International had brought undue influence to bear on MPs.

#McCann #FBI #Leveson - Clarence Mitchell On The News International Payroll ?

Shocking: Clarence Mitchell profile

I was the head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit. Forty people work there and their function is to control what comes out in the media.”  

Clarence Mitchell now works for the PR company, Freud Communications, whose boss is Matthew Freud – the husband of Elisabeth Murdoch, who is the daughter of Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is the world’s most powerful media magnate, with major terrestrial TV, satellite and media interests in dozens of countries. So who is Clarence Mitchell? Find out below…


Carlos Anjos, head of the Portuguese police professional association, who had dealings with Clarence Mitchell, said of him: “He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth”.

Clarence Mitchell in his own words, on 29 September 2007 to Espresso: “I was the head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit. Forty people work there and their function is to control what comes out in the media.”


Clarence Mitchell’s media career began in the late 1980s as a BBC regional reporter in Leeds. He moved to London where he covered stories about the Royals. A 2007 article on the BBC website by Laurie Margolis about him says: “Clarence was also a presenter on various BBC news programmes, looking to make that his main career. The presenting world is a precarious and capricious one, however, and he never quite made it. Once, I was working throughout the night. Clarence was presenting hourly bulletins on BBC News 24. He did the 1am, and 2am, but at 3am a slightly dishevelled looking producer appeared doing the news. It turned out Clarence closed his eyes, sleeping  through the 3am bulletin. Clarence left the BBC suddenly, becoming the Labour government’s Director of its Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information. There, his job was to ‘correct’ bad media stories about the government and to put out the government line”. A ‘spinner’, as some would say, or ‘a professional liar’ as others describe it. In May 2007 he was suddenly seconded to the Foreign Office to work as  the McCanns’ chief PR man, assisting another McCann spokeswoman, Justine McGuiness. In September 2007, in an unusual move, he resigned from the civil service to become the McCanns’ full-time spokesman, on £75,000 a year. He remains in that role, though he has been employed for the last few months by another major PR agency, Freud Communications.


Margolis also noted Clarence Mitchell’s strange association with controversial murder cases:  “He was closely involved with the Fred and Rosemary West case, where a murderous couple had killed young girls and buried the bodies under their patio in Gloucester. He was one of the first reporters to arrive at Gowan Avenue, Fulham in south west London, when the immensely popular BBC TV presenter Jill Dando was shot dead in a murder many feel has never been satisfactorily explained”. Mitchell also covered in depth the arrest and conviction of mass-murderer Dennis Nilson. When Paula Yates’ partner Michael Hutchance died in mysterious circumstances in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Sydney, Australia, in 1999, Clarence Mitchell was despatched to cover the death; more recently, in a story he worked on right up to the day he left the BBC, Clarence led coverage of the murder of the Surrey schoolgirl Millie Dowler in 2002. The case has never been solved. Mitchell has also written books on the Fred & Rosemary West and Jill Dando cases. He also reported extensively on the murder by Ian Huntley of Soham girls Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells. On 9 January this year, the Independent ran a brief article titled: ‘Remember Clarence Mitchell?’  It said: “Clarence Mitchell, formerly of the BBC and now spokesman for Madeleine McCann’s parents, has developed a nice little niche as a spin doctor of misery. First he took on Fiona MacKeown, mother of teenager Scarlet Kelling, who was murdered in Goa.  Then he started representing the parents of murdered London  teenager Jimmy Mizen. And today we’ve discovered that Mr Mitchell is also speaking for the wife of Jeremy Hoyland, the British jet skier who went missing off the coast of Bali last October.  Mr Mitchell is not charging for his services. But his presence can hardly be reassuring – the PR equivalent of an angel of death”.

