the McCanns recieving recieving vile internet abuse !!

Just why do the McCanns alienate so many people when the natural human reaction to their plight should be sympathy?

I think you are a victim of media-led drivel. So are the McCanns. Maybe you should rely more upon your 'natural human reactions'. You might find they serve you well.

I did not say I was alienated although I am never comfortable watching them. I was referring to a lot of the public's animosity when they should be receiving sympathy.

Sympathy for what exactly?

Sympathy because they do not know what has happened to their daughter.

My only sympathy is for Madeleine and her misfortune to have this pair as parents.

or "the lie detector test, why do the mcanns refuse to take one?"

McCanns say they dont need to do one.

thats it really.

**************************************THREAD FINISHED*****************************************************

Sympathy because they do not know what has happened to their daughter.

those that have no sympathy also doubt that statement

the lie detector test was something else the promised to do,along with never leaving portugal,cant believe the police havnt solved this its simples the macaan s are lying when you see their lips move,

Would YOU risk everything on a test that is known to be flawed. There is nothing to gain, but everything to lose.
When the McCannns stated that they wouldn't leave without her, they could not have imagined the present situation. They DID stay for a long time. Try to keep things in some sort of context.

I don't think 1st time poster knows anything about lie detector tests
Also, when your child has just gone missing, of course your natural reaction is to say you're never leaving until you find her, but then naturally REALITY sets in, they realise for the sake of there other two children they have to go back not to mention the fact they were hounded out of the country by the portuguese police and media hell bent on making them prime suspects, how can something so simple and obvious escape you, then again, mccann haters always see what they want to.

What do you think happened to Maddie, SH?

Abduction. An accidental death cover up is too unlikely given the facts.

no one mentioned lie detector tests till the macaans brought it up and said they,d take one,what i no or think has sweet fa to do with it,along with the promise to stay and umpteen changes to statements it proves their word is worth nothing,nada,zero

What were these "umpteen changes" you refer too exactly ?

SH spends an awful lot of time on here defending the mccanns. Ever wonder why?

Abduction. An accidental death cover up is too unlikely given the facts.


Just what 'facts' are these. I've been waiting 7 years for some...

What were these "umpteen changes" you refer too exactly ?

Shutters, windows, patio doors and doors. Open shut forced?

Distance from the bar to the apartment.
How often the children were checked.

A few easy ones to start with.

Can I just ask fellow forumites what you thought of the Crimewatch reconstruction that showed Madeline asking Kate on the morning of the disappearance "where mummy and Daddy were the night before" as she woke up crying.

I cannot understand why the police felt they needed to show that to viewers as it clearly leads you to think the McCann's did something or at least makes me think it was bad leaving your children but the fact that your eldest woke up crying for you the night before and she tells you this and you do the same thing 12 hours later. Why show British viewers that?

Why not show it?

Well, they are after catching an abductor, and at no stage had any British authority showed the McCann's bad parenting.

Don't answer a question with a question akabula, I want your thoughts.

Are you suggesting plod had an ulterior motive, Steamship?

They were corrections, not changes for the sake of change, you can't expect people to remember what at time would have felt insignificant and all whilst coming to terms with a missing child.

akabula, I'm ordinary member of the pubic, let's not get paranoid with cryptic posts.

I assume the mccanns had told them about it and maybe someone with a conscience on the programme felt the need to include it.
As regards a reconstruction of an abduction it does seem at odds with the programme.

Why continually try to stop the thread SH. If you are fed up with it why not simply ignore?

I cannot ignore the *%&£ posted.

People are entitled to post their opinions.
I don't subscribe to any of the theories other than an abduction but that is only my opinion.

Funny that, if a fred is full of shíte i won't go near it...

akabula    23 Nov 14 22:38 
I assume the mccanns had told them about it and maybe someone with a conscience on the programme felt the need to include it.
As regards a reconstruction of an abduction it does seem at odds with the programme.

I never saw the programme.

How did they manage to reconstruct an abduction, where there is zero evidence that an abduction was what actually happened?


NOTE FOR SCANDINAVIAN_HAVEN ===================================

====================== NOT END OF THREAD

Yes I am guiness but I don't know why.
Why though as the parent would you mention that? To me it is an admission of guilt by Kate.

I've often thought it, and mainly because they get such an easy time in the UK. but if that is a cunning plan by plod (a large oxymoron) then they are taking their time getting a result (another oxymoron)

How did they manage to reconstruct an abduction, where there is zero evidence that an abduction was what actually happened?

I was replying to a post that used that terminology taxi so maybe you want to ask the original poster.

Clarence Mitchell the Mc canns adviser,now standing as tory candidate for brighton,amazing whenevers there's some sordid sinister goings on they seem to be around it...

Even more strange that Mitchell could have taken 'gardening leave' but chose to resign from his job in full, to assist the McCanns.

