Jump to content
IGNORED

Madeleine Mccann


Super

Recommended Posts

I have no idea either, and I apologise if I've wrongly grouped you with everybody else, but everyone on here seems so cocksure that the McCann's did it, despite having zero proof to back it up. They spout "evidence" which is in fact paper tittle-tattle, and attribute it to backing up their fundamentally flawed arguments. I'm not saying it definitely wasn't them, of course there is a possibility, but the hatred for the McCann's is literally ridiculous.

 

Fair enough having a go at them for being incredibly daft and irresponsible. I completely agree with that and say it myself. But as I've said, they've paid the ultimate price, and anyone suggesting they deserve to be charged, or sent to prison, or the like, is incredibly foolish. It would solve nothing, it would prove nothing, and they have already been punished beyond belief. Yet the media-fuelled hate campaign seems to have twisted so many minds with zero reason behind it.

Yet they never seem to take any responsibility. Guessing most that understand on here what they did are parents themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the outcome, and whatever conjecture is put forth as fact on here, you can guarantee that the law enforcement communities in both Portugal And the UK have explored every single avenue of investigation available. And, dare I say it, with intellectual and investigative expertise that far exceeds the deranged rantings of a third tier English football club message board.

To use the fact that both parents are so-called "middle class" and relatively financially comfortable as a stick to beat them with is crass and ignorant. They have been proved innocent both forensically and physically.

They aren't the criminals. The people who abducted the little girl are. Whatever righteous indignation you may feel against the McAnn's for their percieved "neglect" of their daughter is repugnant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Whatever the outcome, and whatever conjecture is put forth as fact on here, you can guarantee that the law enforcement communities in both Portugal And the UK have explored every single avenue of investigation available. And, dare I say it, with intellectual and investigative expertise that far exceeds the deranged rantings of a third tier English football club message board.

To use the fact that both parents are so-called "middle class" and relatively financially comfortable as a stick to beat them with is crass and ignorant. They have been proved innocent both forensically and physically.

They aren't the criminals. The people who abducted the little girl are. Whatever righteous indignation you may feel against the McAnn's for their percieved "neglect" of their daughter is repugnant.

They haven't been cleared in a court, so your presumtion of innocence is based on insufficient evidence to prosecute, a subtle difference. I have no axe to grind with their social standing or financial situation - well, at least their finances as earned by profession - nor am I really perturbed by parents popping to a bar or restaurant, or a neighbours close to home or a holiday chalet.

They may, or may not be criminals, until someone is arrested, tried and convicted, we won't know if its them who have covered up a death, or if they, along with their daughter are victims of a horrible crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They haven't been cleared in a court, so your presumtion of innocence is based on insufficient evidence to prosecute, a subtle difference. I have no axe to grind with their social standing or financial situation - well, at least their finances as earned by profession - nor am I really perturbed by parents popping to a bar or restaurant, or a neighbours close to home or a holiday chalet.

They may, or may not be criminals, until someone is arrested, tried and convicted, we won't know if its them who have covered up a death, or if they, along with their daughter are victims of a horrible crime.

 

To be in court, you have to be charged with a crime. My so-called "presumption of innocence" is actually a fact. As for your frankly ludicrous statement about "covering up a death", thats just you reading too many whodunnits.

The more I read this forum, the more candidates there are for the coveted "Idiot of the Year" award. You'll be pleased to hear you just made the top 5. 

 

Admin?

 

:laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be in court, you have to be charged with a crime. My so-called "presumption of innocence" is actually a fact. As for your frankly ludicrous statement about "covering up a death", thats just you reading too many whodunnits.

The more I read this forum, the more candidates there are for the coveted "Idiot of the Year" award. You'll be pleased to hear you just made the top 5.

Admin?

:laugh:

Everyone in the world until convicted of a crime has presumption of innocence... Does not mean the world. Is not fall of uncharged or caught criminals...

No one knows what happened, not white knighters like you defending the McCanns or those that are suspicious... Only time will probably tale... Get upset or angry about it is just pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone in the world until convicted of a crime has presumption of innocence... Does not mean the world. Is not fall of uncharged or caught criminals...

No one knows what happened, not white knighters like you defending the McCanns or those that are suspicious... Only time will probably tale... Get upset or angry about it is just pointless.

