Madeleine McCann

callmehal · 05-07-2020 4:21pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

dark crystal wrote: »

Now, now, we can do this all day....just because you state all I want to discuss is the McCanns, does not make it thus.

The McCanns are an integral part of this sorry tale, so of course they will be discussed within the thread. If you feel they should be erased from the discussion, you post away with all and sundry theories you feel are relevant and continue being your best 'neutral' self.

I've discussed the German suspect numerous times, maybe you missed it as by your own admission, you weren't paying attention to my posts, however when someone else discussed another suspect, you put them on ignore! Let's not continue with the charade that you have some overwhelming desire to discuss other suspects, shall we?

Still no discussion on other suspects. Always bringing it back to the McCanns. You're basically proving me correct. Thanks.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 4:21pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

That's what I was discussing. Sorry if you couldn't keep up.

You have provided no proof to say that they were telling the truth about the timelines.

I mentioned nothing about timelines, so that’s a complete red herring to deflect from the actual conversation on your part.
We were discussing the McCanns covering up their neglect, of which you’ve provided no evidence to support.
That’s ok if you don’t have any, let’s just move on now.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 4:23pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

The difference between these other criminals and the McCanns is that the McCanns are Madeleines parents. Her mammy and daddy who should have been the very people to protect her from anything or anybody harmful. They didn’t do that though and I do think they should have been prosecuted. Shocking and so sad what they did.

Fine then. Other parents have been actually been convicted of committing the most horrific crimes against their children. Physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, to put it lightly.
These parents haven’t received anywhere near the amount of vitriol directed at them that the McCanns have.

cnocbui · 05-07-2020 4:24pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

The difference between these other criminals and the McCanns is that the McCanns are Madeleines parents. Her mammy and daddy who should have been the very people to protect her from anything or anybody harmful. They didn’t do that though and I do think they should have been prosecuted. Shocking and so sad what they did.

Do you believe the tens of thousands of parents of children worldwide who drown, should also be prosecuted, as well as those who die as a result of preventable accidents?

limnam · 05-07-2020 4:26pm

cnocbui wrote: »

Do you believe the tens of thousands of parents of children worldwide who drown, should also be prosecuted, as well as those who die as a result of preventable accidents?

always with these bizzare comparisons.

If you leave 3 kids under 4 alone in an unlocked apartment while you go out drinking

You should be done for neglect.

Regardless of who falls on a sking slope.

Can't believe this continually has to be explained to you.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 05-07-2020 4:30pm

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

Neglect of their children for several nights in a row.

That’s not neglect

limnam · 05-07-2020 4:31pm

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

That’s not neglect

Child neglect is a form of child abuse,[1] and is a deficit in meeting a child's basic needs, including the failure to provide adequate supervision

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:33pm

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

That’s not neglect

Yes it most certainly is.

limnam · 05-07-2020 4:34pm

13 years on and we're still covering the basics of child neglect.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 05-07-2020 4:35pm

limnam wrote: »

Child neglect is a form of child abuse,[1] and is a deficit in meeting a child's basic needs, including the failure to provide adequate supervision

Wrong. Still not neglect.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 05-07-2020 4:35pm

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

Yes it most certainly is.

I’m sorry but that’s not child neglect.

dark crystal · 05-07-2020 4:35pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Still no discussion on other suspects. Always bringing it back to the McCanns. You're basically proving me correct. Thanks.

Wasn't it you who posted some torturously long copy and paste post about the McCanns and their perceived suspicious behaviour? Hmmm.

Anyhow, you really shouldn't be so concerned about what I'm posting about or about whom I post about and should just continue your 'neutral' discussion about other suspects, but only those about whom you don't get so offended by, you block the posters who bring them up!

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:35pm

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

Do you believe the tens of thousands of parents of children worldwide who drown, should also be prosecuted, as well as those who die as a result of preventable accidents?

If these parents were out drinking while their children were in an unlocked room in a separate building then the answer is yes.

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:36pm

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

I’m sorry but that’s not child neglect.

