# Madeleine McCann Madness



## billy_bob (May 24, 2007)

I just heard someone outside my window shouting, presumably after a child, "Maddy! Maddy, come here!"

No, I didn't look.

But it occurred to me to look.


----------



## Ranbay (May 24, 2007)

someone in my other halfs work has made ribbons and is selling them to rasie money.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 24, 2007)

Is this still going on? Haven't seen much in the news lately other than her dad coming home and something about a Europe wide search.


----------



## Dubversion (May 24, 2007)

Has Proust been arrested yet?





(really fucking tenuous gag i'm regretting making before i even press 'post')


----------



## _angel_ (May 24, 2007)

Oh shit what have I done now?


----------



## zenie (May 24, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> someone in my other halfs work has made ribbons and is selling them to rasie money.



Raise money for what?


----------



## Ranbay (May 24, 2007)

for the fund to find her ?

or to keep the parents in tapas and babysitters for anothe few months i guess ?


----------



## Crispy (May 24, 2007)

O shit, sorry, i had her. soz. lol


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> Has Proust been arrested yet?


Feeling smug cos i got it   (without Googling!)


----------



## Nemo (May 24, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> Has Proust been arrested yet?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Okay I'll bite. ¿Qué?


----------



## rollinder (May 24, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> Has Proust been arrested yet?
> 
> 
> (really fucking tenuous gag i'm regretting making before i even press 'post')


----------



## detective-boy (May 24, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> or to keep the parents in ... babysitters for anothe few months i guess ?


Well, it'd be an improvement ...

 ... some would say ...


----------



## Schmetterling (May 24, 2007)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Feeling smug cos i got it   (without Googling!)


Feeling stupid because I don't!


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Okay I'll bite. ¿Qué?


The Madeline - a biscuit - features heavily in Proust's A La Recherche du Temps Perdu (sp?).  Haven't read it, but its something to do with triggering memories

E2a: I'm gonna regret this, somebody who actually knows about it is gonna come along in a minute..


----------



## Nemo (May 24, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Well, it'd be an improvement ...
> 
> ... some would say ...


Tut tut! You're not allowed to say that. Anyone who voices any criticism over this affair of anyone other than the pervs-they-don't-have-any-evidence-against-but-everyone-knows-it-was-him-what-done-it-just-look-at-'ims is clearly in collusion with an international paedo conspiracy to kidnap all the children in the world and use them to sate their vile appetites (or something).


----------



## zenie (May 24, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> for the fund to find her ?
> 
> or to keep the parents in tapas and babysitters for anothe few months i guess ?




I see

Glad you've cleared that up, cheers Bob


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 24, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Well, it'd be an improvement ...
> 
> ... some would say ...



Nicely put.


----------



## dlx1 (May 24, 2007)

Still don't get the frezzy about this it one child. Not to sound hartless it sad but 
children go missing evey day!

And if they didn't leve the child on it oun in the 1st place, this would have not happend.


----------



## Nemo (May 24, 2007)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> The Madeline - a biscuit - features heavily in Proust's A La Recherche du Temps Perdu (sp?).  Haven't read it, but its something to do with triggering memories
> 
> E2a: I'm gonna regret this, somebody who actually knows about it is gonna come along in a minute..


Ah, that explains why I didn't get it. Haven't read _A la Recherche du Temps Perdu_.


----------



## billy_bob (May 24, 2007)

Crispy said:
			
		

> O shit, sorry, i had her. soz. lol



Fucking bad taste.






















But lol


----------



## _angel_ (May 24, 2007)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> The Madeline - a biscuit - features heavily in Proust's A La Recherche du Temps Perdu (sp?).  Haven't read it, but its something to do with triggering memories
> 
> E2a: I'm gonna regret this, somebody who actually knows about it is gonna come along in a minute..



I thought I was a cake, not a biscuit.


----------



## Kanda (May 24, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> or to keep the parents in tapas and babysitters for anothe few months i guess ?



Apparently they don't bother with babysitters


----------



## Sasaferrato (May 24, 2007)

Personally, I'm waiting for the parents to be charged with abandonment of the child.

What sort of half wit goes off and leaves a child of that age alone?


----------



## _angel_ (May 24, 2007)

Sasaferrato said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm waiting for the parents to be charged with abandonment of the child.
> 
> What sort of half wit goes off and leaves a child of that age alone?



I wouldn't have left em but I don't see the point in bringing charges myself.

course if it had been me a single mum on a council estate going to the pub and leaving my kids I'd probably have had them taken into care by now.


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I thought I was a cake, not a biscuit.


Remembrance of Jammy Dodgers Past


----------



## longdog (May 24, 2007)




----------



## xenon (May 24, 2007)

The missing Madeleine


----------



## Mogden (May 24, 2007)

Good to see these missing girls have been splashed all over the news too. I mean Birmingham is a bit closer to home and we're in a better position to find them.

Oh wait...


----------



## jiggajagga (May 24, 2007)

Mogden said:
			
		

> Good to see these missing girls have been splashed all over the news too. I mean Birmingham is a bit closer to home and we're in a better position to find them.
> 
> Oh wait...



Exactly! Spot on! Where is the 2.5 mill each for these girls then?
Are they not worth as much as Maddy? Why not?


----------



## _angel_ (May 24, 2007)

jiggajagga said:
			
		

> Exactly! Spot on! Where is the 2.5 mill each for these girls then?
> Are they not worth as much as Maddy? Why not?



They didn't have such nice names though.


But also



> Two girls who went missing from their home in Birmingham have been found safe and well.


----------



## Tank Girl (May 24, 2007)

and also



> About 40 officers searched the area after Tia left a note saying they were going to the shops in the city centre.


----------



## Poot (May 24, 2007)

Sasaferrato said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm waiting for the parents to be charged with abandonment of the child.
> 
> What sort of half wit goes off and leaves a child of that age alone?



Yes, that would help. I'm sure they don't realise the consequences of their actions already.


----------



## sorter (May 24, 2007)

i cannot believe some of you see fit to slag these people off while thier child is still missing. 

for crying out loud, yes most of us would not have done what they did, BUT the child is still missing, and it's probably ripping thier hearts to pieces. have a heart for god's sake. don't make nasty piss taking comments about them, it doesn't make you look good. honest.


----------



## renegadechicken (May 24, 2007)

sorry, but i didnt know her, she aint a relative of mine, the parents should not have left her alone, i do hope she is alive but the chances of that are slim......and can i ask why should i give a shit?


----------



## renegadechicken (May 24, 2007)

oh by the way...i aint a parent but i do know that if i was i would not have left my 3 yr old and two other 2yr olds alone while i went out for a fun evening.
so dont even try that one!


----------



## tendril (May 24, 2007)

zenie said:
			
		

> Raise money for what?




to buy them another one, silly


----------



## 1927 (May 24, 2007)

Two things are going thru my mind.

At which point do the parents give up hope and decide to come home, and how the hell do you make a decisiojn like that?

Is it not possible that the incredible media interest in this case, well out of proportion when other kids go missing all the time as others have pointed out, make it increasingly likely that whoever took her is going to, or already have killed her, as it will be impossible to bring her back now. Like stealing the crown jewels you'd end up ditching them as you couldn't possible sell them on as they would be too well known.


----------



## Ranbay (May 24, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i cannot believe some of you see fit to slag these people off while thier child is still missing.
> 
> for crying out loud, yes most of us would not have done what they did, BUT the child is still missing, and it's probably ripping thier hearts to pieces. have a heart for god's sake. don't make nasty piss taking comments about them, it doesn't make you look good. honest.




i cannot believe you cannot believe the things people say here.....


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 24, 2007)

A pub here has suddenly put lots of yellow ribbons up and is holding a fancy dress fundraiser...." help find maddy"

Business has been slow for months....cynical eh?


----------



## Nemo (May 24, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> A pub here has suddenly put lots of yellow ribbons up and is holding a fancy dress fundraiser...." help find maddy"
> 
> Business has been slow for months....cynical eh?


Do they think she's hiding in the beer cellar or something?


----------



## stavros (May 24, 2007)

Are the Birmingham girls black? That could have a major effect on tabloid reporting, and smiling blonde white girls sell a lot more papers (see Sarah Payne and the Soham girls, although Damilola Taylor is an anomaly in that case).


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 24, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I thought I was a cake, not a biscuit.



Its more of a sponge.


----------



## Part 2 (May 24, 2007)

Search over...here's loads of em.  







Now where's that reward?


----------



## heartof gold (May 25, 2007)

thedyslexic1 said:
			
		

> Still don't get the frezzy about this it one child. Not to sound hartless it sad but
> children go missing evey day!
> 
> And if they didn't leve the child on it oun in the 1st place, this would have not happend.



whose to say it wouldnt have happened, or if not her than another child.


----------



## London_Calling (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i cannot believe some of you see fit to slag these people off while thier child is still missing.
> 
> for crying out loud, yes most of us would not have done what they did, BUT the child is still missing, and it's probably ripping thier hearts to pieces. have a heart for god's sake. don't make nasty piss taking comments about them, it doesn't make you look good. honest.


Some people are so determined to be 'cool' and alternative that they don't see the diff between - on the one hand -  baulking at the media presentation of the story and how many of the general public are consumed by the media presentation, and - on the other -  the personal tragedy of losing your child.

Actually,  those people just ain 't too bright in my experience., so I'd try not to think about it as they surely aren't.


----------



## Kanda (May 25, 2007)

Some also might think there might be more encompassing, pressing issues that should be occupying the press.

1 child missing, thousands getting killed all over the world every day etc. It's typical media numbing and happens all the time 

*devils advocate*


----------



## selamlar (May 25, 2007)

These aren't madeleines.






These are madeleines.






Getting peoples hopes up like that, saying you had found them when in fact it was an entirely different cake based snack food.  I hope you are ashamed!


----------



## wishface (May 25, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Do they think she's hiding in the beer cellar or something?


I suppose at this point, if she is still alive, she could well be anywhere.

Even weston super mare (at least presuming the mindset of the person who posted the 'help find' poster i saw t'other day.

Abducting a child to weston super mare is a special kind of evil.


----------



## wishface (May 25, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> Some also might think there might be more encompassing, pressing issues that should be occupying the press.
> 
> 1 child missing, thousands getting killed all over the world every day etc. It's typical media numbing and happens all the time
> 
> *devils advocate*


because little girl from nice middle england family sells more papers than another days carnage in iraq or the standards of food in tescoes. 

i don't think it qualifies as news really even though it's a terrible thing that's happened.

I do wonder how this particular incident of a child gone missing has become such a big story. Especially in lieu of an outcome (unlike the Bulger case).


----------



## Kanda (May 25, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Abducting a child to weston super mare is a special kind of evil.



I for one hope this isn't the case, that would be awful


----------



## Part 2 (May 25, 2007)

selamlar said:
			
		

> These aren't madeleines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Apologies, I should've realised using a Google search would be useless. 

(Goes off to make dowsing rods from wire coat hangers)


----------



## likesfish (May 25, 2007)

isn't that rehab central now?
 somebody figured out rehabs make more money than rest homes so out with the old gimmers in with the junkies.
 though weston on a cold jan afternoon might make the hell of drug addition attractive


----------



## J77 (May 25, 2007)

Who needs a World Cup summer when you've got Maddy.


----------



## rollinder (May 25, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Abducting a child to weston super mare is a special kind of evil.







			
				Kanda said:
			
		

> I for one hope this isn't the case, that would be awful



Can I sue my mother/guardians for abuse?


----------



## Belushi (May 25, 2007)

Theres a big billboard askign peple to keep an eye out for Madeleine at the top of Brixton Hill


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i cannot believe some of you see fit to slag these people off while thier child is still missing.
> 
> for crying out loud, yes most of us would not have done what they did, BUT the child is still missing, and it's probably ripping thier hearts to pieces. have a heart for god's sake. don't make nasty piss taking comments about them, it doesn't make you look good. honest.



just as well they're too busy squeezing the media to read urban then, yes?


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

i just hope thier detractors don't have kids of thier own, otherwise that would be sad. 

i personally would want any sensationalist media coverage if it helped in ANY small way to get my girl back.


----------



## Kanda (May 25, 2007)

How the fuck is a big billboard at the top of Brixton Hill gonna help get Maddy back?


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

exactly, who gives a fuck about a board where the minority vent their frustration with the fucking grief factory which has gone into overdrive...

(overheard)

Small child in costume shop yesterday wandered around to the other side of the stacks where I was trying to find the right glasses for a party. Five minutes or so later, mother wanders round visibly anguished, grabs child by the hand and says

"it's not safe any more, bad people might take you - don't leave my sight"

What you only just realised the amazingly long odds on your child being snatched and have only now begun to keep an eye on your child  

"It's not safe any more" It's not a fucking warzone


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> How the fuck is a big billboard at the top of Brixton Hill gonna help get Maddy back?



Maybe they can see it in Portugal. If it's that big. And on a hill.


----------



## Belushi (May 25, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> How the fuck is a big billboard at the top of Brixton Hill gonna help get Maddy back?



I dont know, but Im going to call the police every time I see a little white girl from now on.


----------



## DeadManWalking (May 25, 2007)

Balbi said:
			
		

> (overheard)
> 
> Small child in costume shop yesterday wandered around to the other side of the stacks where I was trying to find the right glasses for a party. Five minutes or so later, mother wanders round visibly anguished, grabs child by the hand and says
> 
> ...



I heard something similar on a radio phone in about parking restrictions in Camden, a woman phoned in to say: "it wasn't safe for kids to walk to school what with the madeiline case and all"

Isn't her photo being projected on Marble arch today (along with someother kids) as it's national missing childrens day?


----------



## DeadManWalking (May 25, 2007)

Opps


----------



## heartof gold (May 25, 2007)

those who see fit to mock what are you going to do or say if it happens to you/your child or a family member?


----------



## Ranbay (May 25, 2007)

hire a baby sitter maybe... or just avoid Portugal all together.... It's a tuffy...


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

i went to the pub the other day there was a really bad homemade poster of her with the slogan "LOOK INTO MY EYES" printed on it, freaky, what do you suppose they meant?


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> those who see fit to mock what are you going to do or say if it happens to you/your child or a family member?


eh?


----------



## T & P (May 25, 2007)

I draw the fucking line at this myself:

Madeleine's face projected on Marble Arch


I mean, what the fuck?????


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> I draw the fucking line at this myself:
> 
> Madeleine's face projected on Marble Arch
> 
> ...


i don't know, i love a bit of mass hysteria. i like the hangover afterwards too, when the whole thing seems like a crazy dream.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

like i said before, if it was my daughter, and the media went bonkers, and it helped in a tiny way secure her return, i wouldn't be moaning. if it was your child, neither would you. 

if you don't like it, turn the page, look the other way, press the off button etc.


----------



## T & P (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> i don't know, i love a bit of mass hysteria. i like the hangover afterwards too, when the whole thing seems like a crazy dream.


 I don't enjoy the hysteria too much myself I must say. I guess now thanks to the interweb one can at least express his thoughts without risk of being demonised.

Back in 1997 When Saint Diana died most people (me included) were not online yet and I had to keep quiet about my contempt for the sordid spectacle so not to upset the 'mourners' and their public displays of sorrow. I knew there must have been like minded people elsewhere but it was damned difficult to find them on the day of the funeral.


----------



## T & P (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> like i said before, if it was my daughter, and the media went bonkers, and it helped in a tiny way secure her return, i wouldn't be moaning. if it was your child, neither would you.
> 
> if you don't like it, turn the page, look the other way, press the off button etc.


 I don't blame the parents for trying. But I blame the media and celebrities for being ridiculous and so over the top it beggars belief.

And if I was the parent of a previously dissapeared child who didn't enjoy such public exposure and support I'd be well pissed off as well.


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> I don't blame the parents for trying. But I blame the media and celebrities for being ridiculous and so over the top it beggars belief.
> 
> And if I was the parent of a previously dissapeared child who didn't enjoy such public exposure and support I'd be well pissed off as well.


exactly. the media are making a total killing out of this, and they are not doing it out of kindness. it will not help find her one bit, in fact it will reduce any chance she will be found alive, it's entirely repellent on every level if you think about it. i don't really care though.


----------



## chio (May 25, 2007)

I'm told commercial radio stations across the UK are either about to play or have already played something called "the song for Madeleine" on their breakfast shows. Of course, people all over Portugal tune in daily to hear Key 103 or Capital FM's morning slots. This'll be heard by whoever's got her and he'll be moved enough to hand her back. It is in no way a cynical attempt by the failing commercial radio industry to boost publicity for their rubbish stations...


----------



## Nemo (May 25, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> those who see fit to mock what are you going to do or say if it happens to you/your child or a family member?


If it happened to me I'd be incandescent at how OTT it's all got and how a crowd of strangers was trying to muscle in on my personal heartache to sell papers and/or raise their own profiles. Just a thought like.


----------



## T & P (May 25, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> If it happened to me I'd be incandescent at how OTT it's all got and how a crowd of strangers was trying to muscle in on my personal heartache to sell papers and/or raise their own profiles. Just a thought like.


 Quite. I noticed how the Sun and News of the World couldn't help themselves and had _just_ to put their masterfont logo on top of the 'Find Madeleine' posters they had so generously printed for people to display.


----------



## London_Calling (May 25, 2007)

DeadManWalking said:
			
		

> a woman phoned in to say: "it wasn't safe for kids to walk to school what with the madeiline case and all"


subtext: "But Darling, I  know we're having trouble making ends meet but I couldn't possibly get a job or even give up the fashionable 4x4, I mean someone has to take the kids to school and pick them up safely. Those poor parents . . . . no, I don't think I could give up the gym membership either, what could I do with all my time ? Those poor, poor parents . . . "


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

i can assure you nemo, you wouldn't.

you would literally do anything for your kids, and wouldn't care who muscled in, as long as it brought them back.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> subtext: "But Darling, I  know we're having trouble making ends meet but I couldn't possibly get a job or even give up the fashionable 4x4, I mean someone has to take the kids to school and pick them up safely. Those poor parents . . . . no, I don't think I could give up the gym membership either, what could I do with all my time ? Those poor, poor parents . . . "



eh?


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i can assure you nemo, you wouldn't.
> 
> you would literally do anything for your kids, and wouldn't care who muscled in, as long as it brought them back.


what about if they're doing more harm than good? the papers have pretty much guaranteed she is not coming back, ever.


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> if you don't like it, turn the page, look the other way, press the off button etc.









They're all around us man! What the hell?


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> eh?


yeah i didn't really follow that!


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> i don't know, i love a bit of mass hysteria. i like the hangover afterwards too, when the whole thing seems like a crazy dream.



Is this as part of a campaign where lots of children are shown? If it is I see nothing wrong with it. I'd rather large public buildings be used for that rather than projections of Gail porters naked form if it brings a child home- no matter who that child is.

If its just her then like others have said WTF??


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

I'm waiting for the day someone points out that projecting images of small children onto public spaces is an open invitation for paedophiles to gather and start tearing heads off ickle cutey kittens and such


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

One day some cunt's going to ban the showing of the images of missing children 'Because then paedophiles will know what they look like'


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 25, 2007)

bald Gale Porter or FHM Gale Porter? Eithers preferable..


----------



## Nemo (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i can assure you nemo, you wouldn't.
> 
> you would literally do anything for your kids, and wouldn't care who muscled in, as long as it brought them back.


I wouldn't think that turning my child into a latter-day Princess Diana would do any good to me or the child.


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> I wouldn't think that turning my child into a latter-day Princess Diana would do any good to me or the child.



It's genetic engineering gawwwn...etc etc etc etc


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

come on nemo, sort it out. 

when you have kids, assuming you haven't already, and one of them is missing, snatched from thier bed, and they are 3 years old, the last thing on your mind is people being put out by the campaign to get her back.

all they want is one thing, and that is to get her back, and if that means your offended by the scum having a campaign, i'm sure they won't mind.


----------



## Nemo (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> come on nemo, sort it out.
> 
> when you have kids, assuming you haven't already, and one of them is missing, snatched from thier bed, and they are 3 years old, the last thing on your mind is people being put out by the campaign to get her back.
> 
> all they want is one thing, and that is to get her back, and if that means your offended by the scum having a campaign, i'm sure they won't mind.


I don't blame the parents actually. I blame all the people who've jumped on the bandwagon and taken some kind of collective ownership of the grief, worry, and outrage generated by this case. This is a three-ring media circus and it's got, as in the case of Princess Diana, that if you dare to voice any disapproval at all, you get accused of pretty much anything the tabloids can devise to blacken the motives of people they're trying to traduce.


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> all they want is one thing, and that is to get her back, and if that means your offended by the scum having a campaign, i'm sure they won't mind.


so what's yr point then? i don't think anyone was suggesting writing a letter of complaint to the parents.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

i suppose my point is this case is different in a way because this child is still missing. the holly/jessica thing and the diana thing was some sort of national grief thingy, whereas as we speak and write, a child is missing, and needs to be found. newspapers are always about circulation, and always have been, so knocking them for it isn't very original. if one article printed in one paper in some way secures an answer to her fate, then i think it'll be worth it.


----------



## Nemo (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i suppose my point is this case is different in a way because this child is still missing. the holly/jessica thing and the diana thing was some sort of national grief thingy, whereas as we speak and write, a child is missing, and needs to be found. newspapers are always about circulation, and always have been, so knocking them for it isn't very original. if one article printed in one paper in some way secures an answer to her fate, then i think it'll be worth it.


I hope you're right, I really do. Sadly I don't think the chances are very high considering how long it's been.


----------



## jæd (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> if one article printed in one paper in some way secures an answer to her fate, then i think it'll be worth it.



What, even if she's dead...?


----------



## jæd (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> i suppose my point is this case is different in a way because this child is still missing. the holly/jessica thing and the diana thing was some sort of national grief thingy, whereas as we speak and write, a child is missing, and needs to be found. newspapers are always about circulation, and always have been, so knocking them for it isn't very original. if one article printed in one paper in some way secures an answer to her fate, then i think it'll be worth it.



Oh... And do you know which country the girl went missing in, and its geographic relation to the UK...?


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> What, even if she's dead...?



Televised funeral me up


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 25, 2007)

yeah but we've got yellow ribbons. if that doesn't bring the kid back then nothing will, eh.


its got to the point now where i'm just getting well and truly sick of hearing about it tbh.

a 12 year old little girl in Gorton was shot in the head by her own brother and got 5 mins on the local news. she was only a poor black kid from a council estate though so it doesn't matter does it eh 


the story of a cute little middle class blonde kid gone missing sells papers and boosts ratings, thats the bottom line as far as the media are concerned. of course they don't give a fuck.

i give it 6 months before the family granny/aunt/hairdresser tries to sell a book about it as well.

i know i'm a cynic but this whole 'FIND MADDIE!' thing really leaves a sour taste in my mouth. its horrific that an innocent child has gone missing like this, but it happens every single day, i don't see why this one child is more important than any other. we're supposed to live in a democracy where everyone gets a fair chance, yet its not the case is it.


----------



## jæd (May 25, 2007)

Balbi said:
			
		

> Televised funeral me up



Fuck... You can just see it now... A funeral parade through London to St Pauls, and then a two minutes silence across the entire country.

I wonder if we can get the day off...? 

Oh, and probably some conspiraloons claiming she was the bastard offspring of Dodi + Diana who had to be eliminated before she got older...


----------



## ICB (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> i went to the pub the other day there was a really bad homemade poster of her with the slogan "LOOK INTO MY EYES" printed on it, freaky, what do you suppose they meant?



I saw the same thing printed in one of the broadsheets.

My instant response was "the eyes, the eyes, not around the eyes"


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 25, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Oh, and probably some conspiraloons claiming she was the bastard offspring of Dodi + Diana who had to be eliminated before she got older...




Nah, she's too fair for that.  Could be James Hewitt's though


----------



## beeboo (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> what about if they're doing more harm than good? the papers have pretty much guaranteed she is not coming back, ever.



I'm fairly confident the massive media hype surrounding this would ensure than any child snatching paedo-psycho-pied-piper completely panicked, killed the girl (if they hadn't already), destroyed any trace of evidence and probably topped themselves for good measure.

Even in the increasingly slim likelihood she was snatched by traffickers/childless couple etc etc, they'll have completely gone to ground due to this publicity and the chances of ANYONE 'finding' her wandering down the street hand-in-hand with her captors are very very very unlikely.


----------



## wishface (May 25, 2007)

why are the parents still in Portugal? Are they going around conducting house to house searches or something?

Would it not have been better for those who have organised this fund to instead use the money to create a proper charitable organisation dedicated to helping ALL victims of missing children.

Surely the Macanns should come home and at least try and let their other kids get on with their lives. I do not think it's wise or helpful to fund them continuing to remain in Portugal.

This whole situation surrounding the incident is out of control.


----------



## rutabowa (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> newspapers are always about circulation, and always have been, so knocking them for it isn't very original.


don't you think it is worth knocking them when they reach such depraved, cynical depths of manipulation? yes papers have to make money, but i believe they also have at least some kind of moral duty as well, is that to crazily idealistic?


----------



## wishface (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> come on nemo, sort it out.
> 
> when you have kids, assuming you haven't already, and one of them is missing, snatched from thier bed, and they are 3 years old, the last thing on your mind is people being put out by the campaign to get her back.
> 
> all they want is one thing, and that is to get her back, and if that means your offended by the scum having a campaign, i'm sure they won't mind.


what the family want is quite another thing from the media and the masses.


----------



## Kanda (May 25, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Theres a big billboard askign peple to keep an eye out for Madeleine at the top of Brixton Hill



It's not the electric billboard at the junction is it?


----------



## J77 (May 25, 2007)

Has Bono added his two euro cents worth, yet?

I'm going intercontinental tomorrow, I'll be sure to keep an eye out.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 25, 2007)

J77 said:
			
		

> Has Bono added his two euro cents worth, yet?




nah hes too busy wasing $82m dollars boosting his own profile to give a fuck.


----------



## detective-boy (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> i went to the pub the other day there was a really bad homemade poster of her with the slogan "LOOK INTO MY EYES" printed on it, freaky, what do you suppose they meant?


"It's a paedo's charter"  ((c) The Sun)


----------



## detective-boy (May 25, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> I knew there must have been like minded people elsewhere but it was damned difficult to find them on the day of the funeral.


I know at least one of them was standing in uniform, lining the drive to Kensington Palace ...


----------



## J77 (May 25, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> "It's a paedo's charter"  ((c) The Sun)


Really? The Sun have inside knowledge that a paedophile's involved?

e2a: didn't we already do this thread... "dowsing for..."


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (May 25, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> Back in 1997 When Saint Diana died most people (me included) were not online yet and I had to keep quiet about my contempt for the sordid spectacle so not to upset the 'mourners' and their public displays of sorrow.



speak for yourself

i slagged her off on line practically before her mangled corpse was even pulled from the car


----------



## detective-boy (May 25, 2007)

J77 said:
			
		

> Really? The Sun have inside knowledge that a paedophile's involved?


I was musing at the possible Sun response to the "Look into my Eyes" line ...

(And as for the thread, the rest of the world have already done the front page story about twenty times and they're still doing it again ... surely we can have at least one poxy repeat ...)


----------



## felixthecat (May 25, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Surely the Macanns should come home and at least try and let their other kids get on with their lives. I do not think it's wise or helpful to fund them continuing to remain in Portugal.



If I were in their postion, only 3 weeks after my daughter went missing there is no fucking way on earth I would be going home, no way, no how. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Ok so it might not be helpful in getting my child back, but I still wouldn't be able to leave. I'd feel like I was giving up on her - and my daughter is much too precious to me to do that.

This might not be logical, but I am speaking purely as a parent. I very much doubt wishface has children.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (May 25, 2007)

felixthecat said:
			
		

> If I were in their postion, only 3 weeks after my daughter went missing there is no fucking way on earth I would be going home, no way, no how. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Ok so it might not be helpful in getting my child back, but I still wouldn't be able to leave. I'd feel like I was giving up on her - and my daughter is much too precious to me to do that.
> 
> This might not be logical, but I am speaking purely as a parent. I very much doubt wishface has children.


Speaking as a parent and also a logical person, I can't see the point.  It's most likely she's no longer in Portugal so what's the point in staying there?  I really don't understand.  

Going back home to the UK doesn't mean giving up on her, it means getting some sense of normality back into the lives of the two children who haven't been abducted.

What if she's missing for a decade or so, like that Austrian girl Natasha?  Or that American boy, I can't remember his name?

Are they going to stay in Portugal for the rest of their lives?   What about their other two children?  Surely it would be in their best interests to be surrounded by a familiar environment and close to family and friends.  Not stuck in another country.


----------



## renegadechicken (May 25, 2007)

i really wish people would get a grip............its one child gone missing...not the end of the earth or the attack of the killer tomatos.


i dont have children, never want children so the issue of imagine how you'd feel really doesnt apply..............what i cant fucking stand is all the media bollocks and the probability that the publicity has surely killed her.....

if i was an abductor and had taken this child, there would be no way on earth se would live to id me no way.....and her body would never turn up either...................

god praise publicity for 'saving a little girls life'


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 25, 2007)

felixthecat said:
			
		

> If I were in their postion, only 3 weeks after my daughter went missing there is no fucking way on earth I would be going home, no way, no how. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Ok so it might not be helpful in getting my child back, but I still wouldn't be able to leave. I'd feel like I was giving up on her - and my daughter is much too precious to me to do that.



if they gave a fuck about their daughter in the first place none of this would've happened anyway.


flame me if you want, but its true.


----------



## renegadechicken (May 25, 2007)

agrees with johnnymarrsbars


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> if they gave a fuck about their daughter in the first place none of this would've happened anyway.
> 
> 
> flame me if you want, but its true.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

felixthecat said:
			
		

> If I were in their postion, only 3 weeks after my daughter went missing there is no fucking way on earth I would be going home, no way, no how. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Ok so it might not be helpful in getting my child back, but I still wouldn't be able to leave. I'd feel like I was giving up on her - and my daughter is much too precious to me to do that.
> 
> This might not be logical, but I am speaking purely as a parent. I very much doubt wishface has children.



i second that. neither would i.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> i really wish people would get a grip............its one child gone missing...not the end of the earth or the attack of the killer tomatos.
> 
> 
> i dont have children, never want children so the issue of imagine how you'd feel really doesnt apply..............what i cant fucking stand is all the media bollocks and the probability that the publicity has surely killed her.....
> ...



blimey. what colour is the sky in your world?


----------



## renegadechicken (May 25, 2007)

Purple

what you saying that if you abducted her youd let her live after all this???????????


----------



## wishface (May 25, 2007)

felixthecat said:
			
		

> If I were in their postion, only 3 weeks after my daughter went missing there is no fucking way on earth I would be going home, no way, no how. Not a snowballs chance in hell. Ok so it might not be helpful in getting my child back, but I still wouldn't be able to leave. I'd feel like I was giving up on her - and my daughter is much too precious to me to do that.
> 
> This might not be logical, but I am speaking purely as a parent. I very much doubt wishface has children.


I don't. 

I'm just not entirely sure that staying in portugal at this point will serve any purpose. If she has been abducted the media circus has very liley driven her abductor out of the country with her (that's not assuming the worst either).

The longer they stay the harder it gets, surely.

I don't think I need to have kids to understand the emotions involved.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> I don't think I need to have kids to understand the emotions involved.



sorry but you do.


----------



## sorter (May 25, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> Purple
> 
> what you saying that if you abducted her youd let her live after all this???????????



sorry, but abducting children, and the 'best' way of dealing with it, isn't something on my radar.


