Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

mconigol

AskMyChocolate wrote: »

Freudian slip there mconigal ?

No?

dark crystal

Wolflikeme wrote: »

This.

I've read the thread over the last few days.

Open minded? Your blinkered at best, at worst, totally ignorant.

You've continuously ignored arguments. Have you actually gone and read any of the links presented in this thread? If you have I don't see how you could still have no doubt they'd nothing to do with it.

No evidence to suggest they've nothing to do with it? Well there's zero evidence of an abduction and a ton of circumstantial evidence against the McCann's.

Seriously, I find it hard to comprehend that anyone that has gone and read the McCann files etc still has NO DOUBT they'd anything to do with it then I'm lost for words!!

I'll tell you what I find hard to comprehend...there are a few posters on here, so convinced of the McCanns guilt, they can't help but throw around insults at any posters who are not.

Why can't you just agree to disagree and leave it at that? Why question someone's intelligence because they choose to believe the McCanns side of the story?

Whether you believe them or not, they ARE innocent until proven guilty.

endabob1

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Thank you:)

I have always said if I am proved wrong I'll be the first to admit it. But so far I haven't seen anything to convince of any other scenario than abduction.

I'm genuinely amazed that people believe there is evidence to support an abduction scenario. The only things pointing to that were Kates reaction, in itself suspcious because rather than think the child may have wandered off she imeditaely said she she'd been abducted & the ever-changing statements of Jane Tanner who seems desperate to suport whatever theory the Mcanns were persuing at any given time. She is probably the least credible witness in the whole case & yet the whole abduction theory hinges on her sightings - deliberate use of the plural to cover the varity in her statements ;-)

Now I have my own theories which I accept have flaws too and the timelines for potential body disposal etc.. are far from clearcut but to me there is far more actual evidence to support it than the hugely flawed abduction.

DCUlad

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

You think joking about a kid that probably came to an untimely end is funny.

Don't post in this thread again.

......yes ?

Forever Hopeful

thebullkf wrote: »

get over myself?

have you read the case files?

do you know me?

nice of you to ask , and answer your own question . i suggest you apply your first line to yourself, and try and educate yourself to available (alleged) police fil data.

Anybody who reads it,and has your attitude.....

Yes I have (no I don't know you and don't care to now!) and yet I still say get over yourself... Honest to God why on earth would they poor people go through all of this publicity! I am sickened to my stomach at the comments on this site. I guess its the nature of AH but my God, I am disturbed. Are you a parent? Have you lost a child? No one is perfect but no one, NO ONE, deserves to go through what this poor family is going through. Accusations of this sort is sick and vile. I actually will have to stop reading this because I am ashamed at my fellow country men.

cat_dog

Damn I missed the interview

dark crystal

Sound Bite wrote: »

Whether they are guilty of being involved or just guilty of negligance, their lack of remorse and continual blaming of others is shocking.

Never once have they said we f***** up here, we wish we could turn the clock back, we wish things had been different, in hindsight we were naive, etc...

Absolutely no sense of remorse, regret, guilt......

Kate did say that tonight. She said she felt guilt for years afterwards about leaving Madeleine and that if she could take Madeleine's place she would.

thebullkf

mconigol wrote: »

Apart from the missing child.

Where's the circumstantial evidence? I think you mean speculation and opinion. Nothing more.

are you now taking the pi$$ - genuinely?

you don't see the timelines,dogs,changing stories,or the fact that a joint taskforce of brit/porto police OFFICIALLY believe the McCanns were involed-->you see this as specualtion and opinion only

well lob it into me boss,and call me a tinker-

jos28

bad2dabone wrote: »

I'm sick of this type of comment to be honest, and i don't mean it personally Audrey, but come on, leaving 3 small kids on their own in an unlocked room where you can't see them is not a mistake, its neglect.

It's far more serious than a mere "mistake".

Excusing their utter failure towards their daughter by calling it a mistake is wrong in my opinion. Again I don't mean it personally towards you but I wish people would stop trying to excuse what they did.

I don't think they killed her, i'd be horrified if it turns out that she was killed by them. I don't like Gerry, or indeed Kate. But I don't take them for murderers or monsters. Having said that there's something nigglingly wrong about the case.

Couldn't agree more, I don't think they killed her but they are guilty of neglect. I never felt convinced by their version of events, I never felt overwhelming sympathy for them. I don't know why, I am normally a very sympathetic and emotional person. I watched the interview and hoped that they would sway my opinion of them They did not, something still just niggles at me. I wish they could have persuaded me but they failed. As a mother, I have taken chances but I have NEVER left my children alone while I went to a restaurant. I cannot understand their apparent lack of guilt. Parents spend their lives wracked with guilt everytime something happens to their children. I have yet to see the McCanns express that form of guilt.

