Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

sham69

When have I ever said that I'm not suspicious? But being suspicious and accusing the parents of being involved are two very different things. Personally I would rather err on the side of caution. Those people are missing their child, if they had nothing to do with it, then what kind of hell must they be going through? If they were involved, then I hope they are brought to justice.

But then you'd know those are my feelings on it, if you had read the thread

All I get from reading your posts is that your opinion is right and all the other haters are wrong for having an opinion that is contrary to yours;)

ISDW

sham69 wrote: »

quite strange considering they are actual statements and not newspaper crap.
I am starting to think people don't want to know what really happened that night.
I will say again and I really do believe this, if it was a normal joe soap couple from inner city Dublin or the like the kids would have been take from them.

But why is everyone so interested in this though? Being brutally honest, it will make not a single bit of difference to my life by finding out what did happen that night, so no actually, I don't care if I ever find out what happened. What difference will it make to yours? It would be fantastic if she were found safe and well somewhere. But then it would also be fantastic if Ben Needham was found safe and well.

And I still disagree with you, having worked with social services in the UK and in Ireland. The main reason they wouldn't take the children away from them is that would be punishing the children, as has been said before, their sister is missing, why on earth would anybody want to then take them away from their family and put them with strangers? Or are they not important, do you not think that their lives have already, and will continue to be, affected by their sister? And actually, as has also been said on this thread before, they were an ordinary joe soap couple.

ISDW

sham69 wrote: »

All I get from reading your posts is that your opinion is right and all the other haters are wrong for having an opinion that is contrary to yours;)

Please tell me what my opinion is.

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

Apparently Jane Tanner is a friend of the McCanns, so I think she'd know what Gerry looked like.

I'm not buying any crap, I wasn't there, I don't know what happened, I haven't seen all the evidence, read the police files, so I'm not buying anything. You and other posters on the other hand have the McCanns guilty and convicted, even though you also haven't seen the evidence.

on the eveidence i have seen i smell a rat. you don't

With the hatred thats been put up on this thread, a single thread on an Irish forum, I can totally understand why they say nothing and control what goes out to the media.

i don't understand, neither do many others, because of the inherent flaws in their stories.

I would love to live in the perfect world that so many posters on here live in, where nobody ever does something that they shouldn't.

as would i;)

How many posters who are slating the McCanns have NEVER driven over 50kph in a built up area? What if a child ran out in front of you and you knocked them down? If you had been sticking to the law, the child would probably survive, but by breaking the law, you will probably kill that child. That, in my opinion, is just as negligent as leaving the children unattended, which is why I never do it, I couldn't live with myself if I hit a child while speeding.

Sorry ISDW, thats a ridiculous, irrelevant analogy. Its the not the same thing at all, wilfull repeated neglect of your children is not the same as an unknown accident as your analogy implies.

People do stupid things every single day, most of us get away with them.

True, but its about cause and effect- through their negligence, and refusal to co-operate they've made thermselves scapegoats in the eyes of certain sections of the public and media. Their child is gone, their otherchildren are missing a sibling, Murats life is ruined and he gets death threats to this day...

Something stinks, if you don't see that then i don't know...

sham69

But the fact that you are following this thread and replying (disagreeing with everyone elses interpretation:)) means that you do care?

It won't affect me in the slightest but it would be good to know if a crime was commited that justice is done.

Please tell me what my opinion is.

Sorry but this is getting rediculous.
I will not justify my reasoning to you.
It is clear what your opinions is, have you not read the thread

Why can't people show an interest in this without you questioning them?
If you don't like it and as you already said "don't care what happened" stay out of the thread, simple.

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

Oh right, so they left them with babysitters, and they're wrong. They don't leave them with babysitters and they're wrong.

Hmmm:rolleyes:

to paraphrase yourself : oh FFS .

and not forgetting : :rolleyes:

ISDW

thebullkf wrote: »

Sorry ISDW, thats a ridiculous, irrelevant analogy. Its the not the same thing at all, wilfull repeated neglect of your children is not the same as an unknown accident as your analogy implies.




Something stinks, if you don't see that then i don't know...

No, its not a stupid analogy at all. Accidents happen, of course they do, I am asking if people drive at more than 50kph in an area where there may be children? A child could run out and you knock them down if you are sticking within the law, that would be an accident, and hopefully the child would survive. If however you are driving faster than that, that is negligence and you could be culpable in a child's death, as the speed of the car will have an impact on the child's injuries. Why is the speed limit put down for built up areas? For the very reason that there somebody may be in the road, so by not adhering to that speed limit, the driver is aware of a potential hazard, but is disregarding it. The same as leaving children unattended in a holiday apartment. Most of the time, people get away with it, sometimes they don't, with dreadful consequences.