Clarence Mitchell has achieved much in the Madeleine McCann case. He played the key role in arranging for the McCanns to meet the Pope on 28 May 2007, just 25 days after Madeleine McCann was reported missing. A man with connections at the highest level, Clarence Mitchell openly boasted in a TV interview that it was he who arranged, via Roman Catholic Archbishop Cormac Murphy O’Connor, for the McCanns to visit the Pope – in what was a highly publicised visit. The Pope put pages of material about the McCanns and Madeleine on his website. But two days before the McCanns were made arguidos – ‘provisional suspects’ – in September 2007, the Pope wiped all references to Madeleine from his website. Margolis wrote in 2007: “I would imagine Clarence is content in his new role as the family’s voice. He’s centre stage on a huge story, intimately involved as ever, and on television and in the papers all the time. It was extraordinary how, last week, his intervention seemed to eliminate within hours any misgiving about the McCanns in the British media”.

Who has been paying Clarence Mitchell’s salary whilst he has been working for the McCanns? This remains a mystery. We know that up to September 2007, the British government paid his salary. He left the government that month. Since then, the McCanns and Mitchell have said on the record that the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’ has not paid any part of his salary. They say that he was paid by ‘an anonymous backer’. But Clarence Mitchell won’t say who that backer is, nor why that backer is giving him so much support. [UPDATE: In an article in the Independent on Sunday, 1 March 2009, Mitchell has contradicted previous claims that his salary was being paid by an anonymous backer. He now says he gets a retainer of £28,000 a year from the Helping to Find Madeleine Fund, donations to which were given to ‘help find Madeleine’, not pay the salaries of PR professionals].

Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns:

21 Issues of Concern

Here we examine 21 of the many issues that have caused people concern about Mitchell’s role in the Madeleine McCann case. At the end of our leaflet we explain how to obtain more information on the Madeleine McCann case, including our 60-page booklet: ‘What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann? – 60 Reasons which suggest she was not abducted’.  
1. Allegedly being involved in tipping off the McCanns that the Portuguese police had been, or were going to, track their e-mails and ’phone calls

The McCanns were tipped off that the Portuguese police were monitoring their e-mails and ’phone calls. There was naturally concern over how this information leaked to them. A former Portuguese police officer has admitted working for the Spanish private detective agency, Metodo 3. He in turn had an inside contact in the Portuguese police who supplied Metodo 3  with information about the investigation. Clarence Mitchell was asked in an interview by Simon Israel on Channel 4 how the McCanns were tipped off. He refused to answer. 

2. Being forced to deny the McCanns’ initial claim of a break-in

On the evening that Madeleine was reported missing, the McCanns claimed an abductor had broken into the children’s room by ‘jemmying open the shutters’. They repeated that claim many times – a claim the media reported extensively. But the managers of the Mark Warners resort where the McCanns were staying, and the police, soon discovered that the shutters had not been tampered with. This forcing the McCanns to dramatically change their story – one of many changes of story – to say: ‘the abductor must have walked in through an unlocked patio door”. Asked about this discrepancy, Mitchell was forced to concede on the record: “There was no evidence of a break-in. I‘m not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”. It is however most unlikley that an abductor could have ‘got out of the window easily’ leaving no forensic trace.

3. Smearing Robert Murat
A curious feature of the Madeleine case was the targeting of Robert Murat, a dual Portuguese-British citizen, as a suspect. A journalist who worked closely with Clarence Mitchell, Lori Campbell, suspected Murat of involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance and reported him to the Police. Three of the McCanns’ close friends, the so-called ‘Tapas 7’, also reported seeing Robert Murat close to the McCanns’ apartment the evening Madeleine went missing, a claim he denied. The McCann camp made a concerted attempt, for whatever reason, to smear Murat. Clarence Mitchell himself played a key role in this: He said:
    “An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica [Soham children murdered by Ian Huntley] is possible. I don’t want to, and I can’t, talk about Robert Murat, but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won’t say more”. He was very lucky that Murat did not sue him for libel, since in 2008 Robert Murat collected a reported £550,000 in libel damages from news media and journalists whom he claimed had smeared and libelled him.

4. Being forced to retract his claim that ‘Madeleine is probably dead’

During early 2008, Clarence Mitchell was forced to concede that ‘Madeleine is probably dead’. This caused grave embarrassment for the McCanns, who were determined publicly to maintain that Madeleine was still alive. His statement could also have had serious implications for the Fund, which can only continue to operate and keep asking for donations  on this premise. Dr Gerald McCann was forced to publicly rebuke his PR chief by insisting on his blog two days later that they remained hopeful that Madeleine was still alive.

