Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

K-9

lugha wrote: »

Perhaps you should re-read the post you quoted, I think it addresses your problem. In short, all cover ups are not equally easy to pull off.

After any staged abduction I have no great difficulty in believing that the McCanns could have drawn on the undoubted anguish at the death of their daughter and project it as anxiety for a missing child. This indeed has been done many times.

My problem is with the suggestion that a relatively normal couple, not psychopaths with a natural and chilling capacity to express no emotion, not serial child abusers who have practiced the art of deception over time, could simply at will, summons the ability, not the motive mind, the ability, to project a happy exterior for a couple of hours, when internally they were distraught. As always, you have to qualify by saying "nothing is impossible". But then is in the same league of implausibility as the intruder through the window scenario.

I do not know a single person who could even come close to pulling this off, I think you probably would have to be of a psychopathic mind to do so.

Anyway, why the obsession with insisting that the McCanns did pull off this remarkable feat? Have you contemplated that there may be a scenario where they are in fact guilty but which does not require this tall tale?

Why do you think they aren't psychopathic?

Jaysus, the PJ should employ you if it's that simple.

Think we are back at "sure aren't they a lovely middle class couple".

iamwhoiam

I am not saying they did or didnt do anything but the qestion arose about keeping up a charade .
People get sucked into a lie and it grows and grows , it becomes a whole story with added legs and arms .Out of a lie a whole tale grows and you simply cant get out of it .You must carry on with the lie and live it .Problem with lies is that you forget what you said , you trip up , you loose momentum .
If anyone cops on and questions you have to either cave in or rise up and get all offened and hurt .You get angry and ask How Dare They .
Those who disbelieve grows and grows and you get even more offened and so it carries on , once you lie you have to keep it up or cave .On and on it goes

lugha

sunflower27 wrote: »

You don't have to be a psychopath to make a decision to try and save yourself and your own life (career, crediblity, children, family) when you know there is no saving your daughter.

The real difficulty is not that they would not have made the decision to engage in the deception I reference, it is that they had the emotional capacity to pull it off. They might at a stretch, have being willing, the almost certainly would not have been able.

Have you ever had the misfortune to be a child's funeral? Do you really think there would be no difficulty for the parents, if it suited their purposes, to suppress their absolute torment and play at happy clappy families?

I think quite a few posters who, quite reasonably, sneer at some of the McCanns dafter explanations of what might have happened are seriously undermining their credibility here.

At the very least, it should be conceded that this is a big ask. And really you should be looking for a better fitting scenario.

sunflower27

lugha wrote: »

The real difficulty is not that they would not have made the decision to engage in the deception I reference, it is that they had the emotional capacity to pull it off. They might at a stretch, have being willing, the almost certainly would not have been able.

Have you ever had the misfortune to be a child's funeral? Do you really think there would be no difficulty for the parents, if it suited their purposes, to suppress their absolute torment and play at happy clappy families?

I think quite a few posters who, quite reasonably, sneer at some of the McCanns dafter explanations of what might have happened are seriously undermining their credibility here.

At the very least, it should be conceded that this is a big ask. And really you should be looking for a better fitting scenario.

I 100% believe it is a big ask and I for one would not be on here wasting my time if I truly believed that the parents were not involved.

They refused to answer incriminating questions that I believe they should have been made to answer and they had backing from all on high from the get go.

If as you surmised Madeleine may have wandered off and harmed herself, why did her parents not look for her? To me that is shocking beyond belief.

It's bad enough they left their children unattended, but to not look for her when she is missing is just ridiculous. I believe at that point they were grieving her death and could not face going out into the public to search and deal with the public regarding a supposedly 'missing' child.

lugha

K-9 wrote: »

Why do you think they aren't psychopathic?

Fine. That would explain it. But few are saying that they sadistically murdered their daughter. Thus the only reason for throwing psychopathic in to the mix is to allow one particular scenario of what happened to work. So you are attributing an astonishally rare condition to the McCanns just to make your story work?

If you genuinely do not not any problem here then I'm afraid there is little point in us batting this back and forth. I can only leave you with the advice of this fine fellow. :pac:

K-9 wrote: »

At this stage if you don't get it and you wont get it, fair enough.

