NYT : British Papers Blunder in Missing Girl Case

British Papers Blunder in Missing Girl Case

By SARAH LYALL | March 20, 2008

LONDON — The headline, splashed across the front page of The Daily Express on Wednesday, could not have been clearer or more jarring. “Kate and Gerry McCann: Sorry,” it said.

The paper indeed had something to be sorry about. In the ensuing article, it admitted that much of its coverage of the case of four-year-old Madeleine McCann, who disappeared during a family vacation in Portugal last May, was dead wrong. Especially the part where it repeatedly accused Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry, of murdering her and then covering up their crime.

“We acknowledge that there is no evidence whatsoever to support this theory and that Kate and Gerry are completely innocent of any involvement in their daughter’s disappearance,” the paper said. It added: “Kate and Gerry, we are truly sorry to have added to your distress.”

The apology came as the paper settled a libel case brought by the McCanns, physicians from Leicester, England, who said they had sued after unsuccessfully urging the Express and its sister papers, The Daily Star, The Sunday Star and The Sunday Express, “to show greater restraint in their reporting.” As part of the deal, the newspapers also agreed to read out the apology in court and to pay 550,000 pounds in damages, which will be contributed to a fund to help find Madeleine.

The apology and the payment represented a shocking U-turn. For months, papers from the Express Newspapers group used shady, innuendo-laced information, interviews with unnamed sources and leaps of logic to promote a disturbing theory: that Mr. and Mrs. McCann had killed their daughter, disposed of her body and then cynically pretended to be distraught about her death.

Although the McCanns have been named as suspects by the Portuguese police, the police have neither produced evidence against them nor charged them with their daughter’s murder. Mr. and Mrs. McCann have always maintained their innocence, saying they believe Madeleine was abducted.

Speaking of their families, the McCanns said: “Their pain over the loss of Madeleine has been compounded by having to witness the irresponsible and libelous reporting that we have successfully challenged today.”

It is highly unusual for British newspapers to correct errors, let alone apologize for them. It is even rarer for them to publish corrections or apologies that readers are actually able to find.

“Generally speaking, they’re tucked away toward the back of the paper,” said Paul Gilbert, a media lawyer at Finers Stephens Innocent.

Noting that The Star ran a similar mea culpa on its own front page on Wednesday, Mr. Gilbert added: “As far as I can tell, you’ve never had a situation where two papers have published apologies like this on the same day.”

In English law, the burden of proof in libel cases rests on the defendants, meaning that to win their case newspapers have to prove the accuracy of their statements. Clearly unable to prove in court that Madeleine’s parents had murdered her, the newspapers seemed to have no option but to settle.

“They were staring down the battle of a defamation claim, and it’s probably a cheap out for them,” said Leigh Ellis, a media lawyer at Gilhams Solicitors.

In the offending articles, The Express pursued such angles as Mrs. McCann’s demeanor after Madeleine went missing — was she too cool, too unemotional? — whether Mr. McCann was hiding an explosive temper under his affable exterior, what they might have done with Madeleine’s body after her supposed murder and whether Madeleine’s blood was found in a car the McCanns rented after she had vanished.

A spokesman for Express Newspapers refused to comment on whether the articles had been or would be taken down from the Web. “We have nothing to add to what has been said in court and in our titles,” he said tersely, referring to the printed apologies. Then he hung up.

But articles of the type The Express has been printing are par for the course in the world of British tabloid journalism, and The Express is hardly the only guilty paper in the McCann case. Outside court, the McCanns’ lawyers suggested that the couple would consider pursuing other papers whose reporting had stepped over the mark.

Mr. Gilbert, the media lawyer, seemed to suggest that he had some sympathy for the newspapers, whose reporters have to contend with cut-throat competition and management demanding scoops.

At the same time, he said, the Portuguese authorities, unschooled in how to deal with the news media, seemed to be happy to provide the British newspapers all sorts of half-baked theories disguised as official lines of inquiry.

“There was a lot of misinformation plying around, both official and unofficial,” Mr. Gilbert said. “It’s understandable that some of this stuff was going to be published.”