5. Failing to explain that the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’ was not a charity
Interviewed by James Whale, Mitchell repeatedly refused to correct Whale when he referred to the McCanns’ fund as a ‘charity’. In fact, the Helping to Find Madeleine Fund is registered as a ‘private trust’; its aims are not charitable and include making payments to the McCanns.

6. Asking people to send money in envelopes to ‘Gerry and Kate, Rothley’

Asked on the same James Whale show how people could contribute to the fund, Mitchell said: “Just put money into an envelope and send to Kate and Gerry McCann, Rothley, it’ll get there”. That was unprofessional – monies should have been directed to the registered office for the Fund, namely London Solicitors Bates, Wells & Braithwaite. For example, monies sent in the post could be stolen en route or would not be properly accounted for.

7. Claiming that the Fund was ‘independently controlled’
Pressed about control of the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’, Clarence Mitchell claimed that the Fund was ‘independently controlled’. This is untrue. The Trust’s Directors consist mainly of members of the McCann family and their friends or acquaintances. 

8. Retreating on whether or not the McCanns would take a lie detector test
The McCanns were anxious to convince the world that they were telling the truth about how Madeleine had suddenly gone missing. To bolster their claim, Clarence Mitchell announced:  “Kate and Gerry McCann would have no issue with taking a lie detector test”. However, two months later, he announced: “Of course they are not going to take any lie detector test”.

9. Making a film for TV about the McCanns’ distress ‘one year on’ whilst at the same time claiming the McCanns were not doing so
Clarence Mitchell told the media: “The McCanns don’t want to do anything about ‘woe is us a year on’. That is what the tabloids would like us to do, but we are not following their agenda, we are following our own agenda” (one of many references to ‘our agenda’). Weeks later, there was a two-hour long pre-recorded TV interview: ‘Madeleine McCann – One Year On’, clearly prepared long before his public statement, and certainly with his personal knowledge.

10. Issuing a ‘Crimewatch’-style video clip with a description of an abductor
It has always been the McCanns who have given out descriptions of a possible abductor. The Portuguese police from early on doubted the truthfulness of claims by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns’ ‘Tapas 7’ friends, that she had seen an abductor. In early 2008, Clarence Mitchell announced that the McCann team were looking for a moustachioed man seen in Praia da Luz around the time Madeleine went missing. He did this in a widely-shown video clip in which he acted like a Crimewatch presenter. At a meeting at the London School of Economics on 30 January 2008, this performance, plus his commanding stance and choice of words, prompted one member of the LSE audience to ask: “Are you the police?” There was much laughter.

11. Claiming that “…whatever the Portuguese police might find in their investigation, the McCanns will have an innocent explanation for it”
To this bizarre statement, Mitchell added the equally strange comment: “There are wholly innocent explanations for any material that the police may or may not have found”, prompting  many to ask: “How could the McCanns and Clarence Mitchell  know in advance what the police might find and know that there would be ‘an innocent explanation’ for everything?

12. Claiming it didn’t matter if Dr Kate McCann changed her clothes on 3 May
One of the key issues in the Madeleine McCann case is whether the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends have been telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the events of 3 May 2007, the day Madeleine was reported missing. In late 2008, a French journalist, Duarte Levy, claimed to have seen photos taken that evening conclusively proving that Dr Kate McCann had left the table during the evening and changed her clothes. That would blow a hole in her claim that she was at the Tapas bar the whole evening. She would have had to explain why she changed her clothes. Mitchell’s official response to these claims was: “So what if she did leave the table and change her clothes?” He refused to elaborate.

