Nothing I think I can reasonably challenge here. All rather convincing arguments. I think I was applying my general feeling that parents worry too much to a case that doesn't warrant such.
I feel enlightened. Cheers.
Madeleine McCann
- Thread starter Fergies Gum
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
I feel enlightened. Cheers.
There's something mental about this whole thing...
Haven't they had these e-fits for years, just not made them public till now?
The parents look dodgey too, not just from what happened that holiday, their body language and stuff in interviews looks strange. Plus, haven't they become authors? The dad just looks cold and calculated, looks like a serial killer himself, the Mrs, looks frightened imo. But that's only my opinion, and I've never won a game of cluedo, so my input is shit anyway.
This is also one of the longest "missing" cases I can remember being in the news as often as it is, especially considering we're 6 years on.
I don't even understand how they're allowed to keep their other kids.
Good Lord, its posts like this that should make anyone weep for the jury system. Far too many people make their minds up and refuse to change them based on bullshit like this. It's really quite scary how many people just decide the guilt of people on "they don't look right" and "gut feeling".
Exactly
From a website:
Regardless of whether you felt that it was or wasn't neglect to have left them alone every evening... As a parent, if you had heard that two of your kids had been crying whilst you had left them alone the night before, would you dream of then going out that evening as well?? I personally would not have put my interests before those of my kids in that situation.
But maybe thats just because I want to feel morally superior, as Eyepopper would say...or at least he will once he finishes work and reads this thread later today.
True. But it is also true that many people have steadfastly made up their minds that they weren't involved. Am not sure if that is based on appearances or not, but I am yet to see the concrete evidence that they could not have had anything to do with it.
My mind isn't made up and I'm not on a jury. It's just my opinion. I'd always look to evidence first, but I cba sifting through any amounts of shit for this case, Portugal police vs UK police, random e-fits, differing stories, DNA feck ups, etc etc. I don't understand the point in releasing e-fits years after they initially had them (or am I mistaken with this, I read they had them for years).
Parents leaving their kids in an apartment on their own, in a foreign country, while they go for some food and wine, should make anyone weep for what assholes are allowed to have kids.
Of course they do but I guess it's sometimes better to think up of impossible scenarios and give more protection to your kid, especially in its earliest youth, than just let the kid take care of itself to a large extent when they're barely speaking comprehensively and can hardly figure out what goes around them.
Parents (or grandparents for that matter) often offer way too much protection to their kids. My mum who's become a grandmother a year ago won't let my niece do anything when she's taking care of her because she's afraid she'll hurt herself. She can walk fine and she can play with all sorts of toys but she won't be allowed to do so when my Mum is around because she's obssessed. It's taking it too far for my liking but still better than heading off to your bedroom living your kid playing in the kitchen with boiling water in the kettle and hot oil in a frying pan with knives and forks lying on the table.
Well I find that the police aren't total mugs so if it was as obvious and easy to see that the parents were involved as some internet conspiracists would have you believe, they'd have fully looked into that far more than anyone on here know's. So you can only presume innocence. We do live in a society of innocent until proven guilty, hard as that is to believe reading on here.
I think the Police suspected that a terrible accident had occurred in the parents absence and it was subsequently covered up and made to look like an abduction. Especially with the Dogs smelling death etc.
Not too much of a stretch when you think that the girl was probably on edge due to being left alone previously and might have climbed up towards the window to try and find her parents?
Certainly not enough of a stretch to call people idiots for taking a line of thought about her parents involvement anyway.
Not too much of a stretch when you think that the girl was probably on edge due to being left alone previously and might have climbed up towards the window to try and find her parents?
Certainly not enough of a stretch to call people idiots for taking a line of thought about her parents involvement anyway.
True, and am not saying that the McCans are guilty. But I am saying that I should fall under suspicion.
On a serious note:
What evidence is there that Madeline was abducted (aside from the fact she is missing).
What evidence is there that Madeline died in the apartment?
You could add the fact that the British police dogs detected the scent of a cadaver in the apartment, and in the McCann's hire car to evidence that Madeline died in the apartment.
Am curious as to what evidence there is that convinces them that Madeline was indeed abducted.