DexyDrain

Why do people think psychopathy is so rare? I think there is a lot of folk psychology going on in this discussion that doesn't reflect what we know about the human mind. For one thing, losing a child is devastating. Fear of such devastation is what keeps our guard up at all times, ensuring we never knowingly place very young children in danger or in situations where they are not being monitored carefully. If you didn't fear and dread such devastation, you might be a lot more lax about letting them fend entirely for themselves, as many other species do.

We also know that empathy is not a fixed feature in people, it varies to a very large degree. You can't assume people would feel the way you would feel about a situation. What tends to vary much less is a very strong, instinctive drive for self-preservation.

You could analyse the actions and words of any given couple and make a reasonable judgement on where along these scales they fall. You have to take that step before you can even begin to speculate on what some generic, off-the-shelf couple might be capable of, or might be expected to react.
Yet this simple first step is heavily resisted in favour of the assumption that any given couple is of the generic, stereotypical type. Why is that?

BQQ

lugha wrote: »

The real difficulty is not that they would not have made the decision to engage in the deception I reference, it is that they had the emotional capacity to pull it off. They might at a stretch, have being willing, the almost certainly would not have been able.

I dunno, the fact that they were able to leave their kids alone in an unlocked appartment shows considerable emotional detachment on their part IMO

the grieving families you mentioned wouldn't have done that either

K-9

lugha wrote: »

Fine. That would explain it. But few are saying that they sadistically murdered their daughter. Thus the only reason for throwing psychopathic in to the mix is to allow one particular scenario of what happened to work. So you are attributing an astonishally rare condition to the McCanns just to make your story work?

If you genuinely do not not any problem here then I'm afraid there is little point in us batting this back and forth. I can only leave you with the advice of this fine fellow. :pac:

The point is, you are dismissing it because it's a rare scenario exactly because it's a rare scenario! At this stage the easiest thing would be not to come clean as the case is soooo big they'd cause an almighty backlash.

An English police officer remarked upon Gerry's very cold demeanour and there are other hints like Gerry's books. It doesn't mean they are psychopathic just the lie has got so big they have to cover it up.

mrsbyrne

DexyDrain wrote: »

Why do people think psychopathy is so rare? I think there is a lot of folk psychology going on in this discussion that doesn't reflect what we know about the human mind. For one thing, losing a child is devastating. Fear of such devastation is what keeps our guard up at all times, ensuring we never knowingly place very young children in danger or in situations where they are not being monitored carefully. If you didn't fear and dread such devastation, you might be a lot more lax about letting them fend entirely for themselves, as many other species do.

We also know that empathy is not a fixed feature in people, it varies to a very large degree. You can't assume people would feel the way you would feel about a situation. What tends to vary much less is a very strong, instinctive drive for self-preservation.

You could analyse the actions and words of any given couple and make a reasonable judgement on where along these scales they fall. You have to take that step before you can even begin to speculate on what some generic, off-the-shelf couple might be capable of, or might be expected to react.
Yet this simple first step is heavily resisted in favour of the assumption that any given couple is of the generic, stereotypical type. Why is that?

Hold on, so your saying one psycho doctor managed to meet and marry another psycho doctor, both of these psycho doctors having been out in society, mixing, meeting and mending people for almost 20 years, yet the first time their psychopathic tendencies come to the surface is when they murder/find dead their little daughter!?!Both kate or gerry , two psychos, managed to resist doing a Shipman at any time! Because try as people can, and they have tried bloody hard, nobody can find anything bad to say about either of the McCanns previous to the tragedy, can they? Kate McCanns nickname in Uni (Hot Lips Healy, not Psycho Healy) is as psycho as it gets, isnt it? Wow! What are the odds??

DexyDrain

mrsbyrne wrote: »

Hold on, so your saying one psycho doctor managed to meet and marry another psycho doctor, both of these psycho doctors having been out in society, mixing, meeting and mending people for almost 20 years, yet the first time their psychopathic tendencies come to the surface is when they murder/find dead their little daughter!?!Both kate or gerry , two psychos, managed to resist doing a Shipman at any time! Because try as people can, and they have tried bloody hard, nobody can find anything bad to say about either of the McCanns previous to the tragedy, can they? Kate McCanns nickname in Uni (Hot Lips Healy, not Psycho Healy) is as psycho as it gets, isnt it? Wow! What are the odds??

I tried to race through that at what I thought might be the same pace as you wrote it, no that is not what I am saying.