Yes it is

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:38pm

Something Else

SusieBlue wrote: »

Fine then. Other parents have been actually been convicted of committing the most horrific crimes against their children. Physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, to put it lightly.
These parents haven’t received anywhere near the amount of vitriol directed at them that the McCanns have.

All they had to do was look after their children and none of this vitriol would have happened would it.

cnocbui · 05-07-2020 4:39pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

limnam wrote: »

always with these bizzare comparisons.

If you leave 3 kids under 4 alone in an unlocked apartment while you go out drinking

You should be done for neglect.

Regardless of who falls on a sking slope.

Can't believe this continually has to be explained to you.

You always bring up drinking as if it was more than 3 or so glasses of wine and was the principal purpose of the gathering, rather than socialising and conversation among friends and colleagues. It's the sort of knee-jerk focus I'd expect from a former alcoholic it's such an obsessive focus.

weldoninhio · 05-07-2020 4:41pm

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

It was almost two hours later. Miss Pennington can’t even be sure when she heard Kate say those words, just that she heard her say them but she’s certain they weren’t the first words from her mouth.

The person who overheard Kate screaming “they’ve taken her” was woken by a knock on her door altering her and her husband to the turn of events at 11:30pm, so approx an hour and a half after it was realised Madeleine was gone. It was then when she heard Kate state these words, “the bastards have taken her”, which aren’t that outrageous when you consider her child had been gone for nearly two hours at this point, so far from a nonsensical accusation, it was more of a realisation she came to nearly two hours later when she realised whoever had taken Madeleine, had probably taken her, and she was unlikely to return.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddie-mccann-kate-gerry-screams-10350597.amp

Also, because I don’t think it can be stated enough on this thread, a few words from the former nanny who was actually there on the night and was witness to the aftermath:

She is still constantly quizzed by people about the case who ask if “the parents did it”.
She said: “I tell them no, there’s no way at all. A, timings and B, where it was, their reactions, the whole thing. Not a chance.”

An important observation from someone who was there on the night and witness to the severe distress and panic unfolding before her.

And sorry but I will not take a lecture about knowing the basics from someone who doesn’t know Pat Kenny from Ryan Tubridy and who imagined the audience laughing away at a question that was never even asked. A completely fabricated scenario.

"I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone.

"When we were coming out we saw Kate and she was screaming: 'They've taken her, they've taken her!'

v638sg7k1a92bx · 05-07-2020 4:41pm

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

Yes it is

Wrong. Zero chances of securing a conviction for child neglect in either jurisdiction. None.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 4:42pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

I mentioned nothing about timelines, so that’s a complete red herring to deflect from the actual conversation on your part.
We were discussing the McCanns covering up their neglect, of which you’ve provided no evidence to support.
That’s ok if you don’t have any, let’s just move on now.

I was discussing the McCanns and co covering up for their neglect. You couldn't provide any proof to back up your claim that they were telling the truth.
You can run away from it if you want, I don't care.

cnocbui · 05-07-2020 4:43pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

All they had to do was look after their children and none of this vitriol would have happened would it.

You can say that about any childs accidental death - if only they had....

callmehal · 05-07-2020 4:44pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

dark crystal wrote: »

Wasn't it you who posted some torturously long copy and paste post about the McCanns and their perceived suspicious behaviour? Hmmm.

Anyhow, you really shouldn't be so concerned about what I'm posting about or about whom I post about and should just continue your 'neutral' discussion about other suspects, but only those about whom you don't get so offended by, you block the posters who bring them up!

Yes, someone asked for the evidence against them, I kindly provided it.

Discussing all suspects is neutral. But thanks for proving my point even further.

the_pen_turner · 05-07-2020 4:47pm

Something Else

from tusla .
The following are features of child neglect:

Children being left alone without adequate care and supervision
Malnourishment, lacking food, unsuitable food or erratic feeding
Non-organic failure to thrive, i.e. a child not gaining weight due not only to malnutrition but also emotional deprivation
Failure to provide adequate care for the child’s medical and developmental needs, including intellectual stimulation
Inadequate living conditions – unhygienic conditions, environmental issues, including lack of adequate heating and furniture
Lack of adequate clothing
Inattention to basic hygiene
Lack of protection and exposure to danger, including moral danger, or lack of supervision appropriate to the child’s age
Persistent failure to attend school
Abandonment or desertion

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:48pm

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

You can say that about any childs accidental death - if only they had....