This question of why the McCann's get a hard time is an interesting one. I think it is because we are part of the internet age where people share opinions freely and those opinions help form a narrative which is at odds from the one which the press would usually seek to portray. In the old days there were few of the red flashing lights relating to the parents and so they would have had unlimited sympathy because they are photogenic, middle class, together and associated with the caring professions. People could in theory relate to them as individuals and a family unit.

The problem is this goodwill was squandered by their and especially Gerry's odd behaviour and by the simple fact that they were grossly negligent parents. People can make all the excuses they want for them but you simply don't go out night after night leaving babies especially when one of them has become traumatised by the experience.

And that sadly is the one true actual fact which we have to go on at the moment.

if people want to carry on like parrots repeating themselves cmat for their own self satisfaction reasons berating the parents for 9 millionth time then so be it. Though I think the sane ones amongst us can agree there is very little else to add now.

Well cheerio SH as I would imagine you don't want to be labelled a parrot by repeating that.

true but I am replying to nonsense whilst others are repeating it

Eeternal. "Gerry's odd behaviour"? What did (or didn't) he do that was odd?

oh please... not again

I'm beginning to see what SH is getting at

I would consider it odd behaviour for a doctor to use profanities in front of other peoples children when they are on their way to a holiday which Gerry himself says he is not there to enjoy himself. It shows a lack of self control around children at best.

Nice way for the children to start there holiday when Gerry replies to a question with a feck off in front of them all on the bus before they have even started their holiday. Who on here would use profanities in front of other peoples children. The fact that none of the other parents pulled him on his behaviour shows what an outfit this group were.

Nov 23, 2014 -- 11:12AM, scandanavian_haven wrote:

Abduction. An accidental death cover up is too unlikely given the facts.

How likely is abduction then ? Not only no trace of one but how many cases can you point out where a stranger has taken a child from the place they were living ? 0 as far as i know .

Nov 23, 2014 -- 4:33PM, scandanavian_haven wrote:

They were corrections, not changes for the sake of change, you can't expect people to remember what at time would have felt insignificant and all whilst coming to terms with a missing child.akabula, I'm ordinary member of the pubic, let's not get paranoid with cryptic posts.

They were corrections once their initial story was found to be full of sh!t . Thye thought the portuguese plod would see an open window and assume the abductor had got in and out that way .It was only when the window was examined and found that it could not have been opened from outside that they retracted their claim that they had done their 'checks' by entering through the locked front door .You seriously think they had forgotten that they left the doors open ?

I would expect someone to know wether a window had been opened and wooden shutters forced up. Or not.
To make a statement that this had occurred, when in fact it had not, is more than a change or correction imo.

With three small children inside I would suggest you would know exactly the state of windows and doors when you left the apartment and if this was a nightly occurence you would know the routine as you would have weighed up the consequencies and likelyhood of their getting out or someone getting in.

Steamship    23 Nov 14 22:15 
Can I just ask fellow forumites what you thought of the Crimewatch reconstruction that showed Madeline asking Kate on the morning of the disappearance "where mummy and Daddy were the night before" as she woke up crying.

I cannot understand why the police felt they needed to show that to viewers as it clearly leads you to think the McCann's did something or at least makes me think it was bad leaving your children but the fact that your eldest woke up crying for you the night before and she tells you this and you do the same thing 12 hours later. Why show British viewers that?

The only answer is to enhance the abduction theory.

Once again, there is zero evidence to suggest that such a conversation with the child took place.

It is designed to strengthen the abduction case as it is much better to be thought of as being feckless and selfish parents than anything worse.

It also worth noting that this supposed conversation came to light at the same time that one of their tapas  friends claims of seeing the abductor with the child was dismissed by plod.

This original "sighting", fortuitously by one their mates, gave rise to the abduction hysteria.

Until hard evidence is produced, this case is a disappearance and not an abduction.

maybe they stretched a few truths because they realised how it may have looked,a natural reaction, or maybe they just couldn't remember.

maybe they stretched a few truths because they realised how it may have looked,a natural reaction, or maybe they just couldn't remember

No maybes SH they lied, pure and simple. A horrible selfish couple.

scandanavian_haven   
24 Nov 14 17:35 
maybe they stretched a few truths



Superintendent Nipper - Ron, did you kill Jack McVitie?   

Ronnie Kray - No, I like his digestives though.

Make your mind up scandinavian. One minute they are squeaky clean with nothing to be ashamed of and now they are telling lies and thus potentially obstructing the investigation.