 

Define a "white knighter" please.

 

And what's your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone in the world until convicted of a crime has presumption of innocence... Does not mean the world. Is not fall of uncharged or caught criminals...

 

 

I've read that 6 times and it STILL makes no sense whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the outcome, and whatever conjecture is put forth as fact on here, you can guarantee that the law enforcement communities in both Portugal And the UK have explored every single avenue of investigation available. And, dare I say it, with intellectual and investigative expertise that far exceeds the deranged rantings of a third tier English football club message board.

To use the fact that both parents are so-called "middle class" and relatively financially comfortable as a stick to beat them with is crass and ignorant. They have been proved innocent both forensically and physically.

They aren't the criminals. The people who abducted the little girl are. Whatever righteous indignation you may feel against the McAnn's for their percieved "neglect" of their daughter is repugnant.

The issue with them being "white, middle class" has nothing (for me anyway) to do with their guilt or lack there of, more the way that it has been kept in the public eye. If the child in question had been a tubby black boy with glasses and goody teeth from a council estate in Bradford, this thread would not exist because no one would remember the kids name and the Met wouldn't be sending officers to Portugal 6 years after the fact. That's not to say that there shouldn't still be high profile campaign to find the boy, but it just wouldn't be happening

However, I do agree that a number of people on here have gone too far with their accusations. While I find the pseudo-celebrity that they've cultivated for themselves distasteful and there are still questions hanging over them about their conduct before and after the child went missing, their presumption of innocence should be maintained- it is, after all, the centre point of our justice system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

To be in court, you have to be charged with a crime. My so-called "presumption of innocence" is actually a fact. As for your frankly ludicrous statement about "covering up a death", thats just you reading too many whodunnits.

The more I read this forum, the more candidates there are for the coveted "Idiot of the Year" award. You'll be pleased to hear you just made the top 5. 

 

Admin?

 

LOL

Unless you were there that night, you are speculating and making your mind up on reading the facts and reports that may well not be facts, in internet articles, newspaper stories and TV/ Radio shows just as others are. Just because everyone doesn't reach the same conclusion, doesn't make them idiots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you were there that night, you are speculating and making your mind up on reading the facts and reports that may well not be facts, in internet articles, newspaper stories and TV/ Radio shows just as others are. Just because everyone doesn't reach the same conclusion, doesn't make them idiots.

 

But to be fair mate, isn't presuming someone to be guilty before proven innocent in a case with so few facts available, well, a bit daft?

 

These "reports that may well not be facts" are only linked with those trying to prove them guilty based on hearsay. I haven't seen one "fact" that isn't actually fact that has been used by those ascertaining innocence (or at least ascertaining an unknown rather than guilt).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

But to be fair mate, isn't presuming someone to be guilty before proven innocent in a case with so few facts available, well, a bit daft?

These "reports that may well not be facts" are only linked with those trying to prove them guilty based on hearsay. I haven't seen one "fact" that isn't actually fact that has been used by those ascertaining innocence (or at least ascertaining an unknown rather than guilt).

I haven't pronounced them guilty, only made a point that there is a possibility that here was something other than an abduction by person(s) unknown. Someone made a point earlier in the thread about a feeling or gut instinct about the Phillpots and not having the same about the McCanns. I differ in that I felt from day one, there was someting about Kate McCanns manner and body language, that said there was more to it. Maybe I've misread it and she comes across as that for another reason, but no matter which side of the fence you sit on this one, none of us are doing anything but speculating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't pronounced them guilty, only made a point that there is a possibility that here was something other than an abduction by person(s) unknown. Someone made a point earlier in the thread about a feeling or gut instinct about the Phillpots and not having the same about the McCanns. I differ in that I felt from day one, there was someting about Kate McCanns manner and body language, that said there was more to it. Maybe I've misread it and she comes across as that for another reason, but no matter which side of the fence you sit on this one, none of us are doing anything but speculating.