Far bigger chance if they are in a roadside unlocked room on their own in a foreign country.

Immortal Starlight · 05-07-2020 4:49pm

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Wrong. Zero chances of securing a conviction for child neglect in either jurisdiction. None.

It is neglect.

retro:electro · 05-07-2020 4:51pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Welcome to ignore. Slán leat.

For such a “neutral” and “unemotional” poster you have that many people on ignore, one would be forgiven for thinking you’ve actually no interest in being impartial, and only want to engage with those whose theories you agree with.
That’s one strange dictionary definition of neutral you’re working off.

limnam · 05-07-2020 5:01pm

the_pen_turner wrote: »

from tusla .
The following are features of child neglect:

Children being left alone without adequate care and supervision
Malnourishment, lacking food, unsuitable food or erratic feeding
Non-organic failure to thrive, i.e. a child not gaining weight due not only to malnutrition but also emotional deprivation
Failure to provide adequate care for the child’s medical and developmental needs, including intellectual stimulation
Inadequate living conditions – unhygienic conditions, environmental issues, including lack of adequate heating and furniture
Lack of adequate clothing
Inattention to basic hygiene
Lack of protection and exposure to danger, including moral danger, or lack of supervision appropriate to the child’s age
Persistent failure to attend school
Abandonment or desertion

Can't believe we've doubled the amount of people who don't see anything wrong with this is in a couple of weeks

It was the one thing previously everyone could agree on.

The reckless neglect.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 5:09pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

limnam wrote: »

Can't believe we've doubled the amount of people who don't see anything wrong with this is in a couple of weeks

It was the one thing previously everyone could agree on.

The reckless neglect.

It's basic stuff. You have to worry for the kids of posters on this thread. Hopefully they don't have any, maybe that's why they are so flippant?

the_pen_turner · 05-07-2020 5:10pm

Something Else

limnam wrote: »

Can't believe we've doubled the amount of people who don't see anything wrong with this is in a couple of weeks

It was the one thing previously everyone could agree on.

The reckless neglect.

i could understand if it was a one off couple of minutes that the supervising adult niped across to colect some food or get a drink etc but hours of neglect every evening from several families

dark crystal · 05-07-2020 5:11pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Let’s play devils advocate. Okay so who verifies that Gerry was at the Tennis Court? Why did he send David Payne to check on his wife and kids (but weird but not out of the ordinary, Gerry said David was there for 30 mins but his wife Kate said 30 servings ( that’sa huge discrepancy)

He was playing tennis with the Tennis coach, Dan, Dr. julian Totman and a man called Curtis. All independent witnesses and not part of his group of friends.

From his statement: https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

They bathed the children, the deponent having left at 18H00 for a tennis game only for men, at which were: DAN, tennis instructor; JULIAN, with whom he had played tennis several times; and CURTIS, with whom he had also played.

During the afternoon of that day the rest of the group members, including the children, were at the beach, [they] having returned at 18H30, the time at which he saw DP next to the tennis court. DAVID went to visit KATE and the children and returned close to 19H00, trying to convince the deponent to continue to play tennis, to which [entreaty] he did not accede as he had already been playing for about an hour and had to go back to to his wife. Nevertheless, RUSSELL, DAVID and MATHEW stayed to play.

So, David Payne, having returned from a beach trip with his family and other members of the group - but not the McCanns - met Gerry at the tennis court at 6.30pm and then went to talk to Kate at her apartment. He then returns to the tennis court just before 7pm and plays tennis himself whilst Gerry goes back to the apartment.

Sorry, but I cannot find Kate's statement in which she says how long David Payne was at the apartment and whether there was a discrepency, however, Payne was at the tennis court, in the vision of independent witnesses, at 6.30pm and again just before 7pm.

