KATE'S DIARY WAS GIVEN TO PORTUGUESE FEMALE JOURNO BY THE PJ

No doubt that is winging it's way to Carter Ruck. I bet they love a bit of satire.

Jayelles wrote:Bennett is so 2007.

Very droll but oh so accurate. LOL

Do the anti posters on those forums not realise that parading their total ignorance for all to see makes them look like complete idiots.



Just because this stupid poster hasn't bothered to read the NOTW apology where the donation was clearly explained doesn't mean the McCanns failed to read it or that the rest of the world failed to read it.

What? It could hardly be simpler.

PJ>Portuguese woman>NOTW.

NOTW pay Portuguese woman.

NOTW print diary while trying to kid themselves they got permission.

NOTW make apology and donation to Find Madeleine Fund.

Mind you, that is fairly typical of the total lack of anything resembling functioning brain activity in pitchforkerland over this.

Maybe they simply are not programmed to process information like this?

wasn't Cabrita's husband/partner something to do with the tourist office where Gonzo's wife worked or have I remembered that wrongly?

nope got that wrong

For those that may not know Amaral's lawyer 'Dr António Cabrita' is the husband of 'Felicia Cabrita' the journalist who was said to have 'allegedly' obtained copies of witness statements; witness land and mobile phone numbers; and witness addresses from one Goncalo Amaral.

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t45-amaral-s-lawyer-dr-antonio-cabrita-quotes

It's all pretty obvious what happened if you know the past background. Cabrita and her access to the Tapas group's names and phone numbers when only The PJ had this information. Followed by The Diary, also only held by The PJ. It really doesn't take much to work it out. I'm just amazed that they thought they would get away with it.

I hope Cabrita's husband didn't know what was going on because he will be in deep shit as well, if he did.
Actually, I don't hope anything of the kind. The whole set up stinks and I hope they all get done.

That's her, Jay. Gonc probably though she was doing him a favour at a time when witnesses were forbidden to retaliate against false reporting. And maybe she was. But I doubt they saw the fallout coming from the stolen Diary. Who would have thought there would be an Enquiry into Press Standards?

The only thing bothering me now is that The Portuguese Attorney General has know about this appalling breach of Portuguese Law for quite some time, but appears to have done nothing about it.

From Bren via Myths, an old article from 2008 but very interesting:

The Real McCann Scandal
Brian Cathcart

Published 23 October 2008

Brian Cathcart details how the British press set out to systematically destroy the parents of Madeleine McCann.

You may have missed it: at the High Court in London on 15 October, Express Newspapers agreed to pay £375,000 in libel damages to the so-called "Tapas Seven", the friends of Kate and Gerry McCann who were with the couple in Portugal when Madeleine McCann disappeared.

This development did not receive much coverage. There were three sentences in the Sun on page 21, for example, and just a little more in the Daily Mirror on page 20. In the Daily Express itself you might easily have failed to spot the apology that was part of the settlement, as the two paragraphs in the top corner of page five were a little lost beside the bold headline blaring out across the rest of the spread: "Let the jobless lag lofts, says Brown". The Tapas Seven victory, it seems, was treated as a minor footnote to a burned-out story; few people were likely to be interested.

Well, they ought to be interested, because the McCann case was the greatest scandal in our news media in at least a decade - an outrage far worse than the Andrew Gilligan "sexed-up dossier" affair of 2003 - and those responsible are now slinking away almost unpunished. They are escaping, moreover, by the most shameful of means. The editors and proprietors of the papers responsible for the great balloon of speculative nonsense that was the McCann story had the power to kill off discussion of what went wrong in the press, and they used it. When their balloon burst, they simply began pretending it had never existed.

Not one editor and, so far as I know, not one reporter has lost his or her job or even faced formal reprimand as a result of the McCann coverage. There has been no serious inquest in the industry and no organised attempt to establish what went wrong, while no measures have been taken to prevent a repetition. Where there have been consequences, as with the Tapas Seven, they have come from outside and been reported to the public with the most grudging economy.

This is a remarkable evasion of responsibility by an industry which is the first to boast of its own importance to a healthy democracy, and it is all the more unpalatable when you consider the standards this same industry expects of others.

"We want scapegoats," wrote Max Hastings in the Daily Mail recently, as he surveyed the wreckage of the banking industry. "And when we have the names, like the profiteers of the First World War, they should be perceived as men and women whom decent people will not share a park bench with." Patrick O'Flynn, chief political commentator of the Daily Express, took a similar line: "Setting aside the quite understandable desire for revenge against the reckless bankers who enriched themselves for so long at our expense, there are other perfectly sound reasons for insisting that the bosses of British finance are dispatched to the nearest jobcentre."

