A couple of times I've spotted a familiar face directing the crowds and apparently protecting the McCanns as they make their regular public appearances.
Here is a photograph from Sky News of the very same Clarence Mitchell accompanying Mr McCann on his recent flying visit to the UK. He is the bloke on the right in the ice-cream seller's jacket.
Mitchell was a BBC Reporter who appears to have left the Beeb for an important job with HM Government. According to this, he is now the director of the Media Monitoring Unit within the Central Office of Information(COI). If he is still employed there, and presumably drawing his salary, what the heck is he doing mixed up with the Madeleine business? Does he have his nose in the ever growing Madeleine Fund trough?
I have sent an e-mail to the COI requesting this information.
Keep tuned folks.
UPDATE 26th May.
According to this Clarence has morphed into "Foreign Office Spokesman".
But why should HMG be involved in an essentially private matter. And who is paying to perk up Clarence's sun tan?
Update 29th May.
See my post here
My sister’s daughter went missing for about a week and a half a number of years ago and not one of us sought attention from the local and national newspapers for financial recompense. We worked closely with the police and my sister who suffers from an incurable illness [ similar to M.S ] scoured the length and breadth of parts of East and North London and so did we the family….. Moreover, we hired a private investigator. We worked in close conjunction with her schools and friends, etc She was eventually found safe by the P.I ….
Not once did my sister behave in the absolutely abhorrent manner in which the McCanns have conducted themselves! My sister was extremely ill and she still went out on the streets to search for her child…
The last thing on our mind was money or ribbons or media attention. Sarah Payne’s parents did not start this same sort of media circus which surrounds the McCanns now and neither did James Bulger’s parents. I think it is hsamleful the wayin which the disappearance of a child has ended up producing a corporation of sorts with a fixationon what appears to be fiancial recompense for their parents’ obvious negligence. Why an earth hasn’t Leicestershire Social Services flown out to Portugal. Are they under the spell which the McCanns seem to have cast over everyone??
Posted by: Rowan | 28 May 2007 at 03:17 AM
So right Rowan. There are many of us who totally agree with you. We are absolutely stunned by the Media's take on this case. The McCanns are absolutely disgraceful!
Posted by: Diane | 28 May 2007 at 02:51 PM
The McCanns' three children were conceived by the IVF (in vitro fertilisation) procedure which the Catholic church totally opposes and considers a mortal sin. How, then, can the McCanns be "devout Catholics"? I find the McCanns very troubling people. WHY didn't they offer a reward IMMEDIATELY? They are rich professionals with a house worth 800k Pounds and undoubtedly a very high credit ability to get a giant loan, as well as ruch friends & colleagues. WHY did they take so long to mention the "flash" in Madeleine's eye? I pray for the little girl's safety and return, but the deeply disturbing underlying question remains: HOW could these supposedly loving and caring parents leave their 3 toddlers night after night, unattended for periods up to 50 minutes (9:10pm to 10pm May 3rd) over a 3-hour+ stretch???
Posted by: Kitty | 05 June 2007 at 10:00 PM
... and, I should add, the 3 children were left in the foreign hotel hotel room WITH THE DOOR UNLOCKED!
Posted by: Kitty | 05 June 2007 at 10:03 PM
This is a repost of a comment I made on a friends blog (http://teammccann.blogspot.com/)
Something clearly isn't right.
All this symbolic crap such as releasing balloons, selling (very profitable) wrist bands and hordes of pre-prepared children "mobbing" the Mccans with pre-prepared posters.
If all these brats already had posters of Madeline to wave about as soon as the mccanns and the television cameras turned up, why did the Mccanns need to go there to 'raise awareness' about the daughter they so criminally neglected?
Surely they weren't using the whole thing as a way of extending their holiday and dragging their media circus with them?
Their agent seriously needs to coach them a little about not turning up at each destination in full makeup and beaming for the cameras when wishing to appear distraught.
