“Freindly Fire Zone”

American columnist Chris Freind again questions why Gerry and Kate McCann won’t admit that THEY are most responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance

Is it any wonder why the state of journalism is so dismal?  Why its luster as a noble profession has been lost? And why so many citizens no longer have faith in the media to ask tough questions and seek the truth, wherever it may lead?

Sadly, that brand of hard-nosed, “no sacred cows” reporting is now virtually nonexistent.  Instead, it’s all about making nice with interviewees and bowing at the altar of political correctness, where reporters spend more time trying not to offend than actually doing their job.

Case in point: the nauseating interview by CNN’s Piers Morgan of Gerry and Kate (G and K) McCann, parents of Madeleine, the British toddler who went missing from a Portuguese resort four years ago. Maddy, you may recall, was left alone in a ground floor, unlocked apartment along with her twin two-year old siblings while G and K ate and imbibed at the resort restaurant. 

Rather than probe G and K to shed light on the many questions needing clear and concise answers, Morgan merely placated them (“…you’re certainly good parents… no one is questioning that..”), allowing the McCanns to manipulate the discussion to their liking.

So once again, a chance to help Madeleine via a worldwide audience is wasted by the McCanns’ self-serving spin. 

                                                               *****

The McCanns claimed Madeleine was kidnapped, though there is scant evidence to that claim. While those who have followed the drama have various theories as to what really happened to Madeleine, this author has consistently hammered home four core points:

1) There are numerous inconsistencies in the McCanns’ version of what transpired that fateful night. And the only way to get straight answers would be for an interviewer to do his job and ask the right questions.  But for the world to trust the McCanns, and by extension generate renewed vigor in the search for Madeleine, Gerry and Kate need to come clean and address the many inconsistencies.  Example: why did Kate allegedly yell “they’ve taken her” rather than “Madeleine is missing” after discovering her disappearance? And why kidnapping was her first thought, which is totally inconsistent with Gerry’s interview answer to Morgan (detailed below).

The Court of Public Opinion will judge G and K accordingly, but the longer questions go unanswered, the more doubts arise.  (For the record, “Freindly Fire” has repeatedly requested an interview, but to no avail).

2) The McCanns, unequivocally, endangered their children through negligence.  No matter what spin is put on the situation, the fact that three children, with a combined age of seven, were left alone for hours is inexcusable.  Sure, no one is perfect, and there are degrees of mistakes, but that takes the cake.  Some critics argue that focusing on Gerry and Kate’s actions do nothing for finding Madeleine and serve no purpose, but in fact, the opposite is true.  First, by genuinely admitting their grave mistake and taking pains to show the world that children should never be left unattended, they set the right example for parents who may still engage in that practice. 

More important, they would build enormous goodwill with those who simply can’t get past the McCanns’ arrogance, and in doing so, generate a level of trust that they can be believed.  Taking blame for their mistake will win people over, and for obvious reasons, the more people tuned into Madeleine’s situation (without so much anger directed at the parents), the better the chances for additional leads.

3) The British media should do its job by reporting the facts and asking the right questions. Despite Britain’s ridiculously stifling and archaic libel laws, the UK press still has plenty of leeway in which to move this case forward.  They should neither pronounce guilt nor cozy up to the McCanns, but take an objective down-the-middle approach to finding answers to the most pressing questions.

And along those lines, the McCanns would be well served to stop suing or threatening every individual, web group and media entity that states something they don’t like.  By leaving your children alone in a foreign nation --- and not adequately addressing that mistake --- they brought criticism upon themselves.  Deal with it.  Threats to silence critics only make them look guilty.

4) Why have no negligence charges been brought against Gerry and Kate, thus showing the world that willfully walking away from your children is not only wrong, but criminal?  Remember, for a three-year old in an unfamiliar place, parents who are 100 meters away might as well be in a foreign land.

                                                               *****

Unfortunately, the Piers Morgan interview demonstrates that those lessons involving humility and honesty have not been learned by Gerry and Kate.  It’s just more of the same: softball questions, slick answers, and the blame game.  The most telling excerpts:

Piers Morgan (PM): Why didn’t you just pay to have a nanny if you wanted to go out to dinner?

Gerry (GM): We did what we thought was best….If you’re children are asleep upstairs in a bedroom and you’re dining (outside) in the garden, you can’t hear them. And that’s the similar thing to me.

PM: But most people’s homes are secure. (The resort) wasn’t a secure property. People could come in off the street…

GM: It gets back to the safety issue.  We did not perceive an element of threat. Child abduction is so rare.  Why would you have ever thought that someone would have entered the apartment and steal your child? It just didn’t enter our head.

Kate: We’ve been through all these questions, day in and day out….we felt really safe….and there’s no way we would have taken a risk.

GM:  (These questions on our behavior) take the focus away from the abductor, and that becomes quite frustrating for us….Those responsible for taking her are still at large.

A question comes to mind for our well-to-do globetrotting celebrities (both physicians who could have easily afforded a nanny or babysitting service):

Is there a change of seasons on your planet?

Give Gerry credit.  He actually said those things with a straight face.  As far as Piers, he dropped the ball and let them off the hook.  Same old story.

Perhaps he could have followed up just a bit more on the “dining-in-the-backyard is the same as being out at a restaurant,” pointing out that Gerry couldn’t see the room (it was blocked by a six-foot wall) and was barely within earshot of the apartment even if an adult had screamed, let alone a child crying in distress.

Piers, it appears, isn’t ready for prime time.

And the “element of threat?”  Why is it only kidnapping, in hindsight, that Gerry sees as the threat?  I’ve been to resorts in that area of Portugal. Guess what?  The floors are hard as rock, because in many instances, they are.  So the possibility never occurred to the McCanns that an unsupervised Madeleine could playfully jump on the bed --- and fall off?  And if she did, how would checking on the children every half-hour help if she broke an arm --- or skull?

What about little children getting into medicine and overdosing?  Or simply walking out the unlocked door and into a dangerous world --- one very close to the ocean?

And if there had been a fire, would Madeleine, with her whopping three years of life on Earth, be expected to save herself and the twins?

Perhaps most interesting, were the McCanns’ valuables locked in the safe, as some state?  If so, why --- if there was no “element of threat?”  Smart doctors surely would not have left their children alone in an unlocked room if there was even a remote threat of burglary.  Would they?

The risks to the McCann children are obvious to all who possess common sense, and, one would presume, to two well-respected doctors.  But Gerry and Kate once again failed to admit what is apparent to most people: negligence has consequences. So when Gerry expresses frustration that focusing on the McCanns’ behavior takes away from the search for the abductor, he still doesn’t get it.

He and Kate need to admit that by looking in a mirror, they will instantly see who is most “responsible” for Madeleine’s disappearance, since, by definition, she wouldn’t have gone missing or been “kidnapped” had an adult been present.

Then, and only then, will Gerry’s and Kate’s long road back to credibility begin.  And that is the best thing possible for little Madeleine McCann.

Chris Freind, an accredited member of the press, is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative
reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com His extensive collection of columns questioning the McCanns for their negligence can be found in his website’s archives.

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries
and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including
The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick
Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."

Freind, whose column appears regularly in Philadelphia Magazine and nationally in
Newsmax, also serves as a frequent guest commentator on talk radio and state/national/international television.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it