h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

The media reports are mixed on that one. There is even the suggestion that the place ws left unlocked.

A 'timeline' of the events on the Beeb website mentioned that a window was open (can't remember whetehr it said forced...I think it did.)

Wow I must say this whole thing has become so much more fun than cluedo. Every little possibility and question, throws up seemingly endless possibilities and answers. Yes it is a bit like a film or novel. But maybe also like a very complicated game. The Portuguese secrecy laws married to the voracious appetite of the media lead to off the record briefings. The actual scenario itself is also full of unlikely *facts*. You really couldn't invent it any better. Yes it does seem to have echoes with the Lindsay Chamberlain, dingo affair. Or what about Picnic at Hanging Rock? Also an Australian event. I'm also thinking of the novel, 'A passage to India' and the Marrabar caves incident.

And going back to the situation here, where we are unable to say things that are all over the press and the BBC, although extremely annoying in some ways, adds to the fun.

I got home really late last night and switched on the radio. Naughty BBC radio 5live. Some one is saying that the Portuguese police are getting desperate because there is no body. Then something about the sea and a boat. Then something about how their only hope is a 'confession'. Then something about rumours of a tormented priest who they are desperate to find.......

What's that saying? 'Truth is stranger than fiction' But what about when truth and fiction are intertwinned together?

"Lindy Chamberlain was convicted of killing her baby, because at the time no-one would believe that a dingo would steal a baby. Another big factor was that she didn't behave like a properly grieving mother - she appeared unemotional I think. I think she was also a fundamentalist christian, which added to her oddness. The case is a very good study in the judgements that people make about others, especially people they don't know and who aren't doing what the public think they should."

There's another more recent case also involving Australia. That of the British backpacker whose boyfriend was murdered by a drug-runner. For a long time she became a suspect based on media speculation and the usual nonsense about her not "acting properly" for someone whose boyfriend had been killed.

They eventually got the man who did it but for a long time a lot of people seemed convinced that she did it. A lesson for us, there.

Fanny< The Portuguese secrecy laws married to the voracious appetite of the media lead to off the record briefings.>

You forgot to mention the parents use of the media as well. This has had a huge influence over how the case and the reactions to it have gone.

Yes I completely agree with you. For so long nothing was heard from the Portuguese police. The media was played quite spectacularly with one agenda. If I was in the Portuguese police, hamstrung by the secrecy laws, I would be extremely irritated because I seem to remember stuff about their supposed incompetance in our press. And yet we had certain PR maestros keeping the case high profile, manipulating the news agenda. Certain awkward facts of the case were played down from the start. Because as we know in any such case everyone is a potential suspect

To a degree one party may have brought this on themselves. It has certainly fed the drama we now have.

(I have tried really hard to write this in such a way that it won't get yikesed.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6996560.stm

"The family of missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann is to launch another advertising campaign to publicise her disappearance in May.

Up to £80,000 from donations to the Madeleine Fund will be used for newspaper, television and billboard adverts, beginning in a fortnight."

And the McCanns wonder why the media will not leave them alone?

Last week they were telling the media to leave them alone. Let their other two kids to grow up normally and then this week they announce this.

>>For a long time she became a suspect based on media speculation and the usual nonsense about her not "acting properly" for someone whose boyfriend had been killed.<<

As someone who internalises stress and emotion, especially in public, I'm sure if I was in that situation I'd have similar judgements made about me. Which has nothing of course to do with how I would actually be feeling.

>>And the McCanns wonder why the media will not leave them alone?<<

It seems that there is no middle ground any more. You either shun the press entirely, and you might get left alone (no guarantees though). Or if you try and have *some interaction with the press it's like a licence to the press for open slather.

I can't see any problem with using the media to an extent and still wanting some privacy (except of course it doesn't work any more). Some people and organisations have that all the time.

That's a general comment about the press and fairness, not about what the McCanns have done.

Wonder what the advertising campaign will be like ?

How about "Professional couple seek reasonable excuse for going out and leaving their children unattended. Replies urgently sought - Socal Services pending"

Someone should be running a book on which posts are likely to stay. That one's a goner I reckon.

It's only a personal opinion...

I wonder if anyone who contributed money would now like to have it back?

Well I can only see the censorship getting worse now here after Sir Richard has weighed in setting up a fund so that they have only the very best lawyers money can buy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2461207.ece

It does help to have the odd hundred thousand at your disposal if you want to being libel actions.

<>

Terms of the fund (from their website):
1.1.2 To procure that Madeleine's abduction is thoroughly investigated and that her abductors, as well as those who played or play any part in assisting them, are identified and brought to justice.

1.1.3 To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.

Note that the fund is a company and not a charity.

I wonder if there's small print saying refunds will not be supplied, in the event of:

1.1 Madeleine never being found
1.2 Ludicrous, completely unfounded accusations by police or press or anyone with a grudge against medical professionals

The Archb**** John Sentamu has now dived in saying he doesn;t think they did it as the evidence doesn;t stack up...oh and they are good Catholics as well...so that's alright then.

The question is, what the should we care what he thinks about the case? He has nothing to do with it. He is not a lawyer. The Portuguese police don't give a crap about his opinion, so neither should we.

Unfortunately, *he* thinks he has the standing to say these things and as people listen to him then his views are 'important'.

To move in on all this, I don't really see why they need a fund for their legal fees? I mean they'll get a state lawyer anyway, won't that.

Actually, let's move away from the specific case. 'Prove innocent' funds - what for? Celebrities don't know that a person is innocent, the point of the court is to determine that. Surely these funds are an attempt to break the fairness of legal procedure based upon a media-inspired position of faith (I am supposing: 'I identify with these people, so they must be innocent')?

If it were a case where the claimant wouldn't get a free lawyer of their own (civil cases I suppose?), or where their opponent has already hired the best and they need to compete, that would make sense.

>>
The Archb**** John Sentamu has now dived in saying he doesn;t think they did it as the evidence doesn;t stack up...oh and they are good Catholics as well...so that's alright then.
<<

Where did you hear that? I can't find anything on google.