Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

maebee

dark crystal wrote: »

Of course, Madeline is the victim. However, her family are also victims of the monster who abducted her. They will have to live with this crime for the rest of their lives. They will probably never see their daughter again.

People who lose their posessions as a result of burglary are seen as victims - why not people who lose their child?

There is absolutely NO evidence that a monster abducted Madeleine. If you read the official Police Files you will see that the McCanns LIED that the window had been jemmied and that the Portuguese (and British) police she died in the apartment and her death was covered up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1242716/Madeleine-McCann-dead-abduction-faked-say-Portuguese-police.html

Mr.Crinklewood

Could call the book "The Late Late Show".

If they had gone back earlier this might never had happened.

El Horseboxo

dark crystal wrote: »

If indeed they are guilty of murder, they are playing a very stupid and dangerous game. It would also make them sociopaths of the highest order.

Well you have come to that opinion after reading the same stuff as everyone else. Someone just below you agrees with you. How many people in the world share both of your opinion? A lot of people deal with guilt differently just as you mentioned a lot of people deal with shock differently. Some people feel interjecting themselves into the investigation is a way of easing the guilt while others need to feel like they are constantly doing something proactive as they feel eyes are on them all the time. I don't know what happened and i don't really have a strong opinion on it other than some of the suspicious actions surrounding it. I work with law enforcement in a child abuse and exploitation capacity and have come up against the psychology behind guilt on many an occasion. I'm not saying you are wrong. Just pointing out that keeping themselves in the limelight could be their way of dealing with it.

dark crystal

maebee wrote: »

There is absolutely NO evidence that a monster abducted Madeleine. If you read the official Police Files you will see that the McCanns LIED that the window had been jemmied and that the Portuguese (and British) police she died in the apartment and her death was covered up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1242716/Madeleine-McCann-dead-abduction-faked-say-Portuguese-police.html

Why were they never indicted for murder or manslaughter, so?

With all this damning evidence against them, it seems ridiculous that they should still be roaming the streets four years later, imploring the public to help find their missing child.

This case does now seem to be entering the realms of conspiracy theories, a la JFK and Jack The Ripper. The tiniest scraps of flimsy circumstancial evidence are taken as proof of guilt.

By the way, have Kate or Gerry ever been subjected to a polygraph test at any stage? I know the reults of such tests are inadmissable, but the conclusions would be very interesting....

mconigol

All the self righteous mouths on here really sicken me.

They made a massive error in leaving their kids alone in the apartment that night and all the other nights they did. It doesn't mean they are bad people, stupid, yes but evil monsters, no.

BUT....bitching and moaning about that isn't going to change the fact. There is a little girl missing and that is what is important now, nothing else.

FrostyJack

dark crystal wrote: »

By the way, have Kate or Gerry ever been subjected to a polygraph test at any stage? I know the reults of such tests are inadmissable, but the conclusions would be very interesting....

The polygraph is the biggest crock of dog doo. It doesn't work outside of movies/tv. It is inadmissable for that very reason.

Animord

dark crystal wrote: »

By the way, have Kate or Gerry ever been subjected to a polygraph test at any stage? I know the reults of such tests are inadmissable, but the conclusions would be very interesting....

I read somewhere this morning that they offered to do one but then when it was actually offered to them they refused to do it.

FrostyJack

mconigol wrote: »

All the self righteous mouths on here really sicken me.

They made a massive error in leaving their kids alone in the apartment that night and all the other nights they did. It doesn't mean they are bad people, stupid, yes but evil monsters, no.

BUT....bitching and moaning about that isn't going to change the fact. There is a little girl missing and that is what is important now, nothing else.

Very good, but if they did kill her we should ignore that and continue looking pointlessly? Every angle should be investigated for Madeline's sake.

dark crystal

El Horseboxo wrote: »

I work with law enforcement in a child abuse and exploitation capacity and have come up against the psychology behind guilt on many an occasion. I'm not saying you are wrong. Just pointing out that keeping themselves in the limelight could be their way of dealing with it.

Fair play to you working in such a capacity - I honestly couldn't deal with the exploitation of children on a day to day basis. It would break my heart.

