Madeleine McCann

[Irwinwastheking]

Its also been said they should be publicly lambasted, if you want to see parents who have lost a child lambasted I think it's fair to suggest you might lack a bit of sympathy.

I don't think that they should. I think they should be allowed to carry on now campaigning to get their kid back. I'm not asking for them to be paraded in sack cloth or to be stoned for their sins, but equally I'm not going to sit here and say that what they did wasn't wrong.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

A negligent terrible style of parenting.

From what I can tell you are basing that on a few days that have been put under intense scrutiny by the press. Still think that's fair?

They made a poor choice and are the ones who have to live with the consequences but on current evidence their daughter's disappearance is not their fault.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

From what I can tell you are basing that on a few days that have been put under intense scrutiny by the press. Still think that's fair?

They made a poor choice and are the ones who have to live with the consequences but on current evidence their daughter's disappearance is not their fault.

Yeah, maybe they were top top parents back at home and have never ever did anything like this before or since, but that doesn't change that what they did was incredibly stupid and was a causal factor in the child going missing.

 

[Eyepopper]

I don't think that they should. I think they should be allowed to carry on now campaigning to get their kid back. I'm not asking for them to be paraded in sack cloth or to be stoned for their sins, but equally I'm not going to sit here and say that what they did wasn't wrong.

Me either, I just don't see the point in it being one of the focal points of discussion every time the case gets mentioned. You might not want to see them lambasted but thats what Tdon wants, another poster a few days back suggested that its hard to sympathise with them because they don't show remorse when they're on the telly campaigning.

Thats the sort of attitude I, and I think wibble, are questioning.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Me either, I just don't see the point in it being one of the focal points of discussion every time the case gets mentioned. You might not want to see them lambasted but thats what Tdon wants, another poster a few days back suggested that its hard to sympathise with them because they don't show remorse when they're on the telly campaigning.

Thats the sort of attitude I, and I think wibble, are questioning.

Kate McCann looks like a broken woman so I'm not sure how much more she could give.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Yeah, maybe they were top top parents back at home and have never ever did anything like this before or since, but that doesn't change that what they did was incredibly stupid and was a causal factor in the child going missing.

If Madeline was abducted then it's likely the family was stalked for at least a few days, if that is the case they are guilty of being predictable, as families with children often are and to be fair the abduction could have taken place on any number of occasions. They may have taken a risk but who are we to assess the level of risk they took? We weren't there.

 

[Eyepopper]

who are we to assess the level of risk they took? We weren't there.

Come on Dwayne with sources like madeleinemythsexposed.com and the Daily Mail, who actually needs to have been there!

 

[Irwinwastheking]

If Madeline was abducted then it's likely the family was stalked for at least a few days, if that is the case they are guilty of being predictable, as families with children often are and to be fair the abduction could have taken place on any number of occasions. They may have taken a risk but who are we to assess the level of risk they took? We weren't there.

We know several facts about the case that enable us to assess the level of risk they took and that risk was much too great. What you have said above makes them even more guilty than if someone just happened across the open door. The fact they created a clear pattern of this window of opportunity to put their kids at risk is fairly damning in my view but somehow you see it as negating their part in this. Strange and not something I can really understand.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Come on Dwayne with sources like madeleinemythsexposed.com and the Daily Mail, who actually needs to have been there!

Haven't that admitted themselves on numerous occasions that they left the kids like this every night. That's the only risk/fact that I'm commenting on.

Is there any doubt that they left the kids 5 nights in a row like this? Serious question.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

We know several facts about the case that enable us to assess the level of risk they took and that risk was much too great. What you have said above makes them even more guilty than if someone just happened across the open door. The fact they created a clear pattern of this window of opportunity to put their kids at risk is fairly damning in my view but somehow you see it as negating their part in this. Strange and not something I can really understand.

Erm..they didn't abduct their own child. Is that really so difficult to grasp? Most everyone has a routine they stick fairly close to no matter what they're doing.

Also people don't typically realize they're being stalked/watched unless the stalker lets them know.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Erm..they didn't abduct their own child. Is that really so difficult to grasp? Most everyone has a routine they stick fairly close to no matter what they're doing.

Also people don't typically realize they're being stalked/watched unless the stalker lets them know.

Where in that post did I suggest they abducted their own child.