Posted by: Mark | 20 June 2007 at 09:10 AM
Hi I'm from Portugal an I would like to add some stuff even though this seems a rather old post: "So what's Clarence Mitchell doing here?" - We in Portugal are outraged by the lies and manipulation the majority of the press and specially sky news, disgustingly biased, do about the case, the police, the country... man anything they could throw mud... First, and this is a FACT, the first thing kate did when she "realised" she lost her daughtert was to call sky news and underline abduction... only much later the police were called. Pamela Fenn, an english lady living above the mcscam's offered help and to call hte police herself. kate refused. In the GNR phone records they were phoned 40 minutes after this suggestion by mrs Fenn. kate and the so called tapas 9 people displayed unusual behaviour after the so called abduction. kate goes to the apartment and according to what she says she understood the daughter was missing, left the apartment, didn't check the other kids, closed the door, (funny stuff because they insinuated that the alleged abductor was probably inside according to their instinct) and WALKED, not RUNNED, to the restaurant. Over there informed the others. What do they do? They leave the tables and the insane number of bottles of wine, (perhaps they were trying to forget something) and EACH FAMILY GROUP goes to their own apartemnt. Testemonies from the resort staff, fenn and neighbors confirm that kate wasn't emotionally affected, she was in control, very calm... I would like to say here that in my view, completly different from your press and media that sell an image of a emotionally affected mother I see another type of person. The only word I can find to describe kate is "lifeless". I'm sorry but she is very weird. Very quickly they had the help of the english ambassador phoning to every police chief, the pressure was huge from the beginning to search an abductor. A-B-D-U-C-T-O-R!!! The media, the ambassador, your foreign minister, the family, the famous tapas 9, everybody pressured for the search of an abductor. Plus, in what regards to murat, this guy was so framed, one of the members of the tapas 9, janet, says she saw a man carrying a child covered with a blanket while she left the restaurant table. The problem is that an englishman, apparently works as a producer in London, was at precisely at that time on that street and didn't see a thing. And it's a narrow street. She claims he was headed to what we know now as murats house. russel o'brien, another member of the tapas 9, apparently husband of janet claims he saw murat sniffing around in the firts searches of madeline. And he is very convinced of that. The problem is that he was the only one claiming this. From the people envolved in the searches, resort staff, family, neighbors, police, GNR, etc - russel is the only one to see murats presence. These tapas 9 people are very odd characters. they avoid giving any sort of interviews and are apparently scared of media attention. They go to great lenght to avoid being seen or to be connected to the case. In England they have moved recently from house to house frequently. Man It maybe just me but if a friend of mine is searching for his daughter, man I am envolved, give interviews, say what I have to say, actively helping the cause etc. most recently, and I love this, cos I honestly didn't remember it, but obviously cops have, the cops asked kate why didn't the twins wake up during the noisy search inside the apartment? The cops were already inside and they were very noisy. And why, and this is the important question, didn't kate woke them up and asked them if they heard anything saw anything. Kate refuses to answer this question among others, delicate to answer like this one. In fact her status as arguida allows her not to answer if that's her wish... but isn't this weird that justine mcguiness and gerry and kate came out saying that they are cooperating with the police and then refuse to answer the questions. They don't confirm or deny, they simply refuse to answer as it is allowed them.
Posted by: El-Rey Lusitano | 09 September 2007 at 07:46 PM
Although I am troubled by the disappearance of this small child, I too cannot understand why that at the precise moment Kate McCann apparently discovers her eldest child missing,does not immediately wake up the twin babies instinctively and bundle them out of that apartment for their protection. Or,at the least stayed with them and shouted out for help. She left her children not once but twice on that fateful evening. This behaviour simply does not make any sense – especially for a doctor trained to protect the vulnerable – let alone a distraught mother.
Of course the second unanswered question for me is this fund. Why haven't private search parties and investigators been called in with the help of this substantial pool of money? We, the public, were led to believe that that was what this fund was set up for. A new ad campaign? Why? Is this really necessary? We all know what this little girl looks like. There is no escaping her cute little face on the cover of newspapers worldwide, all over the media and the Internet.
Of course, innocent until proven guilty, but many questions have to be answered soon in a legal environment so that this circus can end. The McCanns sought media attention and unfortunately must face the terrible consequences of that erroneous invitation.
Posted by: Karen Sugerman | 18 September 2007 at 03:18 PM
Kate refused to answer 40 questions.
I just have one.
WHY?
Posted by: Michael | 21 September 2007 at 10:27 PM
Maddies knee
get a blow up and show where the cut is?
Posted by: Michael | 24 September 2007 at 02:02 PM
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5497694,00.jpg
Sorry here is the link
Posted by: Michael | 24 September 2007 at 02:03 PM
What a load of opinionated, bigoted claptrap there is on this page.
You should be ashamed.
Posted by: Christian Ball | 24 September 2007 at 03:54 PM
Christian,
Welcome.
Exactly which bits are too opinionated and/or bigoted for your taste? You may not realise it, but not everyone is taken in by the McCanns. Best challenge what is written rather than just spray graffiti around
t
Posted by: Tony Hatfield | 24 September 2007 at 05:07 PM
Most people posting on this web-site seem to be suffering from a serious case of wearing, not rose coloured specs, but black coloured specs. If you suffer from giving in easily to bias, then you can explain every move, every motive, every thing done or said by the McCanns according to the judgement you would like to see cast. Please be careful. Why is this boiling down to petty for or against the McCann's discussions? I suppose some people find that sort of game fun. Fun until you're in their shoes.
Posted by: J & C Butlin, Christchurch | 21 October 2007 at 06:06 PM
Excellent blog and some good first comments (esp from Portugal).
So we paid their mortgage did we?
And the Rolex watch for Kate.
What else?
Looking forward to their day in court.
Posted by: T. Train | 31 October 2007 at 03:21 AM
what's this re a Rolex watch?
note that Gerry has returned to work after 6 months,I presume that this is to do with his salary being reduced by a half by NHS.
I assume that he was still on full pay when their mortgage was paid out of the "No stone unturned" fund
Posted by: Allan Martin | 13 November 2007 at 10:30 AM
what's this re a Rolex watch?
Posted by: Allan Martin | 21 November 2007 at 09:51 AM
what's this re a Rolex watch?
Posted by: Allan Martin | 21 November 2007 at 09:51 AM