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> sorry but you do.



Oh fuck here we go.

You're not a parent so you can't talk about it.

Yeah but we can all buy fucking yellow ribbons and express sorrow about a little girl can't we


----------



## renegadechicken (May 25, 2007)

neither is speculating on other peoples feelings but you do that


----------



## felixthecat (May 25, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> I don't.
> 
> I'm just not entirely sure that staying in portugal at this point will serve any purpose. If she has been abducted the media circus has very liley driven her abductor out of the country with her (that's not assuming the worst either).
> 
> ...



Staying there probably isn't serving any purpose - again, logic flies out the window. But altho this seems to be going on forever to us, particularly when there are things going on in the world that are so much worse, to those parents this is still fresh - and to them, sorry, but no, there isn't anything worse happening anywhere.

Chances are this kid is dead or at the very least not coming back to her parents ever. To the parents, staying where they last saw her pushes this awful thought away for a while. They'll have to come to terms for it eventually, but 3 weeks? Its still so recent for them. The best possible outcome would be this child is returned alive to her parents, but if that doesn't happen(as is most likely), a body will at least give then a degree of closure. I really hope they get that at least.

And altho I don't want to say that you have to have children to understand the emotions involved beacuse thats not completely true, your whole outlook DOES change when you have your own.


----------



## detective-boy (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> sorry but you do.


----------



## futha (May 25, 2007)

the whole thing is doing my head in.(the media frenzy i mean not the actual event which is very sad)


----------



## Balbi (May 25, 2007)

d-b, do only married with family officers get given these cases

cos that's, clearly, why she hasn't been found


----------



## subversplat (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> sorry but you do.


So what about all of us who have kids who _also_ think the whole thing is a bit, well, -ey ?

Obviously not fit to be parents, eh?


----------



## jæd (May 25, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> sorry but you do.


----------



## alsoknownas (May 25, 2007)

rutabowa said:
			
		

> i went to the pub the other day there was a really bad homemade poster of her with the slogan "LOOK INTO MY EYES" printed on it, freaky, what do you suppose they meant?


She's got a very unusual pupil-extention-type-thingy in one of her eyes.  That's why they're drawing people's attention to her eyes - it's one of the best ways of possibily identifying her.
They also made a logo saying "Look for Maddy", with the first o in look having the p-e-t-t drawn on to it (I have to admit I found that quite touching  ).


----------



## alsoknownas (May 25, 2007)

From the official website:


----------



## stuckin72 (May 25, 2007)

Sooner or later her parents will have to go home & get on with their lives-if Maddy is still near where she went missing-its because her body has not been discovered--if alive she would be anywhere but nearby--funny thing tho--if you had a large suitcase stuffed with £20 notes--would you leave it unattended lying on the bed in an insecure holiday chalet?--I doubt it---& yet the Mcanns left their kids-worth infinitely more--& went to a resturant---


----------



## Kanda (May 25, 2007)

So the trick is to stuff a suitcase with your child, take it to the restaurant....


----------



## Fledgling (May 25, 2007)

I think the coverage of this story doesn't appear to be as intense as last week, altohugh not being a tabloid reader perhaps I am partly mistaken. I've heard a lot of talk about the fact that other, far worse things are happening around the world. This is undoubtedly true, but two points should be made: 

Most people realise that terrible things are happening around the world, but they often, I tihnk, feel powerless to stop them and thus tire of seeing such events in the media. Somalia, the Congo and Darfur see atrocities daily which very few people in this country have experienced. We see, time after time, pictures of African turmoil, natural diasters in Asia and poverty in South America. It's news about situations we ourselves have no control over. A nice middle class family who seem to bear a lot of critcism for being nice and middle class have no influence whatsoever or any personal experience of these huge events. 

A child goes missing on holiday though and this is something which could happen to any parent, I've been lost when I was younger and so I'm sure have many other people. In a small way people feel that they can show support and help out a little here by buying a ribbon or so wheras with other tragedies it's harder to do so (the mining accident in Russia recently for example). 

I don't blame the parents for remaining in Portugal, that's where the child disappeared and they may find it useful to be in close proximity to Portugese police, remember we don't hear everything . 

One thing which worried me was the emphasis on one of the men being questioned's nationality. What did being Russian have to do with anything? It doesn't take much for a hack to write a speil in the vein of "well, he probably did didn't he, I mean well, you know, these Russians, foreigners in the  algarve, what's he doing there anyway etc." Thankfully that didn't happen. A sympathtic crowd can turn into a baying mob rather too quickly.


----------



## stuckin72 (May 25, 2007)

The suspect had a daughter identicle to Maddy---therefore he done it----& all Russian computer experts are ivolved in child porn--everybody knows that---


----------



## sorearm (May 25, 2007)

This is a really tragic situation, the media frenzy continues to feed, as it's just another story for them.

These parents put a dinner before their children, simple as. I'm a parent and there is no way I would leave my daughter in that situation. They could have either alternated and one parent stayed / used a babysitter (I'm sure there were facilities at such a plush resort).

What pisses me off is that can you IMAGINE the reaction of the scum press if:
a) this was not a nice middle-class professional 'intact' nuclear family
b) single dad / single mum

they would be ripped apart.

I bet there won't be any social services waiting to 'have a chat' when they touch down on these shores eh?

not that I don't take what they are going through seriously, as it must be the most unbearable pain. But they bear responsibility for their child.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 25, 2007)

stuckin72 said:
			
		

> all Russian computer experts are ivolved in child porn--everybody knows that---




know they're not, they're involved in polonium poisoning


----------



## chio (May 25, 2007)

Only click me if you want to throw things at your computer


----------



## sorearm (May 25, 2007)

chio said:
			
		

> Only click me if you want to throw things at your computer



*clutches head*

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## _angel_ (May 25, 2007)

sorearm said:
			
		

> This is a really tragic situation, the media frenzy continues to feed, as it's just another story for them.
> 
> These parents put a dinner before their children, simple as. I'm a parent and there is no way I would leave my daughter in that situation. They could have either alternated and one parent stayed / used a babysitter (I'm sure there were facilities at such a plush resort).
> 
> ...



I know. There was a babysitting facility at that hotel also which they chose not to use.

However you have to have a heart of stone not to feel sorry for the parents regardless. 

I think the 'media frenzy' is a lot down to the family themselves, they want to keep this story in the headlines and I don't blame them but it can't last indefinitely without any developments.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 26, 2007)

chio said:
			
		

> Only click me if you want to throw things at your computer



Words fail me..


----------



## rollinder (May 26, 2007)

chio said:
			
		

> Only click me if you want to throw things at your computer






> what every person in the country feels is a sense of solidarity


please tell me that the fact I'm laughing hysterically at that doesn't mean I'm a sick and twisted psycopath who needs to be locked up for the good of society


----------



## wishface (May 26, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I know. There was a babysitting facility at that hotel also which they chose not to use.
> 
> However you have to have a heart of stone not to feel sorry for the parents regardless.
> 
> I think the 'media frenzy' is a lot down to the family themselves, they want to keep this story in the headlines and I don't blame them but it can't last indefinitely without any developments.


i dont think you can attribute that to the parents. the media are in charge of their own agendas and they know what will sell and they will go with that whether its this little girl or not.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> Words fail me..



would you not do the same if your child/niece went missing?
The family did that because they sought out the opportunity to be able to have it screened in the media and at football games.

I know Id want to do whatever I could if one of my family went missing


----------



## detective-boy (May 26, 2007)

Balbi said:
			
		

> d-b, do only married with family officers get given these cases


I think you've stumbled on something here ...


----------



## dessiato (May 26, 2007)

I recently posted some comments on another board about the media circus this has become. I had started and finished my comments with my best wishes for the child and family. I mentioned the numbers of other children who disappear every year and asked what was being done for them. Another poster commented that my obseervations were sound and posed the same question. We had our comment removed as being inappropriate. The inference was that it is not proper to say anything that might be considered criticism of the situation.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 26, 2007)

I think thats on those boards perhaps.
On a parenting forum I use the response has been mixed, some angsty "bring maddy home" posts and yellow ribbon avatars,. some of FGS responses....

My feeling is instead of slagging off the coverage this case has got we should be demanding that coverage of missing children generally is increased.
I would have no problem sitting through TV ad type alerts every day if it meant children were spotted and returned to their parents or to a place of safety if parents werent an option


----------



## dessiato (May 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> My feeling is instead of slagging off the coverage this case has got we should be demanding that coverage of missing children generally is increased.
> I would have no problem sitting through TV ad type alerts every day if it meant children were spotted and returned to their parents or to a place of safety if parents werent an option


I agree with you, if i had to sit through ads as you describe, no problem. Anything that helps find all missing children is acceptable.


----------



## Sugarmouse (May 26, 2007)

I agree with LMHF I guess...Children go missing,are killed every single day..yes this case has alot ofpublicity comparitively and it does kinda get my goat, same as the Holly andJessica thing did.

Also sorearm I am with you too...the broadcasting of the fact she was an IVF child is annoying me too. Its irrelevant.

There is something fishy with this case thogh..if the girl had been abused and killed I am sure something would have been found by now.I dont think its a typical case


----------



## jæd (May 26, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> I agree with you, if i had to sit through ads as you describe, no problem. Anything that helps find all missing children is acceptable.



It used to be "anything that stops terrorism is acceptable". Look where that got us... Perhaps tackling the causes of missing children (child abuse, murder, child-runaways etc)  would be a better long-term solution...


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> would you not do the same if your child/niece went missing?
> The family did that because they sought out the opportunity to be able to have it screened in the media and at football games.
> 
> I know Id want to do whatever I could if one of my family went missing



If I was stupid enough to allow my kid to get kidnapped/murdered because I didn't get a babysitter the last thing I would do was make an mp3 of a Simple Minds song. Which just goes to show how ineffectual all this bullshit grief tourism is.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 26, 2007)

Isnt it easy to sit in your ivory tower judging?
Does it make you feel nice and smug, give you a lovely warm glow??

I would never ever have left my children either but its done, the likelihood of her being abducted wasnt even on their radar ( and lets be fair it was incredibly remote)
BUT I would do everything possible to get her back( whatever that was) if she was my child and I think anyone who says they wouldnt ( like you have) is lying.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 26, 2007)

So does this mean that a video will be shown at Wembley every time a kid goes missing? No. The media fandango around this is sickening. Its a bizarre cult like fad. They think they are using the media to find their child. They are not. They are being used and the morons with yellow ribbons are lapping it up. If my child went missing I wouldn't want a media parade or to be exploited by the Sun, as a way of selling papers and filling airtime. Chances are I wouldn't get one either.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 26, 2007)

I dont think you have the first idea what you would want if your child went missing in terms of being able to see it all as some sort of political statement( stp talking about my child everyone- my principles dont allow it!! BULLSHIT..).
You would use every opportunity offered and you would seek each and every opportunity out.
Im sure it hasnt escaped the Mcann family just how lucky they are that their child was one who had the media's attention and that many dont.They dont because they are abducted usually by their parent/parents or because they are suspected ( probably wrongly in many cases) of running away... from the UK.. not being taken when abroad ( which is very rare, Uk nationals children being abducted while on holiday)

What do you think they should do out of interest? Just say No shes missing and sit and wait for the portugese police to say something? ( who dont as a matter of law release any info)

IIRC Kerry Needham did exactly the same in a very very similar situation was she being used?? Im sure she didnt think so.


----------



## subversplat (May 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I would have no problem sitting through TV ad type alerts every day if it meant children were spotted and returned to their parents or to a place of safety if parents werent an option


Really? I think most people would turn the TV over.

As an aside - how come adults get kidnapped and children get abducted?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 26, 2007)

Money?? Perhaps that marks the difference between the two terms..
Kidnappe suggests a demand of some sort being made for their safe return.

If ads were shown an d you wanted to turn the TV over that would be fine by me. I would rather have the option to not watch it ( via the off switch) than ads not be shown at all.


----------



## Citizen66 (May 26, 2007)

Why do humans kidnap people but aliens abduct them?


----------



## polly (May 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> My feeling is instead of slagging off the coverage this case has got we should be demanding that coverage of missing children generally is increased.



yeah, agreed in principle- but what about the vastly higher number of children that are murdered every year by their family/friends of family? all the hype around children being abducted gives a disproportionate public view of how much this does happen, which leads to adults feeling that they can't help when they see kids wandering around on their own for fear of being labelled paedos, as well as people being reluctant to intervene in family situations where a child is being abused, simply because they don't understand quite how much danger the child is in. my job often involves working with children and i've seen both of these examples, the second unfrotunately more than a few times. 

also feel that children (and adults) need to be educated about the risks of this to prevent as far as is possible their being abducted, while recognising that you cannot stop it 100% and that the benefits children get from being free and untethered by adult hysteria far outweigh the (very small) risks of some grubby old man bundling them off. 

sorry, wandered a bit there...


----------



## scumbalina (May 26, 2007)

I totally agree that it's all out of hand, got pretty ridiculous, disppropotional and all this public grieving stuff is bizarre bullshit. Yellow ribbons and celebrities, FFS    It's really doing my fucking nut in, and like someone else mentioned, under other circumstance the parents would have probably been vilified a lot more (not saying they should be) by the media, it's all lovely, paper selling, front news stuff.  But I don't see how anyone can blame the parents for that, they're just doing/exploiting whatever they can to get their daughter back, it's totally understandable, and I find it a bit odd when people judge how people act in situations like this. If I was in their situation I'd do whatever I thought would help get my child back (not saying they haven;t been misguided in what they've chosen to do, but they clearly think the whole constant media stuff will help). I've been on one board where people where slating them saying they didn't deserve public support and that they should be selling their organs to pay for the campaign because they haven't cried on TV. And the whole thing about them leaving her, yes, it was a stupid fucking thing to do, they're going to be punished for the rest of their lives by the guilt of it, but it doesn't make this whole thing "their fault", that responsibilty lies with whoeve took her and it doesn't make them any less desrving of sympathy for the loss they're going through. It's the media, exploiting the British public's love of a tragedy that's to blame for all the bullshit.


----------



## sorter (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> If I was stupid enough to allow my kid to get kidnapped/murdered because I didn't get a babysitter.



just so we're clear: to all those who would have done the opposite to the mccanns, ie got the baby sitting service, the service offered is for people to check on the children at regular intervals, and NOT to actually stay in the apartment. in other words, what they did was NO different to what was on offer. don't let the facts get in the way of a good slagging off though eh?


----------



## sorearm (May 26, 2007)

The anguish these parents are in is totally understandable

The media frenzy has good points and bad points - good points including a greater awareness of missing people. bad points including the shear cynicism I feel that this is injected with.

What really fucks me off is the pretence that this country actually gives a fuck about children. 

The recent UNICEF report that this country ranks as the lowest to grow up in as a child.

I look around and see childrens lives overregulated by a regime of jumping through hoops in education to meet targets to pass tests, things that don't REALLY teach you about life, or make education and schooling enjoyable, but attempt to put children into little boxes.

Look at this countries attitude to childcare - it's basically like a second mortgage. If we really valued our future members of society there would be decent, affordable, universally available childcare. It can't be good to have 2 knackered parents working just to cover everything???

Professor Al Aynsley-Green, England's first Children's Commissioner, himself is scathing of the society that children grow up in.

And then there is my current bugbear, the family law courts - supposedly putting the child's best interests first, when in fact what you experience is a biased, 'mum knows best' attitude that disregards a kids life and instead uses an adversarial system with a winner takes all attitude. As a father I find out that there isn't a case of winning or losing, just degrees of losing, but ultimately my daughter loses.

So don't piss on my leg and tell me its raining when the meeeddddjjjaaayyy get all kid-friendly, don't insult my intelligence when suddenly kids are all important as the real value we place is very low on kids in reality.


----------



## sorearm (May 26, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> just so we're clear: to all those who would have done the opposite to the mccanns, ie got the baby sitting service, the service offered is for people to check on the children at regular intervals, and NOT to actually stay in the apartment. in other words, what they did was NO different to what was on offer. don't let the facts get in the way of a good slagging off though eh?



why were they even out for a meal leaving the kids alone???

Apart from if one of the kids woke up having a bad dream/needed some reassurance, say there was a fire etc.

They decided to go for a meal and leave their kids alone, that was wrong.


----------



## subversplat (May 26, 2007)

sorearm said:
			
		

> why were they even out for a meal leaving the kids alone???
> 
> Apart from if one of the kids woke up having a bad dream/needed some reassurance, say there was a fire etc.
> 
> They decided to go for a meal and leave their kids alone, that was wrong.


FFS, we've already done _that_ topic to death. Some people think it was wrong absolutely, some people have had the same done to them and been fine and some people would happily do the same if needs be and certain conditions were met.

None of this has any bearing on the obscene amount of media bullshit and its accompanying sick-making grief tourism


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (May 26, 2007)

chio said:
			
		

> Only click me if you want to throw things at your computer


OMFG!

That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 26, 2007)

I wonder what the media would do if the Portuguese police discovered the parents did it?


----------



## pembrokestephen (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> I wonder what the media would do if the Portuguese police discovered the parents did it?


Slag off the Portugese police, I expect.


----------



## scumbalina (May 26, 2007)

pembrokestephen said:
			
		

> Slag off the Portugese police, I expect.



then shit their facs off in excitement and start some sort of lynch mob campaign


----------



## pembrokestephen (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> So does this mean that a video will be shown at Wembley every time a kid goes missing? No. The media fandango around this is sickening. Its a bizarre cult like fad. They think they are using the media to find their child. They are not. They are being used and the morons with yellow ribbons are lapping it up. If my child went missing I wouldn't want a media parade or to be exploited by the Sun, as a way of selling papers and filling airtime. Chances are I wouldn't get one either.


I think you're confusing two things: the media circus, and this business of blaming the parents. It doesn't make for a very coherent argument.

Personally, I think none of us have any right to sit in judgement on the parents. The fact is that, whatever your views on what they have done, someone did a far worse thing and abducted that child. As far as the whole media circus thing is concerned, I can't blame them for making use of anything that they think might help get their child back. Yes, I find it mawkish and false, and I cringe every time I see one of those "find Madeleine" posters around, because it seems so futile to hope that we might be any help...but if the parents feel there's a possibility it will, and people are willing to put up the posters, why not?

This issue seems to have aroused a great deal of self-righteous indignation. I find myself wondering what the actual motive for all that indignation might really be...


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 26, 2007)

Yes, losing the kid in the first place and the media circus can be seen as separate issues. Principally I am annoyed by the saturation media coverage. I am also annoyed by the people who have become obsessed by it like its the latest fashion. Of course it's just dawned on me that I maybe equally obsessed. With that in mind I am going to stop talking about it and pretend it isn't happening.


----------



## Pie 1 (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> If I was stupid enough to allow my kid to get kidnapped/murdered because I didn't get a babysitter ...




FFS.  

Idiot.


----------



## Calva dosser (May 26, 2007)

The hatred that humans reserve for humans that murder their own offspring is far less than that they reserve for strangers who indulge in this bizarre activity.

This is right and proper. A human murdering it's spawn is cutting off the gene-line.

Should the parents be found responsible- non story. Someone with thick lensed specs held together with elastoplast- much more salacious. Mmmm.


----------



## chio (May 26, 2007)

AnnO'Neemus said:
			
		

> OMFG!
> 
> That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.



It's what's been sent out to all the radio stations to be played out on the morning shows


----------



## sorter (May 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> Of course it's just dawned on me that I maybe equally obsessed. With that in mind I am going to stop talking about it and pretend it isn't happening.



thank god for that, it's exactly what i was trying to tell all the snipers to do about 3 pages ago. 

turn your telly over, and stop buying crap tabloid newspapers, and i'm sure you'll be able to live your lives without having some 3 year old abducted child from ruining your day.


----------



## Cid (May 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> would you not do the same if your child/niece went missing?
> The family did that because they sought out the opportunity to be able to have it screened in the media and at football games.
> 
> I know Id want to do whatever I could if one of my family went missing



In what sense is massive press coverage possibly going to increase the chances of her being recovered alive?


----------



## wishface (May 27, 2007)

today's headline in the mirror is enough to make your eyes roll out of their sockets and spin off into the night. I really despair. 'My life with madeleine suspect'.

Plus, what are the family doing posing for OK style photo shoots? Have you seen this?


----------



## jiggajagga (May 27, 2007)

'kin hell! They want to see the Pope now!

I give up!


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 27, 2007)

I think we've run out of ways of discussing just how insane this has got:



> *Madeleine parents to see the Pope*
> 
> The parents of four-year-old Madeleine McCann are set to visit the Pope to discuss the plight of their daughter, who vanished 24 days ago.
> 
> ...


Link


----------



## dessiato (May 27, 2007)

I know I shouldn't say this, but I am getting really pissed off with all of this. What the fuck is the Pope going to do? Has he a magic wand that will perform some sort of miracle?


----------



## dessiato (May 27, 2007)

double post


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 27, 2007)

This has the feeling of hyper un-reality about it, it's insane.


----------



## jæd (May 27, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> I know I shouldn't say this, but I am getting really pissed off with all of this. What the fuck is the Pope going to do? Has he a magic wand that will perform some sort of miracle?



Catholic Priests are well known to be kiddy fiddlers...


----------



## ill-informed (May 27, 2007)

i wandered past the maddy shrine the other day and saw a few of the messages. They struck me as desperate and hysterical.

And the media is long gone...


----------



## wishface (May 27, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> This has the feeling of hyper un-reality about it, it's insane.


quite.

I suppose there is some bizarre logic to seeing the pope; after all he is supposed to be second in command to god right now so if anyone can rescue maddy from the paedo horde it's gods right hand man.


----------



## Silva (May 28, 2007)

Part2 said:
			
		

> Apologies, I should've realised using a Google search would be useless.
> 
> (Goes off to make dowsing rods from wire coat hangers)



In all fairness, we (and probably the spaniards) call the top ones "Madalenas".


The only thing that's bugging me now is how would the Brit media treat this case if it was a _Portuguese_ kid with _Portuguese_ parents kidnapped in _London_.


----------



## jæd (May 28, 2007)

Silva said:
			
		

> The only thing that's bugging me now is how would the Brit media treat this case if it was a _Portuguese_ kid with _Portuguese_ parents kidnapped in _London_.



Lots of foreign kids go missing in London everyday... Why would _Portuguese_  people be treated any differently...?  And the parents would probably be deported for stealing headlines from Maddie...


----------



## selamlar (May 28, 2007)

> In all fairness, we (and probably the spaniards) call the top ones "Madalenas".




Aha! I always knew there was something funny about the Portuguese!
Pre-emptively changing the names of confectionary now are we?


----------



## Silva (May 28, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Lots of foreign kids go missing in London everyday... Why would _Portuguese_  people be treated any differently...?  And the parents would probably be deported for stealing headlines from Maddie...



This is more a thing against Portuguese media as I don't recall them being obsessed with any other kidnappings before. With almost one month gone, and some of them (admittedly, most not-so-secretly want to be The Sun) are still pushing the "developments" into the headlines.


----------



## dessiato (May 28, 2007)

Silva said:
			
		

> This is more a thing against Portuguese media as I don't recall them being obsessed with any other kidnappings before. With almost one month gone, and some of them (admittedly, most not-so-secretly want to be The Sun) are still pushing the "developments" into the headlines.


All the TV Cabo channels seem to be pushing it hard. Students are asking, regularly, if there is any more news from UK about the case. The obsession seems to be overwhelming Porto's championship. One recurring theme is the Chinese stealing the body parts! According to them 'it happened in Trofa once'. It would be less of a worry if the students saying this weren't at University!


----------



## Pie 1 (May 28, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> This has the feeling of hyper un-reality about it, it's insane.




Giant inflatable billboards now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6698215.stm



I doubt if even Chris Morris' imagination could have even come up with this.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 28, 2007)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> Giant inflatable billboards now.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6698215.stm
> 
> 
> ...



Jesus. Does anyone know of another planet I can go live on for a while?


----------



## renegadechicken (May 28, 2007)

if the parents find her............do they get the reward?????


----------



## renegadechicken (May 28, 2007)

double post


----------



## STFC (May 28, 2007)

pembrokestephen said:
			
		

> This issue seems to have aroused a great deal of self-righteous indignation. I find myself wondering what the actual motive for all that indignation might really be...



Me too. The saturation coverage of the case, sad as it is, means I tend not to pay much attention whenever I come across the story on the news or in the papers. Some people seem to be getting _really_ worked up about it though. I can't get my head round it.


----------



## chio (May 28, 2007)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> Giant inflatable billboards now.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6698215.stm
> 
> 
> ...



When I saw this on telly, I was quite struck by the fact that the words "NEWS of the WORLD" are in bigger type than "FIND MADDIE".


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 28, 2007)

Cid said:
			
		

> In what sense is massive press coverage possibly going to increase the chances of her being recovered alive?



If she is alive it does increase the possibility that she will be spotted and returned.. More than "weve got a child whos been abducted but we cant show you who she is, the law wont allow us, Just in case like..."


----------



## detective-boy (May 29, 2007)

chio said:
			
		

> When I saw this on telly, I was quite struck by the fact that the words "NEWS of the WORLD" are in bigger type than "FIND MADDIE".


I'm sure that this a simple design oversight ... 

(Can you imagine what it will be like if she is found alive?)


----------



## Paul Russell (May 29, 2007)

If only Doris Stokes were still alive. She'd have the answer.


----------



## heartof gold (May 29, 2007)

its up them what they do i dont suppose they worry about what ppl say on a forum i guess to leave portugal at the moment is too painful.

To say they dont care about their daughter is awful if they did they wouldnt be putting this much effort into a search just cos you leave your child to eat a meal it means you are abit naive but dosent mean you dont care?


----------



## dessiato (May 29, 2007)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> Giant inflatable billboards now.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6698215.stm
> 
> 
> ...


when I first saw this I thought it was a NotW advert, then looked again and saw the Find Maddie headline.

I am cynical when I say the whole thing is being manipulated as a marketing ploy for the red tops?


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 29, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> when I first saw this I thought it was a NotW advert, then looked again and saw the Find Maddie headline.
> 
> I am cynical when I say the whole thing is being manipulated as a marketing ploy for the red tops?



Wouldn't it be better if they had the reward money in Euros rather than £, but then that wouldn't look as good on the front page of NOTW.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

Well, at least they get to meet the Pope now


----------



## heartof gold (May 29, 2007)

what can the pope do tho?


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

Get on the bone to God


----------



## heartof gold (May 29, 2007)

lol who is god?


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 29, 2007)

Give her back...


----------



## heartof gold (May 29, 2007)

we must be bored perhaps we should go help look for her .


----------



## subversplat (May 29, 2007)

I'm impressed yet shocked that I haven't heard any Madeleine McCann jokes yet!

e2a: I stand corrected. Sikipedia is on the job. I am continually amazed at the comedy depths the internet can plumb.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> lol who is god?


He's got this special radar


----------



## chio (May 29, 2007)

I'm lucky enough to have a satellite dish; I've taken to watching the news on a selection of random foreign channels, rather than sitting through the assorted mix of "last photos / videos / whatever of Madeleine" and "the government says not to drink / smoke / have fun" that we get on the BBC...


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> I'm impressed yet shocked that I haven't heard any Madeleine McCann jokes yet!


I have.


----------



## billy_bob (May 29, 2007)

I didn't quite expect this thread to last the weekend when I fucked off last Thursday.  As it was me who started it I just wanted to add my own view, although it's nothing that hasn't been said.

I have every sympathy for the family and I don't blame them for a second - either for leaving Madeleine alone (an error of judgement - and all parents make those - which will be its own punishment for the rest of their lives) or for exploiting the ever-more-absurd media frenzy that comes their way, because they're clutching at even the most miniscule hope that one of these stunts will help.

My point was, I thought the fetishisation of HollynJessica (tm) was sick, but this eclipses it a hundredfold.  And now the fuckin Pope! Because the Catholic church is largely known for its expertise in making little kiddies safer isn't it


----------



## jæd (May 29, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> we must be bored perhaps we should go help look for her .



I've got Kentish Town covered... Can someone check Camden for us...?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 29, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> I've got Kentish Town covered... Can someone check Camden for us...?



Scary. You live in Kentish Town too?


----------



## jæd (May 29, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Scary. You live in Kentish Town too?



Nope... Just work here...


----------



## veracity (May 29, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> I'm impressed yet shocked that I haven't heard any Madeleine McCann jokes yet!
> 
> e2a: I stand corrected. Sikipedia is on the job. I am continually amazed at the comedy depths the internet can plumb.



I wish I hadn't looked but I just couldn't help myself.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 29, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Nope... Just work here...



Oh right.


----------



## Maxine (May 29, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> I'm impressed yet shocked that I haven't heard any Madeleine McCann jokes yet!
> 
> e2a: I stand corrected. Sikipedia is on the job. I am continually amazed at the comedy depths the internet can plumb.




I have heard one, unfortunately.   It was so BAD I could not repeat it to anyone.  It shocked even me.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 29, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I have.



lets hear 'em


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> lets hear 'em


I alread did a thread and it caused a stink - if you can be bothered, check out my 'is this too soon?' thread or just consult Sickipedia


----------



## Orang Utan (May 29, 2007)

http://www.sickipedia.org/index.php?title=Madeleine_McCann


----------



## Cid (May 29, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> If she is alive it does increase the possibility that she will be spotted and returned.. More than "weve got a child whos been abducted but we cant show you who she is, the law wont allow us, Just in case like..."



It also vastly increases the chance that any kidnapper will have killed her and hidden her body. If, on the other hand, she actually did wander away or something well, young, white, English children on their own are pretty likely to be picked up by the authorities/some kindly passer-by sooner quickly. It seems _very_ unlikely that she's walking around somewhere. I'm not arguing against missing persons adverts and rewards, but plastering it all over the media certainly hasn't helped before and doesn't appear to be helping here.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 29, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I alread did a thread and it caused a stink - if you can be bothered, check out my 'is this too soon?' thread or just consult Sickipedia



Oh.. I just did... they were a bit crap. Although the Houdini one maybe..


----------



## detective-boy (May 29, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> Although the Houdini one maybe..


LOL at the Liverpool one, too!


----------



## wishface (May 29, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> He's got this special radar


gaydar?


----------



## dessiato (May 29, 2007)

Thought the one about the cost of a meal was bitterly accurate.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 29, 2007)

So the McCanns have gone on a plane to meet the Pope....leaving their 2 young children behind?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (May 29, 2007)

Couldn't we go the whole hog and have lengths of railings specially installed in town centres up and down the land for hysterical people to cling on to whilst balling their eyes out?


----------



## wishface (May 29, 2007)

If i was Helen Lovejoy right now, i'd explode.


----------



## heartof gold (May 29, 2007)

how much lower can you get making sick jokes about a missing child, how much worse can you get? im sure all those who think its funny would really think it was funny if it were their child?

Im shocked, its one thing abit of banter about the media coverage etc but to make or enjoy sick jokes is another? It makes me mad some ppl can be so horrible.


----------



## Cid (May 30, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> how much lower can you get making sick jokes about a missing child, how much worse can you get? im sure all those who think its funny would really think it was funny if it were their child?
> 
> Im shocked, its one thing abit of banter about the media coverage etc but to make or enjoy sick jokes is another? It makes me mad some ppl can be so horrible.



Satire. The traditional way of dealing with anything that has reached epically ridiculous proportions. No-one (on this thread at least) actually takes any pleasure in kidnapping etc, it's just a counter to media created hysteria (which, after all, is far worse in many ways - at least we're not making shitloads of cash). About shocking yourself too - awkward laughter, chalenging your own preconceptions etc. Think Brasseye.