 

But you did suggest that the only reason they haven't been found guilty was due to insufficient evidence, implying that they are in fact guilty. Well that's what I took from it, once again, if that was wrong, I apologise. Fair enough having a gut feeling, that's completely understandable, but it's the ones that portray it as fact, then back it up with "evidence" from dodgy websites with no substance that irritate me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

But you did suggest that the only reason they haven't been found guilty was due to insufficient evidence, implying that they are in fact guilty. Well that's what I took from it, once again, if that was wrong, I apologise. Fair enough having a gut feeling, that's completely understandable, but it's the ones that portray it as fact, then back it up with "evidence" from dodgy websites with no substance that irritate me.

I was responding to Ooops post, where he/she claimed

They have been proved innocent both forensically and physically.

which to the best of my knowledge, they haven't. It was the use of the word proved, which is usually reserved for court verdicts that I was responding to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I just find your sweeping generalisation to the presumption of guilt and the morality of judgements amusing.

 

Feel free to elaborate, seeing as I'm in the minority in actually NOT making sweeping generalisations to the presumption of guilt.

 

I was responding to Ooops post, where he/she claimed which to the best of my knowledge, they haven't. It was the use of the word proved, which is usually reserved for court verdicts that I was responding to.

 

Ah fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal theory - and it's just a theory like all the others - is that Madeline wandered in the night, as toddlers do, probably looking for mummy and daddy.

 

The other side of those appartments is the fast coastal highway. A drunk driver or someone else who shouldn't have been driving hit the little girl, panicked and disposed of the body in the sea. It's the Atlantic Ocean there, with the right currents, the body would never be found.

 

it may well be that had they found Madeline dead, the McCann's would've been charged. As it is, I incline to the view that they are suffering a torment far worse than anything a court could order.

 

Oh, and I don't think they did it either. Both are intelligent, if they had a guilty secret to hide, they'd not spend years trecking around the globe, making appeals and pressuring the British police to get involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So her parents didn't kill her and dispose of her in some satanic ritual?

 

That's good to know.

 

Does anyone honestly think that the cynicism surrounding this case has not been exhaustively investigated by the Police forces involved? DNA evidence, motive, psychological profiling, CCTV footage?

 

If the McCanns were at fault, they would have been arrested, tried and banged away 5 years ago. All this baseless conjecture is Daily Mail-esque, third hand speculation. These people aren't the middle class version of Shannon Matthew's parents, who actively participated in their own daughters abduction, they are just two people trying to find their baby girl.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feel free to elaborate, seeing as I'm in the minority in actually NOT making sweeping generalisations to the presumption of guilt.

 

 

Ah fair enough.

 

Legally, one has to be in a court of law before proof of guilt is required. As of today, the McCanns have not been summoned to court to aswer any charges for any alleged crime. 

 

So, until they are tried and convicted of a crime, they remain innocent of any allegations or supposition. 

 

I'm no lawyer, but surely you grasp the ******* concept?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legally, one has to be in a court of law before proof of guilt is required. As of today, the McCanns have not been summoned to court to aswer any charges for any alleged crime. 

 

So, until they are tried and convicted of a crime, they remain innocent of any allegations or supposition. 

 

I'm no lawyer, but surely you grasp the ******* concept?

 

Erm... you realise I've been agreeing with you and arguing the same point as you this whole time right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, spouting what could potentially be complete rubbish as fact. Were you involved in the Portuguese case? I think you'll find the McCann's were actually named and treated as suspects for a significant amount of time. Were you partial to the information as to why they were discounted or are you in fact just making a very uneducated guess?

Other than that, I agree with everything else you wrote.

Red Goblin taking rumour and gossip as fact? Never. That's not a regular occurrence.

If he can find any strange or dodgy website to back him up that is good enough as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So her parents didn't kill her and dispose of her in some satanic ritual?

 

That's good to know.

 

Does anyone honestly think that the cynicism surrounding this case has not been exhaustively investigated by the Police forces involved? DNA evidence, motive, psychological profiling, CCTV footage?

 

If the McCanns were at fault, they would have been arrested, tried and banged away 5 years ago. All this baseless conjecture is Daily Mail-esque, third hand speculation. These people aren't the middle class version of Shannon Matthew's parents, who actively participated in their own daughters abduction, they are just two people trying to find their baby girl.  

Of course they were at fault they were her parents and left her alone in a hotel in another counrty while they went out drinking, they are the only people to blame until an abduction is proven and somebody is in custady

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...