Gerry was spotted at 9pm which would make a great alibi then the Smith sighting was later then the Tanner sighting. Could that have been Gerry after he got his alibi by having a conversation with Wilkins? There’s a timeframe if Gerrys tennis can’t be verified outside of his immediate Tapas friends. So say from 5:30-10pm that’s a solid timeframe if they had someone else involved ie: CB ( The horrible job he was quoted from his ex) Now that’s devils advocate and just a quick thought process. Not saying it’s right or wrong but a way it could happen.

The Smith sighting cannot be Gerry, as many independent witnesses put him at the Ocean Club resort at 10pm, the same time as that sighting.

I'm a bit unclear about your last suggestion..are you saying that it's possible that Gerry contacted CB, a paedophile living in a country they'd never visited before, to hand his child over to the day before (May 2nd)?

Apologies if that's not what you're saying, but if so, that goes way beyond playing devil's advocate and there's no proof whatsoever of any connection between the two.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 05-07-2020 5:17pm

the_pen_turner wrote: »

i could understand if it was a one off couple of minutes that the supervising adult niped across to colect some food or get a drink etc but hours of neglect every evening from several families

Still not neglect.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 5:18pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

I was discussing the McCanns and co covering up for their neglect. You couldn't provide any proof to back up your claim that they were telling the truth.
You can run away from it if you want, I don't care.

You are the one who made the original assertion, which you were unable to back up with supportive evidence. As the person who made the original claim, the onus was on you to provide the proof and you didn’t.
You are the one running away and trying to deflect it on me just because you have nada to offer up besides your opinion :pac:

dark crystal · 05-07-2020 5:23pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Yes, someone asked for the evidence against them, I kindly provided it.

Discussing all suspects is neutral. But thanks for proving my point even further.

Holy Gozunda, Batman! It's like pulling teeth...

I suggest you scroll past my posts if you think they're not neutral enough and we can stop this silly carry on and continue with the discussion like adults. Feel free to post as many neutral discussions as you like, I'm not stopping you!

the_pen_turner · 05-07-2020 5:26pm

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Still not neglect.

except that it is

callmehal · 05-07-2020 5:27pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

You are the one who made the original assertion, which you were unable to back up with supportive evidence. As the person who made the original claim, the onus was on you to provide the proof and you didn’t.
You are the one running away and trying to deflect it on me just because you have nada to offer up besides your opinion :pac:

If you haven't followed the case closely enough to know about the checking timeline issues then I'm not here to educate you on that. You shouldn't be making claims you can't back up if you haven't followed the case. I've provided enough links for people with getting little thanks for it. More appreciation needed.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 5:31pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

dark crystal wrote: »

Holy Gozunda, Batman! It's like pulling teeth...

I suggest you scroll past my posts if you think they're not neutral enough and we can stop this silly carry on and continue with the discussion like adults. Feel free to post as many neutral discussions as you like, I'm not stopping you!

Fair enough, another one running along. Do as you wish.

OwlsZat · 05-07-2020 6:26pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

dark crystal wrote: »

He was playing tennis with the Tennis coach, Dan, Dr. julian Totman and a man called Curtis. All independent witnesses and not part of his group of friends.

From his statement: https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

You are quoting Gerry McCann worst parent of the year from his own statements as if it's evidence. Get a grip on reality.

You'd do well to watch the new Netflix show Usual suspects. I'd love to hear your thoughts on episode 2 and the lead suspect. He goes to great lengths to explain how the murder can't be him has he has a perfect alibi. Like Gerry the statement's demonstrate his intelligence but no more.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 6:34pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

If you haven't followed the case closely enough to know about the checking timeline issues then I'm not here to educate you on that. You shouldn't be making claims you can't back up if you haven't followed the case. I've provided enough links for people with getting little thanks for it. More appreciation needed.

Why are you bringing up the timeline, you’re moving the goal posts? We weren’t discussing timelines, at no time did I question the timeline or anything to do with the tapas group?
We were discussing the McCanns doing a cover up to hide their neglect.
It seems you cannot back up your assertion that they were trying to cover up their neglect with any conclusive evidence and now you are throwing out red herrings to deflect. It’s so transparent.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 6:36pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

OwlsZat wrote: »

You are quoting Gerry McCann worst parent of the year from his own statements as if it's evidence. Get a grip on reality.