----------



## T & P (May 30, 2007)

I myself find the crocodile tears, hypocrisy and shameless cashing-in displayed by media, celebrities and members of the public alike far more offensive than the worst joke out there.


----------



## Maxine (May 30, 2007)

I wonder if there is any significance in the fact that the McCanns' spokesperson is on secondment to the Foreign Office for the specific purpose of "

 "handling media relations related to the Madeleine McCann "disappearance" [ note not abduction] in Portugal".

Will his salary be paid by us?  

Any thoughts?

http://retiredrambler.typepad.com/tonys_ramblings/2007/05/more_on_clarenc.html


----------



## jæd (May 30, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> how much lower can you get making sick jokes about a missing child, how much worse can you get? im sure all those who think its funny would really think it was funny if it were their child?
> 
> Im shocked, its one thing abit of banter about the media coverage etc but to make or enjoy sick jokes is another? It makes me mad some ppl can be so horrible.



Lighten up...! People make jokes about things to reassure themselves and help themselves get through bad times...


----------



## sorter (May 30, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Lighten up...! People make jokes about things to reassure themselves and help themselves get through bad times...



as far as I can see, people on this thread don't regard this situation as a 'bad time which needs getting through with reassurance' in the sense you mean it. they think it's funny. what's happened to people on these boards. it was never like this in the past. 

do the majority of you find the views on this thread fair game? i'm not talking about the media, but the mccann bashing and jokes about a still missing 4 year old girl. if any of you are parents, then shame on you.


----------



## maldwyn (May 30, 2007)

> Parents have set up a "paedophile watch" scheme to try to protect their children.
> Twenty-five volunteers have signed up to patrol school routes and playgrounds on the look-out for potential offenders.
> The group, which calls itself Parentally Aware Neighbourhood, is modelled on the Neighbourhood Watch.
> Patrollers are equipped with bright yellow overalls and have put up signs warning paedophiles that they are "not welcome".
> "Heidi and other parents decided to set up the group in light of what happened to Madeleine McCann in Portugal.


This is in Bournemouth, beggars belief. Better not let grand pa pick the kids up from school. If they really wanna hunt paedo’s  their own homes would be a better starting point.


----------



## Error Gorilla (May 30, 2007)

I read yesterday that a woman in Weston Super Mare contrived to burn her flat down after her makeshift Madeleine shrine combusted when a candle toppled over.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (May 30, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> how much lower can you get


Stick around, I reckon we've barely scratched the surface


----------



## jæd (May 30, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> as far as I can see, people on this thread don't regard this situation as a 'bad time which needs getting through with reassurance' in the sense you mean it. they think it's funny. what's happened to people on these boards. it was never like this in the past.



I don't think anyone thinks thats Maddies disappearance is funny... As I said before... People make light of the situation to reduce its impact on them. Having anyone disappear is terrible, and this is people's way of dealing with the fact there's a nasty person about in Portugal/Europe...




			
				sorter said:
			
		

> do the majority of you find the views on this thread fair game? i'm not talking about the media, but the mccann bashing and jokes about a still missing 4 year old girl. if any of you are parents, then shame on you.



Where's anyone bashing the parents...?  Yep, it probably wasn't the best idea to leave her alone, but hindsight is 20/20, as umpteen people here 

But I suppose you're a parent so you can't look at this logically or rationally any more...? (And if this is what being a parent makes you, you can lump it as far as I'm concerned...!)


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

I want to know how the pope is going to help find Maddaline...


----------



## Belushi (May 30, 2007)

Rutita1 said:
			
		

> I want to know how the pope is going to help find Maddaline...



He's going to phone god obviously.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

I want to know why it matters to any of you who are criticising them that they are visiting the pope?Whats wrong with that?

If it brings them peace/comfort because it is in line with their religious beliefs what does it matter who they visit?
Just because its not what any of you believe in, can you not respect the parents right to their own deeply held beliefs or is that not ok?


----------



## Termite Man (May 30, 2007)

Rutita1 said:
			
		

> I want to know how the pope is going to help find Maddaline...



magic beans !


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I want to know why it matters to any of you who are criticising them that they are visiting the pope?Whats wrong with that?
> 
> If it brings them peace/comfort because it is in line with their religious beliefs what does it matter who they visit?
> Just because its not what any of you believe in, can you not respect the parents right to their own deeply held beliefs or is that not ok?



I didn't criticise anyone.
There's nothing wrong with it, I bet lots of other religious parents of missing children would love the opportunity too.


----------



## London_Calling (May 30, 2007)

heartof gold said:
			
		

> how much lower can you get making sick jokes about a missing child, how much worse can you get? im sure all those who think its funny would really think it was funny if it were their child?
> 
> Im shocked, its one thing abit of banter about the media coverage etc but to make or enjoy sick jokes is another? It makes me mad some ppl can be so horrible.


Points been made already in this thread, most people can distinguish between the adsurdity of much of the media coverage - and comment on that - and the  very real effect of this abduction on the family.

But yep,  it would seem a few  people  just aren't bright enough to make the distinction between a family tragedy and media coverage of same.


----------



## jæd (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I want to know why it matters to any of you who are criticising them that they are visiting the pope?Whats wrong with that?



Did you miss the big scandal about Catholic Priests being kiddie fiddlers...?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (May 30, 2007)

I hope they're not leaving the other two kids with the local priest.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

Mocking them is a form of criticism.
Im sure many other deeply catholic parents would get the opportunity.
A friend of mine was granted an audience with the pope and took along her severely autistic son. She prays for anything which will help him and for strength to get her through every day.
If that makes her feel better then so be it.

Im quite staggered by the amount of energy being put into slating these parents by people who are claiming not to give a shit


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Did you miss the big scandal about Catholic Priests being kiddie fiddlers...?



I well aware of it thanks. I still am not sure what many people getting their kicks here are gaining from constant sniping about it all.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Mocking them is a form of criticism.


I think you'll find i was mocking the Pope.




> i'm quite staggered by the amount of energy being put into slating these parents by people who are claiming not to give a shit



Speaking for myself....i'll think you'll also find I have not slated those parent once on this thread.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

well I read your post as mocking them... after all what will the pope do to find them... Ie why the fuck are they bothering which such lunacy, waste of time etc


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> well I read your post as mocking them...



Well, I've also read posts wrong before. It happens.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 30, 2007)

nice to see they love their kids so much they've just left the other two in portugal while they hop on a private jet to see the fucking pope.


im probably digging a big hole for myself here but i get a very uneasy feeling that something doesn't quite add up with those parents.


----------



## T & P (May 30, 2007)

Mind you, if you suspect a kid has been snatched by a paedophile the Vatican is an excellent choice of place to look for them.


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

The sad likelihood is that Madeleine is dead.

The whole "find Maddy" campaign is premised on the idea that if she is still alive, widely distributing her photographs will mean she is soon recognised and found. In cases such as these, every day counts. I'm sure that a review of child abduction cases would find very few in which the child is held alive for any significant period of time.

Of course, the family are quite right to cling to hope and do everything that they can to ensure that if this 1% chance is the case, they find her. Alternatively, that the publicity one way or another leads to the guilty parties being caught and the matter resolved.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 30, 2007)

Do you have a yellow ribbon LMHF ?


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 30, 2007)

am i really the only one that thinks there's something very fishy about those parents?


----------



## sorter (May 30, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Where's anyone bashing the parents...?  Yep, it probably wasn't the best idea to leave her alone, but hindsight is 20/20, as umpteen people here
> 
> But I suppose you're a parent so you can't look at this logically or rationally any more...? (And if this is what being a parent makes you, you can lump it as far as I'm concerned...!)



i can't be bothered to trawl through quoting all the comments bashing the parents, but we both know there are loads.

i am a parent, and i can still look at this logically. i also have a great sense of humour, but my GSOH doesn't stretch to taking the piss out of this family, the missing girl or thier situation. sorry, i don't find it funny, and i'm surprised the people on this board, who come across as well read, caring, forward thinking individuals can find it funny.


----------



## Kanda (May 30, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> nice to see they love their kids so much they've just left the other two in portugal while they hop on a private jet to see the fucking pope.
> 
> 
> im probably digging a big hole for myself here but i get a very uneasy feeling that something doesn't quite add up with those parents.



They're left with family members.


----------



## purves grundy (May 30, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> am i really the only one that thinks there's something very fishy about those parents?


Yeah, I noticed their evil, starey eyes. Well dodgy.


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> well I read your post as mocking them... after all what will the pope do to find them... Ie why the fuck are they bothering which such lunacy, waste of time etc



The parents are trying to get maximum publicity for their cause. Making a well-documented visit to the head of a religion with 1.5 billion adherents will get them more coverage, especially in Portugal and Spain which are Catholic countries and where Madeleine is most likely to be if she's still alive.

I assume Madeline's parents are smart enough to realise that the Pope will not "find" Madeleine, even if you're not.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> The parents are trying to get maximum publicity for their cause. Making a well-documented visit to the head of a religion with 1.5 billion adherents will get them more coverage, especially in Portugal and Spain which are Catholic countries and where Madeleine is most likely to be if she's still alive.
> 
> I assume Madeline's parents are smart enough to realise that the Pope will not "find" Madeleine, even if you're not.



I think you should have aimed this post at me...LMHF wasn't mocking them she was questioning my mocking of the pope.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 30, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> They're left with family members.



so?

if it was me i wouldn't leave go of my kids, let alone leave them out of my sight.




it doesnt add up at all. showed them holding hands and looking brave in a nice warm soft focus shot on the bbc news yesterday while on the private jet. why would they let a BBC film crew onto the airoplane with them?

i wonder if they're in frame for questioning by the police.

and if someone broke in and snatched a kid (who would be screaming surely if taken by a stranger), why wern't the other 2 kids woken up as well?

sorry, just doesn't add up AT ALL in my opinion. its sickening.


----------



## sorter (May 30, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> The parents are trying to get maximum publicity for their cause. Making a well-documented visit to the head of a religion with 1.5 billion adherents will get them more coverage, especially in Portugal and Spain which are Catholic countries and where Madeleine is most likely to be if she's still alive.
> 
> I assume Madeline's parents are smart enough to realise that the Pope will not "find" Madeleine, even if you're not.



LMHF was quoting, not stating!


----------



## mrkikiet (May 30, 2007)

but it (the visit to the pope) hasn't got them any coverage in Spain. People here are bored of it and have there own problems to worry about. A missing English girl is pretty low down their list of priorities.

this was wrong, it was written before the visit to the pope, they managed to make it onto most major news bulletins and the freebee papers featured them somewhere.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

mrkikiet said:
			
		

> but it (the visit to the pope) hasn't got them any coverage in Spain. People here are bored of it and have there own problems to worry about. A missing English girl is pretty low down their list of priorities.


 But in all fairness the pope does make the news in Spain.


----------



## sorter (May 30, 2007)

mrkikiet said:
			
		

> but it (the visit to the pope) hasn't got them any coverage in Spain. People here are bored of it and have there own problems to worry about. A missing English girl is pretty low down their list of priorities.



all the more reason for them to keep plugging away! good luck to them.


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> LMHF was quoting, not stating!



Apologies to LMHF. The absence of quotation marks was misleading, but I'll try to read even more carefully in future.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I well aware of it thanks. I still am not sure what many people getting their kicks here are gaining from constant sniping about it all.


I'm not sure what many people joining in and getting their kicks out of the Diana-style grief style are gaining from constant watching of television for non-news updates, like her parents are meeting the Pope.  

I mean, wtf?  How's that supposed to bring back their daughter?  Is the Pope capable of divine intervention or something?  No.  Is he a detective?  No.  Does he know the whereabouts of their child?  No.  Is the fact that they're meeting the Pope therefore newsworthy?  No.  Is the parents' religion a private matter for the parents?  Yes.  

There are seemingly lots of people getting their kicks and gaining something from vicariously experiencing the loss and grief of the parents.  Now *that's* sick.


----------



## mrkikiet (May 30, 2007)

I have seen no mention of it on the tv news. The only way I know about it is from reading English papers online and here.

They don't spend all day talking about him, only when something notable happens, like he goes to Spain/Brazil or he dies.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> Do you have a yellow ribbon LMHF ?



nope.
Ive not bought into it all at all. But I am a parent and find the whole mocking them thing really distasteful and unecessary.
Is it so hard to have a little empathy for two people who have lost their child?


----------



## sorter (May 30, 2007)

AnnO'Neemus said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what many people joining in and getting their kicks out of the Diana-style grief style are gaining from constant watching of television for non-news updates, like her parents are meeting the Pope.
> 
> I mean, wtf?  How's that supposed to bring back their daughter?  Is the Pope capable of divine intervention or something?  No.  Is he a detective?  No.  Does he know the whereabouts of their child?  No.  Is the fact that they're meeting the Pope therefore newsworthy?  No.  Is the parents' religion a private matter for the parents?  Yes.
> 
> There are seemingly lots of people getting their kicks and gaining something from vicariously experiencing the loss and grief of the parents.  Now *that's* sick.



well the thing is ann.............................erm............................... let me put it this way....................................

fuck it, can't be arsed.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 30, 2007)

*agrees with ann*


----------



## mrkikiet (May 30, 2007)

sorter said:
			
		

> all the more reason for them to keep plugging away! good luck to them.


I don't understand why? 

if people aren't paying attention now they aren't suddenly going to start paying attention due to some publicity stunt. People have there own problems and concerns, there have just been elections, martgages are in toruble etc..


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

AnnO'Neemus said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what many people joining in and getting their kicks out of the Diana-style grief style are gaining from constant watching of television for non-news updates, like her parents are meeting the Pope.
> 
> I mean, wtf?  How's that supposed to bring back their daughter?  Is the Pope capable of divine intervention or something?  No.  Is he a detective?  No.  Does he know the whereabouts of their child?  No.  Is the fact that they're meeting the Pope therefore newsworthy?  No.  Is the parents' religion a private matter for the parents?  Yes.
> 
> There are seemingly lots of people getting their kicks and gaining something from vicariously experiencing the loss and grief of the parents.  Now *that's* sick.



Im not sure either... but I do feel it is possible to occupy a middle ground, where you can be respectful and sympathetic without joining in some public grief fest and not sit taking the piss out of their every move either.

Both make me feel deeply uncomfortable TBH


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

,


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Apologies to LMHF. The absence of quotation marks was misleading, but I'll try to read even more carefully in future.


Thanks


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2007)

.


----------



## dessiato (May 30, 2007)

I have a lot of sympathy for the the parents having lost the child. But I wonder how much help and attention is going to the parents of all the other missing children. If this hysteria also helps them then so much the better. But I doubt that is the case.

In response to JMB, I also think there is something not quite right with the McCanns. Can't put my finger on it but something is just not ringing totally true. Is it not also the case that in the mahority of cases lke this the family/parents are often guilty of the crime?


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> In response to JMB, I also think there is something not quite right with the McCanns. Can't put my finger on it but something is just not ringing totally true. Is it not also the case that in the mahority of cases lke this the family/parents are often guilty of the crime?



Is this based on your wide general experience of how parents of abducted children usually act?


----------



## jæd (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> nope.
> Ive not bought into it all at all. But I am a parent and find the whole mocking them thing really distasteful and unecessary.
> Is it so hard to have a little empathy for two people who have lost their child?



Who's mocking them...? I think everyone here has the greatest of sympathy with them. (Hard to have empathy with as most people haven't lost kids abroad...) 

Who *is* being mocked...? The Media and sickkos who are feeding it. The parents are doing what they feel are right. Its just the Media are enabling them do whatever they feel they need to do... 

I bet every parent who's ever lost a kid for even 5 mins would like to get God looking for them, but most people don't have access to his right-hand man.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (May 30, 2007)

I disagree .. I think your last comment IS directly mocking them and their actions. You havent mentioned the media in that sentence have you? Only them off to see god and get god looking for her and so it continues..
What exactly are you gaining by slating them?

Does it make you feel nice in some way? I find it hugely bizarre the way some people appear to be getting off on it


----------



## dessiato (May 30, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Is this based on your wide general experience of how parents of abducted children usually act?


No, it is based on watching their behaviour everyday and drawing my own, unscientific, conclusions. Of course, as I said elsewhere, there is no basis for my conclusion beyond my personal prejudices.


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> No, it is based on watching their behaviour everyday and drawing my own, unscientific, conclusions. Of course, as I said elsewhere, there is no basis for my conclusion beyond my personal prejudices.



You are right in saying that in many cases of murder and abduction, family and close friends are often the culprits. I'm sure that the Portuguese police are aware of this and that they will have exercised due diligence in ensuring that the family (including the extended family) are not ruled out as suspects. Of course, this needs to be done with the utmost sensitivity. I would be highly surprised if the police haven't taken a detailed statement from each of the McCanns about their movements since arriving in Portugal and tried to corroborate these using mobile phone traces, card transactions, other witnesses, etc.

The one thing that you can say about the McCanns is that they are known people connected to the inquiry and incredibly visible. If they have been involved in any mischief, it is very unlikely that they will be able to perpetuate it further or take any more steps to conceal it without being discovered.


----------



## jæd (May 30, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> What exactly are you gaining by slating them?



Ho-hom... I think this is third time I've said I'm not mocking them or slating them... I have the upmost sympathy for their plight... My point it is that when you lose anyone there's always a wish to find them by any means needed, including appalling to a higher power. This understandable, especially by people who have lost a child in a foreign country...

But the vast majority of people don't get an audience with the Pope. Its only because of the Media Circus they have been able to take this step.

Please point how this "slates" the parents... Apart from from reassurance to the parents, don't you see how this audience will accomplish nothing but sales of papers...?


----------



## untethered (May 30, 2007)

jæd said:
			
		

> Please point how this "slates" the parents... Apart from from reassurance to the parents, don't you see how this audience will accomplish nothing but sales of papers...?



The real issue here is whether further publicity might be instrumental in bringing this matter to a conclusion, whether a good one or not. I think it's fair to say that we're in diminishing returns territory. Whether the strategy is the right one or not is impossible to say because we do not know the circumstances in which Madeleine disappeared. More publicity might be the deciding factor or it might not. We won't know until it's over or sufficient time has passed for us to be certain that she won't be found alive and is unlikely to be found dead without any significant breakthrough.


----------



## dessiato (May 30, 2007)

I've just been told by a relative that a 13 yr old boy has just been found after being missing for 13 days, how come he has not been on the news? Is his case not as important as Maddy? Perhaps if he had been a prettty little girl from a middle class family someone might have cared about him. At least he has been found safe and well.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 30, 2007)

Nearly a month ago I heard this story in a 1 minute spot on the news on te radio. That was all the information I required.


----------



## wishface (May 30, 2007)

As I waited in line at the bank i saw a little girl, two in fact, staring at me with haunting eyes. This little girl was Madeleine - two of these 'find maddy' posters pasted onto the screens at the cashier desk. One of the strangest things i've seen in a while. Of course one cannot argue against this because you will always get met with 'well she couls be anywhere' or 'it's better than nothing' and thus be on the receiving end of a all this misplaced 'emotion' the media are cynically channelling. 

Something very odd is happening, has happened (it happened a decade ago iirc), to the national psyche. We seem to be emotionally fragile and prone to sentimentality on a remarkable scale.


----------



## wishface (May 30, 2007)

Am i right in thinking that the mcanns have left the remainder of their children in order to visit the pope, or did they take them with them (contrary to what the papers say).


----------



## renegadechicken (May 30, 2007)

ahhh, man, the parents are now gonna go on a european tour...........how the feck is that gonna help, like the pope praying.well if she aint found after the pope has blessed the piccie of her and said prayers, bearing in mind he is god on earth..............what then?

the european tour aint gonna help, haven't they got two other kids somewhere.........have they left them in the hotel room whilst they search for maddy????????

eta for alleged intelligent people they aint helping themselves now!

the hype over this is ridiculus.......there are many more important things happening in the world other than 1 child going missing ffs, and a lot more that affect me directly and i aint on the telly or asking to see the pope about it....neither are the families of all the other missing children throughout the world, not just the white middle class western world either........

apart from her direct and extended family who really cares........i know i cant get worked up about 1 child going missing otherwise i'd never be able to live..everytime a child went missing that i didnt know i'd have to freak out about it ask to see the pope and wear a differant coloured ribbon and pray for them, i'd lose my job if i did that cos i'd always be in prayer somewhere in the world.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 30, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Am i right in thinking that the mcanns have left the remainder of their children in order to visit the pope, or did they take them with them (contrary to what the papers say).


I'm afraid it's true.   They have left the other children.   But it's ok...they can see them from the plane.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 30, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Am i right in thinking that the mcanns have left the remainder of their children in order to visit the pope, or did they take them with them (contrary to what the papers say).




yes, theyve left the kids with family/friends in portugal and fucked off in a private jet, along with a bbc camera crew, to see the pope.



such fucking WONDERFUL parents.


----------



## renegadechicken (May 30, 2007)

there is something not quite right about them...or is it only me that thinks that?


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 30, 2007)

Apparently a butterfly landed on the woman while she was meeting the pope, now it's tommorrows front page headline "Butterfly Of Hope" .
 


 FOR FUCKS SAKE, GIVE IT A REST


----------



## renegadechicken (May 30, 2007)

Fuck off................................................ is that true???????????????


----------



## renegadechicken (May 30, 2007)

i bet one of the parents is gonna be dragged in over this at some point....where will that leave the media?


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 30, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> Fuck off................................................ is that true???????????????



They just showed tommorrows front pages on Newsnight.  


EDIT - 

here you go - The Sun's new official line is that Madeline has been reincarnated as a red admiral butterfly that follows Mrs McCann about.




			
				The Sun said:
			
		

> A BUTTERFLY gave hope to brave Kate McCann yesterday — as it landed softly on her hair before an emotional audience with The Pope.
> 
> The tiny Red Admiral then flitted from the yellow ribbon tying her ponytail, only to return two minutes later.
> 
> ...


----------



## renegadechicken (May 30, 2007)

JEEEZE  

HOW FUCKED IS THAT


----------



## wreckhead (May 31, 2007)

Just been told that a new version of Bryan Adams' "Everything I Do" is being considered to "help".  I seriously thought it was a windup until I did a little googling:


> Radio stations across the UK have played a special version of the Simple Minds song Don't You Forget About Me, while the family's spokesman said *a new version of Bryan Adams's Everything I Do is also considered*.
> 
> The first line "look into my eyes" is thought to be particularly relevant because of Madeleine's unusual iris in her right eye.


http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21812850-5001021,00.html


----------



## renegadechicken (May 31, 2007)

ahhhhhh fuck off this is fucking stupid now...........


----------



## renegadechicken (May 31, 2007)

eta  flame me i dont care this has gone past what most people would consider normal,it's just weird and scarey now


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (May 31, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> eta  flame me i dont care this has gone past what most people would consider normal,it's just weird and scarey now



i agree with you mate..its absolutely ridiculous.


a large part of me thinks the parents did it though.


----------



## fishfinger (May 31, 2007)

I think I'm gonna throw-up!


----------



## Chairman Meow (May 31, 2007)

wreckhead said:
			
		

> Just been told that a new version of Bryan Adams' "Everything I Do" is being considered to "help".  I seriously thought it was a windup until I did a little googling:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21812850-5001021,00.html



Oh fucking hell - that is just the absolute limit! That's my most hated song EVAH!


----------



## Kanda (May 31, 2007)

Big Brother has started, the Nation has a new interest and they'll probably be fucked off the front page pretty soon.

Thank fucking god.


----------



## Paul Russell (May 31, 2007)

Ohhh, that's a sign innit.





			
				DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> Apparently a butterfly landed on the woman while she was meeting the pope, now it's tommorrows front page headline "Butterfly Of Hope" .


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Ohhh, that's a sign innit.



Just found this:



> The Ive Tree.. 30 September - 27 October - The power of the Ivy to cling and bind made it a potent symbol of determination and strength. Ivy can strange trees and was a portent of death and spiritual growth. Ivy people are restless, socialble and good natured. Cheerful, expnasive and magnetic, they win friends easily and dislike offending others. Although often indecisive, they are not weak willed and tackle difficult tasks with infectious optimism.
> The Ruling Deity - The faery bride Guinevere rules this sigh
> The Druic Animal -The Butterfly symbolises faery faith - Ivy  people must not get too caught up in others problems or they can suffer disappointment and betrayal. Planetary Ruler - Persephone Ogham Word - Gort


http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/amethystbt/celtictreeastrology.html


----------



## Crispy (May 31, 2007)

I think I'll make a Madeleine mask and wear it on the tube.


----------



## T & P (May 31, 2007)

Has Private Eye started a 'Madeleineballs' column? If it hasn't already, it fucking should. Enough material to keep it running for 10 years.


----------



## wishface (May 31, 2007)

if that butterfly is their transmigrated child then all hope is lost - FUCKING PERVERT LEPIDOPTERISTS WATCH OUT!

Rebekah Wade comes for you!


----------



## Barking_Mad (May 31, 2007)

According to today's Independent the idea to visit the pope first came from the News of The World.


----------



## Belushi (May 31, 2007)

wreckhead said:
			
		

> Just been told that a new version of Bryan Adams' "Everything I Do" is being considered to "help".  I seriously thought it was a windup until I did a little googling:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21812850-5001021,00.html
> 
> ...


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 31, 2007)

is this a cult?


----------



## Belushi (May 31, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> if that butterfly is their transmigrated child then all hope is lost - FUCKING PERVERT LEPIDOPTERISTS WATCH OUT!
> 
> Rebekah Wade comes for you!



Innit, and they claim those big nets are just for catching butterflies...


----------



## Nine Bob Note (May 31, 2007)

Current menu on the Sky 'News' website...

    * Home
    * UK News
    * MADELEINE
    * World News
    * Politics
    * Business
    * Money
    * Comment
    * Living
    * Strange News
    * Weather
    * Traffic


----------



## STFC (May 31, 2007)

The McCanns are Catholic, right? So why wouldn't they take the opportunity of visiting the head of their faith, if they thought there was even the slightest chance it might help them get their daughter back?


----------



## nino_savatte (May 31, 2007)

Can someone tell me what is the point in the Pope (who protected paedophiles) blessing a photo?

FFS, this has gone too far.


----------



## nino_savatte (May 31, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> The McCanns are Catholic, right? So why wouldn't they take the opportunity of visiting the head of their faith, if they thought there was even the slightest chance it might help them get their daughter back?



So the Pope is a miracle worker now as well as the head of the Roman Catholic church? I wonder how many loaves of bread he can conjure up for the starving....oops, he doesn't care about them - does he?


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2007)

The incredible mass response to this, not the awful abduction, loss, etc,  is beginning to look like something that would happen in the middle ages, maybe it is significant? evidence of a malaise in the world, alienation, etc, can anyone who is up in medieval history inform us of similar phenonemen.


----------



## STFC (May 31, 2007)

nino_savatte said:
			
		

> So the Pope is a miracle worker now as well as the head of the Roman Catholic church? I wonder how many loaves of bread he can conjure up for the starving....oops, he doesn't care about them - does he?



I really don't know whether he does or not, he doesn't mean anything to me. I understand he's a pretty important person as far as RCs go though.


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Innit, and they claim those big nets are just for catching butterflies...



Its all starting to make sense now....


----------



## Belushi (May 31, 2007)

treelover said:
			
		

> The incredible mass response to this, not the awful abduction, loss, etc,  is beginning to look like something that would happen in the middle ages, maybe it is significant? evidence of a malaise in the world, alienation, etc, can anyone who is up in medieval history inform us of similar phenonemen.



Well, if it turns out the Jews have stolen Madelaine to use her blood for passover


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Well, if it turns out the Jews have stolen Madelaine to use her blood for passover



 

I blame the witches.


----------



## Bristly Pioneer (May 31, 2007)

Did anyone see the advert on TV yet?  This whole thing seems to have become much more of a media farce and public bonding session than anything to do with finding a little girl.

I can only begin to imagine how much prime time TV advertising costs (even with charitable discounts).  

Don't get me wrong I would love for the little girl to be found, but as has been said before, what about all of the other missing kids.

If it had been a single mum who had lost her kid whilst dining out the press would be crucifying her.  The whole thing just smacks of media hipocracy, and leaves a very odd feeling in my stomach.


----------



## treelover (May 31, 2007)

I mean the basically hysterical response to the event, not the act itself.




> Well, if it turns out the Jews have stolen Madelaine to use her blood for passover


----------



## Belushi (May 31, 2007)

treelover said:
			
		

> I mean the basically hysterical response to the event, not the act itself.



The believe that Jews were stealing kids was a pretty hysterical response to child dissapearances!


----------



## Jessiedog (May 31, 2007)

And in the meantime......


On this very planet.....

Twenty one children under five years old die - every _minute_ - of malnutrition (i.e. they starve to death,) or of related preventable diseases.


That's 1,260 per hour.

That's 30,240 per day.

That's over 11 million each year.

Year in.

Year out.

Eleven million _every_ year.

Year after year after year after year after year.



Maddie?


Pfaff!




Woof


----------



## STFC (May 31, 2007)

Jessiedog said:
			
		

> And in the meantime......
> 
> 
> On this very planet.....
> ...



Nobody's saying that's not important, are they? Start a thread on the subject if you like.

Should we only care when the numbers reach a certain level? One kid doesn't matter, but millions do?


----------



## T & P (May 31, 2007)

Yesterday I saw TV ad appeal. On a UK TV channel.

I kid you not.

I was urged to visit some website, download and print 'missing Madeleine' posters and put them up in my area.

I think I might just do that. You never know whether she might be in South London eh?


----------



## Grandma Death (May 31, 2007)

Ive had around half a dozen e mails sent to me-including my works groupwise account (for which people have been sacked for its misuse) urging me to help find maddy.


I'm now starting to get _really_ annoyed with the amount of publicity this is generating.


----------



## wishface (May 31, 2007)

Grandma Death said:
			
		

> Ive had around half a dozen e mails sent to me-including my works groupwise account (for which people have been sacked for its misuse) urging me to help find maddy.
> 
> 
> I'm now starting to get _really_ annoyed with the amount of publicity this is generating.


get on and help then!

you filthy butterfly hating anarchist!

Honestly


----------



## untethered (May 31, 2007)

It sounds like compassion fatigue to me.

First you're shocked.
Then you're angry.
Then you want to help.
Then you're sad and frustrated.
Then you're bored.
Then you wish the whole family had been abducted.


----------



## john x (May 31, 2007)

Grandma Death said:
			
		

> I'm now starting to get _really_ annoyed with the amount of publicity this is generating.



The inevitable backlash is about to begin, I fear.  

john x


----------



## Jessiedog (May 31, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> Nobody's saying that's not important, are they? Start a thread on the subject if you like.


Nah.

I'll post when and where I like.

And you can fuck right off.





> Should we only care when the numbers reach a certain level? One kid doesn't matter, but millions do?


It's a question of proportion though, isn't it?

What's so important about "Maddie" that makes half of Europe (or at least the UK,) go into some kind of mass-hysteria-emotional-meltdown?

I'd sure be interested to know how many peeps printing out "Maddie" posters to put in their windows have ever given a second thought to (let alone taken any action about,) the *33,000* kids under five years old that die *every day* 'cos they don't have enough to eat?

I have a sneaking suspicion that it wouldn't amount to many of them (though I accept I have no evidence to support my supposition).

Obviously it's true that one death is a tragedy, whereas millions of deaths are simply a statistic.

I find the ongoing media circus (circling vultures more like,) surrounding this event distastful in the extreme - and the behaviour of those in the UK who are so caught up in it to be completely fucking ridiculous.