Look, the truth is, no one knows for sure what happened that night, except Madeline and whoever took her. I won't pretend that I believe for one second that the McCanns killed their daughter. I simply can't find a motive, nor can I accept that their behaviour 4 years later equates to the behaviour of a couple who killed and disposed of their child whilst holidaying in a foreign country. If it makes no sense to me, I can't accept it!

Who knows how someone acts when they lose a child? Everyone has different ways of dealing with it, I guess. Thank goodness, it's never happened to me or anyone close to me, so I can't pretend to know what the appropriate way of dealing with such a trauma would be like.

You can read so many things into behaviour, but the truth is, unless Madeline or the culprit is found, we will never really know what happened for sure.

maebee

dark crystal wrote: »

Why were they never indicted for murder or manslaughter, so?

With all this damning evidence against them, it seems ridiculous that they should still be roaming the streets four years later, imploring the public to help find their missing child.

This case does now seem to be entering the realms of conspiracy theories, a la JFK and Jack The Ripper. The tiniest scraps of flimsy circumstancial evidence are taken as proof of guilt.

By the way, have Kate or Gerry ever been subjected to a polygraph test at any stage? I know the reults of such tests are inadmissable, but the conclusions would be very interesting....

The case was archived in 2008 and it can be opened should new evidence come to light. The McCanns had a legal right to request a re-opening of the case but chose not to do so. Kate McCann also refused to answer the 48 questions put to her by the PJ and they refused to return to Portugal for a re-construction. She also admitted that she never "physically" searched for Madeleine and that she was sleeping normally after 5 nights after the "abduction".

BraziliaNZ

Kate is SO HOT. I would do anything for a piece of her...

mconigol

bad2dabone wrote: »

because its their fault!

oh man, this is a slow one we got here!

FrostyJack wrote: »

Very good, but if they did kill her we should ignore that and continue looking pointlessly? Every angle should be investigated for Madeline's sake.

Where is this "we" coming from? Who the After Hours police? Neither the Portuguese or English have charged or convicted them with anything. I'll take that over a bunch of conspiracy theorists on an internet forum any day. I highly doubt any of them have been looking pointlessly or not.

mconigol

maebee wrote: »

The case was archived in 2008 and it can be opened should new evidence come to light. The McCanns had a legal right to request a re-opening of the case but chose not to do so. Kate McCann also refused to answer the 48 questions put to her by the PJ and they refused to return to Portugal for a re-construction. She also admitted that she never "physically" searched for Madeleine and that she was sleeping normally after 5 nights after the "abduction".

Wow, what compelling evidence!

Parents or relatives are usually the chief suspects initially in cases like this so answering questions that could quite likely cause you to unintentionally incriminate yourself is hardly uncommon.

People react to tragedy in different ways. Sleeping normally after 5 nights doesn't mean jack **** ffs.

maebee

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id236.html

I have followed this tragic case for the past four years and with the knowledge I have gained in that time, the above is what I now believe is at the crux of the case.

FrostyJack

mconigol wrote: »

Where is this "we" coming from? Who the After Hours police? Neither the Portuguese or English have charged or convicted them with anything. I'll take that over a bunch of conspiracy theorists on an internet forum any day. I highly doubt any of them have been looking pointlessly or not.

I know murderers walking the street, where everyone and their dog (including the police) know they did it but as there is no evidence/witness by the letter of the law they are free. There is as much "evidence" that an outside party committed the crime as there is the McCann's were responsible, actually there is more circumstantial pointing their way so it isn't a great stretch of the imagination to be a "conspiracy theorist" in this case.

mconigol

FrostyJack wrote: »

I know murderers walking the street, where everyone and their dog (including the police) know they did it but as there is no evidence/witness by the letter of the law they are free. There is as much "evidence" that an outside party committed the crime as there is the McCann's were responsible, actually there is more circumstantial pointing their way so it isn't a great stretch of the imagination to be a "conspiracy theorist" in this case.

There's very few murderers walking the streets who haven't been charged with at least a minor offense. They might get off at trial with a lack of evidence or some other thing but there's usually an attempt at the very minimum to bring them to justice.

maebee

mconigol wrote: »

Wow, what compelling evidence!