You'd do well to watch the new Netflix show Usual suspects. I'd love to hear your thoughts on episode 2 and the lead suspect. He goes to great lengths to explain how the murder can't be him has he has a perfect alibi. Like Gerry the statement's demonstrate his intelligence but no more.

You’re the one who needs to get a grip on reality, there are parents out there who torture, beat, starve, and sexually abuse their kids for years on end and you’re calling him worst parent of the year?

OwlsZat · 05-07-2020 6:40pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

SusieBlue wrote: »

You’re the one who needs to get a grip on reality, there are parents out there who torture, beat, starve, and sexually abuse their kids for years on end and you’re calling him worst parent of the year?

The McCanns were shockingly hopeless negligent parents. The title worst parent is well earned by our Gerry.

OwlsZat · 05-07-2020 6:42pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Susie, Dark and Electro. In a couple of sentences can you explain why you defend the McCanns when they were obviously negligent parents? What motivates you?

Spanish Eyes · 05-07-2020 6:47pm

I enjoy following the chit chat here, and contribute now and then, often get a rollicking from the usual suspects who cannot nor will not have an open mind! But whatever.

I think we can say what we wish, as long as we are not personally abusive to another poster. So let's all just post away and see where it goes.

The entire group were negligent drunks afais. Stick the kids in the creche all day, leave them alone at night while they got hammered. Well maybe selfish idiots is another word I would use. But there we are. The truth is that they didn't care about their precious children one bit. Left that to others, or left them on their own, and see what happened as a result? The child is gone.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 6:50pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

I hate to embarrass you like this but it has to be done so we can move on.

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Very well put. The probability is very low. It would make total sense for an abduction to have taken place. All of CB’s movements, reports of conversations he has with friends and the Re- registering his Jag point to his involvement but no forensics were found to implicate him either (so far) maybe the investigation is only raw in this guy atm. Nobody is innocent until someone is proven guilty. It would be the greatest crime by two people with previously no convictions to get away with killing their daughter. Very low possibility but there is a probability too, time lines are sketchy as they all left their phones in their apartments on the evening and Madeline was last seen at 5:30pm. So the timeline is much longer then everyone thinks. We’ll wait and see.

callmehal wrote: »

The parents were most likely trying to cover up their neglect, of course, all this managed to do is hinder the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance and made them suspects.

They need to find more on the peado. It's hard to see if a definite sighting of him at the scene or near it will be found now. Obviously, if they can find who was on the phone to them but who knows, that might have been an unrelated call.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Except they covered up nothing. From day dot, they’ve gotten dogs abuse from the press and the public for leaving the kids alone.
They never hid that, they never denied it, and they didn’t cover it up.
Nobody cares if they did or didn’t check on the kids, or how often the checks happened, because most people are rightly of the opinion that they should never have left them in the first place, regardless of checks.

So they didn’t cover up anything and they didn’t get away with anything. So they really had no motive in that regard because none of the ‘neglect’ was covered up at all.

callmehal wrote: »

Well in fairness, you hardly think they were going to get praised for leaving their kids alone while they drank away every night?

They did try to cover it up. The checks were likely to be far less than stated by the group. Especially with the fact that Madeleine was reported to be crying for a long time previously. It's really sad when you think about it.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Where did I imply I believe they should be praised?

No one cares about the checks because the checks don’t let them off the hook for anything, the point remains the same - they never should have left them alone, even if they were checking on them.
They have received dogs abuse for this stupid choice and everyone has been fully aware since the early days of 2007 of what they did, they never hid it.

So they covered up nothing and got away with nothing. Their choice to leave the children has been discussed, criticised and condemned ad nauseam, so they must have done a pretty piss poor job of their ‘cover up’ if that’s the case.

callmehal wrote: »

Yes, they did a piss poor job of their cover up. Even hindering the search for Madeleine. Leaving their kids on their own was bad enough but they compounded it! It's sickening really.