Again I repeat:rolleyes: I am not saying they didn't have anything to do with the disappearance, but they have never been charged with anything, what if they didn't have anything to do with it, what hell must they be going through? What if only one of them had something to do with it? What about the other parent?

maebee

Martin Brunt's (Sky News) latest blog:

http://blogs.news.sky.com/lifeofcrime/Post:51ef82f6-3b42-4ecf-9e64-67f17fe476d9#none

ISDW

sham69 wrote: »

But the fact that you are following this thread and replying (disagreeing with everyone elses interpretation:)) means that you do care?

It won't affect me in the slightest but it would be good to know if a crime was commited that justice is done.



Sorry but this is getting rediculous.
I will not justify my reasoning to you.
It is clear what your opinions is, have you not read the thread

Why can't people show an interest in this without you questioning them?
If you don't like it and as you already said "don't care what happened" stay out of the thread, simple.

Sorry, didn't realise you were a mod in here.

Do you take as much interest in every other crime thats happened? What are your theories on Ben Needham?

_feedback_

ISDW wrote: »

No, its one law. But, maybe due to their intelligence, they knew how the media worked, so got lawyers and PR people involved because they could see how everything would be twisted if they didn't - how ironic.

Washing the cuddly toy may seem strange to some people, but even though a lot of posters on here seem to think that Kate McCann is an unfeeling bitch, maybe she didn't know what on earth she was doing for a few days/weeks? Maybe it was just what she did regularly? Or, maybe if the suggestion had been made that an abductor had moved the toy, she didn't want to have contact with something that someone that took her child had touched? So, she washed them off it? Two plausible reasons why she could have washed the toy.

I just can't believe the vitriole and hatred on this thread and people 'knowing' what happened when all they've ever seen are media reports and reports that the public were allowed to see. Yet the police from two countries didn't have enough evidence to charge anybody.

Whichever poster it was that said it WAS Gerry with Madeleine in his arms, who else could it have been. Seriously, it was a family holiday resort.

How can you say in one sentence that they were so intelligent that they got advise on how to deal with the media, and then say that she didn't want something that the abductor had touched, so she washed it?

Come on now.

What intelligent person washes the possible key to the identity of the abductor away?

On your last point, very few here (if any) claim to know what happened, but have put out possible scenarios for debate, just like you have also done above.

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

I have never defended them leaving the children alone, ever. But when they did leave the children with the creche (not babysitters) posters attack them.

not attack, criticise . it shows a pattern of not minding their children properly

Actually though, I can see a difference between leaving children during the day in a creche with lots of people and other children there, and having a stranger alone in an apartment with children.

as opposed to leaving them with no one? baby monitors are extremely cheap, even video ones. coupled with a Hotel employee as babysitter it would seem like a porudent,reasonable thing to do if you wanted to go for some time alone with your partner ( though it seems they spent all day with their paretners while kids where in the creche...)

Again, before I get jumped on, I am not defending them leaving the children unattended.

nobodys jumping on you.

just incredulous is all

ISDW wrote: »

But its not illegal, what business is it of yours or anyone else's how someone spends their holiday?

so if you witnessedd adults leaving 3 kids alone in aprtment, even once.
you wouldn't report it.. cos its "not illegal, and none of your business..."

are you serious?

I've been to hotels abroad and the children's club would run from 10am in the morning until 4/5pm. I've also been to Butlins where I haven't seen the children (10/11/12 year olds) from breakfast until dinner because they've been off doing the activities.

10-12 year olds is different to 1-4 year olds. and 10-5pm is different to 10-5.30pm, and 8.30pm -11.00pm,.

sham69

ISDW wrote: »

Sorry, didn't realise you were a mod in here.

Do you take as much interest in every other crime thats happened? What are your theories on Ben Needham?

Not a mod, if I was you would be gone long ago
Please dont question my motives for taking interest in the case.
Thank you

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

I'm guessing you haven't actually read the whole thread?

BTW, no, JK Rowling did not ghost write the book, another 'mistake' that is peddled as the truth:D

how do you know for sure?... oh thats right...from links on this thread:rolleyes:

Seems you read some 'facts' but not others.

Anyhoo, I'm still waiting to hear from all the righteous posters about whether or not they've ever driven faster than 50kph in a built up area where children might be playing.

yes i have, never killed anyone. cause and effect, remember?

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

Me make assumptions? How many times? I don't know what happened, I have not assumed anything unlike a lot of other posters on here who also don't know what happened.

OK, to rephrase that was the time, is that better?

you also haven't explained your belief or answered numerous questions, put forward by numerous posters.

mydearwatson

Loving the tags on this thread! :pac:

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

And I still disagree with you, having worked with social services in the UK and in Ireland.

so have i

The main reason they wouldn't take the children away from them is that would be punishing the children,

not necessarily- if what you said were true, no kids woulkd ever be taken from their parents.