Parents or relatives are usually the chief suspects initially in cases like this so answering questions that could quite likely cause you to unintentionally incriminate yourself is hardly uncommon.

People react to tragedy in different ways. Sleeping normally after 5 nights doesn't mean jack **** ffs.

Do you not find this a little strange though?:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html

FrostyJack

mconigol wrote: »

There's very few murderers walking the streets who haven't been charged with at least a minor offense. They might get off at trial with a lack of evidence or some other thing but there's usually an attempt at the very minimum to bring them to justice.

What? Do you think the McCann's have to have petty crime convictions or have a history of murder in order to commit the crime? They were originally investigated were they not? What would the point of bringing them to court if the prosecution knew they couldn't prove it? The media have already made the trial unobtainable, there would have to be conclusive evidence in order to have one.

mconigol

maebee wrote: »

Do you not find this a little strange though?:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html

"Madeleine's mother, who was legally represented in the interview, stayed silent as police threw a series of loaded questions at her that made clear they thought she was involved in her daughter's disappearance."

What would you do if you were being questioned in such a manner. Try to answer a load of questions when the intention of the interviewer is to tie you up in knots. She could have just as easily not been answering the questions in order to try prevent the focus of the investigation turning on her rather than the real abductor.

FrostyJack wrote: »

What? Do you think the McCann's have to have petty crime convictions or have a history of murder in order to commit the crime? They were originally investigated were they not? What would the point of bringing them to court if the prosecution knew they couldn't prove it? The media have already made the trial unobtainable, there would have to be conclusive evidence in order to have one.

No of course petty convictions have no effect. You said that you know murderers walking the streets that are free due to a lack of evidence. Give some examples? As I said most of these people typically are charged with something at some point and then either charges are dropped or it goes to trial and the get off on a technicality or lack of evidence.

dark crystal

maebee wrote: »

Do you not find this a little strange though?:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html

I would assume they were questions she had already answered numerous times before.

She says herself she can't explain any more than she had already.

If she is truly innocent, I can imagine her being more than annoyed at the fact that she is being asked the same silly questions over and over again, when she would prefer the police to be out searching for the real culprit.

ISDW

maebee wrote: »

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id236.html

I have followed this tragic case for the past four years and with the knowledge I have gained in that time, the above is what I now believe is at the crux of the case.

So now the Leicestershire police are in on the conspiracy as well, as they didn't send the statement until it was too late?

I love a good conspiracy theory, but these are people's lives we're talking about here. The twins are growing up, all of these accusations and conspiracies are available for them to see on the internet and in the press when they're old enough, how do you think that will make them feel? Or are their emotions not important? Very hypocritical if not, as everyone is so concerned about the safety of a little girl.

I don't know if the McCanns had any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance, I have sometimes thought they did, and sometimes think they didn't. But I don't know for sure, so will not go bandying around accusations like that, what if they really didn't have anything anything to do with it, how on earth must they be feeling every day, knowing that their neglect led to it?

Donkey Oaty

dark crystal wrote: »

If she is truly innocent, I can imagine her being more than annoyed at the fact that she is being asked the same silly questions over and over again

Hence the decision to go on the chat-show circuit?

mconigol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

For the people who can't understand why someone wouldn't necessarily want to answer questions the police may ask you check out the above video.

A lot of the time it is more about not mistakenly incriminating yourself rather that trying to hide your guilt.

dark crystal

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Hence the decision to go on the chat-show circuit?

Chat show appearances usually happen on each anniversary - they are not regular occurances.
She clearly does them to raise awareness and keep Madeline in the public eye, not to defend herself against unfounded accusations.

FrostyJack

mconigol wrote: »

"
You said that you know murderers walking the streets that are free due to a lack of evidence. Give some examples? As I said most of these people typically are charged with something at some point and then either charges are dropped or it goes to trial and the get off on a technicality or lack of evidence.

Firstly they are local people from my area so you are unlikely to know them and secondly they are murderers, so naming and shaming them on the internet might not be a good course of action. As you say "most people" are charged with something but this isn't like "most" cases now is it. The World is watching it.