The whole thing is bollocks IMO, it's all about money and nothing else.

Fuck the media and fuck those sucked in by it.

Fuck 'em!

 

Woof


----------



## Orang Utan (May 31, 2007)

Someone's phoned up C4 to suggest that the teardrop/eye logo in Big Brother is a tribute to Madeleine McCann FFS!


----------



## Paul Russell (May 31, 2007)

It's a pretty sad state of affairs if we can only get het about stuff we can imagine happening to us -- "ohh, it's every parent's worth nightmare" whereas a pile full of dying foreigners is seemingly beyond our realms of empathy.

Or something.


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

Would an ironic "List completely idiotic pig-ignorant things we could do to help in the search for Maddy and show we care" thread be in poor taste?

Or is real life parody enough at this point?


----------



## untethered (May 31, 2007)

Jessiedog said:
			
		

> What's so important about "Maddie" that makes half of Europe (or at least the UK,) go into some kind of mass-hysteria-emotional-meltdown?
> 
> I'd sure be interested to know how many peeps printing out "Maddie" posters to put in their windows have ever given a second thought to (let alone taken any action about,) the *33,000* kids under five years old that die *every day* 'cos they don't have enough to eat?



There's a lot of psychology to the issue.

Madeleine and her family are individual people _like us_ that many people can identify with. 

The situation is not particularly complex, either practically or morally. A bad person has done a bad thing. The family are victims. We need to help them rescue the innocent girl and catch the bad person so they can be punished.

Taking on this challenge, however vicariously, does not require us to challenge our preconceived ideas about the world. On the contrary, it serves to confirm them.

The things that people are being asked to do require little effort, thought, commitment or expense.

Ultimately, the situation is potentially resolvable in a clean-cut way. The girl is found (dead or alive).

Contrast this with children around the world dying from hunger, the causes of which are many and various, the means of alleviation not entirely clear, the moral issues obscure, the likelihood that significant change on this issue might involve serious insight, commitment, reevaulation of one's own beliefs, etc. And after all this, there will be no neat solution.

So given the choice, people's latent desire to "do their bit" and take some apparently positive action is better served by printing out a News of the World poster of Maddy and putting it on their work's noticeboard than trying to get their heads around world hunger.

Iironically, a simple direct debit to a reputable aid organisation for an affordable amount, maintained over several years, may well make a substantial and definite difference to the lives of many people.


----------



## Juice Terry (May 31, 2007)

Well I watched Ramsays Fword last night and he used those Maddeline sponge things in the desert, coincidence or product placement?

I did wince though when he stated:-

"Once you've tasted the perfect Maddeline you'll never want anything else"


----------



## Belushi (May 31, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Someone's phoned up C4 to suggest that the teardrop/eye logo in Big Brother is a tribute to Madeleine McCann FFS!



Perhaps thats who theyve got behind that locked door


----------



## Jessiedog (May 31, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> So given the choice, people's latent desire to "do their bit" and take some apparently positive action is better served by printing out a News of the World poster of Maddy and putting it on their work's noticeboard than trying to get their heads around world hunger.


And that is one of the things I find so disturbing about this.

It's speaks volumes about the the peeps "getting involved" in this fruitless (other than revenue generation for big corporates, of course,) exercise.

It's "Mental Maddie Madness".





> Iironically, a simple direct debit to a reputable aid organisation for an affordable amount, maintained over several years, may well make a substantial and definite difference to the lives of many people.


Exactly!

Fuck the media and fuck all those buying into their (money making) agenda.

Fuck 'em!

 

Woof


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> There's a lot of psychology to the issue.
> 
> Madeleine and her family are individual people _like us_ that many people can identify with.
> 
> ...



All perfectly reasonable points, but without wishing to appear to put words into Jessiedog's jaws perhaps the retort would be that if a fraction of effort expended on the search for Madeleine was put into promoting the fact that there are a number of simple, minimum-effort things that people can do to "do their bit" about the bigger more complex wrongs without having their self-definition or lifestyle challenged or disrupted, far more tangible positive results could be achieved than any sane person now hopes for in the case of the McCann family.


----------



## john x (May 31, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Perhaps thats who theyve got behind that locked door



You've heard that too?

I've heard the rumour from 'inside', that Endemol have done a deal with Madeleine's parents to have her appear as a 'surprise' housemate, if/when she is found.

Whatever next!

john x


----------



## Cid (May 31, 2007)

The Missing Madeleine website is a little... Surreal. 'Gerry's blog' reads like a holiday diary or something... 

Fucking hell they even have a minute by minute breakdown of the average McCann day.


----------



## STFC (May 31, 2007)

Jessiedog said:
			
		

> Nah.
> 
> I'll post when and where I like.
> 
> And you can fuck right off.



There there, good little doggie...


----------



## Jessiedog (May 31, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> There there, good little doggie...


 

Woof


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (May 31, 2007)

grief tourist said:
			
		

> Cheese and Wine Evening
> Market Harborough, Leicestershire
> 
> In Market Harborough, Leicestershire, I will be holding a cheese and wine evening on Wednesday 30 May and will charge a £5 entrance fee. There will also be a raffle with various prizes. Local supermarkets and deli’s will be donating the wine and cheese. Our thoughts will be with Maddie and her family as they are every day. xx



 

from that wierd website...


----------



## STFC (May 31, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> There's a lot of psychology to the issue...



Very good post untethered.


----------



## London_Calling (May 31, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> So given the choice, people's latent desire to "do their bit" and take some apparently positive action is better served by printing out a News of the World poster of Maddy and putting it on their work's noticeboard than trying to get their heads around world hunger.


Fwiw, I also think some attach to Maddy as they might an ‘episode’ in a series; a sense of communal togetherness, of communal sorrow, of  . . . community. Ultimately, those people sub consciously understand it’s a short-term emotional investment, that it’ll finish (one way or the other) and be replaced by another with similar emotional potential in a while. Another episode, another drip-fed shared, short-term grieving experience.


----------



## billy_bob (May 31, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> from that wierd website...



Delicious food, fine beverages, and a lot of ineffectual handwringing about child disappearance, possible abuse and likely murder. What's not to like?


----------



## amatis (May 31, 2007)

Yesterday there was a few seconds about it on the news here. They showed the parents meet the Pope in the crowd at the Vatican and he said (with the  photo of the child in his hands) that he prays for her every day. 
Reporters should ask him if he walks towards every parent who's child got missing or only the ones with the money to play the media. I find the British tabloid hysteria strange but this is worse and more disgusting than the prinses Di hysteria.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 31, 2007)




----------



## souljacker (May 31, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> from that wierd website...



That website is completely bizarre. In the 'communities' section, after the wine evening, it mentions that the Isle of Man is holding the TT this week. No mention of Madeleine at all. Was she a motorbike fan, or maybe they are expecting her to show up?


----------



## john x (May 31, 2007)

amatis said:
			
		

> but this is worse and more disgusting than the prinses Di hysteria.



No it is not. By a long, long way!  

This is amusing and slightly irritating but that was scarey.

john x


----------



## Pie 1 (May 31, 2007)

Psychics' in da house!

This really, really is getting sureal.


----------



## stavros (May 31, 2007)

> this is worse and more disgusting than the prinses Di hysteria.


The whole Maddy episode is getting very silly, but is it really reaching Di-levels? I really am dreading this summer when the popular media will go ape shit again and probably start pleading for St George to abdicate so she can take his place.


----------



## ddraig (May 31, 2007)

will be a bit on newsnight bbc2 on the coverege/handling in a mo
paxman said something along the lines 'dignified or helpful' in the preview


----------



## moose (May 31, 2007)

Juice Terry said:
			
		

> Well I watched Ramsays Fword last night and he used those Maddeline sponge things in the desert, coincidence or product placement?
> 
> I did wince though when he stated:-
> 
> "Once you've tasted the perfect Maddeline you'll never want anything else"


That's what happens, sadly. First you rear your own turkeys in the quest for the finest meat, then pigs, and finally, in search of the ultimate feast, small girls. 

Anyway, the psychics' reports are in now, so I expect they'll solve it tomorrow.


----------



## renegadechicken (May 31, 2007)

lets catch the butterfly, kill it, mount it and frame it and sell it on ebay in the name of raising awareness for maddy ...............i suggest a reserve price of 25 million..........


----------



## renegadechicken (May 31, 2007)

then i suggest a fecking great party from the profits...........


ohhhh   i'm baD, I'M BAD ...I'M BAD

ETA  i'm pissed


----------



## Cid (Jun 1, 2007)

If you read the Guardian article it's clear the police are only viewing psychic testimonies as potential leads because they are, by and large, a bunch of loons and are as good a place as any to start looking for psychotic kidnappers.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jun 1, 2007)

i tell you what..i'm not a big news watcher or paper reader but it doesn't totally escape me..and i talk to lots of people..but this whole maddy 'thing' just isn't happening here in aus.

i'm sure the di thing did tho..i was in uk then....but maddy....no, nothin really. just a bit of news.

its only happening big in europe/uk? i think? the whole world hasn't lost their perspective...


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Jun 1, 2007)

Cid said:
			
		

> If you read the Guardian article it's clear the police are only viewing psychic testimonies as potential leads because they are, by and large, a bunch of loons and are as good a place as any to start looking for psychotic kidnappers.



Its a decent theory.


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 1, 2007)

There was a classic headline in the Daily Express the other day along the lines of the "Sick ghouls cashing in on Diana's memory"

I don't know what the story was but -- pot -- kettle, etc.




			
				stavros said:
			
		

> but is it really reaching Di-levels?



Sorry -- back to Madeleine and the butterfly of hope from heaven.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Jun 1, 2007)

There are websites doing the same with the Maddy case, setting themselves up as donation sites...


----------



## Biffo (Jun 1, 2007)

There was a journalist linked to the family on the radio yesterday saying how everything should be done to stop the story from fading away until "little Maddie can return home to her Mummy and Daddy". He suggested a benefit concert ffs.

My suggestion is a Band Aid type record by a super group of all the current hit makers. Ideas for songs include:

I think we're alone now
Don't leave me this way
No regrets
Leave a light on 
Alone again or
Food for thought

Or we could all donate a day's pay to the fund or cut off one of our fingers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2007)

Hey Little Girl by Icehouse or maybe Maurice Chevalier's Thank Heaven For Little Girls.
Or we could crush the butterfly of hope, just to release Mr Mister's Broken Wings


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 1, 2007)

Biffo said:
			
		

> There was a journalist linked to the family on the radio yesterday saying how everything should be done to stop the story from fading away until "little Maddie can return home to her Mummy and Daddy". He suggested a benefit concert ffs.
> 
> My suggestion is a Band Aid type record by a super group of all the current hit makers. Ideas for songs include:
> 
> ...



Everyone with children should abandon one of them to show solidarity.


----------



## untethered (Jun 1, 2007)

Today, we are all Mr and Mrs McCann.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jun 1, 2007)

billy_bob said:
			
		

> Everyone with children should abandon one of them to show solidarity.


 What, even if you've only got one?


----------



## dlx1 (Jun 1, 2007)

god I wish she would  hurry up and come home.


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 1, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> What, even if you've only got one?



Alright, all of them, regardless of how many you've got.


----------



## Nemo (Jun 1, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Today, we are all Mr and Mrs McCann.


Won't that get a little confusing?


----------



## Belushi (Jun 1, 2007)

I'm going to get contact lenses made so I can have one weird eye as a tribute to Maddie.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jun 1, 2007)

Does that mean all our kids are Madelaine, even the boys?


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jun 1, 2007)

I better start perfecting my whiney nasal voice...


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (Jun 1, 2007)

THE PARENTS DID IT


is it just me that finds this blatently obvious??


----------



## untethered (Jun 1, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Won't that get a little confusing?



It will for the Pope.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jun 1, 2007)

Biffo said:
			
		

> There was a journalist linked to the family on the radio yesterday saying how everything should be done to stop the story from fading away until "little Maddie can return home to her Mummy and Daddy". He suggested a benefit concert ffs.
> 
> My suggestion is a Band Aid type record by a super group of all the current hit makers. Ideas for songs include:
> 
> ...



How about Iron Maiden's 'Bring your Daughter to the Slaughter' ...


----------



## Error Gorilla (Jun 1, 2007)

It's straight out of the file marked _Do Bears Shit in the Woods?_ but Kelvin McKenzie really is the epitome of the kind of rabid, tabloid anti-intellectualism that takes hold of debate in this country all too often. Last night he was camped on the _Newsnight_ sofa barking down some woman (her name escapes me) who dared to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this whole thing is driven by a mass media with ulterior motives.

I think what concerns me, apart from the obvious desire that she is found safe - and doesn't it speak volumes that we have to qualify our thoughts with this caveat? - is what will happen if this story comes to a conclusion?

The blanket media coverage afforded to this story; the MySpace icons reproducing the Find Maddie poster (I wonder: is that the name her parents use, or rather like James Bulger, is the cuter-sounding contraction merely a confection by the tabloid press keen to elicit every drop of emotion from this sorry story?) or the Everton team wearing her image on their shirts and the faltering appeals from Beckham and Ronaldo aren’t actually simply a precursor to what we do best, which is to give somebody a good kicking. The Great British Public sense blood and they’ll want all the emotion they’re pouring into this drama repaid ten-fold. Cue a summer of knee-jerk hyperbole and tabloid-led campaigns to hang everybody even remotely suspected of being a nonce from the nearest lampost.


----------



## wishface (Jun 1, 2007)

I beliee it is properly Madeleine, not maddy. Not that the masses care.

Kelvin McKenzie once said and I quote: "all terrorists are muslim".

He is a total cunt. A real media bully who needs to be taken down a peg ot ten.

But a benefit concert? Fuck me.


----------



## T & P (Jun 1, 2007)

*A symbol of hope for everyone*


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> THE PARENTS DID IT
> 
> 
> is it just me that finds this blatently obvious??


No, are you some kind of detective or something? Prat


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 1, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> No, are you some kind of detective or something?



He doesn't need to be. It's "blatently obvious" innit?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2007)

I fucking hate that kind of speculation - only brainless idiots do that sort of thing


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 1, 2007)

Yep.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 1, 2007)

http://www.findmadeleine.com/
"The Official Website to find Madeleine McCann"
So one wag on another board said:
"so does that mean if you find her and dont report it to this site it doesnt count?"


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 1, 2007)

Biffo said:
			
		

> There was a journalist linked to the family on the radio yesterday saying how everything should be done to stop the story from fading away until "little Maddie can return home to her Mummy and Daddy". He suggested a benefit concert ffs.




I was thinking they could release a book, somewhere along the lines of Where's Wally.







Bad taste?


----------



## treelover (Jun 1, 2007)

Yes, imo he is a very influential and dangerous man, he certainly knows how to plug in to mass bigotry, greed and now, mass hysteria,  and perhaps even how to create it.  




> EG said:
> It's straight out of the file marked Do Bears Shit in the Woods? but Kelvin McKenzie really is the epitome of the kind of rabid, tabloid anti-intellectualism that takes hold of debate in this country all too often. Last night he was camped on the Newsnight sofa barking down some woman (her name escapes me) who dared to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this whole thing is driven by a mass media with ulterior motives.


----------



## Error Gorilla (Jun 1, 2007)

treelover said:
			
		

> Yes, imo he is a very influential and dangerous man, he certainly knows how to plug in to mass bigotry, greed and now, mass hysteria, and perhaps even how to create it.



McKenzie's repeated recrudescence after whichever minority he's jerked spittle on of late is nothing short of a fucking miracle. For the sake of us all he must be sealed in concrete and dumped in the North Sea. On a recent edition of _Dinner With Portillo*_ the journalist Lauren Booth was so frustrated with his continual interjections she threw a glass of water in his face.

*How do they keep their food down?


----------



## T & P (Jun 1, 2007)

Part2 said:
			
		

> I was thinking they could release a book, somewhere along the lines of Where's Wally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



'Where's Maddie'

It's got a nice ring to it doesn't it?


----------



## wishface (Jun 1, 2007)

Error Gorilla said:
			
		

> McKenzie's repeated recrudescence after whichever minority he's jerked spittle on of late is nothing short of a fucking miracle. For the sake of us all he must be sealed in concrete and dumped in the North Sea. On a recent edition of _Dinner With Portillo*_ the journalist Lauren Booth was so frustrated with his continual interjections she threw a glass of water in his face.
> 
> *How do they keep their food down?


why would you wish that on the north sea when there is a whole star this planet orbits which would vaporize his worthless form with nary a second thought.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 1, 2007)

Just spotted a couple of posters on lamposts here. At least they are in Portugal so there is a greater relevance. Tomorrow I am going to check all my students, you never know one of them might be her, and, until I saw the posters I might not have been aware of the missing child.


----------



## zenie (Jun 1, 2007)

Got my Euros from the post office earlier and just as she'd given me the money I was handed a Royal Mail A5 flyer to take with me on holiday......




with a photo of Maddeline on  FFS!!!!


----------



## dessiato (Jun 1, 2007)

zenie said:
			
		

> Got my Euros from the post office earlier and just as she'd given me the money I was handed a Royal Mail A5 flyer to take with me on holiday......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Where are you going for your holiday? Don't forget to look for the child.


----------



## subversplat (Jun 1, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> Where are you going for your holiday? Don't forget to look for the child.


8:00am - Breakfast in hotel buffet
8:30 - 9:45am - Sunbathe on beach
9:45 - 12:15pm - Look for Madeleine


----------



## dessiato (Jun 2, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> 8:00am - Breakfast in hotel buffet
> 8:30 - 9:45am - Sunbathe on beach
> 9:45 - 12:15pm - Look for Madeleine


but what about the rest of the day? Are you going to waste it enjoying yourself?


----------



## Cid (Jun 2, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> but what about the rest of the day? Are you going to waste it enjoying yourself?



No, that's for going to church and prayer of course.


----------



## moose (Jun 3, 2007)

Now the parents are appointing a 'long-term campaigns manager', so it doesn't look llike the hysteria will die down for some time yet. 

"Gerry McCann said yesterday: 'We're not going to be holding press conferences in six months time to say, "Isn't this terrible?" We have to be prepared in case it does become that and that's why we need a professional campaigns manager.'"

link


----------



## wishface (Jun 3, 2007)

They are also planning a 'Madeleine Day'.

The fuck is going on?


----------



## STFC (Jun 3, 2007)

*"Just one last thing..."*




			
				johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> THE PARENTS DID IT
> 
> 
> is it just me that finds this blatently obvious??


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jun 3, 2007)

Did they really go and see the pope???

or was that a wind up?


----------



## Jessiedog (Jun 3, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> Did they really go and see the pope???
> 
> or was that a wind up?


They did.

The Pope blessed a picture of "Maddie".

 


Woof


----------



## Nemo (Jun 3, 2007)

Jessiedog said:
			
		

> They did.
> 
> The Pope blessed a picture of "Maddie".
> 
> ...


And a butterfly landed on the mother; don't forget the butterfly.


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jun 3, 2007)

OMG, thats just wrong and creepy if you ask me....i cant explain why, but i have neighbour who is convinced if she met the pope he would sought out her terminal cancer, but no fucker has asked her to go to rome.....

Its just out of proportion and you wonder if they are just evading the real emotion of grief right now...poor buggars they are gonna have to face the reality sooner or later or all this media circus is gonna become like oxygen to them and all consuming....sad


----------



## cyberfairy (Jun 3, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> OMG, thats just wrong and creepy if you ask me....i cant explain why, but i have neighbour who is convinced if she met the pope he would sought out her terminal cancer, but no fucker has asked her to go to rome.....
> 
> Its just out of proportion and you wonder if they are just evading the real emotion of grief right now...poor buggars they are gonna have to face the reality sooner or later or all this media circus is gonna become like oxygen to them and all consuming....sad


They have plans according to yesterday's Guardian to go all over the place to spread the word of her disapearance (that everyone sodding already knows) including the Grand Prix and Isle of Man TT She would never fit on a sportsbike! 
 Yesterday at Lake Windermere, I witnessed a four by four with all its back windows covered in 'Find Maddie' homemade posters


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jun 3, 2007)

cyberfairy said:
			
		

> They have plans according to yesterday's Guardian to go all over the place to spread the word of her disapearance (that everyone sodding already knows) including the Grand Prix and Isle of Man TT She would never fit on a sportsbike!
> Yesterday at Lake Windermere, I witnessed a four by four with all its back windows covered in 'Find Maddie' homemade posters




Its utter madness and quite irritating and annoying, like im starting to not care how they ruddy feel at the moment...


----------



## stavros (Jun 3, 2007)

Elton John's organising a World Madeleine Day or something. Fuck knows what it's going to achieve, other than sell some tabloids. 

That said, he's got a bit of a record with attaching himself to "national disasters" which warrant very little media attention. I think he goes through a 10 year cycle or something.


----------



## Pinette (Jun 4, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> THE PARENTS DID IT
> 
> 
> is it just me that finds this blatently obvious??


Yes it is just you!  You appear to be quite cold and unsympathetic and you can't spell.  You are dyslexic emotionally too perhaps?


----------



## J77 (Jun 5, 2007)

Crimewatch tonight to bring it back to the fore.

Speaking of which, was out of the country -- well away from UK TV, since I live out of the country anyway -- in the US last week, didn't hear or see a peep about this story.

I also heard that it's not that well pressed in Spain either -- from the first few weeks, you'd have thought it was a worldwide phenonema.

Is it still in the UK papers?

Still, hope they get a lead eventually.


----------



## The Groke (Jun 5, 2007)

It's all a bit pathetic really.

I am glad we haven't had a bar of it out here in the Middle East.

Western society's (in particular, the UK) penchant for high profile grief-porn makes me


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 6, 2007)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> Western society's (in particular, the UK) penchant for high profile grief-porn makes me


I take it you couldn't find a "vomit" smiley ...


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 6, 2007)

just got back from Spain, inland not the coast, a small village where my mum lives, only about 2 English couples live there in a village of 350 people... there are 3 posters in the town and one in the bar, all over Spain there are posters, in the airports here there are loads of posters... people all over are aware of her missing... I don’t think that they need to make anyone else in the UK aware. 

While there I did have a conversation with someone who told me there is a problem in Portugal with kids being stolen to order for people in Morocco and Africa, they seemed to think this happens from time to time.. Not sure if this is true though.


----------



## May Kasahara (Jun 6, 2007)

When I was in Barca last week I saw some Madeleine stuff dotted about, including, bizarrely, a "Look into my eyes" poster stencilled onto a wall, graf-style.


----------



## mrkikiet (Jun 6, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> just got back from Spain, inland not the coast, a small village where my mum lives, only about 2 English couples live there in a village of 350 people...


There is NOTHING in Zaragoza, thankfully. (or nothing i have seen yet, maybe the expat bars have something.)


----------



## sorter (Jun 6, 2007)

mrkikiet said:
			
		

> There is NOTHING in Zaragoza, thankfully. (or nothing i have seen yet, maybe the expat bars have something.)



why 'thankfully'? does it offend you?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 6, 2007)

*Has the media backlash begun?*



> MADELEINE McCann’s parents were forced to deny any involvement in their daughter’s abduction today after accusing questions from the German media.
> 
> Kate and Gerry McCann looked appalled when they were asked if they had anything to do with their four-year-old’s disappearance.
> 
> ...


Link


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jun 6, 2007)

yawn


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jun 7, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Link



The description of the person who was seen carrying what could of been a child away from the apartment.

White
5ft 7ins
Medium build 
Short hair
Wearing a dark jacket, beige trousers and dark shoes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6695743.stm



From your link







You would think he would at least have the sense not to dress exactly so as to look like the description of the main suspect.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 7, 2007)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> The description of the person who was seen carrying what could of been a child away from the apartment.
> 
> White
> 5ft 7ins
> ...


Sorry but I had to laugh!


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 11, 2007)

Madeleine parents in Morocco trip...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6739893.stm


told ya...


----------



## Schmetterling (Jun 11, 2007)

Can anyone recommend a good alternative search engine to Google?  According to one of the tabloids Google is planning on incorporating the eye thing in the o of its name.
Call me heartless but it right pisses me off.  I don't want to keep being reminded of something very horrible that could have entirely been prevented.


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Jun 11, 2007)

Schmetterling said:
			
		

> Can anyone recommend a good alternative search engine to Google?  According to one of the tabloids Google is planning on incorporating the eye thing in the o of its name.
> Call me heartless but it right pisses me off.  I don't want to keep being reminded of something very horrible that could have entirely been prevented.



This is the point when to me the grief tourism on this matter has really gone too far.  When I heard the news I shouted out 'for fucks sake enough'.  

There are shedloads of little kids here and abroad who go missing why concentrate on the blonde middle class one.


----------



## sorter (Jun 11, 2007)

Schmetterling said:
			
		

> I don't want to keep being reminded of something very horrible that could have entirely been prevented.



iraq?


----------



## Aldebaran (Jun 11, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> hile there I did have a conversation with someone who told me there is a problem in Portugal with kids being stolen to order for people in Morocco and Africa, they seemed to think this happens from time to time.. Not sure if this is true though.



Of course and you can add the whole Middle East to that. We Muslims would do everything to save poor non-believers and don't forget the girls abducted in Europe for the "white slave trade". It was still alive and famous in Europe up to the seventies and eighties. My mother was a prime example. 
I always thought I was born too late in the century to be able to buy White Blond Girls for my harem from a Secret Catalogue, but this announces the revival of these Glorious Days. 

salaam


----------



## Joon (Jun 11, 2007)

I thought the G gle thing was a wind-up.

But it's not.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 13, 2007)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6749131.stm


----------



## Belushi (Jun 13, 2007)

Stranger and stranger.

I remember the case with the stepsisters in Belgium.


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 13, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6749131.stm


Many of these things are absolute bollocks, but if the reported links with the previous letters are genuine and accurate I'd be prioritising the line of enquiry ...


----------



## wreckhead (Jun 21, 2007)

> ...businessman... ...printing free T-shirts for holidaymakers to wear abroad this summer.
> 
> Now he is hoping the start of the summer holiday rush will see the shirts being worn all over Europe alerting more people to the case.
> 
> ...


http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/d...Node=161366&contentPK=17623470&folderPk=88499



Personally I'd feel very odd wearing a "Maddie" T-shirt on holiday, but whatever "helps the cause" eh?!


----------



## Nemo (Jun 21, 2007)

wreckhead said:
			
		

> http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/d...Node=161366&contentPK=17623470&folderPk=88499
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I'd feel very odd wearing a "Maddie" T-shirt on holiday, but whatever "helps the cause" eh?!


It's hardly a disaster. It's a family tragedy which has been blown out of proportion into a media circus; nothing more than that.


----------



## T & P (Jun 21, 2007)

All these businessmen so generously offering free use of their planes for the McCanns, or printing and distributing t-shirts for free... funny how their identities always appear to 'leak' to the press eh?  

Twats.


----------



## stavros (Jun 21, 2007)

It's the Daily Express I feel sorry for, because they've got to weigh up which is the bigger story, Maddy or Diana.


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 21, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> It's the Daily Express I feel sorry for, because they've got to weigh up which is the bigger story, Maddy or Diana.


Wait for them to ring Crimestoppers with a claim that a Maddie-a-lke has been seen in a white Fiat Panda ... or shoutring for help from the back window of Prince Fuggin' Phillips apartments at Buck House ...


----------



## moomoo (Jun 21, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> It's the Daily Express I feel sorry for, because they've got to weigh up which is the bigger story, Maddy or Diana.




What a decision for them to have to make


----------



## exleper (Jun 21, 2007)

there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her  

http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/

there really arent enough rolleyes


----------



## moomoo (Jun 21, 2007)

exleper said:
			
		

> there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her
> 
> http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/
> 
> there really arent enough rolleyes




And how will a 'balloon event' help?  Many (if not most) of the events on that site are small events e.g. _'me and my two children will be releasing a balloon each from our back garden in Basildon'_

Okaaaay


----------



## wreckhead (Jun 21, 2007)

exleper said:
			
		

> there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her :rolpleyes:
> 
> http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/
> 
> there really arent enough rolleyes


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jun 21, 2007)

exleper said:
			
		

> there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her
> 
> http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/
> 
> there really arent enough rolleyes



With all the money they've pocketed, you'd think they could afford a better website.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jun 21, 2007)

I haven't been following for the last week or so: is she still missing?


----------



## Nemo (Jun 22, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I haven't been following for the last week or so: is she still missing?


Apparently. I haven't really been following it either.


----------



## xenon (Jun 22, 2007)

exleper said:
			
		

> there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her
> 
> http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/
> 
> there really arent enough rolleyes



What are they supposed to do then? It perhaps provides them some eleviation from from feeling helpless. Or are they just supposed to forget about it and mellt back into suburbia. Never mind darling, we've got 2 more children.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 22, 2007)

this all went a bit off the boil didn't it. i suspect they'll find her in 10 years or summit in a basement less than 3 miles from the hotel


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jun 22, 2007)

exleper said:
			
		

> there's a 'balloon event' tomorrow, to mark 50 days since she disappeared, people around the world are releasing balloons for her
> 
> http://www.findmadeleine.com/news/50thday/
> 
> there really arent enough rolleyes



I hope they're using balloons that degrade? Why do people think it's OK to release loads of bits of plastic up into the sky, they don't just disappear up into space. People releasing balloons should be charged with littering IMO.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jun 22, 2007)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> I hope they're using balloons that degrade? Why do people think it's OK to release loads of bits of plastic up into the sky, they don't just disappear up into space. People releasing balloons should be charged with littering IMO.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jun 22, 2007)

Ha


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 22, 2007)

xenon_2 said:
			
		

> Never mind darling, we've got 2 more children.


Well, 'til they fancy another Tapas anyway ...


----------



## moomoo (Jun 22, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Well, 'til they fancy another Tapas anyway ...





Oooooh, bitchy!


----------



## Pingu (Jun 22, 2007)

i guess if nothihg else its rasied the profile of the fact that kids go missing all the time. 

which cant be a bad thing if it does help some kid get back home.

personally i dont blame them for wanting to keep it in the public eye as long as possible. its going to be difficult for them though when they want to be left alone to contemplate if she isnt found


----------



## J77 (Jun 22, 2007)

Some of the posts at the top of this page are 

Sad they haven't got any closer to finding her tho' -- don't hear nothing of it over here in Holland, just the odd bit on the radio; heard they were off to look in Malta now.


----------



## Grandma Death (Jun 22, 2007)

Last weekend I was in Belper-took my dog for a walk into a park where a lovely laminated picture of maddy (well it was a rather crude form of lamination that involved lots of sellotape) adorned the park entrance with yellow ribbons. Jeez all I wanted to do was take my dog for a dump.  

Today I arrived in work-signed in and next to the sign in book there were several A4 sheets advertising a song. One of our contractors daughters has written a song for maddy-its been pressed and is on sale in Asda-all to raise funds for the Bring Maddy Home Campaign.
Jeez all I wanted to do is sign in for work  


Please...let it end


----------



## renegadechicken (Jun 22, 2007)




----------



## PacificOcean (Jun 22, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

>


----------



## detective-boy (Jun 22, 2007)

Oh, very good!!!


----------



## Juice Terry (Jul 5, 2007)

and so it goes on





jesus. wept.


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 5, 2007)

Has anyone done a Find Madeleine computer game yet?

It could be anything from a kind of map based puzzle to fighting through hordes of paedo zombies to the crucial road that leads to the burial site.

That pic on the T-shirt would make a good head for the Clone Monsters.