Most everyone doesn't have a routine that involves leaving a toddler and 2 babies alone while they go out. That is as far as I can make out their only fault in this affair and the only thing that I'd admonishing them for. Is that really so difficult to grasp?

What they did was in my opinion and in the opinion of every right minded parent I've spoken to totally out of order and was a causal factor in someone else taking their child. I can't make this any clearer, I'm not blaming them for the loss of the child, I'm blaming them for not providing their children with adequate care that week to prevent someone else taking the child.

 

[Eyepopper]

What they did was in my opinion and in the opinion of every right minded parent I've spoken to totally out of order and was a causal factor in someone else taking their child. I can't make this any clearer, I'm not blaming them for the loss of the child, I'm blaming them for not providing their children with adequate care that week to prevent someone else taking the child.

Define adequate care, should they sleep in the same room.

I assume Sarah Payne, Jamie Bulgers mum, and the countless other people who have had kids abducted didn't provide adequate care to their kids either then? Surely if they had the sick fecks who abducted and murdered them would never have had the opportunity to do so?

If you disagree with that then we're down to personal opinions (and obviously the opinion of every 'right minded' parent) about what is acceptable and whats not. As I've said, I don't think its acceptable to leave kids alone like that, but other parents don't think giving kids mobile phones is acceptable, others don't think feeding them junkfood is acceptable, some don't let them watch TV, obviously none of those present the same risk associated with letting them sleep and only checking on them every half hour, but the point is, everyone has different definitions of what is or isn't acceptable in terms of raising their kids, if they overstep the mark, there are laws to deal with it.

You don't seem many people calling Jamie Bulgers mum a cnut on account of her taking her eyes off her kid in a crowded shopping centre do you? No, because 1. ultimately it was the fault of the person who took him, and 2. who the hell would want to

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Where in that post did I suggest they abducted their own child.

Most everyone doesn't have a routine that involves leaving a toddler and 2 babies alone while they go out. That is as far as I can make out their only fault in this affair and the only thing that I'd admonishing them for. Is that really so difficult to grasp?

What they did was in my opinion and in the opinion of every right minded parent I've spoken to totally out of order and was a causal factor in someone else taking their child. I can't make this any clearer, I'm not blaming them for the loss of the child, I'm blaming them for not providing their children with adequate care that week to prevent someone else taking the child.

You didn't and I don't think I suggested you did. Easy fella. The point was that a parent can hardly be responsible if someone else took their child. Children are abducted from under their parent's noses all the time. Whether it's at a Portugese resort or shopping malls in Liverpool, England or Hollywood, Florida, USA. The point is that abduction is a crime of opportunity but inadvertently providing an abductor that opportunity does not make a parent culpable for their child's disappearance in any way shape or form.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Comparing this with the Bulger case is apples and oranges.

 

[Eyepopper]

But analogies to leaving kids alone for days on end or letting them wander on motorways are perfectly valid?

 

[Irwinwastheking]

But analogies to leaving kids alone for days on end or letting them wander on motorways are perfectly valid?

The analogy to leaving them alone was my attempt to gauge where Wibble drew the line and would assign some responsibility, nothing more. It was worthwhile on my part because it told me that even if a parent did leave their kid for days alone Wibble still thinks they wouldn't be in anyway responsible.

The analogy I made to explain how I felt was the drink driving one and I stand over it.

 

[Eyepopper]

The analogy to leaving them alone was my attempt to gauge where Wibble drew the line and would assign some responsibility, nothing more.

And I'm trying to establish where you draw the line and would assign responsibility. Jamie Bulgers mum obviously took her eyes off him, wasn't paying attention, whatever, which created the opportunity for him to be taken.

Surely if you shouldn't take your eyes off your kids in a holiday resort at night, you shouldn't take your eyes off them in a crowded shopping centre....

(For the sake of anyone who is a bit dumb, I don't blame Mrs Bulger in the slightest for what happened to her son).

The analogy I made to explain how I felt was the drink driving one and I stand over it.

So you stand over a totally hypothetical scenario that has no relation whatsoever to the McCann case but aren't prepared to consider another actual case of child abduction. Between that, and all the 'right minded' parents agreeing with you it seems to me you're sort of picking what suits your argument.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

And I'm trying to establish where you draw the line and would assign responsibility. Jamie Bulgers mum obviously took her eyes off him, wasn't paying attention, whatever, which created the opportunity for him to be taken.