I don't ever remember saying they are squeaky clean with nothing to be ashamed off.
When you change a statement, you are in your own mind making corrections, and at the same time, you don't change your evidence unless you are advised to by your representatives which they clearly must have been, when they made their initial statements, do you think after finding out they just lost a child they were thinking clearly? I think not.
Obstructing evidence -  maybe looking at the diabolical way in which the initial investigation was carried out and handling of the crime scene should attain more focus. Their cowboy operation botched it from the beginning.

i said on here at the time that i thought the whole crimewatch  show  pointed the finger at the macaans in a subtle way and the bloke used in the reconstruction of the irish sighting was an absolute dead ringer for gerry macaan,but others on here said it was old footage they,d seen before,it was the ist time i,d seen it

You seem to be doing the same as they did. You've made a clear and unequivocal statement that they lied because they realised how it may look. Which at the very least seems to be evidence that they thought about a story, instead of thinking about what actually happened and then having thought about the story giving the most accurate story to help expedite any investigation they gave the one which would present them in the best light instead of pulling up trees in order to find their daughter.

I may be being uncharitable here but I don't feel particularly charitable to them because they left babies alone while they gave it the big one. Had they been a she and had that she been a single mum on benefits she would have been mullered for her negligence.

Havng said that I do also feel very sorry for them if she has been abducted because despite what happened no parent deserves to go through their pain.

Only they can answer truly on why, but like I said, they must have been advised to change their statements, we can all speculate and the reasons.

and had that she been a single mum on benefits she would have been mullered for her negligence

Are you actually for real? what exactly have you been reading the last few years, they've received nothing but vile bile for leaving their kids alone. This thread alone is a good reflection of it.

That was the point I was making earlier. People refuse to be dictated to be by the news barons and think for themselves because of the internet. My point was that a single mum would have been buried in the papers and the papers have been very supportive of the McCann's. And yet they did somethign incredibly irresponsible. That isn't a suggestion that if Maddie was indeed abducated that they deserved it. Just that they were grossly irresponsible and have got a free pass with the press.

I'm not at all sure that the press's interest in this is to support the McCanns. That may have been their position initially because it sold papers.

Woman from Birmingham (name not revealed for legal reasons)

Went to Oz to see her boyfriend.

Left her 14 year old son in charge of the other kids. 

He phoned his grandparents.

They phoned Social Services.

Kids not left alone.

Kids not in in any danger.

She did it once.

She got a suspended prison sentence

Strange world.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2846183/Father-left-sick-toddler-dau...

.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2846183/Father-left-sick-toddler-daughter-car-outside-chemist-ran-buy-Calpol-charged-NEGLECT-spend-year-trying-clear-name.html

why posts that on here cmat, any excuse to resurrect this thread

I don't need an excuse to bring a thread back.

scandanavian_haven
why posts that on here cmat, any excuse to resurrect this thread

Surely it's relevant to this thread.

You need to move on with your life cmat imo

If only poor Madeleine could do the same.

People will possibly get off the mccanns backs when they admit, without excuses, that they failed Maddie miserably as parents.

Admit to whom?

to defend a prosecution for starters.

naydam
Admit to whom?

Hazard a guess.

naydam

This is getting incredibly sad

akabula  • November 28, 2014 10:37 PM GMT 


People will possibly get off the mccanns backs when they admit, without excuses, that they failed Maddie miserably as parents.

it would help, to the world

I doubt they ever will, they have trapped themselves into this

I doubt the case will ever be solved either

although they did finally solve the Jack the Ripper murders after 126 years, not a lot of use to us on here

we will die guessing

Of course some are still not certain about the murder of the Princes in the Tower
that goes a long way back
Richard III almost certainly
but some make case for Henry VII and a few others

I doubt the McCanns will be remembered that long

This thread has a good few years left in it yet!

If only to annoy the liberalist apologists..

ttt for Tommy Toes

sorry, wrong thread

I looked in to see if there was any new evidence as the title said (1 new) - but it was akabula.

I looked in coz I saw (1 new) a taxi.

No news is good news for the "gravy trainers"

More friends of the tories..

wasent Gerry involved wiv Camerons brother................

Gerry is seemingly connected to an alleged paedo who coincidentally announced today that he will be stepping down as an MP next year

Gerry is seemingly connected to an alleged paedo who coincidentally announced today that he will be stepping down as an MP next year

Any news on the libel case?

what bigH,s, libel case,

Feels, to me,  as if the libel case is going to end up like an insurance company 'knock-for-knock' arrangement and fizzle out.

What's the weather like in Malta this time of year?

Lucky that the McCanns aren't black or asian, isn't it?

Ozymandius
or white trash from Newham for that matter.

What's the weather like in Newham this time of year Ozy?

Bitter, I'd say.

Ozymandius    03 Dec 14 20:23 
or white trash from Newham for that matter.

Who's white trash from Newham, is it you?

talking to an Italian today about a dead kid in sciliy and he says "its like that uk couple in Portugal who overdosed their kid" Tried to explain that they had never been charged with anything but he didnt quiet understand.

Maybe he does understand.......