Wolflikeme

mconigol wrote: »

Apart from the missing child.

Where's the circumstantial evidence? I think you mean speculation and opinion. Nothing more.

'Missing' doesn't mean she was abducted.

And yes, I mean speculation!! I got a bit worked up!

adamski8

Wolflikeme wrote: »

I don't think so.

Thanking a post because the poster has put forward a good, constructive argument = thank post.

Simply because they share the same views - No. I'd be all day clicking 'thanks' on some threads.

well i think your in the minority then, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055487840 most people here seem to thank people bacuse they are expressing their own opinion on the matter or when they find something funny.

Happyman42

Who the hell spends every living minute in contact with their children? I spent the last week letting my second child walk a portion of the way to school on his own, just like his older brother did. All parents behave differently but the ones who say, 'I would never let them out of my sight' are talking errant nonsense. Your child could disappear from the garden if the right predator was waiting and watching and taking notes ffs. Comes down to seconds if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time at the hands of evil.
Cop on people, stop disgracing yourselves. She said she 'persecuted' herself (not scolded herself, not blamed herself, PERSECUTED herself) for years after and has now (for sanity I presume) put it away. What more do you want, you saints?

mconigol

Wolflikeme wrote: »

I don't think so.

Thanking a post because the poster has put forward a good, constructive argument = thank post.

Simply because they share the same views - No. I'd be all day clicking 'thanks' on some threads.

You can thank for either really.

Not everyone will thank a good, constructive argument if it disagrees with their opinions.

Little Acorn

cat_dog wrote: »

Damn I missed the interview

Will probably be on rte player.

Wolflikeme

adamski8 wrote: »

well i think your in the minority then, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055487840 most people here seem to thank people bacuse they are expressing their own opinion on the matter or when they find something funny.

Not all threads are the same (obviously). I was speaking in the context of this thread/similar threads. I didn't think that part had to be explained.

thebullkf

DCUlad wrote: »

......yes ?

bye bye. :rolleyes:

Moronic post is moronic

Degsy

I dont know if anybody has seen that ghastly RTE series "The Dissapeared" or read the numerous books on the same subject.

The interviews with parents whose children have been abducted dont scan like those two..the parents are sad,burned-out,pessimistic,they remember vague,sad details about the last time they saw thier children and lapse into morose silence,wondering,worrying and grieving..pain etched into thier faces.

in many cases they just want to find the dead body so they can lay it to rest and get some closure on the affair.

Then there was these two..rattling off times to the nearest second,remembering conversations verbatim,numbers,facts and figures relating to the case like actors who have learned their lines before the cameras started to roll.

The whole excercise appeared to be nothing more than a media beanfeast,a series of alibis and counter alibis,explanations,motives and red-herrings..every possible base being covered in scientific,emotionless detail.

I have never seen two less convincing parents grieving for a missing and possibly murdered daughter..it was a grotesque Dog and Pony show and appeared to be little more than a press release for this book of theirs.

Having seen it and bearing in mind the truth will probably never be revealed,the best thing to do is ignore these two,refuse to "buy the book" and starve them of any further publicity.

Only they know for sure what happened to their daughter and they seem to know for sure she aint coming back..they dont deserve to make another penny from the tragedy.

major bill

Sound Bite wrote: »

Whether they are guilty of being involved or just guilty of negligance, their lack of remorse and continual blaming of others is shocking.

Never once have they said we f***** up here, we wish we could turn the clock back, we wish things had been different, in hindsight we were naive, etc...

Absolutely no sense of remorse, regret, guilt......

This..

I found it hard to understand why they left the kids on their own again after maddeline asked her mother why they didnt come when they were crying the previous night, bad parenting,selfish and at fault whether they were involved in her death or not.

adamski8

thebullkf wrote: »

bye bye. :rolleyes:

Moronic post is moronic

funny you say that after your ninja moronic post

DerekWaters

mconigol wrote: »

Apart from the missing child.

Where's the circumstantial evidence? I think you mean speculation and opinion. Nothing more.

That speculation and opinion was the conclusion of a 14month investigation by British and portugese police.

This is infuriating now, the dogs picked up cadevar and blood in the apartment and their rented car. Kates were the only finger prints found on the open window. Why wait nearly two hours before phoning the police? Why delete phone records on both their phones? Cmon this all stinks

Micky Dolenz

DCUlad wrote: »

......yes ?

Banned.