Surely if you shouldn't take your eyes off your kids in a holiday resort at night, you shouldn't take your eyes off them in a crowded shopping centre....

(For the sake of anyone who is a bit dumb, I don't blame Mrs Bulger in the slightest for what happened to her son).



So you stand over a totally hypothetical scenario that has no relation whatsoever to the McCann case but aren't prepared to consider another actual case of child abduction. Between that, and all the 'right minded' parents agreeing with you it seems to me you're sort of picking what suits your argument.

Of course.

 

[Eyepopper]

Well thats how it seems irwin, comparisons to drink drivers, wandering on motor ways, leaving kids for days... all valid.

Comparison to another child abduction - apples & oranges.

If memory serves me correct Sarah Payne was taken from a field where she was playing with no adult supervision.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

A parent being distracted for a few moments and a child wandering off isn't even remotely the same as a parent leaving kids for 5 nights in a row in an unlocked apartment.

It's just not. If you want to know where I draw the line and say it's bad parenting it'd be somewhere between the two cases closer to the Mccann case than the Bulger one.

Opinion pops. Based on where my morals and standards lie.

 

[Eyepopper]

A parent being distracted for a few moments and a child wandering off isn't even remotely the same as a parent leaving kids for 5 nights in a row in an unlocked apartment.

It's just not. If you want to know where I draw the line and say it's bad parenting it'd be somewhere between the two cases closer to the Mccann case than the Bulger one.

Opinion pops. Based on where my morals and standards lie.

How about Sarah Payne then? If memory serves me correct Sarah Payne was taken from a field where she was playing with no adult supervision.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

How about Sarah Payne then? If memory serves me correct Sarah Payne was taken from a field where she was playing with no adult supervision.

I'm not at all familiar with that case. I don't even remember the name. Gimme a sec to I have a wee look.

BTW, the difference just incase I'm not being clear is that one parent made a decision to leave their kid and the other didn't. That's a pretty huge difference.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Sarah Payne's disappearance[edit]

Sarah Payne, who lived in Hersham, Surrey, disappeared on the evening of 1 July 2000 from a cornfield near the home of her paternal grandparents, Terence and Lesley Payne, in Kingston Gorse, West Sussex, England.[17] Payne had been playing with her brothers and sister; aged between five and 13 at the time.[18] A nationwide search commenced within 48 hours, and Payne's parents made numerous television and newspaper appeals for her safe return. On the evening of 2 July 2000, officers from Sussex Police first visited Whiting making inquiries into Payne's disappearance. A number of other suspects were also questioned and at least one other arrest is known to have been made.[19]
On 17 July, a body was found in a field near Pulborough, some 24 km (15 mi) from Kingston Gorse where she had disappeared. The following day, forensic science tests confirmed that the body was Payne's, and Sussex Police began a murder investigation.[20]

Just from reading that it says there was a 13 year old along with her, so no it's not the same at all.

 

[Eyepopper]

BTW, the difference just incase I'm not being clear is that one parent made a decision to leave their kid and the other didn't. That's a pretty huge difference.

Maybe with the Bulger case, as I've said, in the Payne case she was playing in a field, supervised by her 13 year old brother, decided to walk back to her grandparents and was never seen again.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Adam Walsh being another case I referred to earlier.

His mom left him in the games section of a department store while she went to a different section. People don't always suspect the worst possible scenario will happen and will do things that with hindsight will appear to others as very risky. That doesn't mean they're guilty of allowing their child to be taken.

 

[M'n'M]

Surely if you shouldn't take your eyes off your kids in a holiday resort at night, you shouldn't take your eyes off them in a crowded shopping centre....

Yeah because taking your eyes off a child for a moment in a crowded space, when your child is awake and fully able to escape from your attention amongst so many other distractions, is exactly the same as making the decision to leave your sleeping child unattended.

Of all the shit analogies in here that's actually the worst.

 

[Eyepopper]

Just from reading that it says there was a 13 year old along with her, so no it's not the same at all.

So the 13 year old is to blame then? Or are the parents still responsible for letting him look after her in the first place, we've already heard about the lengths caftards go to to make sure their kids are safe.

How many would leave their 8 year old under the supervision of a 13 year old?

 

[Eyepopper]

Yeah because taking your eyes off a child for a moment in a crowded space, when your child is awake and fully able to escape from your attention amongst so many other distractions, is exactly the same as making the decision to leave your sleeping child unattended.