Donkey Oaty

dark crystal wrote: »

She clearly does them to raise awareness and keep Madeline in the public eye, not to defend herself against unfounded accusations.

As a viewer, I'd like to see her defend herself against accusations, not all of which are unfounded.

This doesn't just go for her, by the way, but unfortunately that's what the media has become.

dark crystal

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

As a viewer, I'd like to see her defend herself against accusations, not all of which are unfounded.

This doesn't just go for her, by the way, but unfortunately that's what the media has become.

As a viewer, I'd be pretty uncomfortable seeing a grieving mother being grilled about the possibility of being involved in her daughter's death.

That job should be left up to the police, not some chat show host, looking to boost his or her ratings and stir up some controversy along the way.

Donkey Oaty

dark crystal wrote: »

As a viewer, I'd be pretty uncomfortable seeing a grieving mother being grilled about the possibility of being involved in her daughter's death.

That job should be left up to the police, not some chat show host, looking to boost his or her ratings and stir up some controversy along the way.

That's one way of putting it. The truth is that, at least on the basis of the police report, she would not agree to such an interview.

You clearly think there are no unanswered questions about the case, and are probably the Late Late Show's target audience.

discodita

I know they were wrong for leaving their children in the apartment while they ate, it was a foolish mistake that they have to live with for the rest of their lives. However, I find it very harsh for people to say they deserved what happened to them.
Unfortunatley they are not the only parents to leave their children like that, I was on holidays a couple of weeks ago (in Ireland) and clearly overheard a group of adults talking in the restaurant in the hotel about their young child up in the bedroom and that they would take turns checking on the child during dinner. Straight away I thought of the Mcann case and couldnt believe still some people are doing the very same thing today. I was in the restaurant for over an hour and they checked on the child once, at the very beginning of their meal. You would think people might learn from the Mcanns mistake but people are still doing it today.

Dudess

!MAVERICK! wrote: »

I wont express empathy with parents who 1) Left an infant alone in an apartment while on holidays in a country where crime,theft and abduction (As seen here) is highly prevalent.

2) They have the arrogance to persist the media for over four years to continue spreading awareness when thousands of other parents who are far worse off than the likes of two doctors have lost their children through abduction.

and 3) They have the nerve to not even accept their responsibleness as parents and continue to use methods to rake further wealth into their speculative pockets.

They dont deserve empathy from me they dont deserve empathy from other parents nor do they deserve empathy from the public.

I'm saying it's lacking in empathy to suggest that they "build a bridge and get over" the disappearance of their child. They need to move on for the sake of their other kids, and for themselves, but that doesn't require "getting over" Madeleine/giving up campaigning completely. Anyone whose child disappears, no matter what the circumstances, won't ever, ever, ever get over it - until they go to their grave. That shouldn't be difficult to grasp. What about Madeleine herself? Hopefully not, a billion times, but she could be a prostitute in some hell-hole right now - we don't know that she isn't - and her parents should just forget about it and get over it? Sweet Jesus...

It's shocking too how eager people are to believe she's dead and one of her parents or both are responsible. Whatever about "Some of this is strange and doesn't add up" (which I'd agree with) the "They definitely did it" stuff and the obvious ejaculations at that idea are disgusting. Maybe they did have something to do with it (the non supervision aspect aside), maybe they didn't - the way some people prefer the idea of the former is messed up. If they're innocent (and no matter what has been revealed, we do not know for certain that they're not) imagine the pain all these accusations are causing them on top of what they're already suffering? I always think of Lindy Chamberlain in relation to this case. Poor woman - the death of her child was enough horror, yet she had to contend with a lynch-mob public and then a prison sentence? Some people are just awful - desperate to find badness in others...

The McCanns did a stupid ****ing thing by leaving the children unsupervised that night - no excuse for it, but I still believe they deserve sympathy, because they're more than paying for it now. And to refuse to acknowledge their plight also does their daughter a huge disservice. It's ironic that those who feel the McCanns should be ignored, and by proxy Madeleine, have taken this stance on the very basis of her parents being borderline negligent of her. Saying they deserved it, despite the person suffering the most being their little girl who did nothing wrong, is absolutely fucked up.