13. Saying that ‘none of the Tapas group’ were wearing watches the night Madeleine went missing – and then being forced to retract that statement
Clarence Mitchell had come under pressure from journalists to explain why there were so many major contradictions between the McCanns’ and the Tapas 7’s versions of events on 3 May 2007, when Madeleine ‘disappeared’. There were also many discrepancies in their timelines. Mitchell tried to explain, responding: “None of them were wearing watches or had mobile phones on them that night”. Those journalists then confronted him with the sheer unlikelihood that all nine had neither watch nor mobile ’phone, pointed out that the McCanns and others had used their mobile ’phones that night, and produced pictures of the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends taken in Praia da Luz that week which showed that they were always wearing watches. Clarence Mitchell was forced into an embarrassing retreat, conceding: “Some of them were wearing watches and had mobile ’phones, some of them weren’t”. It is also now known from the McCanns’ statements to the Police, which have been publicly released, that the McCanns both had mobile ’phones with them that evening. As their official spokesman, Mitchell must surely have been briefed on this before he made his statement.

14. Falsely claiming that the McCanns had been ‘utterly honest and utterly open’
On 11 April 2008, Clarence Mitchell made this bold claim: “Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken”.  He later said, referring to himself and the McCanns: ‘We have nothing to hide’. When addressing a largely student audience during what were called ‘The Coventry Conversations’, Mitchell said: “We are always willing to co-operate with the Portuguese police”. These were astounding claims to make given that…

  • Dr Kate McCann was asked 48 questions by the Portuguese police when interviewed on 7 September 2007 and refused to answer any of them.
  • The McCanns had refused point blank to take part in a reconstruction of the events of 3 May 2007, the night Madeleine McCann was reported missing.
  • The McCanns’ statements contained changes of story, contradictions with the accounts of others, evasions and obfuscations.

15. Claiming it would be ‘hugely entertaining’ to devise a cast list for a proposed film about Madeleine going missing
On 7 January 2008 it was widely reported in the media that the McCanns and their advisers were in talks with media and film moguls IMG, who made the film ‘Touching the Void’,  about a possible film about Madeleine’s disappearance. Clarence Mitchell was asked whether  Gerry and Kate would play themselves in any film or if their roles would be played by celebrity actors. He said: “It may be hugely entertaining and a bit of fun to speculate on a cast list, but we are a million miles away from that sort of thing”. On another occasion, he said of Madeleine: “If she is dead, she is dead”. These and other comments made some wonder how much ‘feel’ or concern for Madeleine’s welfare and fate Mitchell really had.

16. Claiming it was a British cultural custom for parents to put children to bed early so they could enjoy the rest of the evening
Interviewed by Irish TV station RTE, Clarence Mitchell tried to explain why the McCanns left three young children under four on their own, several nights in a row, whilst on holiday, and out for the evening wining and dining. He told his TV audience: “There is a cultural difference between Britain and Portugal. It is a British approach to get your children washed, bathed and in bed early in the evening, if you can, so you can have something of the evening to yourself. That’s the British way of doing things. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong. It doesn’t mean it’s right”. Many British parents objected strongly to Mitchell’s description of them..

17. Trying to deny that the McCanns had left the children alone every night
In an interview with Jon Gaunt of TalkSport, Clarence Mitchell was trying to explain why the McCanns had left their children alone ‘that night’ (i.e. the night of 3 May when Madeleine was reported missing). He was quickly corrected by Gaunt who reminded him: ‘But they left them alone every night’. Mitchell had no answer.

18. Blaming Romany gypsies for abducting Madeleine

Clarence Mitchell on one occasion pointed the finger of suspicion at Romany gypsies for having abducted Madeleine. It appeared he had no basis whatsoever for smearing this group of people. He has never apologised for making it.

19. Using an image of Mari Luz without her parents’ permission
Months after Madeleine went missing, another child, Mari Luz, went missing, though in very different circumstances. Sadly she has since been found dead. The McCanns printed posters  of Madeleine together with Mari Luz – without gaining the parents’ prior permission. Her parents were very upset, and complained. Clarence Mitchell reacted by stating: “It’s a shame that they are complaining about us in a press release. How can they be angry with is for wanting to help when all we’re trying to do is find their own daughter?”

