Madeleine McCann

Irwinwastheking said:
I'd say (uneducated opinion) in a legal sense that they probably would have no case to answer.
Click to expand...

I think you are probably correct, the UK itself does not state an age but rather that you should use a sort of Risk management with "that parents can be prosecuted if they leave a child unsupervised ‘in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health’."

Not sure whether that is any use at all given this didn't happen in the UK.
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Not until proven in court.

Would you want to be the cop or attorney tasked with laying those charges?
Click to expand...

If it were me I'd have had no issue with arresting them for neglect. The problem is too many people are being precious about not offending or upsetting a mother and father who lost a child. We can list millions of different examples of scenarios that could have happened had they not left the girl, but they did, and that was a huge contributing factor in her disappearnce.
 
oates said:
I think you are probably correct, the UK itself does not state an age but rather that you should use a sort of Risk management with "that parents can be prosecuted if they leave a child unsupervised ‘in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health’."

Not sure whether that is any use at all given this didn't happen in the UK.
Click to expand...

IIRC didn't the Portugese authorities attempt to charge them with child neglect and the UK government intervened?
 
b82REZ said:
If it were me I'd have had no issue with arresting them for neglect. The problem is too many people are being precious about not offending or upsetting a mother and father who lost a child. We can list millions of different examples of scenarios that could have happened had they not left the girl, but they did, and that was a huge contributing factor in her disappearnce.
Click to expand...



The fact that they had left Madeline and others alone before with no incident would imply that they had no reason to expect any incident was "likely".
 
b82REZ said:
IIRC didn't the Portugese authorities attempt to charge them with child neglect and the UK government intervened?
Click to expand...

Not sure which authority will be binding here. Morally we can say they were stupid, legally would take some trouble proving.
 
b82REZ said:
If it were me I'd have had no issue with arresting them for neglect. The problem is too many people are being precious about not offending or upsetting a mother and father who lost a child. We can list millions of different examples of scenarios that could have happened had they not left the girl, but they did, and that was a huge contributing factor in her disappearnce.
Click to expand...

The crown (DA or other legal body) always considers a lot of factors when deciding whether to go ahead with charges. This case seems to have a lot of pitfalls in that regard.
 
oates said:
The fact that they had left Madeline and others alone before with no incident would imply that they had no reason to expect any incident was "likely".
Click to expand...

That is the weakest argument. Whether they felt any risk was likely doesn't excuse for neglecting their responsibilities as parents. If you mean risk of kidnapping, they probably didn't expect that, or feel there was a high risk of it happening, but there were plenty of other risks that could have put the children in harm.

oates said:
Not sure which authority will be binding here. Morally we can say they were stupid, legally would take some trouble proving.
Click to expand...

In the UK at least, they are safe of charges. Had this happened on British shores I believe there would eventually have been pressure for criminal charge against them.

Dr. Dwayne said:
The crown (DA or other legal body) always considers a lot of factors when deciding whether to go ahead with charges. This case seems to have a lot of pitfalls in that regard.
Click to expand...

See above. Had this occurred in Britain, I believe they would have been charged.
 
b82REZ said:
That is the weakest argument. Whether they felt any risk was likely doesn't excuse for neglecting their responsibilities as parents. If you mean risk of kidnapping, they probably didn't expect that, or feel there was a high risk of it happening, but there were plenty of other risks that could have put the children in harm.
Click to expand...

Well I think it's still tricky, their lawyer must certainly argue that they left the children while they dined within the same complex and had a reasonable expectation that the children were safe. You only have to see within the UK how difficult it is for social workers to gain parental responsibility for children with records of far worse neglect.
 
Don't some European countries work with a legal system that assumes guild and you have to prove innocence rather than the other way round like we have in UK/Ireland.

Anyway, they were never going to and are never going to stand trial for anything to do with this case and, imo, nor should they. Any talk of that from the Portuguese was probably grand standing.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Don't some European countries work with a legal system that assumes guild and you have to prove innocence rather than the other way round like we have in UK/Ireland.

Anyway, they were never going to and are never going to stand trial for anything to do with this case and, imo, nor should they. Any talk of that from the Portuguese was probably grand standing.
Click to expand...

Most, if not all, western democracies are based on the presumption of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

There are some bad examples of laws that put the burden of proof on the defendent but these are very poor draconian laws on very specific matters.

To show you how absurd they can be, the Ontario Dog Owner's Liability Act puts the burden of proof on the dog owner when they are charged with having a pitbull or other banned breed. So, your neighbour who doesn't like you or your dog only needs to go to the authorities and say you have an illegal pitbull and then it is up to you to spend the money and time in court to prove you don't. So wrong in so many ways. You like gestapo?
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Don't some European countries work with a legal system that assumes guild and you have to prove innocence rather than the other way round like we have in UK/Ireland.

Anyway, they were never going to and are never going to stand trial for anything to do with this case and, imo, nor should they. Any talk of that from the Portuguese was probably grand standing.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine any civilised country adopting such law to be honest.
 
FWIW, it was customary in Tudor times (in trials of supposed traitors).
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Don't some European countries work with a legal system that assumes guild and you have to prove innocence rather than the other way round like we have in UK/Ireland.

Anyway, they were never going to and are never going to stand trial for anything to do with this case and, imo, nor should they. Any talk of that from the Portuguese was probably grand standing.
Click to expand...

I remember during the Zimmerman case there were a few posters taking issue with the presumed innocent aspect of that trial they felt very strongly that since someone had died that Zimmerman should have to prove he was innocent. I would certainly not want to live under that type of legal system. In the US (and I imagine elsewhere) we already have innocent people who get found guilty, can you imagine how large a number of wrongfully imprisoned people there would be if you had to prove you were innocent? Can you imagine how easy it would be for cops and prosecutors to get someone sent to jail just because they wanted that person in jail?

Under presumed Guilty, they would not even have to present evidence to prove you were guilty, they would just have to shoot holes in your defense.
 
The major issue with a 'presumed guilty' system would be an even bigger disparity in the type of justice available to rich and poor.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Can't remember where I heard that, and after about 10 minutes of googling I can't find any evidence in Europe of such a system.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's one, certainly not within the European Union. It'd be incredibly difficult to prove innonence at times even if there is no actual evidence of guilt, the line of defence could get tough and it'd be an insane presumption in general.
 
Sarni said:
I don't think there's one, certainly not within the European Union. It'd be incredibly difficult to prove innonence at times even if there is no actual evidence of guilt, the line of defence could get tough and it'd be an insane presumption in general.
Click to expand...


Looking online there seems to be a perception that France has some aspects of that system but I dismissed that as the 'presumed innocent' thing comes from Neapolian so I doubt the nation that invented the system are the only ones not to use it.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Looking online there seems to be a perception that France has some aspects of that system but I dismissed that as the 'presumed innocent' thing comes from Neapolian so I doubt the nation that invented the system are the only ones not to use it.
Click to expand...

I think you are right, also Italian justice seems to be more towards proving your innocence also being related to Roman and then the Napoleonic code.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
The major issue with a 'presumed guilty' system would be an even bigger disparity in the type of justice available to rich and poor.
Click to expand...

We tried this but the "Innocent until proven Irish" policy had a few flaws in the imprisoning the wrong people area.
 
Huh?

I was referring to the British policy of locking up random Irish people whenever a terrorist atrocity occurred in the 70's/80's. Sometimes we even held a trial. I sometimes thought that this might not be entirely in line with the concept of natural justice.
 
So... for the record, who actually agrees with what the McCanns did (leaving the kids unattended)? because you get the idea that some caftards think this is a perfectly fine choice....
 
afrocentricity said:
So... for the record, who actually agrees with what the McCanns did (leaving the kids unattended)? because you get the idea that some caftards think this is a perfectly fine choice....
Click to expand...

Do you? Has anyone actually said it or are you just applying an extreme interpretation to some people's views.

Anyway, what does it matter if random people, who don't really know the circumstances, think it's ok or not?
 
Eyepopper said:
Do you? Has anyone actually said it or are you just applying an extreme interpretation to some people's views.

Anyway, what does it matter if random people, who don't really know the circumstances, think it's ok or not?
Click to expand...

Defensive much? It's just an eye opener that's all. I can't relate to that mentality but I acknowledge that everyone is different...

Edit: Do you condone the actions then? do you have children? and if so have you ever done the same?
 
All I did was question your assertion that people think 'its perfectly fine', I haven't seen anyone actually say that.
 
Eyepopper said:
All I did was question your assertion that people think 'its perfectly fine', I haven't seen anyone actually say that.
Click to expand...
I said 'you get the idea', which you do... if you wan't to clear up your position then fine, do so.
 
It's a funny one afro. I don't think anyone actually thinks it was fine, and no-one has said they would do the same. Some posters are arguing several points to say that it's various levels of excusable and that they share no blame for the eventual event.
 
Out of curiousity, and yes I know this is the internet we are on, how many of us would actually be willing to walk up to the McCanns and tell them to their face that they are to blame for their daughter's disappearance?

If not, why not?
 
JustAFan said:
Out of curiousity, and yes I know this is the internet we are on, how many of us would actually be willing to walk up to the McCanns and tell them to their face that they are to blame for their daughter's disappearance?

If not, why not?
Click to expand...


No, and because I'm not a massive insensitive wanker. What they did was stupid and a causal factor in the loss of their child, but they have already been punished many times more harshly than what their failing deserved.
 
afrocentricity said:
I said 'you get the idea', which you do... if you wan't to clear up your position then fine, do so.
Click to expand...

I already have, if you'd read the thread you would have seen my position a few times.

Its often handy to read threads if you want to 'get the idea' of what people are saying.
 
I'm sure they blame themselves a hell of a lot more than some random caftard could, I'm not saying I blame them. If it was me though, I'd be blaming myself.... horrible thing to happen and I feel for the fact that they have lost a child but can't understand why they were treating them (neglecting all three) the way they were.
 
Eyepopper said:
I already have, if you'd read the thread you would have seen my position a few times.

Its often handy to read threads if you want to 'get the idea' of what people are saying.
Click to expand...
I'm basing it off of what I read... and that's the idea I got. Either we agree or we disagree (that it was a bad thing to do), you seem to be agreeing so why are you arguing with me?
 
The question you're all arguing seems to me to be: was this a serious case of neglect on the part of the McCanns?

I think anyone will agree that the children were indeed neglected, but it's the scale of neglect that's in question here.

Personally I believe that it was a serious case of neglect. Fate can only be tempted so far before the law of averages falls out of your favour, and since these various sets of children were routinely left alone for a number of consecutive nights then the chances of something going wrong were not negligible. The fact that they were left alone for selfish reasons only serves to emphasise the poor standards by which they were being 'looked after'.

Whether the child was indeed kidnapped or if instead she suffered a serious accident which was covered up by the McCanns, the McCanns themselves are without doubt in some part to blame either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.