You cannot really throw any assumptions in here. It's very unlikely that the parents had anything to do with it apart from making the wrong decision in the first place, they were the ones who fully conciously have decided to turn it into a worldwide affair. Lots of kids go missing each year yet Madeleine's case is by far the most popular one in the last decade. Crime like that would be very difficult to cover up if it were them hurting their daugher or leading to her being hurt in some way then concealing the body. We had a similar case in Poland last year when a woman reported her 6-month old daughter missing and backed down on her story and admitted to hiding her body in ruins of an old building within 3 or 4 days. She then tried to describe it as an accidental death but coroners were quick to dismiss her story and she's now jailed for delibarate murder. You can't go too long pretending you had nothing to do with the death or disappearance of your child especially as there'd be a significant risk that there'd be some witnesses.
When I used to go out with my ex gf and her daughter, I'd never take my eyes off her daughter in shops/parks/whatever, and my gf would laugh at me. Had to mind her alone a few times as well, never shit myself so much in my life. I was constantly on edge in case she injured herself or anything.
One reason I will never have kids, the heart can't take it.
I agree with this. The police won't have cleared them at all, but there's nothing to suggest we should find them guilty ourselves.
I can't believe Popper thinks the kids being left all alone is a 'footnote' though. It's what greatly increased the risk and allowed this to happen! I don't believe many or any of you who thinks it's just mere 'risk' have ever been in that situation. Parents have a duty of care over their children (which should be instinct anyway) and the moment you leave them in a hotel room and piss off out to dinner you are neglecting that duty, you are neglecting the kids and you arw greatly increasing the risk of anything happening to them.
Popper's doing an impression of Erica with his "victimised middle class" act.
I doubt the parents were involved in her death directly -- although, as with any open case, nothing can be conclusively ruled out however unlikely -- but their leaving her alone in the apartment was so utterly irresponsible it beggars belief. But, that said, I'm pretty sure they know that now. They've suffered for that mistake since it happened, and no amount of morally superior finger pointing will change that. I'm not really sure what it adds to things, really, except letting everyone else nod their heads in sanctimonious agreement that it couldn't possibly happen to them, because they're not bad parents.
If anything is to be learnt here, it's that even the smallest little thing can have terrible consequences. If you don't agree with what her parents did then don't lavish them in sympathy, but gloating about what awful people they are achieves nothing except making you look like a twat.
I doubt the parents were involved in her death directly -- although, as with any open case, nothing can be conclusively ruled out however unlikely -- but their leaving her alone in the apartment was so utterly irresponsible it beggars belief. But, that said, I'm pretty sure they know that now. They've suffered for that mistake since it happened, and no amount of morally superior finger pointing will change that. I'm not really sure what it adds to things, really, except letting everyone else nod their heads in sanctimonious agreement that it couldn't possibly happen to them, because they're not bad parents.
If anything is to be learnt here, it's that even the smallest little thing can have terrible consequences. If you don't agree with what her parents did then don't lavish them in sympathy, but gloating about what awful people they are achieves nothing except making you look like a twat.
I've no problem admitting it was a huge fecking mistake, but, at the risk of sounding all dramatic... don't you think they've suffered enough for it? What do people want, them to crawl around in sack cloths begging forgiveness? I doubt thats high on the list of priorities, probably for various reasons.
People need someone to blame, and in the absence of anything else they blame the parents, some explicitly, some indirectly, as reasonably well to do, doctors, they are the perfect target for some sort of bitterness people have.
Would you honestly walk up to someone whose kid had been killed by a lorry and say 'terrible about the kid but what were you thinking letting him run in the road?' Would you go to the funeral and say the same thing, and everytime the dead kid is ever mentioned make the, probably valid, point about his parents letting him run in the road?
Anyhoo, I'm out. In the absence of any evidence to disprove my gut, I still think she's in Narnia.
You can feck right off!
We are talking about these people, not to them, at the funeral?
If a kid who habitually played near or on a dangerous road then yes, I do think people would ask questions of the parents. This case is still being discussed because it is unsolved, not because anyone has an agenda.
Am I the only one who sees it?
This has absolutely no bearing on my decision to believe they were some way involved with her disappearance. One thing is for sure though, had this been your traditional council house, working class family they would have been crucified for their actions, rightly so. The fact that the Mcanns are well off middle class doctors has, IMO, led a lot of people to ignore the negligence of leaving a toddler alone.