I never said it was the same. In both cases parents took a risk and it created an opportunity.

And if the way this thread has been going continues, surely the fact that he was awake means she should have been more vigilant?

We've already heard loads of times how the Mccanns shouldn't have taken their eyes off the kids for a split second, how no parents here would do it.

Of all the shit analogies in here that's actually the worst.

Yes comparing one case of child abduction to another is ridiculous, we're much better off comparing leaving a kid in a bed with letting them wander down a motorway.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Adam Walsh being another case I referred to earlier.

His mom left him in the games section of a department store while she went to a different section. People don't always suspect the worst possible scenario will happen and will do things that with hindsight will appear to others as very risky. That doesn't mean they're guilty of allowing their child to be taken.

While it's not the same, I'd say she was largely irresponsible for leaving a child alone like that. There's a major difference between a 3 year old and a 6 year old though. The circumstances are also very different and much worse in the McCann case.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

So the 13 year old is to blame then? Or are the parents still responsible for letting him look after her in the first place, we've already heard about the lengths caftards go to to make sure their kids are safe.

How many would leave their 8 year old under the supervision of a 13 year old?

I'd say letting you 8 year old play near your house with their 13 year old sibling is totally acceptable. How would the 13 year old be to blame?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

While it's not the same, I'd say she was largely irresponsible for leaving a child alone like that. There's a major difference between a 3 year old and a 6 year old though. The circumstances are also very different and much worse in the McCann case.

Irresponsible perhaps but would you impart culpability in her child's abduction, sexual assault and beheading because she left him alone for a time in a place she thought was safe enough?

What is shows is that abduction is a crime of opportunity and no one can predict when or how that opportunity will arise. It only takes a moment, as the James Bulger case shows, to snatch a child. There really can't be any culpability for parents in any of these scenarios.

What I do think helps is that in the other cases the abductors are known. The McCann case being unsolved means that people have nowhere else to direct their emotions other than the parents. That's just my opinion not a matter of fact, of course.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Irresponsible perhaps but would you impart culpability in her child's abduction, sexual assault and beheading because she left him alone for a time in a place she thought was safe enough?

What is shows is that abduction is a crime of opportunity and no one can predict when or how that opportunity will arise. It only takes a moment, as the James Bulger case shows, to snatch a child. There really can't be any culpability for parents in any of these scenarios.

What I do think helps is that in the other cases the abductors are known. The McCann case being unsolved means that people have nowhere else to direct their emotions other than the parents. That's just my opinion not a matter of fact, of course.

Here's a post I made a little while ago and rather than typing it all out again I'll bold the important part.

Where in that post did I suggest they abducted their own child.

Most everyone doesn't have a routine that involves leaving a toddler and 2 babies alone while they go out. That is as far as I can make out their only fault in this affair and the only thing that I'd admonishing them for. Is that really so difficult to grasp?

What they did was in my opinion and in the opinion of every right minded parent I've spoken to totally out of order and was a causal factor in someone else taking their child. I can't make this any clearer, I'm not blaming them for the loss of the child, I'm blaming them for not providing their children with adequate care that week to prevent someone else taking the child.

 

[Eyepopper]

I'd say letting you 8 year old play near your house with their 13 year old sibling is totally acceptable. How would the 13 year old be to blame?

Well the 13 year old let her walk home on her own, after which she was never seen again.

What we've been discussing here is adequate supervision, her brother didn't provide it as he let her walk home alone, but then he's 13 is he old enough to assess the risk or should the parents have assessed the risk of letting their 13 year old mind their 8 year old a little better? It went wrong after all, she was raped and murdered.

The arguement against the Mccanns is that leaving the children in the room created the opportunity, well in the Payne case, her 13 year old brother letting her walk home alone created the opportunity (or maybe him supervising her to begin with).

 

[Irwinwastheking]

If you can't tell the difference between an 8 year old and a 3 year old and their ability to look after them self then we're never going to be on the same wavelength. At some point in a child life you have to give them a little slack to let them develop some streetwise. That guy could have easily grabbed an 18 year old as grabbed the 8 year old. These aren't the same at all.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Here's a post I made a little while ago and rather than typing it all out again I'll bold the important part.

I am happy for you to correct me if I'm wrong it's just the part that says "to prevent someone else taking the child" that suggests some fault on their part.