What I am saying is that 'psychopathic' is at the extreme end of a very broad scale. People seem to assume everyone else is at the opposite end of the scale from psychopaths but this is simply nonsense. People vary very widely in intrinsic empathy. It is actually more likely that such people would end up together as the sheer amount of horrific abuse cases involving either both parents acting together or an emotionally feeble enabler passing a blind eye to protect the dominating partner.

To demonstrate why that is and why psychopathy is so rife in an apparently social, co-operative species would mean delving into some convoluted game theory and I really think no one reaching page 2598 of this discussion has the reserves for that kind of analysis..

TheZohanS

Mistyeyes321 wrote: »

This Pat brown is selling this on Amazon? For how much?!
I could be way off base here but is there anyone out there not charging for their story?! Is there really not one person who doesn't want any Financial gain from this Child?!

Yes. Goncalo Amaral has made the english version of his book available to download online free of charge, he does not profit from it whatsoever.

Seachmall

mrsbyrne wrote: »

Hold on, so your saying one psycho doctor managed to meet and marry another psycho doctor, both of these psycho doctors having been out in society, mixing, meeting and mending people for almost 20 years, yet the first time their psychopathic tendencies come to the surface is when they murder/find dead their little daughter!?!Both kate or gerry , two psychos, managed to resist doing a Shipman at any time! Because try as people can, and they have tried bloody hard, nobody can find anything bad to say about either of the McCanns previous to the tragedy, can they? Kate McCanns nickname in Uni (Hot Lips Healy, not Psycho Healy) is as psycho as it gets, isnt it? Wow! What are the odds??

There's condition called Occupational Numbness where professionals in certain fields such as Police Officers, Firefighters and Doctors learn to hide their emotions and empathy to such an extent where they themselves might feel like sociopaths.

Also, being a sociopath doesn't necessarily mean you're a murderer. The statistics of Antisocial personality disorder (the medical term for sociopaths/pyschopaths) suggest that anywhere from 1/100, or the more commonly cited statistic of, 1/25 people fit the definition of a sociopath. Think about that, look at your facebook friends list. At least one of the 100/200/300+ friends you have on that list is likely to be a sociopath. How difficult is it to believe that 2 sociopaths might know each other and even get married?

Of course sociopaths tend to be attracted to those they can control so it is somewhat unlikely two sociopaths would get married. Even if two non-sociopaths get married it only takes one of them to try and cover up a terrible accident for the other one to play along (all relationships have a dominant/submissive dynamic regardless of how slight it may be).

In saying that I don't think they're sociopaths and I've no opinion on what happened, I just wanted to make the point that it's entirely possible.

mw3guc

DexyDrain wrote: »

What I am saying is that 'psychopathic' is at the extreme end of a very broad scale. People seem to assume everyone else is at the opposite end of the scale from psychopaths but this is simply nonsense. People vary very widely in intrinsic empathy. It is actually more likely that such people would end up together as the sheer amount of horrific abuse cases involving either both parents acting together or an emotionally feeble enabler passing a blind eye to protect the dominating partner.

This is something that makes sense to me - we are all on a continuum for a lot of so-called abnormalities and the expression of such can vary with the circumstances and the dynamics. The Mc Cann couple strike me as the epitome of what you've described, with Gerry as the dominant partner. Whether this dynamic is/was enough to enable a huge and prolonged cover-up in the circumstances (or even if the event occurred as speculated) is a question that will likely never be answered.

AudreyHepburn

TheZohan wrote: »

Yes. Goncalo Amaral has made the english version of his book available to download online free of charge, he does not profit from it whatsoever.

Presumably you'd have pay for it the shops though? Does he charge for the Portuguese version? Was he paid for the documentary?

Why is Amaral repeatedly peddled out as the Knight in Shining Armour in all this? His book and program are as much his own opinions, not facts, as Kate's is.

TheZohanS

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Presumably you'd have pay for it the shops though? Does he charge for the Portuguese version? Was he paid for the documentary?

Why is Amaral repeatedly peddled out as the Knight in Shining Armour in all this? His book and program are as much his own opinions, not facts, as Kate's is.

The english version is free of charge, anyone can download it free of charge, it doesn't cost a penny except the bandwidth from your service provider. Google it and you will find it, makes for an interesting read. The documentary was done for nothing, he did not receive a penny.