NO family, regardless of class status should have done what they did. Reports, tabloid and broadsheet alike, paint a picture of a couple who were more concerned with their holiday and socialising with their friends than caring for their children. It was an inconvienence for them to look after the children.
My personal opinion is they accidently killed her, panicked and have worked tirelessly to cover their tracks. My decision was not based on their occupation.
Can we please take a break from posting stuff which is effectively like 'This is what I believe...and if you don't agree, you're a fool/naive/a lunatic/shill'? That kind of thing absolutely ruins most serious discussions in the CE forum (especially 'religious' threads). With regard to this particular case, none of us know what happened - there's no default correct position, whether you believe it was an abduction or an accident.
Exactly right.
Why with these forums is it always polemic? If you say you are looking forward to the PS4, people take that as an assault on the Xbox One...if you praise Ronaldo, that is seen as diminishing Messi.
Here, if you question the McCanns, it is because you are either trying to establish moral superiority, or because of your bitterness towards well-to-do people.
I have tried to ask people to share the evidence for why they consider Madeline to have been abducted, but instead there is tangent city where people ask whether these are questions we would put to people if we saw them at a funeral.
Strange.
Who is gloating?
I still fail to see why the assertion that one one wouldn't leave 3 kids unattended 5 nights in a row is deemed to be taking the moral high ground or in any way sanctimonious. It's quite common practice not to leave kids unattended.
While the risk they took would rarely lead to such disaster, it's not 'the smallest little thing' in my book.
If you want facts a good place to start is not basing your opinions on what you read in the Mirror.
What's the point in this ridiculous hyperbole? It's especially irrelevant since you're claiming to have personally researched evidence at hand which disproves the theory that the parents were involved.
Perhaps gloating was a poor choice of word, but what does repeatedly pointing out that they made a mistake achieve? I'm sure they realise they made a mistake by now. So unless endlessly reiterating that it's bad parenting to leave a child unattended can help them go back in time and undo that error, I'm not sure what the point is.
So what do you want then?
Leaving kids alone isn't bright, what are people looking for beyond saying that over and over?
No I'm not cider, I'm claiming to have read more about it than what was on my chip wrapper.
I looked up the accounts of their foundation a few years ago because I was dicussing it with someone and, you know, wanted to actually know what I was talking about.
But then, I didn't even realise they were profiting from it, or are they celebrities from it, what ever you're having yourself.
Far from it.
I mentioned earlier, on holidays I would be even more careful. Straight away my fear of even contemplating what they did would be - If a kid especially as young as them wake up in surroundings they are not familiar with, in the dark, with the door unlocked beside a swimming pool?
I mean fecking hell that is unthinkable for most parents. Unforgivable IMO.
Hallelujah.
What do I want? Nothing.
I just disagree with a lot of your second guessing people's motives for their opinions in this thread.
The reason people are saying it over and over is because you dismissed what the did as not being negligent and questioned peoples motives for saying what they say.
They've never faced charges for neglect, its not up to the, generally ill informed, public to judge, or to suggest that the only reason they weren't charged for neglect is that they are middle class doctors.
I'm not sure saying the parents were a bit lax is saying it's their fault, and I also think the converse is true, that a parent placing the focus on the McCann's role means that it could happen to you if you take your eye off the ball.
So that's it? You looked up some financial accounts and from that found assurance that anybody who didn't dismiss the notion that the child might have suffered an accidental death was an idiot?
Yes but nobody here is actually saying that, it's mostly parents expressing disbelief they would leave kids unattended for 5 nights in a row. Not all levels of negligence are punishable by law. I know kids whose mother doesn't brush their hair, that's neglect but not illegal.
You asked for a definition of neglect earlier.
ne·glect
[ni-glekt] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to pay no attention or too little attention to; disregard or slight: The public neglected his genius formany years.2.
to be remiss in the care or treatment of: to neglect one's family; to neglect one's appearance.I posted one article. That was not, the sum total of my research, but was an article that I felt represented some people's interpretation of events.
Rather than continuing to mention this particular chip wrapper, why not share some of the evidence you have found?
Yep thats exactly what I said.
Same as you looking up nothing at all and then offering a half baked incorrect opinion.
Are you claiming now to know what I've looked up? What's the matter with you, boy?
I'm claiming to know you didn't look up the accounts but we're still confident they were financially gaining from the situation, which is bollocks.
I've just read two pages of the newbie version of this thread, and now I need to lie down.