Sir Clement Freud and links to the McCanns

Andrew wrote:Hello Bloodhound and a belated welcome.

I'm not sure about this e-mail stuff and where it's coming from exactly..?

The Mirror quoted the Star for example...

It's also been mentioned that 'maybe' it will be used in the Goddard enquiry as well.

Can't see anything of substance about it though but someone is putting it out there for a reason.

There is something going on behind the scenes and just trying to fathom out what the next move will be.....

Bampots wrote:I agree freedom but from newspaper articles he has been called a pedophile......with as yet only one side of the argument. Whats it all about?

of the report that Mrs F invited a young girl into the marital bed? Then left them alone. Please don't tell me she was unaware of his tendencies. She did not show surprise or outrage at the suggestion he was a p word. She apologised. That points to her being well aware. I realise we only have Sylvia's word that this happened but Mrs F seems to be admitting it. At least it seems that way to me. She could have been indignant or shocked. But no she apologised. Her husband will never take the stand so why would she not at least fake some moral outrage at the suggestion?.......chirpyinsect wrote:

Bampots wrote:Im not out to defend Freud....just curious as to whats going on. Surely if his wife knew of him being a pederast or encouraged via the bedrroom frolics then the police should question her. Simple surely??

Poe wrote:The McCanns friendship with Clement Freud and the recent news about him, certainly puts Sofia Leal's comment in a different light: "“My husband and I have never abandoned our daughters, or allowed paedophiles in our circle of friends."

The general assumption is that she was referring to David Payne because of the Gaspar statements but she may have been referring to Freud.

Bampots wrote:And if Cyril Smith is anything to go by(police were told to release him remember!) then Clement Freud who by the way shared an office with Smith,would have been afforded the same protection. Thus someone like Clarence Mitchell,safe government job good career would jump ship for what.....to look after the parents of a child who may turn up next week?? Come on,and why would Jim Gamble take such a los lose situation to his heart??

poster wrote:

candyfloss wrote:How Clement Freud invited Kate and Gerry McCann for lunch after Madeleine disappeared

Kate and Gerry McCann were two months into the search for their missing daughter Madeleine when they received a letter out of the blue.

I suspect they had contact with him prior to this. And this is deliberately 'distancing'. Why would he wait a whopping two months if he wanted to offer support and was nearby?

Who writes a letter in a small holiday resort when phones and emails are readily available? I presume this is not how Freud communicated with them. It is perfectly possible he knew them already, imo. I suspect the 'letter' is, as has already been pointed out, an 'exhibit'So not 'out of the blue' then, presumably

It was from Sir Clement Freud, inviting them for a meal at his holiday home in Praia da Luz, a short drive from the Ocean Club, where Madeleine had vanished on May 3, 2007.

“I’m embarrassed to admit that Gerry and I thought this letter was a hoax,” Mrs McCann wrote in her book, Madeleine.


Don't believe this for one minute. I suspect their was some link between them even if only through mutual acquaintances.

Gerry McCann phoned the number on the letter, discovered it was not a prank, and the next day the McCanns were at Freud’s villa with their twins Sean and Amelie, plus three friends who had stayed in Portugal to help them.

I wonder who the three friends were?

Freud, 83, broke the ice by offering them strawberry vodka.

Interesting choice of words. Again, this might be a reference to something involving freezers or something. And I presume it is designed to convey that they were completely unacquainted when this might not have been the case.

“I’m usually very intimidated by people with brains the size of planets,” wrote Mrs McCann, “but Clement was incredibly warm, funny and instantly likeable.”

Interesting she says this. I suspect it is because - as in the case of Jeremy Paxman - people who are cleverer than them can see the type of people they really are.

He cooked a “bloody marvellous” meal of watercress and egg salad followed by a chicken and mushroom risotto, “the best risotto we’ve ever tasted before or since”.

Show what poor taste Kate has (pun unintended) that at the forefront of her mind was not finding Madeleine but remembering the food and not only that relishing it. Most people two months after their daughter had disappeared would, I suspect, have little interest in food.