----------



## wishface (Jul 5, 2007)

Juice Terry said:
			
		

> and so it goes on
> 
> 
> 
> ...


no disrespect to the wearer, but that shirt is kinda creeepy.

That face is also splayed all over my local branch of the Abbey.


----------



## T & P (Jul 10, 2007)

Apologies if this has been posted before, but I have just seen this and am pretty speechless.

I just went to the Sky News website- which I don't do often because it's utter shit. But even for their usual crap approach to news, this is a new low.

As is common with many websites the home page has a series of links on the left of the secreen taking you to the various permanent features and sections, i.e. UK News, World News, Sport, etc.

Here's a snapshot of the homepage. Look at the link directly underneath 'UK NEWS'













I mean, WHAT THE FUCK??? 


  x 1,000,000


----------



## spacemonkey (Jul 10, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> Apologies if this has been posted before, but I have just seen this and am pretty speechless.
> 
> I just went to the Sky News website- which I don't do often because it's utter shit. But even for their usual crap approach to news, this is a new low.
> 
> ...



Fuckin hell!  She's slightly less important than UK news, but slightly more important than news concerning the other 6bn on this planet. 

I just came back from a holiday in Portugal, reckon i saw about 300+ posters of her in my 10 days.


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 10, 2007)

Anyone heard the line up for the Concert For Madeleine at Wembley stadium yet ?


----------



## moomoo (Jul 10, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> Anyone heard the line up for the Concert For Madeleine at Wembley stadium yet ?




If Take That are playing, I'll watch it.


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 10, 2007)

There's a rumour they might be playing the one at Rio, or was it Sydney . . .


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jul 10, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> Anyone heard the line up for the Concert For Madeleine at Wembley stadium yet ?



You. Fucking. WHAT?!?!


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jul 10, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> You. Fucking. WHAT?!?!




I think hes taking the piss 



I hope


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 10, 2007)

it's not that funny for some. I have just been reading how, in Bourges in central France, a couple got arrested and taken into custody for several hours on suspicion of abducting this little girl. it turned out that someone had seen them at a motorway station with someone of her description. it turned out she was their own daughter! you can imagine the rumour mill....

It might be time to act slightly more discreetly in this enquiry, methinks.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jul 10, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> I think hes taking the piss
> 
> 
> 
> I hope



Thing is, with this story I really can't fucking tell anymore. If someone said Gordon Brown was convening an emergency meeting of the UN to start a world wide search I'd about believe it at this stage...


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 10, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> I hope


Life imitating art . . . really, you think someone hasn't suggested it to the family yet ?




			
				guinnessdrinker said:
			
		

> It might be time to act slightly more discreetly in this enquiry, methinks.


Prob is, because of all the donations, you can retire if you're person to provide the lead that ends with her being found. It ends up with millions of hours of police time across world being wasted because of chancers with mobiles.


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 10, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> ... or shoutring for help from the back window of Prince Fuggin' Phillips apartments at Buck House ...



there is probably a strong line of enquiry there. you know what the royal establishment is like....


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 10, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> Prob is, because of all the donations, you can retire if you're person to provide the lead that ends with her being found. It ends up with millions of hours of police time across world being wasted because of chancers with mobiles.



and of course, lots of other crimes, including sexual or murder inquiries are left on the side.


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 10, 2007)

They are already on version 1.7 of the FREE Madeleine Toolbar

hurry, download it so she is found before its too late!


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 10, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> They are already on version 1.7 of the FREE Madeleine Toolbar
> 
> hurry, download it so she is found before its too late!



no, thanks.


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 10, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> no disrespect to the wearer, *but that shirt is kinda creeepy.*
> That face is also splayed all over my local branch of the Abbey.



they complain about men looking at little girls, treat them as paedophiles, and then throw her face in their faces


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 10, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> They are already on version 1.7 of the FREE Madeleine Toolbar
> 
> hurry, download it so she is found before its too late!


Jesus fucking wept. I thought that was something from b3ta when I saw the post. Internet parodists are going to have to get a bit quicker off the mark - it's already at version 1.7!


----------



## stavros (Jul 10, 2007)

Does anyone know who's winning the tabloid front page battle between Maddy and Di for the last couple of months? It must be pretty tight.


----------



## rollinder (Jul 11, 2007)

The Express (I think) had a split front page with both of them the other day


----------



## Junglist (Jul 11, 2007)

EDIT: Actually, who was it that said (a reporter) that the parents might od done something to her?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jul 11, 2007)

now in shops....  the  "I'm Not Madeleine" t-shirt ...     all we have to do is make sure  everyone who isn't  her buys this t-shirt  that  will speed up  finding her


----------



## rollinder (Jul 11, 2007)

Junglist said:
			
		

> EDIT: Actually, who was it that said (a reporter) that the parents might od done something to her?



there was a writer online - saw it linked on another forum, I'll see if I can find it again

eta: found it - http://prisonersvoice.blogspot.com/2007/05/what-child-abduction.html


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Jul 11, 2007)

Yup, the world has gone mental.  Driving home this evening, went past a convoy of five identical lorries on the motorway.  Nothing unusual in that, except every square inch of all 5 trailers were plastered in A3 posters of Madeleine McBloodyCann.  I wish I had someone with me who could have taken a picture, it was surreal.

I have every sympathy for the parents - IMO they're not guilty of neglect, just of fucking terrible judgement - I would imagine it's every parent's worst nightmare.  I blame the rest of the universe (read: tabloid newspapers and every prick who think's they're "news" "papers") for losing all sense of proportion.  Effing madness.


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 12, 2007)

Zapp Brannigan said:
			
		

> Yup, the world has gone mental.  Driving home this evening, went past a convoy of five identical lorries on the motorway.  Nothing unusual in that, except every square inch of all 5 trailers were plastered in A3 posters of Madeleine McBloodyCann.  I wish I had someone with me who could have taken a picture, it was surreal.


Comedy sketch idea ...

... Motorist (Unlucky Alf) driving down motorway, past line of Madeline McCann postered lorries, which he stares at in surprise, distracting his eyes from the road ... only to mow down a small child who suddenly runs in front of him, fleeing a vile, Portugese-looking paedo ... child turns out to be ... "Bugger!"

(Mind you, at least he'd be in with a shout of the reward ...)


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jul 12, 2007)

It's surley time to bring Chris Morris in for a bit of perspective?


----------



## spacemonkey (Jul 12, 2007)

I saw a women yesterday in Cardiff city centre with an oversized 'Find Maddie' badge!  Like one of those really poor homemade badges you used to make in school. It was fucking creepy.


----------



## chico enrico (Jul 12, 2007)

thedyslexic1 said:
			
		

> Still don't get the frezzy about this it one child. Not to sound hartless it sad but
> children go missing evey day



'there's still hope for finding madelaine' stories sell papers.

such events as this , lady di's funeral etc rally a collective consciousness in relatively secular times.

that's all it is. 

next time kate moss gets snapped snorting changa or someone comes out with another racist comment on big brother it'll be all forgotten about


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 12, 2007)

I went to the cinema the other day and there was a 'help find maddy' advert 

I just sat there saying "Oh my God. Oh my God. What is wrong with the world?" Other people must have heard me and I was half expecting to be accused of being cold and heartless - or possibly Maddy's kidnapper. But somewhat disappointingly no-one said anything to me.


----------



## twistedAM (Jul 12, 2007)

rollinder said:
			
		

> there was a writer online - saw it linked on another forum, I'll see if I can find it again
> 
> eta: found it - http://prisonersvoice.blogspot.com/2007/05/what-child-abduction.html




damn just spent ages reading that and http://ionglobaltrends.blogspot.com/

very very interesting

i find it hard to correlate the facts that there is no one i know who don't think the McCann's are a bit dodgy in one respect or another yet the media never seems to pick up on such things


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 12, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> I went to the cinema the other day and there was a 'help find maddy' advert
> 
> I just sat there saying "Oh my God. Oh my God. What is wrong with the world?" Other people must have heard me and I was half expecting to be accused of being cold and heartless - or possibly Maddy's kidnapper. But somewhat disappointingly no-one said anything to me.


They probably thought you were godding and goshing in sympathy for the poor little mite and thought, 'aw bless'


----------



## twistedAM (Jul 12, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> They probably thought you were godding and goshing in sympathy for the poor little mite and thought, 'aw bless'



dunno...everyones feels sorrow for the little girl but a hell of a lot of people are getting fed up with the slick PR campaign engineered by a family who left her unattended


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 12, 2007)

Quite


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 12, 2007)

I don't think I could have stopped myself saying "well she's not fucking HERE is she?"

or worse, "oh let me just look under my seat, nope, not there"


----------



## john x (Jul 12, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> and I was half expecting to be accused of being cold and heartless -



Why???  

john x


----------



## Tacita (Jul 12, 2007)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> I don't think I could have stopped myself saying "well she's not fucking HERE is she?"
> 
> or worse, "oh let me just look under my seat, nope, not there"



"Found her - nope, sorry, false alarm! It was my popcorn."


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 12, 2007)

john x said:
			
		

> Why???
> 
> john x


Presumably enough people buy into all this bollocks - otherwise it wouldn't be going on would it?


----------



## tastebud (Jul 12, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> I went to the cinema the other day and there was a 'help find maddy' advert
> 
> I just sat there saying "Oh my God. Oh my God. What is wrong with the world?" Other people must have heard me and I was half expecting to be accused of being cold and heartless - or possibly Maddy's kidnapper. But somewhat disappointingly no-one said anything to me.


I did! 

(But it was just agreement, admittedly).

Actually I also said quite loudly that I thought the little girl was evil & that there was something evil about her eyes.  Sorry, please don't hate me world


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 12, 2007)

She's a changeling - THAT'S why she disappeared!


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2007)

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/11399/Maddy:+Find+the+Arab's+yacht


----------



## john x (Jul 12, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> Presumably enough people buy into all this bollocks - otherwise it wouldn't be going on would it?



I think you may have missed my point. Why would people think ill of you for saying "Oh my God. Oh my God. What is wrong with the world?"

After all, that is what the majority of people buying into this bollocks also think.

john x


----------



## stavros (Jul 12, 2007)

> It's surley time to bring Chris Morris in for a bit of perspective?


I'd rather he did something on the Diana Spencer hysteria which will last a lot longer.


----------



## Nemo (Jul 12, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> I'd rather he did something on the Diana Spencer hysteria which will last a lot longer.


Surely that's beyond parody though.


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 13, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> ...yet the media never seems to pick up on such things


I think you'll find that they do ... but can't print until they have some evidence to justify it!


----------



## J77 (Jul 13, 2007)

Zapp Brannigan said:
			
		

> Yup, the world has gone mental.


fwiw, I see nothing over here in Holland -- and nothing on recent trips to the US and Canada -- I think it's pretty much a UK-centric thing


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 13, 2007)

J77 said:
			
		

> fwiw, I see nothing over here in Holland -- and nothing on recent trips to the US and Canada -- I think it's pretty much a UK-centric thing



I mentioned earlier on this thread how recently a mother was arrested and held in custody for three hours in Bourges, Central France, because someone thought that their daughter, whom he/she had noticed at a motorway station with her parents, was maddie. it's not that UK centric.


----------



## J77 (Jul 13, 2007)

guinnessdrinker said:
			
		

> I mentioned earlier on this thread how recently a mother was arrested and held in custody for three hours in Bourges, Central France, because someone thought that their daughter, whom he/she had noticed at a motorway station with her parents, was maddie. it's not that UK centric.


I meant local media-wise.

You really hear nothing.

Thankfully.


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (Jul 13, 2007)

guinnessdrinker said:
			
		

> I mentioned earlier on this thread how recently a mother was arrested and held in custody for three hours in Bourges, Central France, because someone thought that their daughter, whom he/she had noticed at a motorway station with her parents, was maddie. it's not that UK centric.




whoa. thats fucking outrageous


----------



## Toocandoo (Jul 13, 2007)

"Portuguese police investigating the disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann are examining apparent discrepancies between statements from three friends of the family and the only named suspect in the case."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2125738,00.html

Sounds like this might reach a predicatble conclusion soon...


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jul 13, 2007)

J77 said:
			
		

> fwiw, I see nothing over here in Holland -- and nothing on recent trips to the US and Canada -- I think it's pretty much a UK-centric thing



Interestingly, I saw something in the New York Post when I was there a couple of weeks back. I can't remember what, but they seemed to be familiar with the story.

On a seperate point. I had a _really_ vivid dream the other night that she had been found in South America. I dreamt I was looking at the BBC news website at the point where it was 'Breaking News' and they block out a large part of the front page to break the story. It felt very real and a bit scary!


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 13, 2007)

guinnessdrinker said:
			
		

> I mentioned earlier on this thread how recently a mother was arrested and held in custody for three hours in Bourges, Central France, because someone thought that their daughter, whom he/she had noticed at a motorway station with her parents, was maddie. it's not that UK centric.


Yep, but what chance the people reporting the sighting were British and were reporting it to a fairly clueless local constabulary.


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 13, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> Yep, but what chance the people reporting the sighting were British and were reporting it to a fairly clueless local constabulary.



well, the parents have taken their case throughout europe and it has actually been mentioned on french radio. however clueless the local gendarmerie may be (they're not particularly known for their brain power), they will have heard about it.


----------



## PacificOcean (Jul 13, 2007)

I am surprised how big this story is all over Europe.

I mean, if a French kid was snatched while on holiday in, say, Italy - would we know about it over here?


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 13, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> I am surprised how big this story is all over Europe.
> 
> I mean, if a French kid was snatched while on holiday in, say, Italy - would we know about it over here?


Whats the ratio I wonder,1 English kid = 10 european kids = fuck knows how many African kids


----------



## guinnessdrinker (Jul 13, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> I am surprised how big this story is all over Europe.
> 
> I mean, if a French kid was snatched while on holiday in, say, Italy - would we know about it over here?



no, they're french. nuff said.


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 13, 2007)

I saw her last week AFAIK but everyone thought I was joking


----------



## john x (Jul 14, 2007)

skyscraper101 said:
			
		

> I was looking at the BBC news website at the point where it was 'Breaking News' and they block out a large part of the front page to break the story. It felt very real and a bit scary!



I think you should tell the police about this!  

john x


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 15, 2007)

john x said:
			
		

> I think you should tell the police about this!


You wouldn't believe how many nutters do ...


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (Jul 15, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> You wouldn't believe how many nutters do ...




http://youtube.com/watch?v=jtZayiM966M


?


----------



## Aldebaran (Jul 15, 2007)

I wonder what would happen if I put on a false very long and wild beard, put brown lenses in (inherited the obviously non-Ayrab eye colour of my late mother) and take one of my EU relatives (same age, blond curly hair, big blue eyes and of course Whiter than Snowwhite) on a trip to London. I could add to it wearing my suspect Ayrab traditional dress and have a copy of Al Qur'an in my hand while carrying a backpack.

Wouldn't that be a guarantee for hours of fun?

salaam.


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 15, 2007)

johnnymarrsbars said:
			
		

> ?


It is a bit like that sometimes ... honest!


----------



## pembrokestephen (Jul 15, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I wonder what would happen if I put on a false very long and wild beard, put brown lenses in (inherited the obviously non-Ayrab eye colour of my late mother) and take one of my EU relatives (same age, blond curly hair, big blue eyes and of course Whiter than Snowwhite) on a trip to London. I could add to it wearing my suspect Ayrab traditional dress and have a copy of Al Qur'an in my hand while carrying a backpack.
> 
> Wouldn't that be a guarantee for hours of fun?
> 
> salaam.


I don't think you'd need to go to that much trouble. A djelaba and a bit of incomprehensible mumbling would probably have every Right Thinking Citizen eying you suspiciously and wondering if someone else was going to ring the police, given current levels of pointless paranoia.


----------



## AnIdiot (Jul 16, 2007)

does anyone know how to do one of those petitions on the downing street website, i want to put a petition up asking for her parents to be charged with neglect


----------



## rollinder (Jul 16, 2007)

hasn't there already been one somewhere?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 16, 2007)

asea said:
			
		

> does anyone know how to do one of those petitions on the downing street website, i want to put a petition up asking for her parents to be charged with neglect


That's a bit nasty isn't it?


----------



## AnIdiot (Jul 16, 2007)

not in my opinion. if she hadn't have been neglected and left to fend for herself (well and to look after her two younger siblings) none of this would have happened, that's what the law is there for isn't it? 

am sure if it had been some chav who'd left their kid at home while they'd gone to the pub the chav would have been charged with neglect, why shouldn't they be?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 16, 2007)

asea said:
			
		

> not in my opinion. if she hadn't have been neglected and left to fend for herself (well and to look after her two younger siblings) none of this would have happened, that's what the law is there for isn't it?
> 
> am sure if it had been some chav who'd left their kid at home while they'd gone to the pub the chav would have been charged with neglect, why shouldn't they be?


Because they've lost their kid, you stupid cunt.
Don't you think it's sticking the knife in a bit?


----------



## Belushi (Jul 16, 2007)

asea said:
			
		

> not in my opinion. if she hadn't have been neglected and left to fend for herself (well and to look after her two younger siblings) none of this would have happened, that's what the law is there for isn't it?
> 
> am sure if it had been some chav who'd left their kid at home while they'd gone to the pub the chav would have been charged with neglect, why shouldn't they be?



Her parents left her asleep in a hotel room while they went downstairs for a meal, maybe thats foolish in hindsight but it hardly counts as 'neglect' or being 'left to fend for herself'.


----------



## moomoo (Jul 16, 2007)

asea said:
			
		

> not in my opinion. if she hadn't have been neglected and left to fend for herself (well and to look after her two younger siblings) none of this would have happened, that's what the law is there for isn't it?
> 
> am sure if it had been some chav who'd left their kid at home while they'd gone to the pub the chav would have been charged with neglect, why shouldn't they be?




This has all been covered and, while I may agree with you that they shouldn't have left the children alone, I feel that they have been punished enough.  

What could the courts do to them that would be worse than losing their little girl?


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jul 16, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> This has all been covered and, while I may agree with you that they shouldn't have left the children alone, I feel that they have been punished enough.
> 
> What could the courts do to them that would be worse than losing their little girl?


nothing I suspect but doesn't the fact need addressing?
Suppose I get pissed and crash my car killing my daughter? Am I to be 'let off' because 'I've suffered enough' - I'd fucking hope not
Neglect has occurred and was willful in both cases
yes -it is shitty
yes -we feel for them - the poor bastards
no -they shouldn't have gone for a fucking meal leaving three kids under the age of 12 alone

It is the kind of action that leads me to wonder if the could find heir prescription pads with help


----------



## quimcunx (Jul 16, 2007)

Throbbing Angel said:
			
		

> nothing I suspect but doesn't the fact need addressing?
> *Suppose I get pissed and crash my car killing my daughter? Am I to be 'let off' because 'I've suffered enough' *- I'd fucking hope not
> Neglect has occurred and was willful in both cases
> yes -it is shitty
> ...



quite often the courts will take into consideration what you've suffered yourself through your stupid/willful actions.  In this case others would need to be protected from you doing something similar again.   The McCanns are very unlikely to lose any more of their own or anyone elses children by making the same mistake again.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 16, 2007)

Throbbing Angel said:
			
		

> nothing I suspect but doesn't the fact need addressing?
> Suppose I get pissed and crash my car killing my daughter? Am I to be 'let off' because 'I've suffered enough' - I'd fucking hope not


I probably would let them off with a ban, but it seems to me people are only calling for 'punishment' of the McCanns out of some sanctimonious and malicious self-righteousness that helps make them feel like better parents cos of course they would never ever do anything so neglectful to their kids.


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jul 16, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I probably would let them off with a ban, but it seems to me people are only calling for 'punishment' of the McCanns out of some sanctimonious and malicious self-righteousness that helps make them feel like better parents cos of course they would never ever do anything so neglectful to their kids.



Well, I'd agree that the _eye for an eye brigade_ should fuck off - punishment in itself , in this case, would serve no real purpose, especially if she is dead 

Of course there will be the usual eejits shouting for blood, always is, thanks to the press.

It should be recognised, though, that they were at fault in a legal sense, and therefore must bear responsibility regardless of 'punishment'

and, 99% of parents never do anything this stupid to their kids - although I'm unhappy at how that is phrased, they obviously didn't want/intend Maddy taken from them, we all know that.  The very words done and do imply the purposeful taking of action rather than the idiocy (imho) that was displayed in this case.

fucking shitty all round innit - no winners regardless of outcome(s)/actions taken


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 16, 2007)

Papingo said:
			
		

> The McCanns are very unlikely to lose any more of their own or anyone elses children by making the same mistake again.


I dunno ... that Portugese tapas is very more-ish ...


----------



## T & P (Jul 16, 2007)

Throbbing Angel said:
			
		

> fucking shitty all round innit - no winners regardless of outcome(s)/actions taken


 Well, not quite (and that is part of the problem here); the tabloid press milking it for all it is worth is the winner- as always.


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jul 16, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> I dunno ... that Portugese tapas is very more-ish ...


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jul 16, 2007)

Harry Potter will find Madeline Mcann... NOT

  yawn  

Any decent bookshop would have a cardboard cut out of Diana and Al Gore too..


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2007)

"humm, shall we look after our children, or go and have dinner... Maddie, or Chips.."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6934322.stm


----------



## T & P (Aug 7, 2007)

If this is true and the abductor had time to clean up after himself, just _how long_ were the parents of the child out at the restaurant before they went to check? Half hour my arse.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 7, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> If this is true and the abductor had time to clean up after himself, just _how long_ were the parents of the child out at the restaurant before they went to check? Half hour my arse.



Yup. Never believed that crap anyway...looks like the media is slowly turning away from just believing everything the parents are saying now...


----------



## Ms T (Aug 7, 2007)

Apart from there's no guarantee that the traces of blood (if that's what they are) even belonged to Madeleine.  Loads of people had stayed in that apartment before the McCanns.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2007)

How much money is the place losing on the rental of this room? thats my concern !


----------



## Chairman Meow (Aug 7, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> How much money is the place losing on the rental of this room? thats my concern !



Cold !


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 7, 2007)

now we have code madeline

as soon as a child goes missing  special ninja squads will be dispatched to hunt down all known paediatricians


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2007)

saw that in the paper... 

didnt get all the info got fed up after the first few lines...   _________//


----------



## Junglist (Aug 7, 2007)

I personally couldn't care a less if this Maddie thing is splashed over everything, doesn't effect the way I live so I don't care, I'd probably want to do the same, although I doubt papers would do that for me or you. Anyone wanna email The Sun and ask why those 2 kids (from B'ham?) aren't on the front page with a 6 page story in side?


Some n00b called LogicMan came up with this theory or something, I think he must write for The Sun. 
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopi...ys=0&postorder=asc&highlight=conspiracy+maddy

Or http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31


----------



## aylee (Aug 7, 2007)

Junglist said:
			
		

> Some n00b called LogicMan came up with this theory or something, I think he must write for The Sun.
> http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopi...ys=0&postorder=asc&highlight=conspiracy+maddy
> 
> Or http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31



People who write shit like this are pathetic little Walter Mittys who like screaming "look at me!  look at me!" whenever something horrible happens to someone else.

Twats.


----------



## TAE (Aug 7, 2007)

Ms T said:
			
		

> Apart from there's no guarantee that the traces of blood (if that's what they are) even belonged to Madeleine.  Loads of people had stayed in that apartment before the McCanns.


I can see it now: "DNA of hotel owner found in hotel" shock.


----------



## JHE (Aug 7, 2007)

Junglist said:
			
		

> Some n00b called LogicMan came up with this theory or something, I think he must write for The Sun.



No. Whatever you may think of the daft content of The Sun, its journalists _can write_.  LogicMan is plainly an illiterate.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Aug 7, 2007)

Ms T said:
			
		

> Apart from there's no guarantee that the traces of blood (if that's what they are) even belonged to Madeleine.  Loads of people had stayed in that apartment before the McCanns.



This is what I told my girls when they both lept on the headline of the paper in the supermarket... people cut themselves all the time. Its not even terribly interesting at this stage


----------



## Junglist (Aug 7, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> No. Whatever you may think of the daft content of The Sun, its journalists _can write_.  LogicMan is plainly an illiterate.



I'm sorry, your right. I should of realised The Sun journo's know how to use punctuation.


----------



## PacificOcean (Aug 7, 2007)

The Metro said this morning that the blood is hers and she is definatly dead.

Are they just jumping the gun?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> The Metro said this morning that the blood is hers and she is definatly dead.
> 
> Are they just jumping the gun?




how did you know it was a gun ? eh ?>!??!?! eh !??! !


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> The Metro said this morning that the blood is hers and she is definatly dead.
> 
> Are they just jumping the gun?


Probably.  The searches / tests they have carried out MAY have discovered any or all of the following:

1. Traces of blood.
2. DNA of missing child (or someone else).
3. Blood traces in a particular pattern which may suggest particular activity when subjected to "Blood Spatter Analysis" (the scienec of looking at the shape / distribution of blood spots to work out direction, point of origin, etc.).
4. Blood traces suggesting a particular volume of spilt blood.

I doubt very much whether (3) or (4) have been found as it would have been pretty difficult to miss first time round (it is extremely difficult to clean up significant amountys of blood so as not to leave easily findable bits in cracks and other nooks and crannies). 

If they have found blood which is not hers, it means nothing on it's own - any lawful occupant or visitor could have bled there at pretty much any time for any reason.  

If they have found blood which is hers, it proves nothing on it's own - unless there are concrete denials by parents that she could have bled (falling over, nosebleed, etc.) it is of no value.  

Only if the location (e.g. on a baseball bat) or pattern of her blood suggests an assault, or the amount suggests a serious injury, does it become of much probative value.  And even if there is masses, it will not be conclusive as to her death - you can lose a large amount and still live, and even a little bit goes a long way on walls and floor.


----------



## chico enrico (Aug 7, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> The Metro said this morning that the blood is hers and she is definatly dead.
> Are they just jumping the gun?



Without meaning to be insensitive, but aren't the chances of her being found alive after something (cant remember the precise time regarding child abductions) like 3 or four hours only a couple of percent, obviously depreciating to virtually zero as the time of absence goes on. 

(remember reading about this in, i think the book on child killer Robert Black which was written by the investigating officer) 

as such, i have always found the media circus' desire to sell copy while tortuously keeping her parents 'hopes up' fairly repugnant.


----------



## PacificOcean (Aug 7, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> as such, i have always found the media circus' desire to sell copy while tortuously keeping her parents 'hopes up' fairly repugnant.



There is something about this whole thing that doesn't ring true to me.

But that could be just because of what you say - the media circus.


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 7, 2007)

So how much were the parents paid to go out to dinner and leave the door unlocked


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 7, 2007)

i read that apparently the parents are bein questioned again ...


----------



## veracity (Aug 7, 2007)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> i read that apparently the parents are bein questioned again ...



Source?

I haven't heard anything to corroborate this yet but the only official suspect now seems to have been discounted following another thorough search of his property and vehicles. The next logical step appears to be to re-examine the parents.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> Without meaning to be insensitive, but aren't the chances of her being found alive after something (cant remember the precise time regarding child abductions) like 3 or four hours only a couple of percent, obviously depreciating to virtually zero as the time of absence goes on.


The vast majority of abducted children will be dead within a couple of hours.  A very small number are tortured / abused for some time (days, weeks) (e.g. the young boys kidnapped by paedophiles such as Sidney Cook)  The few that are not _may_ remain alive for very long times (like the Austrian girl who reappeared a few months ago after years and years).


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 7, 2007)

the source is here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2214913.ece

And just seen an independent headline saying the parents may be suspects. 

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3&art_id=nw20070807121804844C683250

i really don't know what to make of the whole thing.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 7, 2007)

from the above link



> Portuguese newspapers have reported that detectives are now investigating whether Madeleine was killed in the bedroom, either deliberately or by accident, by someone she knew.



how many people does a small girl know on holiday?


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2007)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> And just seen an independent headline saying the parents may be suspects.


Until they are specifically eliminated by very reliable evidence, they will _always_ remain possible suspects - they are the last people to see the victim alive.  _AND_ statistics show that the vast majority of children killed are killed by someone within the family / household rather than by strangers.

None of this means they did it ... but it does mean that they are on the list of possibles.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Aug 7, 2007)

There's never been any evidence that she was abducted. I have always suspected it's something more sinister, not an abduction but something happened to her in that apartment.


----------



## JHE (Aug 7, 2007)

Stobart Stopper said:
			
		

> There's never been any evidence that she was abducted. I have always suspected it's something more sinister, not an abduction but something happened to her in that apartment.



I've wondered whether there is evidence of abduction, too.  I don't know, but might she not just have wandered off to the sea and drowned?


----------



## Junglist (Aug 7, 2007)

JHE, I remember them saying that PT police sniffer dogs picked up her scent by a mini supermarket but then the trail went cold? I reckon she went down to the beach and got taken in by the waves, but who really knows?


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 7, 2007)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> the source is here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2214913.ece
> 
> And just seen an independent headline saying the parents may be suspects.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure that source is entirely credible. How would they know that the blood traces are 'from a dead person'.

Oh and aren't the Portuguese police entirely useless, how comes they've _just _found these traces?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Aug 7, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> I've wondered whether there is evidence of abduction, too.  I don't know, but might she not just have wandered off to the sea and drowned?



That could well be an option.  There is something fishy about this case.  Can't  quite put my finger on it but there is something well wrong with it.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 7, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> I've wondered whether there is evidence of abduction, too.  I don't know, but might she not just have wandered off to the sea and drowned?




It's a possibility...


----------



## Gingerman (Aug 7, 2007)

Junglist said:
			
		

> I personally couldn't care a less if this Maddie thing is splashed over everything, doesn't effect the way I live so I don't care, I'd probably want to do the same, although I doubt papers would do that for me or you. Anyone wanna email The Sun and ask why those 2 kids (from B'ham?) aren't on the front page with a 6 page story in side?
> 
> 
> Some n00b called LogicMan came up with this theory or something, I think he must write for The Sun.
> ...


Wow hes got way too much time on his hands,I see the Daily (Diana)Express seems to be turning into the Daily Maddy,every day theres some story about her on the front cover,Dead Di will be pissed off with that


----------



## chico enrico (Aug 7, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> Oh and aren't the Portuguese police entirely useless, how comes they've _just _found these traces?



unlike the ever efficient British old bill, of course and the blodstains the size of peanuts all over the trainers of one of Damiola Taylor's killers  

Apparently the Portugese police are perfectly efficiant, they just dont make a big song and dance about finding evidence until it's proven etc and hold a press conference every time.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 7, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> unlike the ever efficient British old bill, of course and the blodstains the size of peanuts all over the trainers of one of Damiola Taylor's killers
> 
> Apparently the Portugese police are perfectly efficiant, they just dont make a big song and dance about finding evidence until it's proven etc and hold a press conference every time.



I think if she'd  gone missing here they would have had a better chance of finding her...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/08/07/10-police-blunders-in-mccann-case-89520-19581538/

I know it's only the view of the daily mirror but they may have a point.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2007)

chico enrico said:
			
		

> the blodstains the size of peanuts all over the trainers of one of Damiola Taylor's killers


Please link to the source of that information.  As I understand it the bloodstains in question were barely visible to the naked eye.

And you may wish to note that it was not the "old bill" who did not find them, it was the scientists at the Forensic Science Service.


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I think if she'd  gone missing here they would have had a better chance of finding her...
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/08/07/10-police-blunders-in-mccann-case-89520-19581538/
> 
> I know it's only the view of the daily mirror but they may have a point.