The Mirror applauded Gordon Brown when he went "gunning for greedy bankers" and demanded that "heads must roll". So did the Guardian's business editor, Deborah Hargreaves, who wanted to see the fat cats in court, while in the same paper Simon Jenkins thought the time might have come for firing squads.


Error on this scale, involving hundreds of “completely untrue” news reports, published on front pages month after month in the teeth of desperate denials, can only be systemic

Our national press is unforgiving when things go wrong, and the problem doesn’t have to be as apocalyptic as the banking crisis. Ask Steve McClaren, pilloried so comprehensively for his performance as England manager that he now coaches at a small club in the eastern Netherlands. Ask Sir Ian Blair, the former Commissioner of the Met, whose scalp was demanded by most of the right-wing press even though crime figures were improving. Ask the two BA executives who had to go after the disastrous opening of Heathrow’s Terminal Five (Willie Walsh, their boss, survived a clamour of calls for his own resignation). Ask, indeed, the long line of government ministers from Charles Clarke back to Cecil Parkinson and beyond, who have been ordered out of office by editors and leader writers whose high expectations they failed to satisfy. If anything like the same standards were applied to the people running national newspapers, at least three or four of them would have been dispatched to their nearest jobcentres months ago for their conduct in the McCann coverage.

Very few stories have commanded such intense public interest since the death of Princess Diana, and editors found that the image of Madeleine, or her name in a headline, was almost a daily necessity. If it didn't add sales, then at least it helped a paper compete with other titles doing the same thing. But look at what we now know about the stories published in this hyster ical atmosphere, starting with ones about the Tapas Seven. In as many as 20 articles published over six months, the Sunday and Daily Express and the Daily Star suggested that this group covered up the truth about the girl's disappearance and misled the police who were invest igating the case. They also suggested that one member of the group was officially suspected of being in volved in abducting Madeleine.

As the official apology put it: "We now accept that these suggestions should never have been made and were completely untrue." That apology came three months after the former suspect Robert Murat and two associates, Michaela Walczuch and Sergey Malinka, accepted between them £800,000 in damages from the Daily and Sunday Express, the Daily Star, the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Mirror, the Daily Record, Metro, the London Evening Standard, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the News of the World.

In nearly 100 articles, these 11 newspapers made allegations against the three which they admitted were entirely without foundation - allegations which could hardly have been graver, since they included lying to the police, p.a.e.dophile activities and involvement in the abduction of Madeleine McCann. And four months before that apology, Express Newspapers paid £550,000 to Gerry and Kate McCann, who had sued over more than 100 stories about them in the group's four titles, some of which were "grossly defamatory". The real picture is probably even worse, since, in a perverse way, the Express papers were unlucky to be singled out. Anyone who read the McCann coverage elsewhere in the national press will know that the McCanns could probably have sued other titles with equal success; why they didn't is their business.

Such a catalogue cannot be dismissed as a one-off error caused by the misjudgements of individuals - a description that might be applied to the Andrew Gilligan affair and certainly applies to the Daily Mirror fake Iraq torture photo graphs scandal (both of which, incidentally, led to resignations and sackings). Error on this scale, involving hundreds of "completely untrue" news reports, published on front pages month after month in the teeth of desperate denials, can only be systemic. Judging by what appeared in print, it involved a reckless neglect of ethical standards, a persistent failure to apply even the most basic journalistic rigour, and plenty of plain cruelty.

No explanation has emerged besides the obvious one: that this was all done to sell newspapers. Seeing the scale of public interest, it looks as though editors were ready to publish stories, and reporters were ready to write them, even when they had no merit whatsoever. Is that better or worse than the crimes of Sir Fred "the Shred" Goodwin, now shamed out of his job running Royal Bank of Scotland, or of Steve McClaren, or of Sir Ian Blair? Perhaps this judgement is harsh. Perhaps what went wrong in Praia da Luz was more innocent or subtle than it appears. Perhaps it was really all the fault of the Portuguese police, or of the unreasonable demands of the newspaper-reading public.


In that case, as these papers might say in other circumstances, we should be told. If a matter is complicated, the standard response of the leader writers is to demand a public inquiry to get all the evidence out in the open and deliver an informed verdict. And an inquiry might not only look at the conduct of reporters and newspapers, but could also assess the arguments about the conduct of the McCanns, who have been accused of manipulating public opinion through adept use of public relations. Journalists have made much of this, though it is hard to see how anything the couple did could justify so many unfounded news stories, most of them published on front pages.