20. Being ‘encouraged’ that Madeleine ‘may have been abducted by paedophiles’
In early 2008, stories were put about by an unknown Portuguese lawyer, Marcos Alexandre Aragao Correia, that Madeleine McCann had been abducted by paedophiles, raped, murdered and her body dumped in a dammed lake. At the time, a new drawing of a possible abductor was released, and part of the Arade Dam was searched. A friend of the McCanns was quoted as saying: “We fear that a group of two or three paedophiles may have been fishing around the apartments, casing them with a view to taking children”. Mitchell then commented:

“Developments such as this give Mr and Mrs McCann renewed hope. That is exactly the sort of call we want. We think the image is of such a quality that anyone who knows him will be able to identify him. Kate and Gerry are quite buoyant at the moment – every time we do something like this and move things forward it gives them strength. We’re very encouraged by this – putting all this information out, these images out, is helping Gerry and Kate in one way; simply by doing it we have got some momentum and are pushing the agenda forward on our side of the equation”.  Many asked why Mitchell and the McCanns could use such words as ‘buoyant’ and ‘encouraged’ in relation to Madeleine’s having been raped and murdered. The use of the word ‘agenda’ once again prompted the question: What was their ‘agenda’?

21. Explaining why the McCanns deliberately left their three children alone again the night after Madeleine and Sean had been crying the night before
On SKY News, Clarence Mitchell was interviewed, following a pre-recorded interview with the McCanns in which they admitted, for the first time, that two of their children had been crying on the night before Madeleine went missing. There was public outrage that the McCanns were told by their children that they had been crying the previous night whilst they were out wining and dining, only to then leave them alone again the very next night. The SKY News presenter asked: “Why did Kate and Gerry choose to leave the children the same way the very next night?”  Clarence Mitchell’s reply is instructive. Here it is in full:

“That is one interpretation. Let me put it in context. On the morning of May the 3rd, the day Madeleine later went missing, she came out, and said to Gerry and Kate at breakfast, very briefly as an aside, in no way was she unhappy or crying and then, in no way was she reprimanding her parents as some reports papers have wrongly, er, said. She simply said: “Why didn’t you come see – come and see me and Sean when we were crying, last night?”, and Kate and Gerry were puzzled by that, because in their checks – they had been checking her every 25/30 minutes, the same as they did the next night, when she went missing – they had found nothing to suggest that she was in any way distressed or upset, they found her asleep each time. There was nothing wrong. Rachel Oldfield, one of their friends, was in the apartment next door, in the room adjacent to Madeleine’s bedroom.

“She too was there all evening and heard no crying through the walls.  There was nothing to suggest this had happened. So it was a puzzle to Kate and Gerry when Madeleine mentioned it. They tried to question her about it, and she just walked off laughing, and, er, happy, she was [note the past tense] a child and she and, and so, so she dropped it. Now they of course had a serious discussion about what had possibly gone wrong and they decided to check her more thoroughly that next night, and that’s what they did. And in the context of what happened later – her disappearance – they felt that that conversation, puzzling as it was, was very important to bring to the police’s attention. They wonder why, if she cried, why she cried. Was something, or someone already in that room to make her cry and they fled when she cried? Who knows? They can’t prove that, but they told the police in confidence – legally protected documentation has been in those files for 11 months – and why does it appear on the very day they were at the European Parliament? Somebody in the police doesn’t want Kate and Gerry to widen the agenda [that word again!], for whatever reason. It’s wrong. It’s illegal, and the Portuguese government needs to stop this…from happening in the future” [NOTE: The ‘leak’ came from a Spanish journalist known to be very sympathetic to the McCanns].

During this long reply, we see the master media manipulator at work. He makes light of two children crying while their parents were not with them. He justifies the McCanns’ decision to go out wining and dining and leaving all three children alone again the very night after the children told them of their crying. He claims, without evidence, that the Police leaked the story about the McCanns’ children crying on their own the night before. He claims the police have done something illegal. Some might admire him as a master of his craft, and indeed one writer has already said that the McCanns’ public relations campaign will for years to come be a textbook example of how to control the media and manipulate public opinion. But, we may ask, if this is true, whose interests has Clarence Mitchell been serving? Is he someone who helps us get to the truth? Or someone who does his best to stop us getting to the truth? 