If a second child disappeared on holiday, would it be ok then?

And actually, as has also been said on this thread before, they were an ordinary joe soap couple.

no they weren't, they were middle class doctors, who chose to leave their children unattended nightly, whilst on holiday.

biscuiteater

These Liverpool mother can they not look after their children, first Jamie bolger now the McCans, sorry that was tongue in cheek.

Reason why the mcans might annoy English people. If you lived next door to a wee shop, your 3 year old was asleep in bed, you went to the shop to get milk rather than wake the child up, gone for 5 mins, child gets out of bed falls down stairs brakes arm, you bring child to doctors, doctor will report you to child services for neglect by law.

As for my self. My child was bitten by a dog, neighbour, a stand in doctor told me if I didn’t report the bite to a guard he would report me to child services, I did and was tormented until we finally sold the house and got the hell out of it. Child next to me dog at my gate

The mccans are well off they could have afforded the baby sitter service in the hotel. They sponged off well wishers for there mortgage. I don’t care if they killed there child or not I care that they were too tight fisted to mind her, I care that they expect the world to bother when they didn’t

And were they not on holiday in Ireland just before they lost maddie in another group did they not already lose a child here.

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

No, its not a stupid analogy at all. Accidents happen, of course they do, I am asking if people drive at more than 50kph in an area where there may be children? A child could run out and you knock them down if you are sticking within the law, that would be an accident, and hopefully the child would survive. If however you are driving faster than that, that is negligence and you could be culpable in a child's death, as the speed of the car will have an impact on the child's injuries. Why is the speed limit put down for built up areas? For the very reason that there somebody may be in the road, so by not adhering to that speed limit, the driver is aware of a potential hazard, but is disregarding it. The same as leaving children unattended in a holiday apartment. Most of the time, people get away with it, sometimes they don't, with dreadful consequences.

Again I repeat:rolleyes: I am not saying they didn't have anything to do with the disappearance, but they have never been charged with anything, what if they didn't have anything to do with it, what hell must they be going through? What if only one of them had something to do with it? What about the other parent?

i never said it was stupid.

you're driving analogy is irrelevant.

you know this.

thebullkf

ISDW wrote: »

Sorry, didn't realise you were a mod in here.

Do you take as much interest in every other crime thats happened? What are your theories on Ben Needham?

thats twice you've mentioned ben needham, start your own thread about ben, is the simple answer, this is a thread about Madeline, not speeding cars or ben needham.

maebee

http://www.helpfindben.co.uk/

I see they publish the reward for information leading to finding Ben.
Something the McCanns never do.

AskMyChocolate

wilson10 wrote: »

Just came across this thread, only read the first 3 or 4 pages and it's obvious that the majority of contributors don't have kids.

Even those who accept that Maddie was taken are so crass and uncaring in their clever statements that I find it really offensive.

Those who don't believe are so sure of their theories that you'd think they were there, on the scene.

Heh chief. I don't have kids. I have also posited a hypothetical theory (which I think now may be wrong). I also believe there are a number of unanswered questions. I just don't subscribe to the idea that a parent is de facto more caring than any other human being, and above suspicion, because they managed to produce a foetus. I prefer to look at evidence.

Statistically, more child abuse, in all it's forms is perpetrated by the child's guardians than anyone else, by a huge margin.

Quite frankly, I find your post, smug, self-satisfied,superior and patronising. Oh yeah, and also intellectually bankrupt.

But, your tears say more than real evidence ever could.

I have four nephews and two nieces. Will I ever care for them or know them in the way their parents do? No.

But, any time they have been left in my care (over the last 20 years), they have been well looked after. They have never been abused, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of children who have been abused by their parents in the same time-frame.

Oh yeah, I'm also an alcoholic, and never once have I gone to a pub and left those children to their own devices, while under my care. If I did my brother or sister would never speak to me again. But then, of course, maybe their (and my) opinion of responsible childcare differs from yours and the Tapas 9's.

Show Time

I must admit the level of debate here is top class and a very enjoyable read.

Thanks as well to the poster who put up the YouTube links a few pages back.

AskMyChocolate

K-9 wrote: »

Just an aside, I can never understand this "do you have kids?" line thing.

It's as if bad people just automatically change once they have children!

Another extension of it is "are you a mother?" as if mothers all act and care equally. Funnily enough it is being used against the mother in this case.

Cheers K-9. Should have read this before losing my rag two pages on.:pac:

\time-shift backwards

mconigol

maebee wrote: »

Mrs. Fenn was an 80 year old woman who lived alone, in the apartment above 5A. Maybe she should have investigated. More pertinent is that the McCanns proceeded to repeat their actions the following 2 nights, even after Madeleine said to them on May 2nd "Where were you when we were crying last night?"