But fitting as these matters are for an inquiry, and enlightening though it would be to hear the evidence of the various parties, as things stand there is no likelihood that an inquiry might take place. What we have had instead is a brief flurry of brooms as this shameful episode was swept under the carpet, and no acknowledgement whatever of the scale of the fault. And it is useless to protest that justice has been done in the courts, with those damages and apologies. The sums are far below the levels that might alter behaviour in Fleet Street; indeed, editors laugh off such penalties when, as in this case and in the recent Max Mosley sadomasochist sex scandal, they can be set against extra copies sold.

What is to be done with proprietors and editors who are shameless enough to tolerate such errors, cynical enough to cover them up and hypocritical enough to demand that others resign for faults that are less grave? All I can suggest, taking my lead from Max Hastings, is this: if you happen to see one of them on a park bench, make a point of sitting somewhere else.

Brian Cathcart is professor of journalism at Kingston University

http://www.newstatesman.com/law-and-ref ... ly-british

They are both called Cabrita - BUT - Portuguese surnames can be rather confusing, so I wouldn't take it for granted; it may just be a huge coincidence.

You know what is amazing - though maybe it shouldn't be?

Not one person on the hate sites has condemned the PJ for what they did with Kate's diary.

They are more concerned with posting that vulgar toilet smiley they are so fond of and making stupid remarks about the McCanns fighting with Clarence Mitchell. Why on earth would that be happening? He was taken for a ride by NOTW, just as NOTW was taken for a ride by some Portuguese woman and the PJ.

Not one of them has even tried to grasp what really happened, or the extent of the PJ's betrayal of their uniform.

I agree with you bb1.

How stupid can these people be?

In the NOTW Article publishing part of the Diary it says an undisclosed sum was paid to the McCanns , so if true, how can Kate now say she was
devastated. I"m sure the NOTW will find the evidence of such a payment if necessary.

What? How can anyone fail to grasp this?

On 14 September 2008, the News of the World published extracts from 'Kate's Diary'. The newspaper claimed that the 135-page 'journal', written on an A4 pad, had been passed to them by a Portuguese reporter.

When it became apparent that Kate had not given authorisation for its release, the online article was instantly removed. Both The Sun and the News of the World published apologies and made an undisclosed payment to Madeleine's Fund.

NOTW made a donation to the Fund BECAUSE Kate was so upset when it appeared.

Why on earth would there be any mystery about the payment? It's a matter of record.

Why are none of them outraged at what the PJ did? If a US or UK cop did that, they would be facing a long jail sentence right now.

Hate definitely seems to have corroded their brains to the point that they live in a topsy turvy world, Bonny.

At least I think it's hate?

I repeat what was said yesterday, at the inquiry, on oath, in VERY BIG LETTERS - maybe they will understand it this time?

Myler: Source for the Kate McCann diaries story was a Portuguese journalist, who was given 3000 euros #Leveson

The Portuguese journalist responsible for selling the Kate McCann diaries to #notw had apparently obtained them from Portuguese police
by skymarkwhite via twitter 2:25 PM

THE PJ IGNORED A JUDGE'S ORDER TO DESTROY THEM AND COMMITTED THIS SHAMEFUL ACT INSTEAD

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=48450&c=1

Colin Myler: I did not berate the McCanns over Hello story


15 December 2011
By Andrew Pugh

Former News of the World editor Colin Myler yesterday claimed he would not have published excerpts from Kate McCann’s diary without permission – but was told by his news editor Ian Edmondson that the family’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell had given them the go-ahead.

The claim has since beeny denied by Mitchell.

At the Leveson Inquiry last month Kate McCann said she felt “mentally raped” after the NoW published transcripts from her personal diary on 14 September 2008 under the headline “Kate’s Diary: In her own words”, and said it was done without prior notice.

The McCanns claimed that before the article was published Edmondson told Mitchell they were writing a “positive piece” but did not mention the diary, and if they had known they would have considered taking legal action to prevent publication.

Also speaking to the Leveson Inquiry, Gerry McCann said that Myler had "berated" him in an "angry" phone call because the McCanns gave an exclusive story to Hello magazine - rather than the News of the World.

Yesterday Myler revealed the diaries came from a female Portuguese journalist.

He insisted that Edmondson told him he had cleared the story with Mitchell, telling the inquiry: "Ian Edmondson had assured me on more than one occasion that Clarence was aware of what we were intending to do and had said, 'good'.

"I think it was very clear from Mr Edmondson's point of view how he had spelt out what he was doing."

On the subject of the "angry" phone call too Gerry McCann, Myler said: "I don't have a reputation for berating people." He added that he "simply pointed out" his "surprise" that they took their story to Hello with a circulation, he said, of around 300,000 compared with the News of the World's three million plus sale.