Katie McCann charges for her book, even the downloads and quite frankly I'd rather trust the police than someone that was/is a suspect :eek::eek: in her own daughters disappearance. Ask any criminal if they're guilty and most will say no. Most criminals don't like the police either, nothing new there.

K-9

Seachmall wrote: »

There's condition called Occupational Numbness where professionals in certain fields such as Police Officers, Firefighters and Doctors learn to hide their emotions and empathy to such an extent where they themselves might feel like sociopaths.

Also, being a sociopath doesn't necessarily mean you're a murderer. The statistics of Antisocial personality disorder (the medical term for sociopaths/pyschopaths) suggest that anywhere from 1/100, or the more commonly cited statistic of, 1/25 people fit the definition of a sociopath. Think about that, look at your facebook friends list. At least one of the 100/200/300+ friends you have on that list is likely to be a sociopath. How difficult is it to believe that 2 sociopaths might know each other and even get married?

Of course sociopaths tend to be attracted to those they can control so it is somewhat unlikely two sociopaths would get married. Even if two non-sociopaths get married it only takes one of them to try and cover up a terrible accident for the other one to play along (all relationships have a dominant/submissive dynamic regardless of how slight it may be).

In saying that I don't think they're sociopaths and I've no opinion on what happened, I just wanted to make the point that it's entirely possible.

Good post and explains why the "they don't look like pyscho/sociopaths" makes no sense.

dark crystal

TheZohan wrote: »

Yes. Goncalo Amaral has made the english version of his book available to download online free of charge, he does not profit from it whatsoever.

Only because he was banned from distributing it in the U.K.

He had sold over 250,000 copies before the ban came into effect.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/news-from-the-madeleine-foundation-18-march-2011-3-45pm/

Sept 2009 – Lisbon Court bans ‘The Truth About A Lie’ and orders all copies to be impounded. But by this time the book has sold 250,000 copies in Portugal and has been translated into 9 European languages

TheZohanS

dark crystal wrote: »

Only because he was banned from distributing it in the U.K.

He had sold over 250,000 copies before the ban came into effect.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/news-from-the-madeleine-foundation-18-march-2011-3-45pm/

The english version was available for free from the start and is still available now.

dark crystal

TheZohan wrote: »

The english version was available for free from the start and is still available now.

Only because it was prohibited from sale at the time. Now the ban has been overturned, he can make a profit from UK sales, just as he has profited from sales elswhere.

It is wrong to say he hasn't profited from the book.

maebee

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

His book and program are as much his own opinions, not facts, as Kate's is.

His opinions are supported by officers from 2 joint forces, who worked on the case.
Kate's book is facts? And you know this, how? You should have added an imo at the end of that sentence.

iamwhoiam

maebee wrote: »

His opinions are supported by officers from 2 joint forces, who worked on the case.
Kate's book is facts? And you know this, how? You should have added an imo at the end of that sentence.

I so agree about Kates book being facts ! Kate says it so it must be true ! How silly of anyone to beleive that . Gerry says the Tapas restaurant was like sitting in your back garden , so he says it it must be true .Well well .!!

TheZohanS

dark crystal wrote: »

Only because it was prohibited from sale at the time. Now the ban has been overturned, he can make a profit from UK sales, just as he has profited from sales elswhere.

It is wrong to say he hasn't profited from the book.

The portuguese version was never banned yet it has been available free of charge online from the start. The english version was available to download free of charge prior to it's banning in the UK and has been available to download free of charge even after it's banning. It's still available today free of charge, both versions are still available free of charge to download today.

Now to address him making a profit from book sales, yes I'm sure he has. However peope have today, and have always had the option to read the book free of charge or to download it free of charge which is more than I can say about Katie McCanns revisionists drivel. I'm also sure the publishers have made a few quid too. You hardly expect them to give away free paperbacks/hard backs now do you?

If you want to read either versions of his book, free of charge, then go here.

Eh is katie McCanns book available free of charge anywhere? I'm searching but I can't find it.

dark crystal

TheZohan wrote: »

The portuguese version was never banned yet it has been available free of charge online from the start. The english version was available to download free of charge prior to it's banning in the UK and has been available to download free of charge even after it's banning. It's still available today free of charge, both versions are still available free of charge to download today.

