Today I want to report on a small detail that I found in studying the document. Hitherto ignored, it certainly is not exciting revelation, but all the more clear how information on the part of McCanns were scattered, and how naive and trusting acted British journalists.
The statements of the Tapas 9 in May 2007 against the Portuguese police I know mitlerweile almost by heart, and I stumbled upon reading the so-called Rogatory interviews, that is required by the PJ police interviews of Leicestershire in April 2008, an tiny detail that was unknown to me. After I had scoured the May surveys carefully again, I was sure that Jane Tanner a small, previously unmentioned detail to the British police told the first time.
Namely that they had, like the Paynes, a baby monitor it. However, this would not have been technically very good, and the reception was probably unreliable, so they have also so the children still regularly reviewed in the apartment. But they suspect that they may unconsciously, by testing the device in the walled area of the tapas "hijackers" had drawn attention, that they let their children alone.
A baby monitor that was always taken as additional security for dinner would certainly against the Portuguese Police emphasize the concern of parents and their responsibility for the children clearly. The threat of action for negligence could have been mitigated. Why it was never mentioned in the interrogations by the Portuguese police? In my research I came across
then to the article by David James Smith, "Kate and Gerry McCann: Beyond the smears" that appeared in the Times, and paid to the appearance in December 2007 when a lot of praise because of the "objective" reporting was. In this article, strangely enough, the baby monitor by Jane Tanner is mentioned, although the Rogatory interviews were not done before and never had this unit the speech.
A mail request to the author (who believes in the innocence of the McCanns and nothing of "amateur detectives" and "Ghoul" holds), found that he had received before the publication of his article, a lengthy briefing by Gerald McCann and the info on the baby monitor so probably would.
Several questions are raised: What journalistic ethics
it meets to take and receive briefings from suspects and unaudited published?
What is the situation then with the other information in the article, such as the intake of alcohol, violation of the Achilles' heel, the timing of the evening ....?
Why this little detail was added?
feel How does a journalist who has been abused for the dissemination of propaganda?
at least to the last point, I can say that "Britain's leading crime reporters" are aware of any guilt and can also detect anything suspicious. However, he has thrown definitely not look at the files, because of the meeting of the Smith family with a man carrying a child at the time of the "abduction", he had no idea.
Once again, here the quality of today's media agenda is all too clear.