Responding to the diary claims, Mitchell said: "At no point in the one brief call that I received from Ian Edmondson on the Friday evening before publication did he spell out categorically that they had purchased a version of Kate's diary that had been leaked by the Portuguese police and that they were planning to publish it in as big a way as they subsequently did.

"He led me to believe that they were looking to do a positive story on an inside page based on leaks in the Portuguese press of quotes in an alleged diary that had already appeared in Portugal in previous days.

"I told him that we were in no way encouraging any such coverage of a diary, or even confirming that any diary existed.

"However, I said if they were planning to run a positive piece that was up to them and it would be fine as long as it was positive.

"All of my contemporaneous emails at the time are now with lawyers for the Leveson Inquiry, and I am more than happy to give my side of the conversation with Ian Edmondson if required.

"You only need to look at the fact that the News of the World subsequently rolled over a few days later and not only published an apology in the following week's paper but also paid more than £120,000 to the Madeleine Fund by way of compensation. That speaks for itself."

--------------------

It does indeed; moreover, Clarrie's version of events makes sense.

NOTW must have known they were on thin ice; why didn't they simply ask Clarrie for the original diary, instead of paying for a PJ translation, if they thought everything was kosher?

Oh, wait, I know - because they knew it WASN'T kosher, and that they had no damn business publishing something obtained from the PJ via some Portuguese female.

I wonder if there will be any follow-up in Portugal of this disgusting breach? After all, this is damning of the PJ under Gonc and surely Portugal has to stop the embarrassment that he has caused to them?

I personally think that NOTW are now duty-bound to make public the name of the Portuguese woman who sold them the diary, after getting it from the PJ.

That done, I hope the AG of Portugal will commence criminal charges against the PJ officers involved - even the 'retired' ones.

lily wrote:I wonder if there will be any follow-up in Portugal of this disgusting breach? After all, this is damning of the PJ under Gonc and surely Portugal has to stop the embarrassment that he has caused to them?

The Portuguese Attorney General has known about this for some considerable time, Lily, but he doesn't appear to have done anything about it. A serious offence was committed, not least gross misuse of Public Funds for illegal financial gain. We would have heard about it if an investigation had been launched.

Maybe this is fairly small beer in comparison to Portugal's economic woes? Dunno - but surely there has to come a point when Portugal has had enough of Gonc and co dragging their name into the mud?

And why is Morais silent about this? What with her having such high churnalistic standards I would have thought she would have had plenty to say about some Portuguese female being involved in this betrayal of her country's honor for 3,000 pieces of silver.

If the AG does nothing, I expect that more information will be forthcoming in the disgraced cop's libel trial? That will be big news.

No wonder Morais is silent. She, like members of her clique, were hoping silence would reign in this shameful debacle, and it's rendered them speechless?

And a Female Portuguese Journalist to boot. Now would be a good time to make her mark in the Journalistic World. But Mz Morais seems singularly reluctant to seize the her opportunity. One can only assume that she is afraid to do so.
Or maybe Duarte Levy is doing it for her as we speak.

Anyone who thinks this isn't going to come up in Amoral's libel trial is living in Cloud Cuckoo Land, frankly.

I hope it does all come out in The Libel Trial, but I'm not sure if it is pertinent to The Libel itself. There was nothing pertaining to Libel in the illegal release of Kate's Diary. That is another Offence altogether. Although as far as I understand Law, if Gonc's Lawyer raises the issue in some form, then Gonc or his Lawyer can be questioned about it by Isobel Duarte.
Perhaps Sans could help out here

Latest snippet from Leveson - I think we are all waiting for this Portuguese woman to be named and shamed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2011/dec/15/leveson-inquiry-derek-webb-colin-myler-live

11.59am: Leveson asks if there is such a thing as the "lob it in" school of journalism.

Myler says there is not.

I don't think there is. I think in the McCann early days when Madeleine wen missing were truly appalling and should never appeared by any standards in this country. The industry did not like what those newspapers were doing, those newspapers were held to account publicly.

Most journalists and editors I know these days have incredibly high standards of ethics and the law. Yes, we get it wrong … but the manner in which we are all tarnished as reckless and negligent, it's just not there in my experience.


Must say, it always amuses me when the pitchforkers think they are being awfully clever by quoting Goebells and the Big Lie - when all the time, it's them who have fallen for the aforesaid Big Lie.

They still believe all these ancient, discredited media reports - they still quote them as The Truth.

They can't - or won't - see that they were played for fools, and are still being played.

Maybe their irrational hatred is more important to them than the truth?