 

[Eyepopper]

I can't make this any clearer, I'm not blaming them for the loss of the child, I'm blaming them for not providing their children with adequate care that week to prevent someone else taking the child.

Exactly, so presumably in the case of Sarah Payne you'd agree that the parents also didn't provide 'adequate care .... to prevent someone else taking the child' - she wasn't under adult supervision, she was probably either the same distance if not further from adult supervision as Madeleine Mccann.

How about April Jones? She was 5, and playing in the street without supervision, surely she should have been supervised?

Obviously I don't for a minute put any blame on the parents in those cases, abductions happen for a variety of reasons, including opportunity, whether the opportunity is like that in the case of James Bulger, where his mum probably took her eyes off him for no more than a split second in a busy shopping mall, Sarah Payne where a child was left under the supervision of a minor in a field close to home, or Madeleine McCann where her parents left her sleeping in her apartment for a half hour without checking her, its secondary, the ultimate responsibility lies with the person who took the child, but it's incredibly easy to start pointing fingers, or apportion blame in all those cases, as I've said hingsight is 20/20.

The major differences between the cases in my view is that in the Mccann case there is no villain, so a lot of the time peoples anger is aimed, either directly or indirectly at the parents.

If you asked Sarah Payne today if she regrets allowing her 13 year old to supervise her daughter, or if Jamie Bulgers mum regrets taking her eyes off him for a minute I'd imagine they both probably do, thats not to say what happened is their fault.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

I am happy for you to correct me if I'm wrong it's just the part that says "to prevent someone else taking the child" that suggests some fault on their part.

Yes. Is it or is it not a parents responsibility to keep their child safe by using reasonable means. If you fail due to your own negligence then you failed in your duty. There's two 'crimes' here. The one of the parent and the one of the abductor. Separate things. Because the parent failed in their primary responsibility they are culpable for enabling the second crime to happen.

 

[Irwinwastheking]

Exactly, so presumably in the case of Sarah Payne you'd agree that the parents also didn't provide 'adequate care .... to prevent someone else taking the child' - she wasn't under adult supervision, she was probably either the same distance if not further from adult supervision.

How about April Jones? She was 5 and playing in the street without supervision, surely she should have been supervised?

Obviously I don't for a minute put any blame on the parents in those cases, abductions happen for a variety of reasons, including opportunity, whether the opportunity is like that in the case of James Bulger, where his mum probably took her eyes off him for no more than a split second in a busy shopping mall, Sarah Payne where a child was left under the supervision of a minor in a field close to home, or Madeleine McCann where her parents left her sleeping in her apartment for a half hour without checking her, its secondary, the ultimate responsibility lies with the person who took the child, but it's incredibly easy to start pointing fingers, or apportion blame in all those cases, as I've said hingsight is 20/20.

The major differences between the cases in my view is that in the Mccann case there is no villain, so a lot of the time peoples anger is aimed, either directly or indirectly at the parents.

If you asked Sarah Payne today if she regrets allowing her 13 year old to supervise her daughter, or if Jamie Bulgers mum regrets taking her eyes off him for a minute I'd imagine they both probably do, thats not to say what happened is their fault.

A five year old shouldn't be playing on the street with no supervision. I have a five year old and not a hope in hell would I let him out on his own.

I also have an 11 year old girl and when she was 8 she was allowed to cycle around our small estate on her own but no further. An 8 year old and a 3/5 year old are completely different and need to be treated differently.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Yes. Is it or is it not a parents responsibility to keep their child safe by using reasonable means. If you fail due to your own negligence then you failed in your duty. There's two 'crimes' here. The one of the parent and the one of the abductor. Separate things. Because the parent failed in their primary responsibility they are culpable for enabling the second crime to happen.

Thanks for the clarification.

'Reasonable means' could be leaving them in what you believe to be a secure environment and checking on them at regular intervals. I think apportioning any blame on the McCanns at this point is harsh.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

A five year old shouldn't be playing on the street with no supervision. I have a five year old and not a hope in hell would I let him out on his own.

I also have an 11 year old girl and when she was 8 she was allowed to cycle around our small estate on her own but no further. An 8 year old and a 3/5 year old are completely different and need to be treated differently.

Oh man, the places I went without parental supervision when I was five. Different times, of course, but then again in 1981 I was the same age as Adam Walsh when he was abducted.