Read more shockers here

#McCann #Leveson #FBI : Max Mosley - #NewsInternational has blackmailed MPs and others. Leveson must hear the truth'

Interesting article, but before listen again to a clip from Panorama. David Cameron was PRESSURED by News International the SUN AND the MCCANNS to review the case.Sounds like 'hug a hoodie Dave' may have been blackmailed. Lets face it the McCanns are not Cameron's type, too common, too uneducated, too arrogant . Also just call me Dave knows that Madeleine is dead and the political favour involved, as does Theresa May which is why she refused to give them the time of day!

Mr Mosley, who is a former president of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, said: "They [the Murdochs] simply don't care as long as they can sell a few newspapers."
He believes the Murdochs and their newspapers have suborned Parliament. "If I'd been a senior politician, they would never have published that story," he said. "They would have come to me with some of the pictures and said: 'You know, we've been given this story, but, you know, don't worry Max, we're not going to publish it' – but leaving, of course, hanging in the air what would happen if you did anything to annoy them."

He believes this is what happened to several politicians.

"That's exactly what I think has gone on and I believe they have done this to a number of people, some of them on the record. Tom [Watson] is on the record and there is a suggestion that they've done it to senior members of the police force. If it's true, it needs to brought out into the open with as many examples as possible so that one can see this has gone on," he said.

"I really believe that they ran their business rather like the East German government, or the Stasi, except that it wasn't the government it was the Murdoch organisation," he added.
"That sinister way of the Stasi (secret police) – that they would let you know things about you that you rather were not made public – I think it's exactly the same technique. I think that if we knew everything we might be quite surprised how – and for what reason – people were being kept under control."

Senior members of the police force blackmailed by Murdoch would explain Scotland Yard's pretendy review.

The bottom line Madeleine sells newspapers and to Murdoch that is all that matters, sales !

Clarence Mitchell , the cherry on the cake with his media contacts sales are booming. therfore is Mitchell on News Internationals payroll ?

#McCann #Leveson #MET #FBI : Who Is Keeping The McCanns' Out Of Jail ?

A missing child, cadaver dogs, a missing sports bag belonging to the missing childs father, a bag McCann's ventriloquist Mitchell claimed he never owned ????? , Notice McCann could not deny ownership of the bag because he was SEEN with it the afternoon of May 3rd !!!! Alleged Paedophillia held back from the investigation...and the POWER that keeps Madeleine from ever receiving justice...take a look behind the scene at the stench of corruption. Madeleine McCanns death and the cover up was nothing more than a Political Favour.

 Murdoch and the Cameron entourage: a shameful tale laid out for all to see


If you think this is a navel-gazing media story, here's a reminder of what the Tories were about to unleash on the country
Rupert Murdoch leaves the Royal Courts of Justice with after giving his testimony at the Leveson inquiry in London on 26 April. Photograph: Facundo Arrizablaga/EPA
Could this scandal bring down the government? That's not entirely fanciful. But even if not, their every step will be hobbled through to the next election, stifling any high-flown protestations of political virtue. Bang to rights, in Andy Coulson, David Cameron imported into the heart of his operation an agent still in the pay of a powerful political and commercial manipulator. The cascade of revelations of the intimacy between the Cameron entourage and the Murdoch empire saps the government's authority. That's the "shadow of sleaze".

Cover-ups unravelling is what sees heads rolling. The picture emerges of a party deciding long before coming to power to gift Rupert Murdoch a media and cultural dominance beyond anything seen yet. So much is known already: Cameron made a hasty speech threatening Ofcom with the chop. Jeremy Hunt rejected Ofcom's advice to refer the BSkyB bid to the Competition Commission. Cameron was completing what Margaret Thatcher began – and all for what? Fickle support from Murdoch's press.

Why does this make the foundations of No 10 tremble? After all, the story has never changed. The Guardian and a few others have written it time and again, ever since Thatcher first broke every rule, twisted every regulation and bent EU law to give Murdoch a newspaper and television dominance unthinkable in the US or most countries. We have ranted and railed helplessly over the decades, pointing our finger every time politicians of any party kowtowed to the man they feared. Blair as godfather to his child? Brown's last-minute currying favour with a real-terms cut to the BBC licence fee? Democracy was bound to be suborned. That's precisely what competition law is there to prevent: monopolies are monsters hard to chain once set loose, nowhere more than in the media.