CK2010

Happyman42 wrote: »

Your child could disappear from the garden if the right predator was waiting and watching and taking notes ffs. Comes down to seconds if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time at the hands of evil.

they were drinking for alot more than a few seconds.

if they had taken their eyes off her for a few minutes i dont think anybody would hold it against them tbh. its that they deliberately left the kids alone while they drank. its not the same thing.

nobody said they spend every waking minute of their life with their child but leaving three kids under three alone???

mconigol

thebullkf wrote: »

are you now taking the pi$$ - genuinely?

you don't see the timelines,dogs,changing stories,or the fact that a joint taskforce of brit/porto police OFFICIALLY believe the McCanns were involed-->you see this as specualtion and opinion only

well lob it into me boss,and call me a tinker-

It is all speculation yes. If there was any concrete evidence they would have been charged by now.

What would you call it?

Wolflikeme wrote: »

'Missing' doesn't mean she was abducted.

And yes, I mean speculation!! I got a bit worked up!

Well there's not much other evidence for an abducted child apart from the actual child vanishing into thin air. I'm talking about in cases where a kid is just snatched.

thebullkf

Forever Hopeful wrote: »

Yes I have (no I don't know you and don't care to now!) and yet I still say get over yourself... Honest to God why on earth would they poor people go through all of this publicity! I am sickened to my stomach at the comments on this site. I guess its the nature of AH but my God, I am disturbed. Are you a parent? Have you lost a child? No one is perfect but no one, NO ONE, deserves to go through what this poor family is going through. Accusations of this sort is sick and vile. I actually will have to stop reading this because I am ashamed at my fellow country men.

you should stop reading this. read the data.

youre sickened of people accusing the mccanns,because you're ignorant of the obvious discrepencies in their story.

for the record, a few best friends of mine have lost children.
I am a parent. are you?
i have close ties to a similar story to this, (although happier:))

So emotions on my end can run high, but you shouldn't not care to know me- i'm one of the good guys, your posts display immaturity if i'm honest,and a lack of clarity regarding the subject that 'sickens' you.

no offence;)

Wolflikeme

dark crystal wrote: »

I'll tell you what I find hard to comprehend...there are a few posters on here, so convinced of the McCanns guilt, they can't help but throw around insults at any posters who are not.

Why can't you just agree to disagree and leave it at that? Why question someone's intelligence because they choose to believe the McCanns side of the story?

Whether you believe them or not, they ARE innocent until proven guilty.

Did I question their intelligence? I just said I find it hard to comprehend that someone can have absolutely no doubt' they'd nothing to do with what happened their child had they in fact read the McCann files etc.

Saying someone is displaying ignorance or is being blinkered is not exactly questioning one's intelligence.

thebullkf

adamski8 wrote: »

funny you say that after your ninja moronic post

dcu lad a friend of yours?

please . do explain

bad2dabone

Happyman42 wrote: »

Who the hell spends every living minute in contact with their children? I spent the last week letting my second child walk a portion of the way to school on his own, just like his older brother did. All parents behave differently but the ones who say, 'I would never let them out of my sight' are talking errant nonsense. Your child could disappear from the garden if the right predator was waiting and watching and taking notes ffs. Comes down to seconds if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time at the hands of evil.
Cop on people, stop disgracing yourselves. She said she 'persecuted' herself (not scolded herself, not blamed herself, PERSECUTED herself) for years after and has now (for sanity I presume) put it away. What more do you want, you saints?

Was your child 3 years old?

Big difference between letting a school age child walk part-way to school and leaving a 3 year old alone in a strange bed in a strange place.

I agree totally that you can't watch your kids all the time, and I think what you're saying about letting your children walk to school is correct and right for their development and sense of independence, but a child at 3 is still a baby and shouldn't be left alone in a strange place while you and your mates are off having drinks. End of story.

lugha

Degsy wrote: »

Only they know for sure what happened to their daughter ...

True. As it is now established beyond all doubt that they are vile murderers. :rolleyes:

Denners.ie

rok wrote: »

just hope that whoever took her is not a completely perverted sicko.

If she was taken I don't think it would have been by Mary Poppins who was going to take her for daily walks.

Wolflikeme

mconigol wrote: »

It is all speculation yes. If there was any concrete evidence they would have been charged by now.

What would you call it?



Well there's not much other evidence for an abducted child apart from the actual child vanishing into thin air. I'm talking about in cases where a kid is just snatched.

A lot of abduction cases are lot more cut and dry in comparison to this one (I'm guessing). In that, there's usually no doubt the child has been abducted and whereby the parents have never been suspected of foul play following a 14 month investigation.