Of course, the checks are important by the way. Timelines in all this is very important. To try to cover their own backs with their lies hurt the investigation.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nah sorry, you have no evidence there that supports your theory that they covered anything up. It just isn’t washing. Unless you can support your claims with evidence you really shouldn’t make them.

callmehal wrote: »

Eh? You're claiming the tapas crew were telling the truth on the timelines. You got any proof of that?

SusieBlue wrote: »

Quote where I mentioned the tapas group or the timeline, or take back that comment.

You said that the McCanns were trying to cover up their neglect, you have provided no proof whatsoever to back this up apart from your own opinion.

callmehal wrote: »

That's what I was discussing. Sorry if you couldn't keep up.

You have provided no proof to say that they were telling the truth about the timelines.

SusieBlue wrote: »

I mentioned nothing about timelines, so that’s a complete red herring to deflect from the actual conversation on your part.
We were discussing the McCanns covering up their neglect, of which you’ve provided no evidence to support.
That’s ok if you don’t have any, let’s just move on now.

callmehal wrote: »

I was discussing the McCanns and co covering up for their neglect. You couldn't provide any proof to back up your claim that they were telling the truth.
You can run away from it if you want, I don't care.

SusieBlue wrote: »

You are the one who made the original assertion, which you were unable to back up with supportive evidence. As the person who made the original claim, the onus was on you to provide the proof and you didn’t.
You are the one running away and trying to deflect it on me just because you have nada to offer up besides your opinion :pac:

callmehal wrote: »

If you haven't followed the case closely enough to know about the checking timeline issues then I'm not here to educate you on that. You shouldn't be making claims you can't back up if you haven't followed the case. I've provided enough links for people with getting little thanks for it. More appreciation needed.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Why are you bringing up the timeline, you’re moving the goal posts? We weren’t discussing timelines, at no time did I question the timeline or anything to do with the tapas group?
We were discussing the McCanns doing a cover up to hide their neglect.
It seems you cannot back up your assertion that they were trying to cover up their neglect with any conclusive evidence and now you are throwing out red herrings to deflect. It’s so transparent.

Again, I apologise for embarrassing you but you weren't able to follow the conversation.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 6:54pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

I hate to embarrass you like this but it has to be done so we can move on.

And again, the only person talking about the timeline there was you. I was talking about the lack of evidence of covering up the neglect, which as of yet you still haven’t provided any evidence to support.
You’re like a dog with a bone, you can’t let anyone else have the last word but you’re extremely wrong here.
It’s ok.
I’m happy to move on now that we’ve cleared it up.

retro:electro · 05-07-2020 6:57pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

OwlsZat wrote: »

Susie, Dark and Electro. In a couple of sentences can you explain why you defend the McCanns when they were obviously negligent parents? What motivates you?

I’ve never defended their behaviour that night. Can you point to where I have?

I was shocked, aghast, disgusted and couldn’t believe they could ever do such a thing... 13 years ago when this case first came into the public interest. Now, yes I still can’t wrap my head around such a remarkably irresponsible decision but who does it serve to constantly twist the knife and point this out? Me? No.. The McCanns? No.. Twisted internet trolls who just want to berate them over and over... yes. I’m not going to hold onto that much hate and continually fire it in the direction of two people who have paid the ultimate price for their recklessness. I’m not going to participate in the repeated shaming of them like it’s an Olympic sport but by not doing so does not mean i defend their decision.

It’s not something I’ll ever understand, however it’s done and none of us can undo it. Do you think they’re not reminded of their loss every second of the day? I’ve zero interest in adding to their pain and guilt. Do people think if they can get everyone to say how negligent they were enough times that Madeleine will magically reappear? She won’t. It only serves to further twist the knife into two grieving parents who have to live with their reckless decision for the rest of their lives.

These days I tend to save my disgust for the opportunist dickhead who helped himself to something that was never ever his to take, doors open or not, parents there or not.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 6:57pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

OwlsZat wrote: »

Susie, Dark and Electro. In a couple of sentences can you explain why you defend the McCanns when they were obviously negligent parents? What motivates you?