Mrs McCann wrote: “Clement cheered us up with his lugubrious wit, and would continue to do so by email after his return to England.”

I wonder what the emails were really about? I'm sure they weren't just limericks.

By August 31, after spending a few weeks in England, Freud was back in Portugal and called Gerry McCann as soon as he arrived.

So this has become a close relationship, then? Why would Gerry want to call Freud 'as soon as he arrived'? Why has he become so important to the case if his only role, supposedly, was offering hospitality to the McCanns? He must have had a much more important role, imo.

Freud made a joke out of newspaper reports that Mr McCann was close to a breakdown. “Thank God for people like Clement who kept us smiling,” Mrs McCann wrote.

This is all so inappropriate. If Kate and Gerry were genuinely grieving for the loss of their daughter Freud would hardly be 'joking' about whatever state of mind either of them were in. You would expect BOTH of them to be 'close to a breakdown' as the days went by with no sign of Madeleine. And the evidence of the sniffer dogs would have made them both terrified that maybe Madeleine was dead, surely?

On the day the McCanns were formally made suspects in the investigation in September 2007, they had been due to go to dinner at Freud’s house again, but cancelled it.

Interesting timings here. Too much of a coincidence, surely?

Nevertheless, he rang them at 9.50pm that night to invite them for a drink, while warning them: “You’ll have to forgive my night-time attire.”

No mention of this in Kate's book. What an odd thing to say? Why didn't he just change into day time clothes?

Mrs McCann recalled: “We found Clement watching a cookery programme, dressed, as promised, in his nightshirt. It was so ordinary and comforting, a bit like going to see your grandad after a horrible day at school.

Peculiar the mention of the nightshirt, imo. Whether true or not. Notice the minimizing and trivializing of what had happened that day which was deadly serious.


“He gave me one of his looks and a giant glass of brandy, and managed to get a smile out of me with his greeting: ‘So, Kate, which of the devout Catholic, alcoholic, depressed, nymphomaniac parts is correct?’

Again, minimizing and trivializing.

“His response to our catalogue of horrors was merely to raise an eyebrow. Clement had this way of making everything seem a little less terrible. When he heard about the [sniffer] dogs [which had indicated the scent of death in the McCann’s hire car], he remarked laconically, ‘So what are they going to do? Put them on the stand? One bark for yes, two for no?’


As above.

“He was right, of course; it was ridiculous. A couple of hours later, fortified by our brandies (it was my first-ever taste of the stuff), some useful snippets of advice and several amusing anecdotes, we left our friend feeling quite a bit better than we had when we’d arrived.”

As above. There was nothing 'ridiculous' about the sniffer dog findings. They are entirely consistent with Detective Amaral's findings. Why did Kate need to tell us if was her 'first ever' taste of brandy?

The use of the word 'snippets' is interesting. Again, minimizing. Why would advice about what to do in their terrible circumstances be trivialized as 'snippets' as though it was inconsequential? I strongly suspect his advice was anything but 'snippets' and Kate is deliberately trivializing what he said to downplay its seriousness. Who hangs around to listen to 'amusing anecdotes' on the very night that you have been made suspects in your own daughter's disappearance. Surely there are far more pressing things to do? Again, I suspect that Freud played quite an important role in one way or another.

One might even speculate about fridges/freezers.

Possibly even photography/filming/use of video cameras which seems to be a sensitive topic around this case.

All theoretical of course.



http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/how-clement-freud-invited-kate-and-gerry-mccann-for-lunch-after-madeleine-disappeared

Very interesting. Freud is using the language of minimizing and trivializing. Just like the McCanns do.

Hmmm........

Also, if he had a villa in Luz I find it impossible to believe that there would not be connecting factors with some of the other players in this drama. I don't know how often he went there but Brits abroad often have networks of friends out there, even if just other villa owners. And there will be bars and restaurants that they frequent.

And of course Freud is very closely linked with all sorts of establishment figures not least the Murdoch link.

Bloodhound wrote:I also think everything she wrote was for a reason.

I wonder what was going on around the time she started penning her book.

I think that villa was used for something, with and without Freud attending.