In part two of our interview with Anthony Summers and
Robbyn Swan, the authors explain more about the background to their new book Looking
for Madeleine, their thoughts on the police investigations so far, and what
may now lie ahead in this extraordinary case.
How did you conduct your
research? What was the process you followed?
First and foremost, we spent months doing what we have
done on our previous eight books, reading all possible available documentation
– in many cases a logistic challenge because of the Portuguese language factor.
All of this was sorted and allocated and built into a vast chronology.
Chronology, carefully assembled, is the key to investigation – whether by law
enforcement or non-fiction authors.
When
did you come to the conclusion that Kate and Gerry McCann played no part in
covering up their daughter’s disappearance and that claims of this are
unfounded?
Were we to have to put a date on this current view of
ours, we would say it was at the stage a few months ago when – after all the
months of analysing the available evidence and testimony – we were finalizing
the manuscript.
Can your book be accurately considered as ‘the
definitive account’ of this unsolved case?
Note that our
publisher has said that the book is “the most definitive account possible.”
Possible at this time. We hope and believe that it is exactly the case at this
point, as of September 2014. Events yet to occur may change that and – as and
when they do – we would hope to update our work.
Your
book has been described as ‘a whitewash’ and ‘propaganda,’ and criticism has
been levelled at the amount of ‘spin’ it received in the British media before
publication? What is your reaction to this?
It is
emphatically not a whitewash, whether or not those making the allegations
choose to believe it or not. Should they look at the available evidence and
testimony, and in turn how we report it in Looking
for Madeleine, they will find such allegations untenable. We know of no
articles about us or the book that could be called "spin.” There have been
news stories based on the information in the book - that is reporting.
How
would you sum up the way in which the investigations have been conducted over
the past seven years?
A muddle of
events and developments, poorly reported and – because of the lengthy lapse of
time after the case was archived – critically interrupted. Hopefully, with both
nations’ police forces for some time now engaged in systematic fresh work, lost
ground may be retrieved.
How
relevant is the Gamble report discussed on Sky TV shortly before publication of the book?
The report
written by former Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre head Jim
Gamble and his team has not been released. In an interview for our book, Gamble
discussed it, we believe, more openly and at greater length than ever before,
and this was justifiably newsworthy. The inclusion of this self-critique of
British law enforcement’s role in the investigation, from a senior source, was
welcome and long overdue. The first Portuguese investigation has been widely
criticised, often exaggeratedly and in a way that seemed xenophobic. The new
openness from the UK ’s
Gamble may go some way to redressing the balance. Once it becomes ethically possible,
Portuguese law enforcement may perhaps offer similar up-to-date background.
Should that occur, we would be glad to report it in a new edition of Looking
for Madeleine.
How long do you expect the investigation to
continue?
Rather than speak
in terms of months or weeks, we hope the investigations by both Portuguese and
British law enforcement will be allowed to continue until they have followed up
on all the lines of inquiry they regard as necessary. We hope the climate of
public opinion in both countries develops positively, in a way that favours
true international cooperation. Unbiased, moderate media reporting could do
much to make this possible.
Do
you think the mystery will ever be solved?
A major
breakthrough would be a forensic lead. Any trace, dead or alive, of Madeleine. The
police never forget, though, that someone, somewhere, knows – or suspects they
have knowledge – of what happened to Madeleine. Someone’s wife, someone’s
brother or sister or friend. Someone who noticed something but has until now
kept it to themselves. What cold case investigators always hope for is that
some hitherto unknown witness or witnesses will come forward with the fragment
of information that can break the case. It’s happened in the past, and could
yet happen in the case of Madeleine.
3 comments:
Sadly, there is a comment here that instantly suggests the authors may inhabit another planet. "We know of no articles about us or the book that could be called "spin"...
So where have they been for the last few weeks?
Sky News orchestrated the "spin" and the PR has been continuing ever since - particularly in the Daily Telegraph that has been presenting excerpts from the book as if they were 'news'- which clearly they are not.
The saddest thing about this latest book is that the real need for a truthful reconstruction of the night Madeleine went missing has not, apparently, been addressed.
The minute a truthful reconstruction - using the real people who were involved - goes ahead, the huge 'gaps' in this apparently endless mystery will start to show themselves... and then meaningful investigation could begin.
It is a scenario that looks increasingly unlikely to happen as the might of the Met appears to be concentrated elsewhere, and particularly on 'little people' unfortunate enough to have owned mobile phones that were tagged as being 'in the vicinity at the time'.
Visit this amazing site!!
advertise online free
The vilification of Goncalo Amaral has opened the door to fantasists and attention seekers, who "spoke to the police at the time, but they weren't interested". Mrs Jean Godwin doesn't quite come into this category; she just recognised Madeleine more than a year after she disappeared. Madeleine was sixteen months older, much thinner and wearing a black wig. However, Mrs Godwin positively identified her. One Jeni Weinberger also identified the "fat, dirty gipsy woman" who was one of the women with Madeleine. Oh: Mrs Godwin also saw that the child was blonde, despite the wig. Yvone Albino and her family endured a very great deal. They have not the means to sue. It seems that a lot of misery is being inflicted on "little people" to no good purpose.
Post a Comment