I think the police did it to boost tourism


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 7, 2007)

It's probably an insurance scam - they had got one of those new child life insurance policies, and they needed some extra cash.


----------



## chymaera (Aug 7, 2007)

Other than an assumption is there any evidence she was abducted?


----------



## BlackSpecs (Aug 7, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> It's probably an insurance scam - they had got one of those new child life insurance policies, and they needed some extra cash.



christ ............


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 7, 2007)

After all the hype and hullaballo worldwide i bloody hope they havnt done it as that would just be too much to swallow...


----------



## mauvais (Aug 7, 2007)

Maybe they had a child life insurance policy and just wanted a new kid, like when you throw your old TV out of the window and blame it on the dog. Never works in the end, believe me. Stupid mutt always dobs you in.


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

opps bad post


----------



## rollinder (Aug 7, 2007)

*imagines lynchmob of angry sun readers*


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

BlackSpecs said:
			
		

> christ !  this thread is shit !!!!



so's the whole media circus yet that goes on and on and on and on........


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 7, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> After all the hype and hullaballo worldwide i bloody hope they havnt done it as that would just be too much to swallow...



I don't think the parents 'did' it. But there's a remote possibility she met with some freaky accident whilst they were out and they invented the abduction as a cover up story.

I mean why were they so convinced it was a kidnap rather than just the little girl wandering off on her own?


Cos that would have put them as being chiefly to blame, perhaps?


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 7, 2007)

I think it was today, i saw yet another pic of maddeleine and i felt annoyed by her.....how bad is that, i mean all this ceremonial grieving and the po faced p[arents...well if it is them just how fucked up would that all be now...


----------



## mauvais (Aug 7, 2007)

SILENCE! Question not the People's Child!


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 7, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I don't think the parents 'did' it. But there's a remote possibility she met with some freaky accident whilst they were out and they invented the abduction as a cover up story.
> 
> I mean why were they so convinced it was a kidnap rather than just the little girl wandering off on her own?
> 
> ...




Yes, that is possible but would be just as bad in the face of all the support!!


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

did the pope or that butterfly not find her then. some one tell her she won hide and fecking seek


----------



## BlackSpecs (Aug 7, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> so's the whole media circus yet that goes on and on and on and on........



Agreed !


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 7, 2007)

renegadechicken said:
			
		

> did the pope or that butterfly not find her then. some one tell her she won hide and fecking seek




No, its Harry potters turn next....


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

thought he died


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Aug 7, 2007)

nah he didnt, he didnt have sex with Hermeione either


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

ahhhhhh, but did he get drunk?????


----------



## Kanda (Aug 7, 2007)

Can you imagine if it was the parents (and I'm not suggesting it was) and how absolutely fucking ridiculous the media circus will look....


----------



## Kanda (Aug 7, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> After all the hype and hullaballo worldwide i bloody hope they havnt done it as that would just be too much to swallow...



I think it'd be a fucking huge lesson learnt for the media and all it's supporters...


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

nah they will pretend that they knew this but they were covering it so as to lead them, the parents, into a false sense of security

eta they will state the police made them lie to us


----------



## mauvais (Aug 7, 2007)

It'd be dead funny if she never even existed  

and then days later

'Beadle lynched by puzzled world'


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

pmsfl


----------



## renegadechicken (Aug 7, 2007)

how do you know social services didnt snatch her to place her for adoption so their local authority would get money for hitting the adoption targets....(as per daily mail reports)

sorry the child is delusional, both parents killed by a looney but she insists she was abducted and is called maddy!!!!!!!!!










hate myself for posting this after my defense of my profession, but made me grin, when one of my mates told me i done it to hit adoption targets.


----------



## Mogden (Aug 7, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> I don't think the parents 'did' it. But there's a remote possibility she met with some freaky accident whilst they were out and they invented the abduction as a cover up story.
> 
> I mean why were they so convinced it was a kidnap rather than just the little girl wandering off on her own?
> 
> ...


That's the theory of someone at my workplace. I guess putting on a sad face and saying she's disappeared would be easier than being banged up for neglect. I feel sorry for the twins. I can't think they've had much attention since this happened. I agree that the whole thing is just plain odd.

ETA And I also don't get the "she's alive" thing. When people like Sara Payne's parents and those kidnapped by that scumbag Huntley went, the parents believed the worst before they even knew it to be true but these 2 insist she's alive. Some might say they're putting a brave face on things but I'm not convinced.


----------



## moomoo (Aug 7, 2007)

Mogden said:
			
		

> That's the theory of someone at my workplace. I guess putting on a sad face and saying she's disappeared would be easier than being banged up for neglect. I feel sorry for the twins. I can't think they've had much attention since this happened. I agree that the whole thing is just plain odd.
> 
> ETA And I also don't get the "she's alive" thing. When people like Sara Payne's parents and those kidnapped by that scumbag Huntley went, the parents believed the worst before they even knew it to be true but these 2 insist she's alive. Some might say they're putting a brave face on things but I'm not convinced.




The whole thing is very odd indeed.

Sad, but odd.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> nah he didnt, he didnt have sex with Hermeione either




She's legal now


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 8, 2007)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2208999.ece


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2007)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6936214.stm


----------



## DeadManWalking (Aug 8, 2007)

The media seem to be turning this into a fight between the UK and Portugal now, our coppers are better than yours, the Portugese press are blaming the parents.  Usual johnny foreigner bashing.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2007)

mauvais said:
			
		

> SILENCE! Question not the People's Child!


To use the "technical" police expression ...

Maddeline is the People's MISPER ...


----------



## rollinder (Aug 8, 2007)

is that like a Whispa?


----------



## Badgers (Aug 8, 2007)

Has a similar situation ever happened before where there is no outcome? Kid never found?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Aug 8, 2007)

Err, all the time!


----------



## STFC (Aug 8, 2007)

Badgers said:
			
		

> Has a similar situation ever happened before where there is no outcome? Kid never found?



Ben Needham has never been found.

Nice to see the depths to which some people have sunk on this thread, making jokes about the probable death of a young child. Sick fuckers.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 8, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Err, all the time!



I guess you are right... 

Equally I guess it is sad that whilst a lot of children do disappear, it seems that the pretty ones get the most press coverage  

I recall sitting in the pub right opposite the station on the day that Milly Dowler went missing.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2007)

Badgers said:
			
		

> I recall sitting in the pub right opposite the station on the day that Milly Dowler went missing.


* "Hello, Is that Crimestoppers ... " *


----------



## rowan (Aug 8, 2007)

selamlar said:
			
		

> These aren't madeleines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




you're both wrong, these are madaleines  






Recipe


----------



## moomoo (Aug 8, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> Ben Needham has never been found.
> 
> Nice to see the depths to which some people have sunk on this thread, making jokes about the probable death of a young child. Sick fuckers.




Aw, I remember the Ben Needham case.  Another strange one.


----------



## STFC (Aug 8, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Aw, I remember the Ben Needham case.  Another strange one.



Yes, a sad case indeed. Must be harder in some ways for the parents, not ever knowing what happened to him.

I wonder if anyone's got any jokes about his disappearance?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 8, 2007)

Badgers said:
			
		

> I recall sitting in the pub right opposite the station on the day that Milly Dowler went missing.



The Ashley Park Hotel?

Souless place that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 8, 2007)

I think I've found what happened to her:


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 8, 2007)

Hum that article is a bit quick off the mark to decide that the blood is Madeleine's despite not getting lab results back yet.




> Tiny specks of blood were discovered on a wall by a sniffer dog that was taken to Portugal by British police. The blood has been sent for DNA analysis.



Eta:On an entirely selfish note my name's gonna be dead common now I reckon.


----------



## PacificOcean (Aug 8, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> Eta:On an entirely selfish note my name's gonna be dead common now I reckon.



She was the People's Princess mk II goddamit


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Aug 8, 2007)

Badgers said:
			
		

> Has a similar situation ever happened before where there is no outcome? Kid never found?


Yes, there's an outstanding missing child case in Norfolk, his name is Daniel Entwistle, he went missing a couple of years ago. It was in the news for a few weeks then it all suddenly went quiet.


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 8, 2007)

"In Britain, in the past five years, 44 children have been listed as missing and unaccounted for, with 11 having disappeared when five or younger, and four under 12 months old." ()

How many of those 44 can you name?


----------



## Grego Morales (Aug 8, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I think I've found what happened to her:




PWNED!!!111!


----------



## chymaera (Aug 8, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> "In Britain, in the past five years, 44 children have been listed as missing and unaccounted for, with 11 having disappeared when five or younger, and four under 12 months old." ()
> 
> How many of those 44 can you name?




Those statistics need to be treated with a bit of care, due to "kidnappings" involving a divorced/seperated parent.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> "In Britain, in the past five years, 44 children have been listed as missing and unaccounted for, with 11 having disappeared when five or younger, and four under 12 months old." (http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/deborah_orr/article2524418.ece
> 
> How many of those 44 can you name?


How many of those 44 were stranger abductions as opposed to family dispute related abductions?


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 8, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> How many of those 44 were stranger abductions as opposed to family dispute related abductions?



All of them. If they weren't stranger abductions, then they wouldn't be "unaccounted for" because they would know e.g. his dad took him to Pakistan or whatever.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 8, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> All of them. If they weren't stranger abductions, then they wouldn't be "unaccounted for" because they would know e.g. his dad took him to Pakistan or whatever.


Or the relative never got found out


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 8, 2007)

I read in one paper that the parents of Madelaine were shocked by the fact that they were suspects, and that they were assured that they weren't. This looks well dodgy. 

Of course they are suspects. They are prime suspects. 

That does not mean that they killed the girl, or had anything to do with her abduction. It just means that the possibility is there that they may have done either.

It seems strange that they are extremely apprehensive to be scrutinised in this case. And that any suggestion, by the Portugalese Police, that there is that slight possibility that they may know more than they are letting on, they publicly fly off the handle, and claim that they are being stitched up. The kind of claims made by conspiracy theorists, and people with a lot to hide.

I can stand to be proved wrong, but I don't usually like it. In this case I really do hope I am. I really hope they find this little girl, and that she is safe and well. But I hate to say that the outlook, like the integrity of the McCann family, does not look at all good.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Aug 8, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> I read in one paper that the parents of Madelaine were shocked by the fact that they were suspects, and that they were assured that they weren't. This looks well dodgy.
> 
> Of course they are suspects. They are prime suspects.
> 
> ...




What a load of speculative cobblers. Linky to the McCans claiming to be 'stitched up' please?


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 8, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Or the relative never got found out



But to the media, they would be 'unaccounted' abductions, on a par with this one, is the point I was making.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 8, 2007)

.............



> MADELEINE McCann was not kidnapped but died in her bedroom as a result of negligence or murder, it was claimed yesterday.
> 
> In a dramatic development, Portuguese detectives are to re-interview her parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, together with six friends who dined together at a restaurant near the McCanns' holiday apartment on the night she disappeared, senior police sources were quoted as saying.
> 
> ...



http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1240672007


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 8, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> What a load of speculative cobblers. Linky to the McCans claiming to be 'stitched up' please?


I can't seem to find one from a substantial source on the 'net. But if you can, try and either find a copy of the "Evening Standard", where they have a quote by Gerry McCann claiming that the Portugalese Police are trying to "frame his wife".


----------



## Gingerman (Aug 8, 2007)

If the parents did do it,they're pretty good actors then


----------



## goldenecitrone (Aug 8, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> Yes, a sad case indeed. Must be harder in some ways for the parents, not ever knowing what happened to him.
> 
> I wonder if anyone's got any jokes about his disappearance?



Where's Ben when you Need ham?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 8, 2007)

hey does this mean  that  we can now replace the term sweet f a  with sweet m m


----------



## mauvais (Aug 8, 2007)

You wouldn't take your kids on holiday just to kill them, surely. Maybe in the car like, with all that asking if they're nearly there yet, of course we're not fucking there you prick, we're in fucking Cheltenham, I guess then would make sense, but once they're out and running around - well, you couldn't even catch them could you?


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 8, 2007)

mauvais said:
			
		

> You wouldn't take your kids on holiday just to kill them, surely. Maybe in the car like, with all that asking if they're nearly there yet, of course we're not fucking there you prick, we're in fucking Cheltenham, I guess then would make sense, but once they're out and running around - well, you couldn't even catch them could you?


That is why such things as investigations exist. 

No one is saying that the McCanns know anything. And if they do, nobody is claiming that they commited murder. Children can die under other circumstances. And some people can panic.


----------



## moomoo (Aug 8, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> Where's Ben when you Need ham?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> I read in one paper that the parents of Madelaine were shocked by the fact that they were suspects, and that they were assured that they weren't. This looks well dodgy.
> 
> Of course they are suspects. They are prime suspects.
> 
> ...



Are you for real?

Where do you pull, this stuff from?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> That is why such things as investigations exist.
> 
> No one is saying that the McCanns know anything. And if they do, nobody is claiming that they commited murder. Children can die under other circumstances. And some people can panic.



You're drawing some pretty heavy conclusions with no evidential support and infering that they killed their child. Don't weasel about.


----------



## mauvais (Aug 8, 2007)

Yeah but Portugal's really hot, isn't it, and I tell you, it's a bugger to do anything in that kind of weather let alone murder. That's why they have those sierras in the afternoon, cos if it's too much effort to sell those bloody hats then stabbing in your kids is definitely out the question. I suppose you could just about stretch to some accidental death if you found a spot of shade but not after a few bottles of shit plonk, no way.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> All of them. If they weren't stranger abductions, then they wouldn't be "unaccounted for" because they would know e.g. his dad took him to Pakistan or whatever.


I think you are assuming too much of the words "unaccounted for".  Please provide a source for the statistic.  

The number does not accord with my experience at all.  There are _extremely_ few stranger abductions of young children (and, unlike teenagers and adults, there is no large reserve of potential victims who will not be reported missing).


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 8, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Are you for real?
> 
> Where do you pull, this stuff from?


Evening Standard, The Lite, The Mail....

Quotes used by the parents that would be condemned by the public at large if they were falsified by this section of the media.

And just to confirm, these comments do not mean that they knew anything more than they are letting on. it is just to be sure that they are treated as prime suspects, just like anybody else who had access to the girl at the time.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> Evening Standard, The Lite, The Mail....
> 
> Quotes used by the parents that would be condemned by the public at large if they were falsified by this section of the media.
> 
> And just to confirm, these comments do not mean that they knew anything more than they are letting on. it is just to be sure that they are treated as prime suspects, just like anybody else who had access to the girl at the time.



Quotes are quotes, your interpetation of them is yours. You infer that they are guilty of murdering their child. On what basis? The quotes. Bit circular like.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Aug 8, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> All of them. If they weren't stranger abductions, then they wouldn't be "unaccounted for" because they would know e.g. his dad took him to Pakistan or whatever.



You think so?? really??

I think if you look into it unless the abducting parent is traced to an actual address and the children seen by various authority figures ( doctor, police officer etc) they remain very much 'unnacounted for' and most people who abduct their children stay as far away from those people as possible unless they know 110% that the law of their country means their exp partner will never ever have a chance of reclaiming the child/children.


----------



## grubby local (Aug 8, 2007)

rules of maddieworld ...

1. the brit media have an agenda - keep the gravy train going as long as possible, kick the foreigners, our sales/hits go up every time we mention her name

2. the port media have an agenda - we know more than the brit media, this case makes us international, we know portugal is fucked but just stop ramming it down our throats, are there any jobs going?

3. the mccanns have an agenda - get our daughter back safe/keep case in the public eye OR we are in so deep we keep playing the game (who knows)

4. the british public have an agenda - i'm bored of BB, give me some more maddie porn/I have nothing going on in my life and therefore need to leech on to anything that gives me an emotional connection/foreigners are useless

5. the port public have an agenda - why the fuck does no-one give a shit when this happens here/our police force confessions/what fuckwit parents leave their kids on their own

6. the port police have an agenda - look we are not used to this and we are poor/can you stop looking at us/ok, to save face we'll try to sort this out

fucked up

gx


----------



## Chairman Meow (Aug 8, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> Evening Standard, The Lite, The Mail....




Ahh. Nuff said.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Aug 8, 2007)

I rekon the parents done it


----------



## chymaera (Aug 8, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> I think you are assuming too much of the words "unaccounted for".  Please provide a source for the statistic.
> 
> The number does not accord with my experience at all.



As I understand it the average for children abducted and killed in Britain is 6 or 7 a year and it has been that number for a very long time, (since 1840ish) despite the media hype of a paedophile behind every bush


----------



## xenon (Aug 8, 2007)

For a lot of peple apparently not giving a fuck, you're sure keeping this thread alive.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2007)

Whose not giving a fuck then?


----------



## xenon (Aug 8, 2007)

my mistake. It's just idol speculation. With a bit of mass media critique


----------



## JHE (Aug 9, 2007)

The police are conducting a smear campaign against Kate McCann, says friend


----------



## 5t3IIa (Aug 9, 2007)

What's the difference between Madeline McCann and Madeline McCann jokes?

Madeline McCann jokes will get old.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2007)

Lol


----------



## JHE (Aug 9, 2007)

It's not that funny.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 9, 2007)

grubby local said:
			
		

> r
> 
> 3. the mccanns have an agenda - get our daughter back safe/keep case in the public eye OR we are in so deep we keep playing the game (who knows)



Or

3. McCanns have an agenda, they've never seen so much money and are using it to buy a house in the sun.




			
				bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> I rekon the parents done it



I'm hearing that more and more, even from people who were a little shocked when I first suggested it.


----------



## JHE (Aug 9, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Or
> 
> 3. McCanns have an agenda, they've never seen so much money and are using it to buy a house in the sun.
> 
> ...



Oh, FFS... I can understand people getting sick of all the coverage.  I can understand sick jokes.  They are normal in a nasty way.  But this is now getting a bit bonkers.

The McCanns are not short of ways of getting money.  They are both doctors.  There's no evidence that they are getting any money out of this.

Come on.


----------



## wishface (Aug 9, 2007)

Are they still touring Europe?


----------



## STFC (Aug 9, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> It's not funny.



I've fixed your post.


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 9, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> Oh, FFS... I can understand people getting sick of all the coverage.  I can understand sick jokes.  They are normal in a nasty way.  But this is now getting a bit bonkers.
> 
> The McCanns are not short of ways of getting money.  They are both doctors.  There's no evidence that they are getting any money out of this.
> 
> Come on.



I thought theyd given up their jobs???


----------



## wishface (Aug 9, 2007)

That would be a bizarre decision to make, sinister in fact.


----------



## Dan U (Aug 9, 2007)

there's a rather splendid bit of madness doing the rounds of the UK Media today blaming Richard Branson and John Prescott for her killing.

apparently Branson has been secretly convicted of 20 odd murders.

it's nearly 14,000 words long 

here is a snippet



> On Th.3.5.07. a young female person aged three years named Ms. Madeleine McCann disappeared from an apartment in Praia da Luz in Portugal. I suspect that she was abducted by a Mr. Brian Kimble alias 'Mr. Kenneth Clarke' (16th member of The World's Worst Organized Crime Ring), then taken to a boat that Mr. Harold Branson alias 'Mr. Richard Branson', Mr. Michael Wallace alias 'Mr. Vinnie Jones' (395th member of The World's Worst Organized Crime Ring) and other members of The World's Worst Organized Crime Ring (including Mr. Jeffrey Harris alias 'Mr. John Prescott' (12th member of The World's Worst Organized Crime Ring)) were sited on where she was then sexually abused by them, then murdered by them and then disposed of at sea,> suspected to be offshore Morocco.
> >
> >
> >
> ...


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Aug 9, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> That would be a bizarre decision to make, sinister in fact.



I could be wrong, but im sure that there plans didnt include a return to work, well not untill they find her i suppose.....


----------



## STFC (Aug 9, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Lol



Were you really a copper? It must have been laugh-a-minute, eh?


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 9, 2007)

If you can't take a joke, gerrof this thread!


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Aug 9, 2007)

Dan U said:
			
		

> there's a rather splendid bit of madness doing the rounds of the UK Media today blaming Richard Branson and John Prescott for her killing.
> 
> apparently Branson has been secretly convicted of 20 odd murders.
> 
> ...



fuck me. it all adds up.


Shurely, worlds best organised crime ring.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Aug 9, 2007)

grubby local said:
			
		

> rules of maddieworld ...
> 
> 1. the brit media have an agenda - keep the gravy train going as long as possible, kick the foreigners, our sales/hits go up every time we mention her name
> 
> ...



Post of the day 

eta: actually just saw this was posted yesterday. Anyway.. Word.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 9, 2007)

JHE said:
			
		

> Oh, FFS... I can understand people getting sick of all the coverage.  I can understand sick jokes.  They are normal in a nasty way.  But this is now getting a bit bonkers.
> 
> The McCanns are not short of ways of getting money.  They are both doctors.  There's no evidence that they are getting any money out of this.
> 
> Come on.



I don't completely believe it just saying I wouldn't be surprised really. There's been something dodgy about this and them from the outset from what I can see. I thought they had given up their jobs and was using the £1000,000 or so in donations to buy a property to live in out there until they find her...


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 9, 2007)

grubby local said:
			
		

> rules of maddieworld ...
> 
> 1. the brit media have an agenda - keep the gravy train going as long as possible, kick the foreigners, our sales/hits go up every time we mention her name
> 
> ...




Don't understand a word of this.


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 9, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Quotes are quotes, your interpetation of them is yours. You infer that they are guilty of murdering their child. On what basis? The quotes. Bit circular like.


I have never said that they murdered their child. The word "murder" has never been mentioned in accordance with the parents. Yet another misconstruing piece of bullshit to make another poster look dodgy. 

What I have said is that if a murder has taken place, Maddelaine's parents are prime suspects. That does not mean that they have done it. But without any other evidence, with what the police know already, it is more than common sense to investigate them as though they are under suspicion. 

And if they do know more about the girls disappearance, it does not mean that any murder was commited. If it is so that they do, it is highly unlikely that it was murder. There are countless other options in place.

But it is the apparent apprehension of the McCanns to comply which builds more suspicion against them.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 9, 2007)

Keep the story straight for 24 hours harrison

"I really hope they find this little girl, and that she is safe and well. But I hate to say that the outlook, like the integrity of the McCann family, does not look at all good."


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 9, 2007)

HarrisonSlade said:
			
		

> But it is the apparent apprehension of the McCanns to comply which builds more suspicion against them.



eh?


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 9, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Keep the story straight for 24 hours harrison
> 
> "I really hope they find this little girl, and that she is safe and well. But I hate to say that the outlook, like the integrity of the McCann family, does not look at all good."


If Maddelaine was snatched by a stranger, then it was partly due to the absolutely selfish, irresponsible neglect of the parents who went out, leaving the children without a baby sitter (I did hear somewhere that they did have friends who were holidaying within the same area). 

And when they decided to go globe trotting, and shake hands with the Pope, they did so without their children in sight. 

Their integrity looks far from good, whether they were responsible or not.

I hope that clears things up. Or do you want to make a sick innuendo about that as well?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 9, 2007)

You've already done that.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Aug 23, 2007)

The Irish Indie is leading today with a story that detectives no longer believe Madelaine was abducted. Instead they think she died in her room by accident, but they are not fingering the McCann's or their travelling companions! Bit weird innit? Is it not all over the UK papers too ( a cursory look at bbc.co.uk showed nowt about it). Soz if this has been commented on elsewhere., trying to sneakily post at work.


----------



## story (Aug 23, 2007)

That story was all over the British press last week.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 23, 2007)

? so who did it then?


----------



## story (Aug 23, 2007)

That guy over there, the one they've been watching  for a while. The one with the hair. And the wristwatch.


----------



## The Groke (Aug 23, 2007)

story said:
			
		

> That guy over there, the one they've been watching  for a while. The one with the hair. And the wristwatch.




But I've got hair and a wristwatch!


*hands self in*


----------



## story (Aug 23, 2007)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> But I've got hair and a wristwatch!
> 
> 
> *hands self in*


----------



## boskysquelch (Aug 23, 2007)

story said:
			
		

> That story was all over the British press last week.



not that I am following this _per se_ but the father was on R4 this morning, quite reasonably, stating that he has always been led to believe that he and his wife have been kept up with over any developments/information of any importance, and that he had heard nothing of the sort from any Officialdom.


----------



## story (Aug 23, 2007)

Well I'm not following it either. I thought I saw headlines last week, perhaps I was wrong...

Apologies for any confusion

Plenty of other folk here who seem to know plenty about this story - I'll shut up and piss off now.

Anyway, case closed: Swarfega has turned himself in.


----------



## rollinder (Aug 25, 2007)

heard on a radio station news broadcast in a shop that Gerry McCann now wants the media to stop covering it unless the news is actually important.

and the local superdrug seems to be convinced that she's hiding inside the shop - little girl passing with parent & pointing at poster - "maddy", woman "yes, that's Madeline".
I'm getting tempted to do the same thing as with Finding Nemo every time I see a photo of her - point at saying "found her -look there she is"it


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 25, 2007)

rollinder said:
			
		

> heard on a radio station news broadcast in a shop that Gerry McCann now wants the media to stop covering it unless the news is actually important.



I just saw that on the BBC. I have mixed feelings towards the parents tbh, but do feel they should possibly move out of Portugal, at least for the sake of their other children


----------



## Looby (Aug 25, 2007)

rollinder said:
			
		

> heard on a radio station news broadcast in a shop that Gerry McCann now wants the media to stop covering it unless the news is actually important.



So his way of keeping out of the media is to appear at the Edinburgh Television Festival. I think that's in slightly poor taste while his child's still missing. They'll be on the rentagob circuit with Cherie by christmas.


----------



## Tankus (Aug 26, 2007)

professional victim's ltd


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 26, 2007)

What do I know . . .

At this point, I'd think the parents are lost for what to do and what not to do. I can understand them playing the media game when they did as it might have helped, but why not go back to work, let the police do their job and try to begin the process of carrying on with life. 

It doesn't have to mean they're 'giving up', it's just that they've done everything else they can.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 26, 2007)

Well originally the idea was to keep it in the media as long as possible wasn't it? They hired Justine McGuinness (Lib Dem runner up to Oliver Letwin in the last election) as a sort of PR campaign manager especially for that.

Hard to know if they've had a genuine change of heart about the effectiveness of keeping it in the media, or just are getting fed up cos a lot of the press speculation now seems to involve *them*, rather than that Murat bloke.

I think the Express have gone bonkers over this. Every few days they have a story about a breakthrough that's just about to happen. I wonder if they could actually link the Diana and Madelaine "cases".




			
				rollinder said:
			
		

> heard on a radio station news broadcast in a shop that Gerry McCann now wants the media to stop covering it unless the news is actually important.


----------



## Geri (Aug 26, 2007)

rollinder said:
			
		

> heard on a radio station news broadcast in a shop that Gerry McCann now wants the media to stop covering it unless the news is actually important.



It's about time he realised that you can't turn media coverage on and off like a tap, whenever it suits _him._


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 26, 2007)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Well originally the idea was to keep it in the media as long as possible wasn't it?
> 
> Hard to know if they've had a genuine change of heart


It's just a natural progression as far as I can see. The first was appropriate, as is, now, the second. Don't see a 'change of heart' at all.


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

I didn't follow this up, just saw some mentioning of it when it just started, but I think it unfair to blame the parents for exploitation of the case.

YOu seem to overlook that they most likely didn't ask the the media to make such a complete out of control _circus_ of it, that it is the pulp media that profits from it and most of all that it is the public drawn to such coverage like vultures to a corpse in a sad display of unhealty sensationalism. 

salaam.


----------



## Geri (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I didn't follow this up, just saw some mentioning of it when it just started, but I think it unfair to blame the parents for exploitation of the case.
> 
> YOu seem to overlook that they most likely didn't ask the the media to make such a complete out of control _circus_ of it, that it is the pulp media that profits from it and most of all that it is the public drawn to such coverage like vultures to a corpse in a sad display of unhealty sensationalism.
> 
> salaam.



What did they expect? You have to take the rough with the smooth. As I said, you can't turn it on and off like a tap. It's not like they are totally unaware of how the media works.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> YOu seem to overlook that they most likely didn't ask the the media to make such a complete out of control _circus_ of it, .



I'm not so sure about that. It looked like the parents were doing everything possible to keep it in the public eye, why else would they be running around Europe publicising the case and visiting the Pope? Not to mention Gerry McCann having a blog about it


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 26, 2007)

Hiring PR professionals suggests they'd like a bit of publicity. Maybe they should have got a better PR person!


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Hiring PR professionals suggests they'd like a bit of publicity. Maybe they should have got a better PR person!



Absolutely, I think they even hired someone to help out with the campaign! I feel sorry for the parents that they lost their daughter and that is a terrible terrible thing but at risk of sounding callous, if everyone who'd put a poster up about Madeleine McCann put a poster up about gun crime...


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 26, 2007)

"Miss [Justine] McGuinness, who has her own PR company, has worked in strategic communications for 11 years.

Her paid role involves working to keep the Find Madeleine campaign in the public eye - and raising awareness over missing children on a wider scale."

From
http://www.thisisdorset.net/mostpopular.var.1616120.mostviewed.my_mission_to_find_madeleine.php

Disclaimer
(1) This is from a local paper.
(2) I think that they may have now dispensed with her services.


----------



## Looby (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I didn't follow this up, just saw some mentioning of it when it just started, but I think it unfair to blame the parents for exploitation of the case.
> 
> YOu seem to overlook that they most likely didn't ask the the media to make such a complete out of control _circus_ of it, that it is the pulp media that profits from it and most of all that it is the public drawn to such coverage like vultures to a corpse in a sad display of unhealty sensationalism.
> 
> salaam.




Yes they did, photo ops at Mass, lonely walks around the village, isn't there a single coming out-'Don't you forget about me.' Fucking ridiculous.


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure about that. It looked like the parents were doing everything possible to keep it in the public eye, why else would they be running around Europe publicising the case and visiting the Pope? Not to mention Gerry McCann having a blog about it



I think every parent in a similar situation would try to "keep it in the public eye". (for example also by televised appeals to abductors and hostage takers by parents and family members across the globe).

In this case the parents got a very willing cooperation of the media from the very first moment, in other cases that seems to be almost completely lacking.Maybe because it happened while they were abroad made it more "interesting" for the media from the start, and from there it began sprialing out of control.
The same with their "visit" to the Pope. It was not as if they had aasked for a private meeting. Would it not for the media willingly reporting it, they would have "met" him like thousands of others do. Now the Pope surely was made aware of their presence and  -willingly or not - added to the media campaign. 

salaam.


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 26, 2007)

Paul Russell said:
			
		

> Hiring PR professionals suggests they'd like a bit of publicity. Maybe they should have got a better PR person!


It doesn't suggest to you fulltime empolyment for more than one person dealing with a worldwide 24-hour media, and doing it in an appropriate professional way?

No, I didn't think it would..


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 26, 2007)

You're not in the UK are you?


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 26, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> It doesn't suggest to you fulltime empolyment for more than one person dealing with a worldwide 24-hour media, and doing it in an appropriate professional way?
> 
> No, I didn't think it would..



Don't understand your point. Sorry.


----------



## subversplat (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Absolutely, I think they even hired someone to help out with the campaign! I feel sorry for the parents that they lost their daughter and that is a terrible terrible thing but at risk of sounding callous, if everyone who'd put a poster up about Madeleine McCann put a poster up about gun crime...


Then everybody would be sick to death of hearing about gun crime!