Now to address him making a profit from book sales, yes I'm sure he has. However peope have today, and have always had the option to read the book free of charge or to download it free of charge which is more than I can say about Katie McCanns revisionists drivel. I'm also sure the publishers have made a few quid too. You hardly expect them to give away free paperbacks/hard backs now do you?

If you want to read either versions of his book, free of charge, then go here.

Eh is katie McCanns book available free of charge anywhere? I'm searching but I can't find it.

I never suggested it was. Another poster asked if there was anyone involved who hadn't made a profit from their books and you suggested Amaral hadn't, so I was just clearing that up.

TheZohanS

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

His book and program are as much his own opinions, not facts, as Kate's is.

Wrong. The documentary was not made by him, the documentary is a broad documentary that draws facts, interviews etc from various sources including the McCanns lawyer.

TheZohanS

dark crystal wrote: »

I never suggested it was. Another poster asked if there was anyone involved who hadn't made a profit from their books and you suggested Amaral hadn't, so I was just clearing that up.

You're mistaken, a poster did not ask "if there was anyone involved who hadn't made a profit from their books".

The poster asked "I could be way off base here but is there anyone out there not charging for their story?". And I answered, yes, Amaral has his book available free of charge online. He will not make one cent from anyone wishing to download it or read it online.

Tigerbaby

re; the veracity of Amaral's book. well theres a hint in its title; The Truth of the Lie.

This thread is becoming like Groundhog Day. Why dont people people look at the evidence ?

K-9

TheZohan wrote: »

You're mistaken, a poster did not ask "if there was anyone involved who hadn't made a profit from their books".

The poster asked "I could be way off base here but is there anyone out there not charging for their story?". And I answered, yes, Amaral has his book available free of charge online. He will not make one cent from anyone wishing to download it or read it online.

Indeed, the inference seems to be that Amaral shouldn't be charging or making a profit for it which is rather unreasonable. The publishers have to cover their costs which I'm sure are substantial and make a profit, and I don't think there is anything wrong with Amaral making some money to cover his time spent on it. People shouldn't be expecting a higher standard of him than Kate McCann.

As you say, it is available to download for free and he has no problem with that so I don't see why it is nitpicked at.

dark crystal

TheZohan wrote: »

You're mistaken, a poster did not ask "if there was anyone involved who hadn't made a profit from their books".

The poster asked "I could be way off base here but is there anyone out there not charging for their story?". And I answered, yes, Amaral has his book available free of charge online. He will not make one cent from anyone wishing to download it or read it online.

Right ok :rolleyes:

I didn't quote the exact words the poster typed, but her question was more or less the same. The actual question being is anyone out there not charging for their story?

Amaral may have a free version online, but he has also charged people to buy his book. Approximately 250,000 people, in fact.

That's the point I was making. Both the McCanns and Amaral have indeed charged for their stories.

TheZohanS

dark crystal wrote: »

Right ok :rolleyes:

I didn't quote the exact words the poster typed, but her question was more or less the same. The actual question being is anyone out there not charging for their story?

Amaral may have a free version online, but he has also charged people to buy his book. Approximately 250,000 people, in fact.

That's the point I was making. Both the McCanns and Amaral have indeed charged for their stories.

Not more or less the same, completely different actually. In future I would advise you to read the posts more carefully, and you can keep this ":rolleyes:" little dude, make sure you look after him now, feed him and read him a bedtime story.

Amaral has a version of his book that he doesn't charge for and it's freely available, so yes there is someone that doesn't charge for their story.

A poster asked a question, I answered it, you told me I was wrong and I pointed out that I was indeed correct and that you are mistaken.

If anyone wants Amarals book for free they can download it free of charge or view it online free of charge, so YES there is someone not charging for their story.

Stop trying to twist a posters question to fit in with your own agenda, it won't work.

dark crystal

TheZohan wrote: »

Not more or less the same, completely different actually. In future I would advise you to read the posts more carefully, and you can keep this ":rolleyes:" little dude, make sure you look after him now, feed him and read him a bedtime story.


Stop trying to twist a posters question to fit in with your own agenda, it won't work.

You can address me as rudely as you like, but it doesn't take away from the fact whether Amaral has a free online version or not, he has still charged for and profited from his story.

You know exactly what the poster in question was inferring, so accusing me of trying to twist the question to fit in with my agenda, really is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.