Because I don’t think the fact that they left their children alone proves that they murdered their child.

It’s possible to think they were wrong for leaving the children and that they aren’t murderers at the same time.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 6:58pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

And again, the only person talking about the timeline there was you. I was talking about the lack of evidence of covering up the neglect, which as of yet you still haven’t provided any evidence to support.
You’re like a dog with a bone, you can’t let anyone else have the last word but you’re extremely wrong here.
It’s ok.
I’m happy to move on now that we’ve cleared it up.

Maybe have a read again. You can see that Banana Republic was discussing the timelines, I responded to that and then you discussed the checks in your reply to me and then I responded accordingly.

Yes, we can move along now. Again, I hope I didn't embarrass you too badly but at least it's brought an end to the confusion.

Spanish Eyes · 05-07-2020 6:59pm

retro:electro wrote: »

I’ve never defended their behaviour that night. Can you point to where I have?

I was shocked, aghast, disgusted and couldn’t believe they could ever do such a thing... 13 years ago when this case first came into the public interest. Now, yes I still can’t wrap my head around such a remarkably irresponsible decision but who does it serve to constantly twist the knife and point this out? Me? No.. The McCanns? No.. Twisted internet trolls who just want to berate them over and over... yes. I’m not going to hold onto that much hate and continually fire it in the direction of two people who have paid the ultimate price for their recklessness. I’m not going to participate in the repeated shaming of them like it’s an Olympic sport but by not doing so does not mean i defend their decision.

It’s not something I’ll ever understand, however it’s done and none of us can undo it. Do you think they’re not reminded of their loss every second of the day? I’ve zero interest in adding to their pain and guilt. Do people think if they can get everyone to say how negligent they were enough times that Madeleine will magically reappear? She won’t. It only serves to further twist the knife into two grieving parents who have to live with their reckless decision for the rest of their lives.

These days I tend to save my disgust for the opportunist dickhead who helped himself to something that was never ever his to take, doors open or not, parents there or not.

No proof of that is there, but a strong possibility just the same.

SusieBlue · 05-07-2020 6:59pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Maybe have a read again. You can see that Banana Republic was discussing the timelines, I responded to that and then you discussed the checks in your reply to me and then I responded accordingly.

Yes, we can move along now. Again, I hope I didn't embarrass you too badly but at least it's brought an end to the confusion.

Nah you’re a massive hypocrite, constantly badgering people for their alleged lack of supportive evidence when you can’t provide any yourself for your own claims.
It’s there for everyone to see. Maybe remember this the next time before you start hounding someone for posting how they perceive the case.

OwlsZat · 05-07-2020 7:06pm

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

SusieBlue wrote: »

Because I don’t think the fact that they left their children alone proves that they murdered their child.

It’s possible to think they were wrong for leaving the children and that they aren’t murderers at the same time.

Murder is a very strong word. I'd avoid using it as the parents didnt murder her you can be pretty certain of that.

You point out they left their children alone but they were also in an unlocked room. So alone and precariously vulnerable.

Alone in an unlocked room someone could have taken her. Sedated and alone she could have critically injured herself. The alone and unlocked is a requirement of whatever you think caused her death. At the very best the McCanns were partly responsible for her death.

I've heard people saying they were differnt times yet I've not heard anyone saying we used to do that or our friends family parents used to so that.... To me the idea of having tapas and wine while your children are alone in an unlocked room is totally alien. Maybe you can explain a scenario where this didnt contribute to her death.

callmehal · 05-07-2020 7:08pm

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nah you’re a massive hypocrite, constantly badgering people for their alleged lack of supportive evidence when you can’t provide any yourself for your own claims.
It’s there for everyone to see. Maybe remember this the next time before you start hounding someone for posting how they perceive the case.

You misunderstood the conversation and got things wrong. These things happen. Chin up.

Just to get things back on track. When they say the peado re-registered his vehicle, do they have any clue as to where that was done. That could be key.

Madeleine McCann

Comments