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I think every parent in a similar situation would try to "keep it in the public eye". (for example also by televised appeals to abductors and hostage takers by parents and family members across the globe).
> 
> In this case the parents got a very willing cooperation of the media from the very first moment, in other cases that seems to be almost completely lacking.Maybe because it happened while they were abroad made it more "interesting" for the media from the start, and from there it began sprialing out of control.
> The same with their "visit" to the Pope. It was not as if they had aasked for a private meeting. Would it not for the media willingly reporting it, they would have "met" him like thousands of others do. Now the Pope surely was made aware of their presence and  -willingly or not - added to the media campaign.
> ...




I don't think you can have it both ways, Aldebaran. Above, you said the media interest is not the fault of the parents, now you are saying that the parents would inevitably want to keep it in the public eye. 

In any case, it is obviously that the parents themselves have promoted media interest in the campaign, Gerry said as much in his most recent interview.

The bottom line is, we've been saturated with coverage for months and the parents have actively encouraged this. Now they're asking the media to tone it down. I don't have a problem with this request, but I do think it smacks of hypocrisy when they actively wanted coverage and are now saying they don't. If you make abed, surely one may sometimes have no choice but to lie on it


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> Then everybody would be sick to death of hearing about gun crime!



yeah you're probably right. point taken


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 26, 2007)

My mum was over here last weekend, visiting. She told me that my uncle - a psychiatrist - and one of her neighbours, a surgeon, are both convinced the parents did it.

Surgeons have a reputation among medics for having nasty tempers, it seems. . .


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 26, 2007)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> Surgeons have a reputation among medics for having nasty tempers, it seems. . .



Compelling evidence!


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> I don't think you can have it both ways, Aldebaran. Above, you said the media interest is not the fault of the parents, now you are saying that the parents would inevitably want to keep it in the public eye.



I mean the *excessive, exploitational* media "interest" (quite litteraly, that). 



> The bottom line is, we've been saturated with coverage for months and the parents have actively encouraged this.



Like I said, I don't have an oversight on all of that so if that is true, then I think you have reason to say they actively particpated in the media exploitation circus from the beginning. I still doubt however they did that consciously when it all got started. Any parent would want to get as much as publicity possible about their child's disappearance. 
Do you think if the child went missing in the UK, the media would have made such a circus about ?

salaam.


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> My mum was over here last weekend, visiting. She told me that my uncle - a psychiatrist - and one of her neighbours, a surgeon, are both convinced the parents did it.



What I think is that the child woke up, got somehow outside, ran to the sea and got surprised by a wave. (it was on the seaside, isn't it? )

salaam.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

> Aldebaran said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> Again I dispute that. I understnad what you say about any parent wanting coverage if their kid was missing but I personally feel the parents have lpartly let this escalate as it has



I htink most people would initially under-estimate the vulture-like eagerness of the pulp media to milk out this ideal front page story as long as they can. It is easier to get it started than to stop it so wanted or not, they made themselves part of it.



> Well I guess it depends. By and large, if it was a poor black kid from a council estate no I don't think the media would be too interested, save for probably blaming the parents A LOT.



I can see that last thing happen, but seriously, would the Uk media go that crazy (and for months in a row, even getting such coverage that by now almost the whole world must know about it) for a lovely white blond girl that disappeared out of her home in the UK? 

salaam.


----------



## Looby (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> > Again I dispute that. I understnad what you say about any parent wanting coverage if their kid was missing but I personally feel the parents have lpartly let this escalate as it has
> >
> >
> >
> ...


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I can see that last thing happen, but seriously, would the Uk media go that crazy (and for months in a row, even getting such coverage that by now almost the whole world must know about it) for a lovely white blond girl that disappeared out of her home in the UK?
> 
> salaam.




very possibly


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> very possibly



I doubt it. How many children get missing in the UK every year? I know of none of them. 

salaam.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I doubt it. How many children get missing in the UK every year? I know of none of them.
> 
> salaam.



I'm actually not sure what the point you're making is here, tbh, but in answer to the question, yes if you look at how the British media have focused on missing chilren such as Holly and Jessica, I do indeed think so. Maybe you don't look at the tabloids often enough!

Look at the rest of this thread. Other people have pretty much covered it


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 26, 2007)

sparklefish said:
			
		

> If it was a poor black kid from a council estate and the parents popped to the pub 50 yards away I think they would be prosecuted for neglect and twins would be in care.



Well, women have been prosecuted for going away and leaving their teenage kids home alone.

And there was *moral outrage* about it in the right-wing rags. But the McCanns are white middle-class professionals, so they just made an *error of judgement*.


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> I'm actually not sure what the point you're making is here, tbh, but in answer to the question, yes if you look at how the British media have focused on missing chilren such as Holly and Jessica, I do indeed think so. Maybe you don't look at the tabloids often enough!



My point is that I am seldom in the UK, maybe once every few years and then most of the time I lock myself up between dusty antique documents .  
I never heard about a Holly and Jessica anywhere but you can't avoid "knowing" about this little child.

Hence from my point of view there is some serious discrepancy going on between this case and all others and I think it has to do with the combination of "white, blond, lovely child" and "missing in horrible Portugal" with parents who are attributed some sort of "status".

salaam.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> I'm actually not sure what the point you're making is here, tbh, but in answer to the question, yes if you look at how the British media have focused on missing chilren such as Holly and Jessica, I do indeed think so. Maybe you don't look at the tabloids often enough!



Aren't the BBC following a similar editorial on this (and that) though?


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> My point is that I am seldom in the UK, maybe once every few years and then most of the time I lock myself up between dusty antique documents .
> I never heard about a Holly and Jessica anywhere but you can't avoid "knowing" about this little child.
> 
> Hence from my point of view there is some serious discrepancy going on between this case and all others and I think it has to do with the combination of "white, blond, lovely child" and "missing in horrible Portugal" with parents who are attributed some sort of "status".
> ...



whatever you say


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 26, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> whatever you say





I'm sometimes exhausting, isn't it.

salaam.


----------



## Geri (Aug 26, 2007)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> My mum was over here last weekend, visiting. She told me that my uncle - a psychiatrist - and one of her neighbours, a surgeon, are both convinced the parents did it.
> 
> Surgeons have a reputation among medics for having nasty tempers, it seems. . .



On another website I post on, it has been suggested that she was sedated to stop her waking up, and maybe too much was used.

Personally I don't know what to think.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Aug 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I'm sometimes exhausting, isn't it.
> 
> salaam.



Not at all, but as I am no longer sure exactly what your point is, plus it;s a beautiful evening and I have to go and help a friend, seems a good place to leave it


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 26, 2007)

Geri said:
			
		

> On another website I post on, it has been suggested that she was sedated to stop her waking up, and maybe too much was used.
> 
> Personally I don't know what to think.



Well, what I said to my mum is 'would the parents have had time to dispose of a body'?


I don't know what to think either - but I think this story is going to be like Lord Lucan. Some new sighting or theory will pop up every few years or so, for the next few decades.


----------



## rollinder (Aug 26, 2007)

Geri said:
			
		

> On another website I post on, it has been suggested that she was sedated to stop her waking up, and maybe too much was used.
> 
> Personally I don't know what to think.


Money saving expert? think somebody suggested that there too.

that exactly what the Express has been getting outraged about the Portuguise press (alededley) daring to suggest might have happened

commented offline about them only know discovering what was on a forum months ago


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 26, 2007)

Geri said:
			
		

> On another website I post on, it has been suggested that she was sedated to stop her waking up, and maybe too much was used.
> 
> Personally I don't know what to think.



Christ that's a grim thought...


----------



## Maxine (Aug 27, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Christ that's a grim thought...




It's hardly surprising that there is speculation about sedatives since there were eight children in the group and they were put to bed every night and left on their own while their parents went out. (even if they were checked every half our or every hour, they were still alone most of the time, out of earshot of an adult).   I would be a nervous wreck if I had to leave a child who was two or three years old on their own.  How do you get eight children to sleep at the same time?  How do you know they won't wake up and get up and come to some sort of harm.

There are lots of over the counter sedatives for children sold in chemists as "travel sickness" medication.  Adults take them too to help get to sleep.


----------



## wishface (Aug 27, 2007)

Latest news is that the Mcann's keys have corpse dna on them. According to some newspaper.

It just gets more surreal.


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 27, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Latest news is that the Mcann's keys have corpse dna on them. According to some newspaper.


Fantastic.

Which newspapaer?

And WTF is "corpse dna"


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 27, 2007)

When someone dies, the little gnomes that look after their DNA die also, so you can tell if the DNA came from a corpse by looking for the dead gnomes under a microscope.


----------



## selamlar (Aug 27, 2007)

> And WTF is "corpse dna"



This is







(according to google images, anyway)


----------



## DJ Squelch (Aug 27, 2007)

London_Calling said:
			
		

> Fantastic.
> 
> Which newspapaer?
> 
> And WTF is "corpse dna"



It's the Express of course (see other thread), they seem to have totally lost the plot and have had Madeleine front pages for the last 9 days.
Madeleine madness indeed.


----------



## Geri (Aug 27, 2007)

It's not from the Express, it's from Jornal de Notícias, a Portuguese newspaper. The Express are just reporting it (I assume - not being an Express reader). It's not just the car keys either, there are scents from the boot of the hired car.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2007)

The strangest thing in the story that I noticed was when first discovering Madeleine gone the press reported Mrs McCann as returning to the group shouting "They've taken her"

Surely her immediate reaction would be simply "She's gone"  having not known at this stage whether Madeleine had left the appartment of her own accord or not


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 27, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I doubt it. How many children get missing in the UK every year?


In circumstances similar to this?  None most years.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 27, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> Latest news is that the Mcann's keys have corpse dna on them.


And what is "corpse DNA" when it is at home?


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 27, 2007)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

>




The Maddy and Di Show. 

Just remarkable.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 27, 2007)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> It's the Express of course (see other thread),


Jesus fucking Christ - I have never read such absolute bollocks.   

1. wishface - "scent" is not "DNA".   
2. Dogs can be trained to detect specific scents (including corpses) ... but the scent of a corpse before it begins to decompose is, er, the scent of a person.  If we were to believe this claim, it would mean there had been contact with the body some time after death (probably at least several hours).
3. Dogs, being dogs, can't explain what they have detected.  Sometimes they make false detections.  It is not an exact science.  (A bomb detecting dog I used once "found" the scent of a bomb in Safeway (a threat had been made at the time of an IRA campaign) ... in fact it turned out to be the Winalot display ...  ).
4. I'd love to see the video of the dog "detecting blood", seeing as that requires the use of a simple chemical test ...


----------



## May Kasahara (Aug 27, 2007)

'the scent of corpse'  I look forward to seeing that one crop up on CSI.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Aug 27, 2007)

Or a new perfume for goths.


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 27, 2007)

Copse found!


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 27, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> In circumstances similar to this?  None most years.



Like I said: The fact that it was outside the own home/ homeland was used as an ideal setting for this unbelievable media circus.

salaam.


----------



## stavros (Aug 27, 2007)

> The Maddy and Di Show


I think they're the same person. It'll be interesting to see who gets the Express front page on Friday, Maddy vs Di. FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 31, 2007)

wtf is he on about now!  



			
				bbc said:
			
		

> Last week, Mr McCann asked the media to end the constant speculation about his daughter's whereabouts.
> 
> *He said there had been "huge amounts written with no substance" and that it was not necessary to "bombard people on a daily basis" with Madeleine's image. *


so now he wants to stop, u gotta stop  

they are now suing a portugese paper
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6971662.stm


----------



## Cloo (Aug 31, 2007)

So Maddie's school are holding a chair and a peg for her.

So her would-be classmates have to be told all about how she's been snatched from her parents and, eventually, they're going to have to be told she's not coming back or that she's dead. That'll be nice for them.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2007)

ddraig said:
			
		

> they are now suing a portugese paper
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6971662.stm


Seeing as they're claiming that they killed their own daughter, I can't  blame them getting in the lawyers.


----------



## PacificOcean (Aug 31, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> I think they're the same person. It'll be interesting to see who gets the Express front page on Friday, Maddy vs Di. FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.



It was a close race, but Di wins by a nose.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> It was a close race, but Di wins by a nose.


Bonus points for Di. Maddy _and_ some immigrant story!


----------



## x-amount (Aug 31, 2007)

Cloo said:
			
		

> So Maddie's school are holding a chair and a peg for her.
> 
> So her would-be classmates have to be told all about how she's been snatched from her parents and, eventually, they're going to have to be told she's not coming back or that she's dead. That'll be nice for them.



It's hardly been on a press blackout, has it?!


----------



## x-amount (Aug 31, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> I think they're the same person. It'll be interesting to see who gets the Express front page on Friday, Maddy vs Di. FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.



I always think that Maddies mother is Heather Mills McCartney


----------



## PacificOcean (Aug 31, 2007)

x-amount said:
			
		

> I always think that Maddies mother is Heather Mills McCartney



 

Now that you mention it!


----------



## T & P (Aug 31, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> It was a close race, but Di wins by a nose.


 
Though in the future such races could be avoided with this one-front-page-does-it-all solution (courtesy of B3ta):


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 31, 2007)

I reckon that the same swan-eating immigrant killed Diana and Maddie.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Aug 31, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> Though in the future such races could be avoided with this one-front-page-does-it-all solution (courtesy of B3ta):




That made me fall off my chair.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 31, 2007)

MADDIANA ... shurely ...


----------



## silver (Aug 31, 2007)

Cloo said:
			
		

> So Maddie's school are holding a chair and a peg for her.
> 
> So her would-be classmates have to be told all about how she's been snatched from her parents and, eventually, they're going to have to be told she's not coming back or that she's dead. That'll be nice for them.



Thats what I thought too, I know its been all over the papers but other little kids wouldn't necessarily be aware of whats happened. 

I think they're being unfair on the other children, its the kind of thing their parents should have the option to tell them about, not somthing to be faced with when they are first starting school


----------



## London_Calling (Aug 31, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> MADDIANA ... shurely ...


Mad Diana? You're not wrong.


Or Dialeine - no, that sounds like a sink unblocker.


----------



## Cloo (Aug 31, 2007)

x-amount said:
			
		

> It's hardly been on a press blackout, has it?!


 Yes, but, as Silver says, 4-year-olds won't be reading the paper. You could put the same thing on the cover every day and a young kid won't notice it. And it doesn't immediately affect them either, as it does these kids.

Not that I'm one of those people who get all aghast about how things like this will 'psychologically scar' children - I think they would get over it fine - but it still seems unneccessary.


----------



## gilroy (Aug 31, 2007)

Cloo said:
			
		

> Yes, but, as Silver says, 4-year-olds won't be reading the paper.
> 
> Unless its a private school of course


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 31, 2007)

I went to a private school and dont know anyone that read the paper at aged 4 or 5 or six,, and so on.


----------



## rollinder (Sep 2, 2007)

yesterdays paper - can't remember if it was the mail or express but: 
Diana main story, Maddy top left undermasthead next to picture of Sherlock Holmes cd/book/somethingorother offer 
me outloud in woolworths "so they've got Maddy next to Sherlock Holmes because he's the only person left likely to find her "  
plus seeing that poster again on the door of superdrug 
"makes it look like a hide and seek competition - find maddy hidden in this store and win a prize"


----------



## Corax (Sep 2, 2007)

Ain't read the thread (half-cut), probably been said already, but...

Wonder if the attention would have been the same if they weren't white and/or so evidently middle-class.

Coming from probably the most white, middle-class male on the boards.


----------



## Supine (Sep 2, 2007)

I saw find maddy posters on the Isle of Man a few weeks ago. As if thats going to happen!


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 2, 2007)

Supine said:
			
		

> I saw find maddy posters on the Isle of Man a few weeks ago. As if thats going to happen!



There is one on the noticeboard of the Spar in Cork Airport Business park.


----------



## rollinder (Sep 2, 2007)

no point looking their she's hiding in Tivvey superdrug, I tell you


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 2, 2007)

Cloo said:
			
		

> So Maddie's school are holding a chair and a peg for her.
> 
> So her would-be classmates have to be told all about how she's been snatched from her parents and, eventually, they're going to have to be told she's not coming back or that she's dead. That'll be nice for them.


They would already know anyway I suspect. She lives in a small town. Doesnt mean the chair and peg have been labelled, just that a school place has been kept for her.
Would the school be able to offer it then just remove it because this has happened and the outcome is still unknown??


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 25, 2007)

They have found her!!! 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7013480.stm

well, actually someone saw a white girl in Morocco, which as everyone knows is suspicious because Morocco is full of swarthy musselmen


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

I bet the Musselmen wouldn't leave their children asleep at home while they went to the pub.

The people in the photo look like responsible adults. Good luck to them.

(Obviously, if that's Maddy, do the right thing and leave her at the embassy. No funny business.)


----------



## Calva dosser (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I bet the Musselmen wouldn't leave their children asleep at home while they went to the pub.
> 
> The people in the photo look like responsible adults. Good luck to them.
> 
> (Obviously, if that's Maddy, do the right thing and leave her at the embassy. No funny business.)




The first part of this post.

I cannot post a reply.

They would not be in the pub.

Maybe an Hotel.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> They have found her!!!
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7013480.stm
> 
> well, actually someone saw a white girl in Morocco, which as everyone knows is suspicious because Morocco is full of swarthy musselmen



Jesus: kidnapped by crazy arabs. Maybe.


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Looks like a photoshop jobbie to me - there is a black band between the girl and the woman.

Anyway, wouldn't carrying a four year old on your back be quite heavy?


----------



## subversplat (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Looks like a photoshop jobbie to me - there is a black band between the girl and the woman.
> 
> Anyway, wouldn't carrying a four year old on your back be quite heavy?


WTF, are you a seven stone weakling or something?


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

subversplat said:
			
		

> WTF, are you a seven stone weakling or something?



Giving a piggyback is one thing, but carrying a four year old in one of those back things up and down mountians?


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Giving a piggyback is one thing, but carrying a four year old in one of those back things up and down mountians?


A Musselman could do it


----------



## T & P (Sep 26, 2007)

I know it's been done but that picture might as well have come from this book...


----------



## johnnymarrsbars (Sep 26, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> I know it's been done but that picture might as well have come from this book...




argh, beat me to it. 


have they not checked under the McCann's patio? first place i'd look...never seen brookside?!


----------



## g force (Sep 26, 2007)

Why the hell did a tourist take a photo of people walking by a roadside? Christ I hate to have a white, blonde-haired girl aged between 3 and 5 anywhere in Europe because before you know it you'll be the Daily Mail's "most wanted".


----------



## 5t3IIa (Sep 26, 2007)

It *does* look like her.

 How weird it would be if it all works out fine...she's found alive and returned unhurt to her parents? That'd teach us


----------



## T & P (Sep 26, 2007)

g force said:
			
		

> Why the hell did a tourist take a photo of people walking by a roadside? Christ I hate to have a white, blonde-haired girl aged between 3 and 5 anywhere in Europe because before you know it you'll be the Daily Mail's "most wanted".


 I suspect a fair amount of blonde-haired girls who happen to live or be in Southern Europe or Northern Africa will have one of their hairs pulled by a "concerned member of the public" and handed over to the police for DNA tests over the coming years...


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> I suspect a fair amount of blonde-haired girls who happen to live or be in Southern Europe or Northern Africa will have one of their hairs pulled by a "concerned member of the public" and handed over to the police for DNA tests over the coming years...



Whish is why the first thing I would too if I'd kidnapped a blonde girl, is dye her hair black and cut it short. Hypothetically speaking over course.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 26, 2007)

I remember seeing at least blonde child among the Druze in, I think, northern Israel. This was donkey's a go.

Not madly uncommon it appears, explained then as a 'throwback' to the Crusaders. People move around, who know's what we've got in our particular gene pool or when it's going to crop up in future generations.


----------



## Belushi (Sep 26, 2007)

Some of the Berber people of North Africa are very European lloking.


----------



## Kizmet (Sep 26, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> A Musselman could do it


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2007)

5t3IIa said:
			
		

> It *does* look like her.



And the person carrying her *does* look like OJ Simpson


----------



## editor (Sep 26, 2007)

g force said:
			
		

> Why the hell did a tourist take a photo of people walking by a roadside? Christ I hate to have a white, blonde-haired girl aged between 3 and 5 anywhere in Europe because before you know it you'll be the Daily Mail's "most wanted".


Have you never looked through people's holiday snaps? Some people take pictures of any old shit and in this case the woman was in the background.

From what I can see from the photo (which isn't a lot) the girl doesn't half look like Madeleine though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

editor said:
			
		

> From what I can see from the photo (which isn't a lot) the girl doesn't half look like Madeleine though.


In that it looks like a little girl

Ahh, I said I wouldn't get involved in this pointless speculation


----------



## Belushi (Sep 26, 2007)

That photo's so blurry it could be any little white girl about the same age.


----------



## editor (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> In that it looks like a little girl


I'd say there's enough detail there to make it worth investigating.


----------



## christonabike (Sep 26, 2007)

Who wants a tenner at 100-1 that it's her?

No fucker, I'd bet

It isn't her, she fucking dead


----------



## STFC (Sep 26, 2007)

And that's funny how exactly?


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 26, 2007)

christonabike said:
			
		

> Who wants a tenner at 100-1 that it isn't her?
> 
> No fucker, I'd bet
> 
> It isn't her, she fucking dead


That's not going to sell 'papers or fill air time.


----------



## christonabike (Sep 26, 2007)

> And that's funny how exactly?



Dunno, dead kids aren't funny, why are you looking for the funny side of it?

BTW, I have edited my post to say what I originally meant

And I put the smile at the end of pretty much all my posts if that's what you are having a go about


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Why is the picture such shitty quality? 

Funny that.  

Even the most basic camera phone can take a half decent picture.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

editor said:
			
		

> I'd say there's enough detail there to make it worth investigating.


What? A face? And hair?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Why is the picture such shitty quality?
> 
> Funny that.
> 
> Even the most basic camera phone can take a half decent picture.


Looks like a typical camera phone shot


----------



## Pieface (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Why is the picture such shitty quality?
> 
> Funny that.
> 
> Even the most basic camera phone can take a half decent picture.



the real picture is much wider - the pic in most the papers today was cropped


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Looks like a typical camera phone shot



Why would you be using a camera phone for your hoilday snaps?

I still maintain this is a photoshop jobby or they set the secne up for real to sell to the papers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Why would you be using a camera phone for your hoilday snaps?


I didn't take a camera with me on my holidays but took a few pics with my phone. Maybe I should have a look for a picture of a little girl and then flog it to the papers


----------



## STFC (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> Why would you be using a camera phone for your hoilday snaps?



Why wouldn't you?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> I still maintain this is a photoshop jobby or they set the secne up for real to sell to the papers.


Why would they need to bother? There's plenty of existing photos out there


----------



## STFC (Sep 26, 2007)

christonabike said:
			
		

> Dunno, dead kids aren't funny, why are you looking for the funny side of it?
> 
> BTW, I have edited my post to say what I originally meant
> 
> And I put the smile at the end of pretty much all my posts if that's what you are having a go about



I was just wondering why you put a smilie at the end of a post about a dead kid. It seemed a bit out of place to me.


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

STFC said:
			
		

> Why wouldn't you?



If I am off to Morrocco I think I could splash out £30 on a basic camera.


----------



## detective-boy (Sep 26, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> That photo's so blurry it could be any little white girl about the same age.


Precisely (as I've just told one of our tabloids who called me for a comment on the "breakthrough" ...  )


----------



## STFC (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> If I am off to Morrocco I think I could splash out £30 on a basic camera.



I've got a perfectly good basic camera on my mobile. Why spend money on something you don't need?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> If I am off to Morrocco I think I could splash out £30 on a basic camera.


I've never had one


----------



## christonabike (Sep 26, 2007)

"I was just wondering why you put a smilie at the end of a post about a dead kid. It seemed a bit out of place to me."

Didn't even think about it, but I see your point


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Precisely (as I've just told one of our tabloids who called me for a comment on the "breakthrough" ...  )



Call me cynical but the  McCann's new PR and PI people seem to be doing a good job. The red tops must be loving it.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

I've been saying all along that she was most probably kidnapped by Moroccans. But did anyone listen to me?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> I've been saying all along that she was most probably kidnapped by Moroccans. But did anyone listen to me?



yes


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Some of the Berber people of North Africa are very European lloking.



Not only in North Africa. Anywhere. They can have blue, grey or green eyes and brown up to blond hair too.
Their "true origin" is point of discussion but most agree with the theory of a vast amount of European influence in their genetic pole.

That picture is of such bad quality that the only thing I can make of it is that it is *probably* a little girl. With brown hair. Looks much younger than 4 too. 
But don't let that stop The Crazy UK Media. A Marrakkech Link is only a step from a Terrorist Link, no?

What would a Moroccan family, probably blessed already with more children to feed than they can handle, begin with a little European girl? 
Was she left on their doorstep or sent to them -hidden in suitcase - by a relative living in Portugal. 
Or do we have to look for complicity of a pilot of Royal Air Maroc? 

So many difficult questions. No doubt the UK Media shall come up with the answers soon.

salaam.


----------



## Paul Russell (Sep 26, 2007)

The uncropped photo is here btw. 

http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2007/09/can-the-online-.html


----------



## Pieface (Sep 26, 2007)

It's even wider than that, Paul.  Taken from inside a car - you can see the windscreen frame at the edges.


----------



## girasol (Sep 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> What would a Moroccan family, probably blessed already with more children to feed than they can handle, begin with a little European girl?



Exactly, that's what I was thinking...


----------



## Paul Russell (Sep 26, 2007)

Oh right, thanks. I was just thinking that I don't know why I typed "uncropped", because I had no knowledge that was actually the case. I should have typed "bigger".




			
				PieEye said:
			
		

> It's even wider than that, Paul.  Taken from inside a car - you can see the windscreen frame at the edges.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> What would a Moroccan family, probably blessed already with more children to feed than they can handle, begin with a little European girl?



One word answer. Black magic rituals.


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 26, 2007)

That's three words, is it not?

(as well as referring to an entirely discredited mass hysteria/moral panic)


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> (as well as referring to an entirely discredited mass hysteria/moral panic)



Does it effect house prices


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> That's three words, is it not?
> 
> (as well as referring to an entirely discredited mass hysteria/moral panic)



Shit, rumbled.


----------



## Dj TAB (Sep 26, 2007)

Looking at the picture on the front of the paper....

...it's definitely difficult to say categorically that it's her however...

The hairstyle and colour is very similar, and the parting seems in about the right place...

...her right eye (seen on the left) seems very pronounced, and given the unique feature of her pupil fits the description. It could be a trick of the strong sunlight the shot was taken in though....

There does seem to be quite a harsh line along the shoulders of the person carrying her, possible indications of a photoshop job. Having seen the full-size photo though it's a hell of a job and if somebody has done it to gain fame, money or just to sell more papers I hope they end up hanging from a tree....

As for what would a Morroccan family do with a young european girl I shudder to think, and would believe almost anything is possible given the infrastructure of said country....


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> One word answer. Black magic rituals.



I can do that over a picture. Or even without one. Just give me one hair or only something the person touched or make me think of them following your description, and they are doomed. No doubt in my mind any Moroccan is better at it than I am. Moroccan women are "famous" for "magic" in general, as far as I'm informed. (By women.)

salaam.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> Looking at the picture on the front of the paper....
> 
> ...it's definitely difficult to say categorically that it's her however...
> 
> ...


I don't know why you bothered going to the trouble....


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> I can do that over a picture. Or even without one. Just give me one hair or only something the person touched or make me think of them following your description, and they are doomed. No doubt in my mind any Moroccan is better at it than I am. Moroccan women are "famous" for "magic" in general, as far as I'm informed. (By women.)
> 
> salaam.



You should sell your story to the Sun. You'd make a fortune!


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

Question for Detective Boy..

surely if police had a photo like this they'd fucken hotfoot it over to Zinat instead of giving it to the papers?


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> The hairstyle and colour is very similar, and the parting seems in about the right place...



The hair is brown and I see no "eye" at all.



> As for what would a Morroccan family do with a young european girl I shudder to think and would believe almost anything is possible given the infrastructure of said country....



Really? Care to give the details?

salaam.


----------



## Belushi (Sep 26, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> Question for Detective Boy..
> 
> surely if police had a photo like this they'd fucken hotfoot it over to Zinat instead of giving it to the papers?



The photo was given to the Spanish, rather than Portugese Police.


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> As for what would a Morroccan family do with a young european girl I shudder to think, and would believe almost anything is possible given the infrastructure of said country....



The infrastrucrture?  Are they are going to melt her down to make a road?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> As for what would a Morroccan family do with a young european girl I shudder to think, and would believe almost anything is possible given the infrastructure of said country....



They'll be training her to drive taxis up into the Rif mountains, mark my words.


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> The photo was given to the Spanish, rather than Portugese Police.



In the paper this morning she said she took it straight to the British Embassy after the Spanish police showed little interest.


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> You should sell your story to the Sun. You'd make a fortune!



I wouldn't do that to such a respectable UK source of information. You can't tell them anything that even remotely comes close to the truth.

salaam.
goes back at making his glas turn under his hand because too lazy to pick up spoon to stirr his tea.


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> They'll be training her to drive taxis up into the Rif mountains, mark my words.



And probably first of all teach her how to drive while hanging outside after loading some 15 passengers into a relic of a car that kisses the road while bumping upwards on a mountain track. 
You must be a European girl to be able to survive that... Stronger genes and more intellect and all that... Can't be found locally.

salaam.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> In the paper this morning she said she took it straight to the British Embassy after the Spanish police showed little interest.


How very sensible of the Spanish police


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Aldebaran said:
			
		

> You must be a European girl to be able to survive that... Stronger genes and more intellect and all that... Can't be found locally.



Not to mention being only four years old.


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> Not to mention being only four years old.



That is only normal.

salaam.


----------



## Belushi (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> In the paper this morning she said she took it straight to the British Embassy after the Spanish police showed little interest.



Yes, my post was in reposnse to Twisted and the point is this case is nothing to do with the Spanish Police.



> Question for Detective Boy..
> 
> surely if police had a photo like this they'd fucken hotfoot it over to Zinat instead of giving it to the papers?


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> The photo was given to the Spanish, rather than Portugese Police.



I know that, so who gave it to the papers, the Spanish or Brits??


----------



## Dj TAB (Sep 26, 2007)

detail taken from car picture






her hair certainly seems quite brown in the picture, even given the bright direct sunlight...

It's an interesting development in the case, it might be her, it might not. it is certainly possible she was taken from Portugal via this route given that most illegal traffic over the border between Portugal and Morrocco is either illegal immigrants or hasish going the other way. As has also been noted the port was not notified until 26 hours after her disappearance so really quite feasible.

My comments concerning Morrocco's infrastructure are not intended to offend, however I would like to raise the issue of what resources they have to aid the search for this girl or her body....


----------



## Fuchs66 (Sep 26, 2007)

I always said it must 'ave bin some swarthy forrin type what done it, their eyes are too close together or summink. 














Actually I'm more of the opinion that the mystery will be solved a lot closer to her home.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 26, 2007)

Is war with Portugal the only answer now? 

If so it might detract attention away from Dafur and Burma


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

War with Morocco I think Badgers. They have more swarthy foreign types there and they believe in the wrong religion.


----------



## Belushi (Sep 26, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> War with Morocco I think Badgers. They have more swarthy foreign types there and they believe in the wrong religion.



Now they've got back into the white-slave trade we've got no other option  

The fella in my local shop is a bit swarthy, I'll pop in tonight on my way home and find out what he knows about it


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> War with Morocco I think Badgers. They have more swarthy foreign types there and they believe in the wrong religion.