None of this is news to our readers – but the Leveson inquiry evidence so forensically laid out by Robert Jay QC sets out the shameful tale for all to see. Murdoch's replies will enter the annals of amnesia and economy with the truth: "I've never asked a prime minister for anything in my life." Of course not. He just breathed on them.

Is there anything so exceptional about Rupert Murdoch? He's canny and fly, but probably no more so than many sharp-witted businessmen who spot their chance in a flabby market. All he has done is exactly what Adam Smith (the real one) famously said every businessman does given half a chance – corner markets and conspire against the consumer. The success of his business was built on gaining the edge by evading regulators and avoiding taxes, as all companies will unless stopped. So let's not obsess over his character.

If you think this is a navel-gazing media story, here's a reminder of what Hunt was about to unleash on the country, with Cameron and George Osborne's approval. If Murdoch were allowed to own all BSkyB, within a year or two he would package all his newspapers on subscription or online together with his movie and sports channels in offers consumers could hardly refuse, at loss-leading prices. Other news providers, including this one, would be driven out, or reduced to a husk. His would be the commanding news voice. Except for the BBC – which his media have attacked relentlessly for years.

Sky's dominance over the BBC is already looming: now past its investment phase, Sky's income is multiplying fast at £5.5bn a year, against the BBC's static £3.5bn. Sky's growing billions can buy everything, not only sports and movies, but every best series: the BBC trains and develops talent, predatory Sky will snatch it. Nor is Sky that good for the Treasury: for every £1 in Sky subscriptions, 90p flees the country, straight to News Corp and Hollywood in the US.

The BBC is remarkable value for money: Sky subscribers can pay £500 a year, the licence fee is £145 for masses more content. Sky is parasitic, as its own subscribers watch many more hours of BBC than Sky, so Sky would collapse if the BBC denied it its channels. Yet the BBC still pays £5m a year for appearing on its platform, a deal struck by Thatcher to help Murdoch.

The sum was cut, but in all other countries commercial broadcasters pay national broadcasters for the right to use their content – not the other way round. The BBC should be paid a hefty fee from BSkyB to compensate for the 16% cut it suffered, partly as a result of Murdoch lobbying. The cut was pure spite, since the licence fee has no connection with Treasury deficits. Pressure persists to deprive viewers of listed national events saved to watch free on BBC: Wimbledon and the rest would go the way of Premier League football.

If it does nothing else, this scandal will stop the government daring to give anything more to Sky. Much as the Tories detest the BBC – which, like the NHS – stands as a defiant symbol of non-market success, expect no overt attacks on it for a while now. But the BBC charter comes up for renewal in 2017: a Tory victory at the next election would liberate them to follow their vengeful instincts.

Jeremy Hunt was within days of giving Murdoch everything, because the government wished it. A token gesture would have put Sky News behind Chinese walls, but on all previous precedent, soon his newspapers, print, online and TV would have merged into a single newsroom. That would require repeal of the law imposing impartiality on broadcasters. But already Murdoch's friends were softening up opinion against old-fashioned, dull TV news, unsuited to the rowdy, opinionated internet era: Fox News would soon be here. If the arrival of Murdoch's kick-arse Sun was a shock, we'd look back on it as an age of innocence compared with what Fox would do – look what it's done to US politics.

Cameron has said it is his ambition to finish Margaret Thatcher's work. As she privatised nationalised industries, so he would marketise the public sector, with his NHS commercialisation and his promise to put all public services out to tender. The dismantling or shrivelling of the BBC would soon have followed. If Nick Davies had not exposed the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone in the nick of time, all would have been lost – an odd way for the BBC to be reprieved.

The 81-year-old under scrutiny this week rambled a bit and remembered nothing to his own detriment. He was an unsatisfying villain, as most are. But the villainy here is not about one man. He stands as an Adam Smith lesson in the primacy of competition law and what happens when politicians let the free market rip to do political favours.

• Comments on this article will be open at 8am BST on 27 Aprill
• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree