Madeleine McCann

I'm sure you have all seen it but:

Portuguese police have reopened their inquiry into the disappearance of British girl Madeleine McCann, the public prosecutor's office has said.
Madeleine, from Leicestershire, was three when she disappeared from Praia da Luz in the Algarve in May 2007.
Portugal's attorney general said "new elements of evidence" justified the "continuation of the investigation", which was shelved by police in 2008.
Madeleine's parents said they hoped for "the answers we so desperately need".
 
moses said:
What if something did happen? And your folks said they heard you bawling and decided to continue watching the TV?
Click to expand...

I'd have died, but I could have died after 30 seconds. Do you think my parents should then have to spend the rest of their lives being judged or do you think it's an unfortunate accident, and losing a child would be more than enough punishment?
 
Lets hope this new investigation by the Portugese police yields something positive.
 
Eyepopper said:
I'd have died, but I could have died after 30 seconds. Do you think my parents should then have to spend the rest of their lives being judged or do you think it's an unfortunate accident, and losing a child would be more than enough punishment?
Click to expand...
What if it was your child they were babysitting, they ignored it's screams and the child died as a result? How do you think the blame should be apportioned in that case?
 
The Don said:
What if it was your child they were babysitting, they ignored it's screams and the child died as a result? How do you think the blame should be apportioned in that case?
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure how thats relevant.
 
Eyepopper said:
I'm not really sure how thats relevant.
Click to expand...
You're asking, hypothetically, that if on that day, your parents had ignored your cries and you died, should they be blamed for it or was it an accident?

Well, I'm putting you in a similar scenario and asking you how you would react.

I know if somebody in my family happened to be minding my baby, they ignored its cries and the clid came to serious harm, I'd probably never forgive them or it would at least take a very long time and yes, I would blame them.

Saying that, I'm not sure how ignoring a crying child upstairs, for a few mins, equates to abandoning young children, every night, for hours on end.
 
The Don said:
You're asking, hypothetically, that if on that day, your parents had ignored your cries and you died, should they be blamed for it or was it an accident?

Well, I'm putting you in a similar scenario and asking you how you would react.

I know if somebody in my family happened to be minding my baby, they ignored its cries and the clid came to serious harm, I'd probably never forgive them or it would at least take a very long time and yes, I would blame them.
Click to expand...

What if the rest of the world decided to blame you and said it was your fault for leaving your child with that person? Surely if you're going to leave your kid with someone you'd know whether or not they would pick it up if it was crying, and if you didn't, surely you should have asked this before you swanned out and left your kid there to begin with?

Hindsight is 20/20, and its very easy to point out the things you wouldn't do, and what someone else should have done, when things go wrong.

I've said a million times, I don't think they should have left the kids, but in the wider context I don't really see the objective in it being brought up every time the case is discussed. Obviously its a fact of the case, fair enough, but it's never brought up as a fact of the case, it's always brought up in some sort of weird point scoring exercise, 'they shouldn't have left the kids' - yeah they probably shouldn't, but they did, so what do you want to do about it, other than use it as a stick to beat them, or point the finger of moral judgement at them.
 
I agree with popper on this.

They did it, they shouldn't have but they did. The most important thing is to ascertain the truth as to where their daughter went, not to berate them over every single parental decision they have made. None of us are perfect parents!

There is a strong theme running through this thread that people are pushing all sorts of theories that are being passed off as more credible than the most likely one that someone did actually come and take the kid away!

It's mental.
 
Rooney24 said:
I agree with popper on this.

They did it, they shouldn't have but they did. The most important thing is to ascertain the truth as to where their daughter went, not to berate them over every single parental decision they have made. None of us are perfect parents!

There is a strong theme running through this thread that people are pushing all sorts of theories that are being passed off as more credible than the most likely one that someone did actually come and take the kid away!

It's mental.
Click to expand...

Definitely. That story out of Greece with the Roma and the little blonde girl really brings truth the idea that any number of things could have happened. Plus innocent until proven guilty and all that.
 
Rooney24 said:
I agree with popper on this.

They did it, they shouldn't have but they did. The most important thing is to ascertain the truth as to where their daughter went, not to berate them over every single parental decision they have made. None of us are perfect parents!

There is a strong theme running through this thread that people are pushing all sorts of theories that are being passed off as more credible than the most likely one that someone did actually come and take the kid away!

It's mental.
Click to expand...

Most likely in whose opinion?
 
Rooney24 said:
I agree with popper on this.

They did it, they shouldn't have but they did. The most important thing is to ascertain the truth as to where their daughter went, not to berate them over every single parental decision they have made. None of us are perfect parents!

There is a strong theme running through this thread that people are pushing all sorts of theories that are being passed off as more credible than the most likely one that someone did actually come and take the kid away!

It's mental.
Click to expand...


Who and where? A lot of people said they are not fully convinced they are innocent but think it most likely, very very few people actually said they think it's more credible that they are guilty.

The majority of negative opinion towards them is born from the simple fact that they didn't mind their small kids properly and this is the result of their negligence. It's not me berating them because for one thing I'm sure they don't read the caf, and in the main it's just me expressing my opinion. I don't need them to apologise to me of anyone else, I just feel that they did an insanely lax and stupid thing that has been punished so much harsher than they deserved. Doesn't change the fact the were negligent.

Sympathy and blame are not uncommon bedfellows.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
Who and where? A lot of people said they are not fully convinced they are innocent but think it most likely, very very few people actually said they think it's more credible that they are guilty.

The majority of negative opinion towards them is born from the simple fact that they didn't mind their small kids properly and this is the result of their negligence. It's not me berating them because for one thing I'm sure they don't read the caf, and in the main it's just me expressing my opinion. I don't need them to apologise to me of anyone else, I just feel that they did an insanely lax and stupid thing that has been punished so much harsher than they deserved. Doesn't change the fact the were negligent.

Sympathy and blame are not uncommon bedfellows.
Click to expand...

Isn't that just opinion though? Maybe the McCanns didn't get the same parenting manual everyone else did?
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Isn't that just opinion though? Maybe the McCanns didn't get the same parenting manual everyone else did?
Click to expand...

They should have sought a more socially acceptable parenting manual then. It's because they didn't that those with the better received manual feel justified in accusing them of neglect.
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Isn't that just opinion though? Maybe the McCanns didn't get the same parenting manual everyone else did?
Click to expand...

I don't get what you're saying Dwayne. Are you saying that it's a point of opinion as to whether they minded their kids right as opposed to a fact?
 
Eyepopper said:
What if the rest of the world decided to blame you and said it was your fault for leaving your child with that person? Surely if you're going to leave your kid with someone you'd know whether or not they would pick it up if it was crying, and if you didn't, surely you should have asked this before you swanned out and left your kid there to begin with?

Hindsight is 20/20, and its very easy to point out the things you wouldn't do, and what someone else should have done, when things go wrong.

I've said a million times, I don't think they should have left the kids, but in the wider context I don't really see the objective in it being brought up every time the case is discussed. Obviously its a fact of the case, fair enough, but it's never brought up as a fact of the case, it's always brought up in some sort of weird point scoring exercise, 'they shouldn't have left the kids' - yeah they probably shouldn't, but they did, so what do you want to do about it, other than use it as a stick to beat them, or point the finger of moral judgement at them.
Click to expand...
Just to point out I'm very particular about who minds my children. It's always a family member and I always leave a checklist. Not that we go out often at all, anyway. Moving on from that. Is it just pointing the finger of moral judgement? Yes, it is, and rightly so. You won't get many people defending those actions and they should be berated for it.

They are responsible for putting their child in danger, if they are innocent, and for this point we'll presume they are, then whoever took their child was obviously watching them, and spotted their routine of going out and leaving children, on their own, nite after nite, for hours on end. We don't know about the motive but this is one fact of the case, opportunity.

It may be very simplistic, but if they were being responsible parents it's a fair call to say they'd still have their daughter.
 
From what I've understood of the news it's very rare for a case to be reopened here, so either this "new evidence" can lead to significant progress or it's just a PR stunt in response to the more recent re-exposure of the case.
 
The Don said:
Just to point out I'm very particular about who minds my children. It's always a family member and I always leave a checklist. Not that we go out often at all, anyway. Moving on from that. Is it just pointing the finger of moral judgement? Yes, it is, and rightly so. You won't get many people defending those actions and they should be berated for it.

They are responsible for putting their child in danger, if they are innocent, and for this point we'll presume they are, then whoever took their child was obviously watching them, and spotted their routine of going out and leaving children, on their own, nite after nite, for hours on end. We don't know about the motive but this is one fact of the case, opportunity.

It may be very simplistic, but if they were being responsible parents it's a fair call to say they'd still have their daughter.
Click to expand...

According to some statistics that doesn't really make your kids any safer.
 
The case does not get as much attention here in the States as it does in the UK obviously, so I have been trying to read up more about it. Now this Tapas restaurant was about 300 to 400 ft away from the apartment? A walk of about 1 minute? Is that right?
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
It is, at the very least, debateable, Irwin. Everyone does things differently.
Click to expand...


Sorry dude, I don't know how leaving a 3 year old along with two babies alone while you leave them for long periods every night in a foreign country can be called minding their kids properly.

In that line I didn't use the word negligent, abuse or anything like that. I just said they didn't look after them right and even they have admitted that. Their staunchest supporters admit that. In fact you're the first person I've ever heard saying that leaving them was even debatable correct.
 
M'n'M said:
Yes because guess what, I don't like the idea that my child is upset for whatever reason. I don't have a sliding scale and tending to them doesn't seem to much of an inconvenience. "wimpering when trying to sleep" is entirely different and not what you were referring to with controlled crying
Click to expand...

You don't have to like it. In fact is can be heart wrenching. And it has nothing to do with convenience, in fact it is the exact opposite at first. Comforting a child at the drop of a hat trains them that crying=immediate attention. And my point was that people were saying that the McCanns shouldn't have left their kids because they had previously cried. Which is utter bollocks.
 
JustAFan said:
The case does not get as much attention here in the States as it does in the UK obviously, so I have been trying to read up more about it. Now this Tapas restaurant was about 300 to 400 ft away from the apartment? A walk of about 1 minute? Is that right?
Click to expand...

Much closer. They were at a table 50m (160ft) away from their apartment with nothing between them and the door barring the pool. A walk of seconds.
 
Wibble said:
Much closer. They were at a table 50m (160ft) away from their apartment with nothing between them and the door barring the pool. A walk of seconds.
Click to expand...


Apparently it was at least a minute's walk. Granted, that's not the longest walk in the world. But to claim it is only a walk of seconds is akin to the McCann's saying that leaving their kids in their apartment while they went to the restaurant was like sitting at the end of their garden, nothing more.

I am as little of a fan of the Mail as most other people, but here they show the route you would take:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-474428/In-pictures-120-metre-route-check-Madeleine.html

They were not only a matter of seconds away from their children.
 
[quote="The Don, post: 14409075]
It may be very simplistic, but if they were being responsible parents it's a fair call to say they'd still have their daughter.[/quote]


So what are you saying then? They got what they had coming?
 
swooshboy said:
Apparently it was at least a minute's walk. Granted, that's not the longest walk in the world. But to claim it is only a walk of seconds is akin to the McCann's saying that leaving their kids in their apartment while they went to the restaurant was like sitting at the end of their garden, nothing more.

I am as little of a fan of the Mail as most other people, but here they show the route you would take:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-474428/In-pictures-120-metre-route-check-Madeleine.html

They were not only a matter of seconds away from their children.
Click to expand...

So 60 seconds then. And it is in The Mail so they will have faked the photo anyway.
 
Wibble said:
Much closer. They were at a table 50m (160ft) away from their apartment with nothing between them and the door barring the pool. A walk of seconds.
Click to expand...

To be precise you had to walk around the fence to reach the apartment, I think. It wasn't a long distance but still long enough for them not to see their room. Why didn't they lock the patio door again? They're arguing it's because of a possible fire emergency, it was a poor decision because their room was clearly visible from the street and anyone walking by could have seen door being open.
 
People make less than optimum decisions all the time. So why concentrate on this when the evil bastard that stole a child is the actual person to blame?
 
Wibble said:
People make less than optimum decisions all the time. So why concentrate on this when the evil bastard that stole a child is the actual person to blame?
Click to expand...

Of course they are. McCanns made some glaring mistakes but ultimately no one should have gone inside and taken the child with them.
 
Wibble said:
You don't have to like it. In fact is can be heart wrenching. And it has nothing to do with convenience, in fact it is the exact opposite at first. Comforting a child at the drop of a hat trains them that crying=immediate attention. And my point was that people were saying that the McCanns shouldn't have left their kids because they had previously cried. Which is utter bollocks.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what it is and it's not for me or my wife. You love and nurture children, you train dogs. But yes, everybody raises their kids differently and I'm not for a minute suggesting that using your method means you love them any less. Everyone raises their kids differently and I just felt I had to comment as "controlled crying" is nothing to do with what the McCann's did or didn't do on this occasion.
 
I don't think you understand the difference between nurturing, teaching and training. The idea that you never train a child is very odd indeed. Do you toilet nurture, toilet teach or toilet train? I believe in reasoning with children of all ages more than almost everyone I know but sometimes reason doesn't work and then other methods need to be used (and no I don't mean hitting).

And again, I'll repeat, that comment was in the context of people asserting that a reason not to leave a child alone was that they had previously cried. Which is bollocks.
 
Eyepopper said:
[quote="The Don, post: 14409075]
It may be very simplistic, but if they were being responsible parents it's a fair call to say they'd still have their daughter.
Click to expand...




So what are you saying then? They got what they had coming?[/quote]

If they are innocent, no, of course not. No matter how bad their parenting was, they didn't deserve to lose their child.
They do, however, deserve to be lambasted for the way they treated her.

Someone mentioned that it isn't their fault, at all, and no responsibility should be laid at their door. Something along the lines of if they were actually good parents, they could have lost their child anyway, in a car accident etc. (appalling logic) but what they did was more akin to leaving their daughter wandering about on a busy motorway. It makes it inevitable that she would come to harm.
 
I repeat, it takes a special kind of cnut to further victimise and demonise parents who had their kid kidnapped and presumably molested and/or murdered simply for sub-optimal parenting. I can't imagine their pain and the idea of increasing it by criticising them is anathema to me.
 
The Don said:
If they are innocent, no, of course not. No matter how bad their parenting was, they didn't deserve to lose their child.
They do, however, deserve to be lambasted for the way they treated her.

Someone mentioned that it isn't their fault, at all, and no responsibility should be laid at their door. Something along the lines of if they were actually good parents, they could have lost their child anyway, in a car accident etc. (appalling logic) but what they did was more akin to leaving their daughter wandering about on a busy motorway. It makes it inevitable that she would come to harm.
Click to expand...

Inevitable? Don't see how you can make that case. I also think comparing leaving a child sleeping in a bed you are less than 200 yards away from, to leaving a child wandering on a motor way is a bit melodramatic.

As for deserving to be lambasted for it, seriously? They lost one of their kids and you want to lambast them for, what is in your opinion, poor parenting... to me thats just kicking someone when their down, what exactly is the point?
 
Wibble said:
I repeat, it takes a special kind of cnut to further victimise and demonise parents who had their kid kidnapped and presumably molested and/or murdered simply for sub-optimal parenting. I can't imagine their pain and the idea of increasing it by criticising them is anathema to me.
Click to expand...
I repeat, it takes a special kind of cnut to leave babies alone, in a strange building, in a foreign country, night after night. It takes an even more special kind of cnut to defend those actions.

Am doing it right? We just keep calling each other cnuts, yeah?
 
Wibble said:
I repeat, it takes a special kind of cnut to further victimise and demonise parents who had their kid kidnapped and presumably molested and/or murdered simply for sub-optimal parenting. I can't imagine their pain and the idea of increasing it by criticising them is anathema to me.
Click to expand...

It's just absolutely bizarre to me.
 
The Don said:
I repeat, it takes a special kind of cnut to leave babies alone, in a strange building, in a foreign country, night after night. It takes an even more special kind of cnut to defend those actions.
Click to expand...

I don't really think anyone is defending them are they? I've said a number of times its not something I think I'd do myself, I just don't really see the point in 'lambasting' them for it.
 
Eyepopper said:
Inevitable? Don't see how you can make that case. I also think comparing leaving a child sleeping in a bed you are less than 200 yards away from, to leaving a child wandering on a motor way is a bit melodramatic.

As for deserving to be lambasted for it, seriously? They lost one of their kids and you want to lambast them for, what is in your opinion, poor parenting... to me thats just kicking someone when their down, what exactly is the point?
Click to expand...
The point is highlighting the dangers of leaving children alone and getting the message out there to the absolute fools who think it's okay to leave children alone.

The motorway thing was an analogy, btw, not a direct comparison. You need to follow the context.
 
Again: none of us bloody knows what went on.

However I do know that, in the discussion of many criminal cases, if people were reduced to emotional appeals; denigrated generally accepted things like the merits of cadaver dogs and the value of DNA evidence, they'd be called a bunch of fruitloop conspiracy theorists (ie nutters).
 
The Don said:
The point is highlighting the dangers of leaving children alone and getting the message out there to the absolute fools who think it's okay to leave children alone.

The motorway thing was an analogy, btw, not a direct comparison. You need to follow the context.
Click to expand...

I've never said it's ok to leave children alone but carry on calling people fools and cnuts, its always a winner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.