It's not really more pertinent is it. No need to get so defensive. It's just an observation.

I think if I could hear children crying for over an hour in the apartment below me I might start to ask questions.

AskMyChocolate

CK2010 wrote: »

i guess you're entitled to your opinion but i know that if i heard of a couple leaving their three year old child alone and effectively responsible for twin babies, and one of them ended up in grave danger/dead id be expecting at least an investigation into neglect.

and im still of the opinion that deliberately choosing to leave your children alone while you go out with friends is not a mistake.
its not quite the same as taking your eye off one of the kids while you tend to the younger one or something like that- thats what id consider a mistake.

+1,000

If I have a fence that leads down onto a railway and it breaks, and I decide to let the kids out into the back garden that day, because the fence-fixer hasn't come, and I don't want them to be cooped up, and something happens, that's a mistake. If I decide then, that because, nothing happened that one day, there's no need to get the fence fixed, that's bad parenting. It's an accident waiting to happen.

AskMyChocolate

mconigol wrote: »

My understanding is that unless new evidence were to come to light it wouldn't be reopened. Which hasn't happened. They can only go through the same evidence so many times.

I think it's interesting that they also say:



A lot of people seem to think they can solve complex cases from the comfort of their bedroom.

Yeah, but you haven't really answered my question there chief. Are you the McCanns' lawyer? I don't see how new evidence could come to light if the authorities are no longer willing to question the McCanns, however willing the McCanns may be to subject themselves to that questioning.

Also, you've cherry-picked what you want. Have you an agenda?

The portuguese authorities (quite rightly, however cynically) don't want to waste any more money or resources looking for one child in what is , as you say, an extremely "complex case" with unwilling witnesses, when the money could be better spent looking for children whose parents and friends will do anything in their power to assist the authorities in getting the child back.

Btw, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, and how to extract aluminium from Bauxite, were all developed by interested people in "the comfort of their bedrooms";)

AskMyChocolate

mconigol wrote: »

It's pretty strange that someone would sit and listen to that for over an hour and not investigate.

Oh, so you do have an agenda. It's now the fault of the tenant upstairs that the kids were left alone? Tell me, are the Smith family just a bunch of junkies from Kilinarden?

maebee

mconigol wrote: »

I think if I could hear children crying for over an hour in the apartment below me I might start to ask questions.

And if my 3 year old asked me where was I when she & her brother were crying the night before I would ask myself some questions. I most certainly would not repeat my same childcare arrangements for the next 2 nights.

danmoz

ISDW wrote: »

OK, so they didn't then leave them alone after she was abducted? They can't do right for doing wrong can they?

Upon returning to their apartment and discovering Madeleine was gone, Kate then ran back to the restaurant, leaving the twins alone in the apartment from which their sister had just allegedly been abducted from to inform the others she was missing.

Now, if you seriously believed your daughter had been abducted, would you leave your other two kids alone in there?

And for those who can't beleieve they could do it, dispose of the body, stay in the limelight, etc, then you'd do well to look at the case of Mitchell Quy. His wife went 'missing' too and he too kept a pretence up in the media; televised appeals, newspaper interviews, interviews on This Morning, etc. The police eventually tuend their attention to him and decided to charge him for his wifes murder despite the fact there was no body. It was only after a lengthy interview he cracked and confessed to strangling her, dismembering her body and hiding her remains in various locations. Had he kept quiet he'd have probably walked as there was no evidence until he confessed and they recovered the remains.

AskMyChocolate

ISDW wrote: »

Oh FFS, thats ridiculous now. I have been on holiday many times with different foster children. They all loved to go to the holiday play schemes and creches. Much more fun than sitting next to me while I lay on a sunlounger reading a book. Holidays are for parents and children. Yes, in my case we would spend time each day together at the poolside or at the beach, but it would be me usually asking the kids to stay with me, they would want to be off with the friends they'd made playing. Why do you think holiday resorts have these facilities?

I'd have to say, being I think, a heartless neutral in this thread:pac: this is one of the things that I would whole-heartedly agree with. I remember my own summer holidays (in Brittas Bay) and getting up to mischief with like-minded kids, was half the fun. But we were a little bit older, and there were older kids/cousins who kept an eye (for cash:D). We were very lucky. Back then parenting was far more lax. You just did a head count in the bath on Saturday.:pac: But, even back then, there was no way you would leave a 3 yr-old and two babies on their own for two minutes unless they were within earshot. If it had been my parents, the worst they would have been doing would have been playing cards downstairs. And I can assure you they were far from model parents, thank God.:pac:

My mam always told me,"Don't mind when they're screeching, it's when they go quiet you know they're up to no good.":D