Not to mention their shocking black magic rituals with young English girls and their pool of enforced labour taxi driving kindergarten kiddies.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Now they've got back into the white-slave trade we've got no other option
> 
> The fella in my local shop is a bit swarthy, I'll pop in tonight on my way home and find out what he knows about it


Try not to rouse his suspicions though. We don't want them to know we're onto them.


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> It's an interesting development in the case, it might be her, it might not. .




More like an interesting tactic on behalf of Team McCann trying to change the focus away from a murder investigation back to a Find Madeleine campaign.

Expect more sightings soon. 

But let's face it if anyone did kidnap her you'd probably expect them to give her a new haircut and maybe add a bit of dye too.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> But let's face it if anyone did kidnap her you'd probably expect them to give her a new haircut and maybe add a bit of dye too.



I'd have added a false beard, especially in Morocco.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> I'd have added a false beard, especially in Morocco.




And a burqha.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Sep 26, 2007)

I reckon Aldebaran knows more about this than he's letting on, "*Book him DB*"!


----------



## Bonfirelight (Sep 26, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> I'd have added a false beard, especially in Morocco.



and a fez


----------



## greenfield (Sep 26, 2007)

*It's not Maddy!*

Apparently the photo was of a farmer's daughter according to Virgin Radio news on at work at the mo....


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Sep 26, 2007)

Phew! I thought they were going to find her for a minute. Imagine how boring that wold be. Re-open Newgate I say, we need a good hanging.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Sep 26, 2007)

oh yeah? the old 'farmer's daughter' coverup eh?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 26, 2007)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=484109&in_page_id=1770


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 26, 2007)

I swear it was Maddie who served me chips down in our local fish emporium last night.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Sep 26, 2007)

Until I saw that pic today I was convinced that she was dead.

Now, I am not so sure. In the Mail today they have the pic and lots of others of Madeleine and the face structure is very similar, especially around the nose. I know it's a shit quality photo but it's very much like her IMO.


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> And a burqha.



Now _that_ would really make her stand out like a fox in a chicken den.

salaam.
Notices abundance of "them foreign Islam countries, all them muuusliiims are alike" pearls of wisdom in Madeleine thread.

salaam.


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Fuchs66 said:
			
		

> I reckon Aldebaran knows more about this than he's letting on, "*Book him DB*"!



Actually, I saw her only 3 days ago when in Europe. She is the daughter of a close relative (of mother's side), was stolen from them by that English family and hence they went to Portugal to bring her back. They they don't remember that episode, thanks to my in-depth knwoledge of magic. 

salaam.


----------



## nuffsaid (Sep 26, 2007)

Loads of little girls look like Maddie, given blondish hair with a fringe and bob haircut. A work colleague of mine showed me a pic of his 3 yr old and the resemblance is amazing.....................hang on a minute.

Anyway if it is her she looks quite happy, unrestrained, and enjoying the sunshine and NOT with a pack of paedos as feared. Think of the cultural insights to Morocco she'll get compared to most middle-class kids from op north.


----------



## detective-boy (Sep 26, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> Call me cynical but the  McCann's new PR and PI people seem to be doing a good job. The red tops must be loving it.


The PR I'd agree with - the statement today was extremely reasonable.  And they seem to have shut Philomena in a (large) cupboard.  The investigators from Control Risks will be costing them a fucking fortune ... don't know about doing a good job though, it's very difficult to achieve if they haven't got access to all the evidence the police have.  I would be advising having an investigator to improve liaison with the police and offer to do stuff that maybe they can't (for whatever reason, not least resourcing - there are always decisions made to curtail lines of enquiry which _could_ be taken further) rather than one who in effect sets up in competition.  Not sure which approach Control Risks are taking I would suspect the latter from what we have heard.


----------



## detective-boy (Sep 26, 2007)

Dj TAB said:
			
		

> ...it's definitely difficult to say categorically that it's her however...


No.  It's 110% absolutely impossible.  Not "difficult".  It _may_ be possible to apply some enhancement and facial recognition techniques to the photo, but I would be pessimistic of getting a definite result even then.

The best hope of a definite answer is if it is NOT her and the people depicted come forward and are eliminated.  Otherwise we are likely to be left in a "It may be, it may not" limbo for ever.

(ETA: This was posted before I read the posts about the girl being identified)


----------



## detective-boy (Sep 26, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> Question for Detective Boy..
> 
> surely if police had a photo like this they'd fucken hotfoot it over to Zinat instead of giving it to the papers?


Did the police give it to the papers?

It would, however, be logical to release it as the best hope of a result is by the people being recognised and traced.

(ETA:  Ditto)


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

nuffsaid said:
			
		

> Think of the cultural insights to Morocco she'll get compared to most middle-class kids from op north.


Maybe she'll come back speaking Berber or Arabic  

Mind you, that would probably get her selected for a 'random' airport search when she came back into the country, with the possibility of indefinite detention. It's terrible what these Ayrabs can do to someone's life


----------



## Badgers (Sep 26, 2007)

Not Maddy


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 26, 2007)

Badgers said:
			
		

> Not Maddy


It's for the best
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=221941


----------



## bi0boy (Sep 26, 2007)

I'd just like to say that this isn't me:


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> The PR I'd agree with - the statement today was extremely reasonable.  And they seem to have shut Philomena in a (large) cupboard.  The investigators from Control Risks will be costing them a fucking fortune ... don't know about doing a good job though, it's very difficult to achieve if they haven't got access to all the evidence the police have.  I would be advising having an investigator to improve liaison with the police and offer to do stuff that maybe they can't (for whatever reason, not least resourcing - there are always decisions made to curtail lines of enquiry which _could_ be taken further) rather than one who in effect sets up in competition.  Not sure which approach Control Risks are taking I would suspect the latter from what we have heard.



Yes I've noticed that you're not a big fan of Philomena either and they do seem to have   taken away her couch, biscuit tin, tea-making facilities and unsubsribed her from her Sky multimedia package. It can only help the McCann's cause and might make relations with the police and media from that slimy little country better. 

But...I'd argue that the hiring of Control Risks is actually an integral part of the PR strategy. For instance, the Portuguese make a statement and then Team McCann will say, "oh no, those Portuguese haven't looked at it properly, because Control Risks (who after all have former SAS and MI5 people on their books so they can't ever be wrong, and what's more they're British not greasy Iberians) said that it happened like this. 
Cue another Sun/Mirror/Mail headline.


----------



## detective-boy (Sep 26, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> who after all have former SAS and MI5 people on their books so they can't ever be wrong


Ah yes.  Those well known _reactive_ investigators of serious crime, experienced in putting together the evidence necessary for a public trial ...  

(As it happens, they also have some very good and experienced former senior investigating officers and other police on their books or available to them ...  The problem is not the people they have, it is the access to the information they need to conduct a holistic investigation - quite simply without the cooperation of the police they cannot.)


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070926/tuk-uk-britain-girl-fa6b408_5.html

Surprise, surprise!

However, this quote is very telling.  It's gone from back from a murder enquiry in everyone's mind to finding her - too well timed?

"Hopefully, this not only will lead to finding Madeleine, of course, but if it helps bring the focus of everything back onto the search for her, that's all for the good as well," said Mitchell.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> However, this quote is very telling.  It's gone from back from a murder enquiry in everyone's mind to finding her - too well timed?


It's called hysteria you nob


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 26, 2007)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070926/tuk-uk-britain-girl-fa6b408_5.html
> 
> Surprise, surprise!
> 
> ...



Well yes..it wouldn't surprise me that McCann's investigators heard of this nutjob Clara Torres and her picture and thought it was a good time to bring it out, let the Redtops lap it up and change their editorial line in the process.

That's what professionals do for you instead of having Philomena blurt out xenophobia from her couch in Ullapool.


----------



## renegadechicken (Sep 26, 2007)

Why haven't the MaCann's thought of hiring Dirk Gentry for a proper holistic investigation?


----------



## PacificOcean (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> It's called hysteria you nob



Thank you for adding to the discussion with an insult, tosspot.

Please call again.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

I'm just frustrated with the blinkered theorising on this thread


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I'm just frustrated with the blinkered theorising on this thread



Look, it is very simple:  No matter what, the Moroccans did it. 
Why? They are Muuusssliiimmms and Revival of the White Slave Trade is eminent.


The End. 


salaam.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

I think that's the joke on this thread - no-one on here is seriously saying that


----------



## Aldebaran (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I think that's the joke on this thread - no-one on here is seriously saying that



I was referring to the UK Media.

salaam.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 27, 2007)

As I've been saying all along, no way was it the Moroccans. It was Burmese Junta that did it. Wankers.


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 27, 2007)

Surely we can bring Mourinho's sudden leaving of Chelsea into this? He's Portuguese after all and therefore very shady. Philomena told me.


----------



## T & P (Sep 27, 2007)

*Bin done?*

Following Jose Mourinho's comments that he just wants to return to Portugal and disappear from public view, Kate and Gerry McCann have today offered to help.​


----------



## May Kasahara (Sep 27, 2007)

Madeleine is probably too embarrassed to come back now.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 11, 2007)

Fucking ace ! 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5RRmE0_n0K4


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 11, 2007)

May Kasahara said:
			
		

> Madeleine is probably too embarrassed to come back now.


Very, very wrong.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 11, 2007)

goldenecitrone said:
			
		

> As I've been saying all along, no way was it the Moroccans. It was Burmese Junta that did it. Wankers.



Nah, it was Israel


----------



## bluestreak (Oct 11, 2007)

have they found her yet?  i've been on media blackout for the last couple of weeks...


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 11, 2007)

There looking for her in childporn vids now. Thats todays spin.


----------



## bluestreak (Oct 11, 2007)

perhaps some sort of targetted ad amongst the paedophile community then.  "have you seen this child?"


----------



## detective-boy (Oct 11, 2007)

bluestreak said:
			
		

> perhaps some sort of targetted ad amongst the paedophile community then.  "have you seen this child?"


But without showing them her picture, obviously.  Because, being paedo scum they'd only wank all over it ...


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 11, 2007)

lol at "paedophile community"


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 11, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> There looking for her in childporn vids now. Thats todays spin.



That will be the new Pete Townshend defence, "I am not a paedo I was looking for Madeleine".


----------



## greenfield (Oct 11, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> That will be the new Pete Townshend defence, "I am not a paedo I was looking for Madeleine".




 

But I actually wouldn't be that surprised....


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2007)

COCK OFF !!!!!!


I’m so mad, had to throw the papers away yesterday...

NOTW goes with the Proof Madeleine was kidnapped as the was a impression of her left in the bed Kate is a witness to this and can prove she is innocent by giving evidence that she saw the bed this way... like WTF  !>!!?!?

Mirror goes with 

Woman see's fisherman kicking something in a boat who was wearing a jacket... now this must have been maddie... and she is dumped at sea..



COCK OFF !!!!!!! 


Might start Reading the Mail or something.


----------



## cyberfairy (Oct 15, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> COCK OFF !!!!!!
> 
> 
> I’m so mad, had to throw the papers away yesterday...
> ...



In The Sunday Express (read in pub, not purchased!) was The Clue In The Bloody Footprint


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2007)

last week she was tracked by a DNA scent ( 4 months later ) im mean come on... the trail took the tracker to the beach... 

ARghhh !


----------



## rollinder (Oct 15, 2007)

who saw Bremner, Bird and Fortune yesterday? the blokes in the pub suggessting Gordon Brown would suddenly annouce "look who I've found" on the eve of the election and sudennly appear holding "little Maddie McCan"


----------



## Belushi (Oct 15, 2007)

rollinder said:
			
		

> who saw Bremner, Bird and Fortune yesterday? the blokes in the pub suggessting Gordon Brown would suddenly annouce "look who I've found" on the eve of the election and sudennly appear holding "little Maddie McCan"



That was hysterical


----------



## May Kasahara (Oct 21, 2007)

I was impressed that this story made the front page of the Mirror on Friday:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/10/19/maddy-visited-me-in-my-sleep-89520-19976453/

Did anything else newsworthy happen on Friday? I can't remember.


----------



## mikeinworthing (Oct 21, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Might start Reading the Mail or something.



Just make sure you avoid the Express, it shits on all other papers for its coverage.  

SPOT THE DIFFERENT COMPETITION:






Mon. 9/10/07





Tue, 10/10/07


----------



## purves grundy (Oct 21, 2007)

Cracking stuff


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 26, 2007)

it's cool we know who took her now there is this like photo fit thing of him... 

will be a matter of days till he is caught!


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Oct 26, 2007)

Brian Molko from Placebo.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 26, 2007)

Nah, that's clearly Mick Hucknall in a black wig.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 26, 2007)

how do we un-blank his face, maybe it was swirrly before ?


----------



## killer b (Oct 26, 2007)

?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Oct 26, 2007)

The outline looks a little bit like Alan Partridge to me.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 26, 2007)

killer b said:
			
		

> ?


----------



## killer b (Oct 26, 2007)

unsuprisingly, there's plenty more where that came from...


----------



## killer b (Oct 26, 2007)




----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Oct 26, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> it's cool we know who took her now there is this like photo fit thing of him...
> 
> will be a matter of days till he is caught!



is it me or does that look a bit like Mr Mccan?


----------



## killer b (Oct 26, 2007)

funny you should say that...


----------



## Nemo (Oct 26, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> is it me or does that look a bit like Mr Mccan?


It looks like about fifty percent of the male population.


----------



## rollinder (Oct 26, 2007)

it's an auton


----------



## May Kasahara (Oct 26, 2007)

Stop it killer b, you're endangering my life with these funnies (laughing = coughing atm)


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Oct 26, 2007)

killer b said:
			
		

> funny you should say that...



She must be guilty.. look at the way she is blowing her nose on that toy..


----------



## twistedAM (Oct 26, 2007)

Nemo said:
			
		

> It looks like about fifty percent of the male population.



higher than that in the Iberian peninsula!

It was obviously them that done it!


----------



## untethered (Oct 26, 2007)

What's the end game here? Invade Portugal?


----------



## Brainaddict (Oct 26, 2007)

Why stop with Portugal? Those Moroccans are definitely in on it. And the Frogs are always around when dirty business is going down. We should invade them all. Spain too - they're almost the same as Portuguese.


----------



## killer b (Oct 26, 2007)

last one...


----------



## dlx1 (Oct 26, 2007)

:d


----------



## wishface (Oct 26, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> it's cool we know who took her now there is this like photo fit thing of him...
> 
> will be a matter of days till he is caught!


FFS if that's what journalism in this sad little island has come to then we have no fucking  hope. Look here's a fucking etch a sketch of a wanted childsnatcher, quickly call the fucking Justice League!

Jesus it's journalism from the 17th century surely!


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Oct 26, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> FFS if that's what journalism in this sad little island has come to then we have no fucking  hope. Look here's a fucking etch a sketch of a wanted childsnatcher, quickly call the fucking Justice League!
> 
> Jesus it's journalism from the 17th century surely!




I'd say earlier.  If you look carefully you can already see the building of the ducking stool.   The only question is who is going to occupy it.


----------



## wishface (Oct 26, 2007)

killer b said:
			
		

> last one...


mind....melting...must reach...stone...teat...of death!

Only this picture of captain kirk can help me


----------



## wishface (Oct 26, 2007)

KeyboardJockey said:
			
		

> I'd say earlier.  If you look carefully you can already see the building of the ducking stool.   The only question is who is going to occupy it.


a) people who think the earth isnt flat
b) people tho aren't christian
c) common people
d) captain kirk
e) made of wood


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Oct 26, 2007)




----------



## KeyboardJockey (Oct 26, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> a) people who think the earth isnt flat
> b) people tho aren't christian
> c) common people
> d) captain kirk
> e) made of wood




Youv'e been reading the BBC Have Your Say site again havn't you.


----------



## detective-boy (Oct 27, 2007)

KeyboardJockey said:
			
		

> The outline looks a little bit like Alan Partridge to me.


Why don't you ring the Control Risks special helpline and tell them ... then maybe they'd work out why proper investigators would never release such an impression (unless they were interested in the clothing particularly) ... because all you'll get is a mountain of crap to wade through ...


----------



## detective-boy (Oct 27, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> .. look at the way she is blowing her nose on that toy..


Ah, the toy!  The talisman of her missing daughter, the sole link with the sweet thing she has lost, the toy which never leaves her presence ... the toy she, er, _washed_, a few days after Madeline disappeared ...


----------



## liquidlunch (Oct 27, 2007)

shades of this perhaps?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Oct 27, 2007)

Whats all this about him playing tennis????


----------



## _angel_ (Oct 27, 2007)

Playing tennis! Washing things! - Hang 'em!!


----------



## winterinmoscow (Oct 27, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Ah, the toy!  The talisman of her missing daughter, the sole link with the sweet thing she has lost, the toy which never leaves her presence ... the toy she, er, _washed_, a few days after Madeline disappeared ...



you're right, that toy is a bloody talisman!


----------



## mikeinworthing (Oct 27, 2007)

killer b said:
			
		

> ?



PMSL - fucking excellent.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Oct 27, 2007)

killer b those pics are hilarious


i feel kinda bad for laughing but still...


----------



## liquidlunch (Oct 27, 2007)

Ringo???carrying a baby??? bullshit


----------



## wishface (Oct 27, 2007)

winterinmoscow said:
			
		

> killer b those pics are hilarious
> 
> 
> i feel kinda bad for laughing but still...


well i think it displays how stupid the picture and the media is/are.


----------



## winterinmoscow (Oct 27, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> well i think it displays how stupid the picture and the media is/are.




can't argue that


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Oct 27, 2007)

_angel_ said:
			
		

> Playing tennis! Washing things! - Hang 'em!!



No.....i just asked what the story was about because i aint seen it, just some odd mutterings in work....


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 27, 2007)

haylz said:
			
		

> No.....i just asked what the story was about because i aint seen it, just some odd mutterings in work....



Madeleine McCann was actually abducted by aliens. For a laugh, they later returned to the scene of the crime to leave a few drops of blood on the wall as a sort of homage to the mysterious invisible blood on OJ Simpson's gatepost.

This is all true, it was in the daily express.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 27, 2007)

fabulous, killer b


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Oct 27, 2007)

So: where_ is_ that little poppet?


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 27, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> So: where_ is_ that little poppet?



Probably here


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Nov 8, 2007)




----------



## frogwoman (Nov 9, 2007)

I wouldn't be surprised if she was with her parents or (more likely) other family members, alive and well tbh. 

Unlikely but I wouldn't be too shocked if that turned out to be the case.


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 9, 2007)

Hey, maybe we can get a new St Madeleine's day bank holiday out of all this.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2007)

no news is good news?


----------



## May Kasahara (Nov 15, 2007)

I dunno...one or other of the tabloids has carried headlines suggesting that some team of crack child rescuers has been 'closing in' on where Maddie is being held...any day now, they'll have her back...any day now....


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2007)

Child rescuers on drugs... sounds good


----------



## May Kasahara (Nov 15, 2007)

Hey, maybe Maddie has been turned into drugs? Maybe that's how she disappeared so mysteriously - she was rendered down and formed into a sticky media paste.


----------



## stavros (Nov 15, 2007)

Astounding news today, as the Express has no mention of Maddie or any other McCann on its front page for the first time since early August. Have they no soul?


----------



## Giles (Nov 15, 2007)

stavros said:
			
		

> Astounding news today, as the Express has no mention of Maddie or any other McCann on its front page for the first time since early August. Have they no soul?



Maybe some big news about Princess Di pushed Maddy off the front pages?

Giles..


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 16, 2007)

Sky news still has a link to 'Madeleine' between 'UK News' and World News'


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Could we rename this thread the 'Just how thick are most Urban 75 forum users?'

On this one you are neither insightful or funny - just dim boring clueless middle-class metro knobheads.

There, I feel better already.

BAA! BAA!


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 16, 2007)

It's about class! Of course!

Now I understand.


----------



## baldrick (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Could we rename this thread the 'Just how thick are most Urban 75 forum users?'
> 
> On this one you are neither insightful or funny - just dim boring clueless middle-class metro knobheads.
> 
> ...



oooh, you're soooo cool


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> It's about class! Of course!
> 
> Now I understand.



No actually the story isn't

But the fact that you think its right for quips probably is


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

baldrick said:
			
		

> oooh, you're soooo cool



Its amazing you'd notice as you clearly are not


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> But the fact that you think its right for quips probably is


You're right, middle class people are so callous  

The 'story' on this thread is the fucking media you wally. That's what the quips are directed at.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Page after page of ill-informed comments on Child Protection, legal issues, drip fed disinformation from the papers and police, aimless mindless speculation, personal attacks ladled with mysogyny....

I know you will all be the first to help me if I ever get in trouble!

Write about what you know about. It never fails.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> You're right, middle class people are so callous
> 
> The 'story' on this thread is the fucking media you wally. That's what the quips are directed at.



Oh really


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Page after page of ill-informed comments on Child Protection, legal issues, drip fed disinformation from the papers and police, aimless mindless speculation, personal attacks ladled with mysogyny....
> 
> I know you will all be the first to help me if I ever get in trouble!
> 
> Write about what you know about. It never fails.



If you do get in trouble please ensure you propagate months of moronic saturation media coverage so we can easily slag you off here.


----------



## selamlar (Nov 16, 2007)

> Oh really


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> If you do get in trouble please ensure you propagate months of moronic saturation media coverage so we can easily slag you off here.



 

Be a pleasure


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

selamlar said:
			
		

>



Nice Owl

They get a bad press too


----------



## Belushi (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Nice Owl
> 
> They get a bad press too



The ones in Brixton have developed a crack problem


----------



## selamlar (Nov 16, 2007)

That'll be from those damn squirrels.  I bet it was them that took her.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Brainaddict said:
			
		

> You're right, middle class people are so callous
> 
> The 'story' on this thread is the fucking media you wally. That's what the quips are directed at.



Ok, the class thing is a distraction and I take it back - there's plenty of mix on these boards, lets call it an 'Urban Point of View' that's sort of young and hip [ish]. Read the lot and you do think 'DIM'.

A many of the posts and quips are aimed at the media its true, but shed loads are not.

TTFN


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> The ones in Brixton have developed a crack problem



What you mean you can see their arses over the top of their jeans?


----------



## Belushi (Nov 16, 2007)

selamlar said:
			
		

> That'll be from those damn squirrels.  I bet it was them that took her.



Working for the Editor, he's like the Pied Piper of Brixton.


----------



## selamlar (Nov 16, 2007)

You use TTFN and accuse people on here of being middle class?


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> If you do get in trouble please ensure you propagate months of moronic saturation media coverage so we can easily slag you off here.



But be a free thinker then - don't read it and don't repeat it if you do and don't confuse it with the issue..


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

selamlar said:
			
		

> You use TTFN and accuse people on here of being middle class?



Sorry I meant 

Mwah, Mwah, big hugs..


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> But be a free thinker then - don't read it and don't repeat it if you do and don't confuse it with the issue..



How about I just do as is expected and put a poster up saying 'Find Mr Moose' in the local post office and only buy newspapers with your face plastered all over the front of it?


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 16, 2007)

bouncer_the_dog said:
			
		

> How about I just do as is expected and put a poster up saying 'Find Mr Moose' in the local post office and only buy newspapers with your face plastered all over the front of it?



 

Fuck me is this supposed to be satire or something?..

Try not to prove my point every flippin post!!


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Nov 16, 2007)

Why reserve quips for the media? Everyone deserves a good quipping as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 16, 2007)

Linky on the bbc or something

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7098390.stm


----------



## detective-boy (Nov 16, 2007)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Write about what you know about.


Think of the post counts!   

Not only do many posters write about stuff they have no fucking idea about, they argue about it with people who do and wilfully refuse to learn anything.


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 16, 2007)

Can we get back on topic please, this is a serious subject - don't forget we are talking about a missing girl here  

(((((((((Maddy)))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Latest news from the BBC is that "A close friend of Kate and Gerry McCann has told the BBC she saw a man carrying a child through the Portuguese holiday resort"!!

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7098390.stm


----------



## May Kasahara (Nov 16, 2007)

It's a bit fucking late now, isn't it?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 16, 2007)

Yep, thought that when I saw it, why now? Why not months ago?


----------



## stavros (Nov 16, 2007)

> Maybe some big news about Princess Di pushed Maddy off the front pages?


Shockingly not. It wasn't even complaining about foreigners either.


----------



## Ned Pointsman (Nov 16, 2007)

They're quite clearly insinuating that Langham has got her in his den of buggery.


----------



## Belushi (Nov 16, 2007)

Thats a lovely picture of a Lamb though


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Thats a lovely picture of a Lamb though



Donner, anyone?


----------



## stavros (Nov 16, 2007)

The inclusion of the lamb in that space is a nice touch, particularly as it's not blonde or dead, a la Dando/Spencer/McCann.


----------



## moose (Nov 16, 2007)

*Disclaimer:*Any resemblance between the Mr Moose herein and any mr moose living or otherwise, residing with me, is purely coincidental.


----------



## abigail_silk (Nov 16, 2007)

moose said:
			
		

> *Disclaimer:*Any resemblance between the Mr Moose herein and any mr moose living or otherwise, residing with me, is purely coincidental.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 17, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Think of the post counts!
> 
> Not only do many posters write about stuff they have no fucking idea about, they argue about it with people who do and wilfully refuse to learn anything.



Thats for sure


----------



## detective-boy (Nov 17, 2007)

Kid_Eternity said:
			
		

> Yep, thought that when I saw it, why now? Why not months ago?


Does _nobody_ here *critically* read the fucking papers??!!?    

It's the woman who's said that to the police from the start but has never given a media interview until now.  It's NOT a new witness ...


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 17, 2007)

detective-boy said:
			
		

> Does _nobody_ here *critically* read the fucking papers??!!?
> 
> It's the woman who's said that to the police from the start but has never given a media interview until now.  It's NOT a new witness ...




Why would anyone read what the papers have to say about this


----------



## Rosco (Nov 17, 2007)

Belushi said:
			
		

> Thats a lovely picture of a Lamb though




Yes I agree, a lovely lambkin piccy, but why do they grow up to look so wierd looking?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 18, 2007)

It's cool she 100% lives....

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/...leine-alive-we-re-100-certain-98487-20123788/


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> It's cool she 100% lives....
> 
> http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/...leine-alive-we-re-100-certain-98487-20123788/



Either that or there was 100% probably a little blond girl in a van somewhere in Portugal


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Nov 19, 2007)

"It was the jungle. It just came alive and took her."


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2007)

"A Dingo stole my baby"


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Nov 19, 2007)

Seems the papers have decided to go after Murats girlfriend now..


----------



## wishface (Nov 19, 2007)

i saw the headling yesterday 'ALIVE'

suerly that's gross misconduct on the part of the fucking press!


----------



## Chairman Meow (Nov 19, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> i saw the headling yesterday 'ALIVE'
> 
> suerly that's gross misconduct on the part of the fucking press!



It's a total fucking disgrace, isn't it?


----------



## The Groke (Nov 19, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> "It was the jungle. It just came alive and took her."




lols....


----------



## T & P (Nov 19, 2007)

*sorry...*


----------



## theCIA (Nov 19, 2007)

Haha!^^


----------



## spacemonkey (Nov 19, 2007)

wishface said:
			
		

> i saw the headling yesterday 'ALIVE'
> 
> suerly that's gross misconduct on the part of the fucking press!



I couldn't believe that either. How the fuck can they say they're 100% sure she's alive?? 

(unless of course they have a photo of her holding the current daily edition of the Express)


----------



## Jografer (Nov 19, 2007)

spacemonkey said:
			
		

> I couldn't believe that either. How the fuck can they say they're 100% sure she's alive??
> 
> (unless of course they have a photo of her holding the current daily edition of the Express)



In the same way as Diana was 100% killed by the secret service & Prince Philip....

... percentages, but not as we know 'em....


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 19, 2007)

Im confused now.........but that metado outfit seem pretty certain.....


----------



## rollinder (Nov 19, 2007)

I found a clue to Maddy's whereabouts in the local charity shop


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 24, 2007)

This thread is my crowning achievement on Urban. None of my others have made it past about 3 pages.

The world is a sorry place.


----------



## untethered (Nov 24, 2007)

billy_bob said:
			
		

> This thread is my crowning achievement on Urban. None of my others have made it past about 3 pages.
> 
> The world is a sorry place.



And only two more posts after this until #1000!


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> And only two more posts after this until #1000!




And i reckon give it another 1000 and she may indeed be found


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 24, 2007)

race ya for 1000th post

e2a I am made of Win! Eat my internet dust!


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

*blows raspberry*

oooo look at my row of fives...*beams*


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

jesus 

you have them as well


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 24, 2007)

spooky. And posting this sychronizes our last three digits. Clearly It Is Meant To Be.


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

OMG 

How long can we keep this up?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 24, 2007)

So long as we only post on this thread, one after the other, potentially forever.

And it would still be more interesting than Maddiebollox


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> So long as we only post on this thread, one after the other, potentially forever.
> 
> And it would still be more interesting than Maddiebollox



oops


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 24, 2007)

The numbers have unsynched 

This means It Isn't Meant To Be


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> The numbers have unsynched
> 
> This means It Isn't Meant To Be



It was sooooo good while it lasted 

I will never forget you....*wipes mock tear*


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Nov 24, 2007)

Get posting!!!!!!!


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 13, 2007)

Oh Hi, we finded her and she be home soon ok's 

 happy ending and all that init

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=501671&in_page_id=1770


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Dec 13, 2007)

Not as good as this story: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=501638&in_page_id=1770


----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 13, 2007)

Look at that mans face.


----------



## subversplat (Dec 13, 2007)

I bet he's got her.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Dec 13, 2007)

He's Hitlers lovechild.


----------



## kyser_soze (Dec 13, 2007)

He looks like some kind of genetic experiment to create the ideal tory MP.


----------



## twistedAM (Dec 13, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Oh Hi, we finded her and she be home soon ok's
> 
> happy ending and all that init
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=501671&in_page_id=1770



"The agency claims to have around 35 investigators working on the case and is being paid £50,000 a month by the Find Madeleine Fund."

That wouldn;t cover the expenses for 35 ops never mind pay them. 
The PI sounds like a nutter. Maybe they've had her all along and will bring her out of the back room in time for Xmas.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2007)




----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Dec 13, 2007)

x 35


----------



## Ted Striker (Dec 17, 2007)

http://www.madeleinemccann.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=44

I'm not sure if this is meant to be a joke, though check out idea/suggestions 69 and 71... It was a slow day in their office when that was written


----------



## purves grundy (Dec 17, 2007)

Ted Striker said:
			
		

> http://www.madeleinemccann.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=44
> 
> I'm not sure if this is meant to be a joke, though check out idea/suggestions 69 and 71... It was a slow day in their office when that was written


 

Most of them are equally mental. Like:


> Idea/Suggestion Fifty Eight: A 5 minute silence world wide.


yeah i'll sort that out no probs


> Idea/Suggestion Forty Six: Wear Find Maddie t-shirts at the Tour De France 2007.


maybe she's getting a backy off Lance Armstrong


> Idea/Suggestion Twenty Eight: I have recently read the Maeve Binchy novel - Whitethorn Woods published recently 2006 and the story includes the incidence of a child being stolen by a childless woman. Could it be possible someone read this novel on holiday and was tempted to do a similar act. Would it be possible to trace up Algarve visitors who bought this book possibly at airport bookshops and do a follow up on these people


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 17, 2007)

I can't believe this was meant seriously:

"Idea/Suggestion Eighteen: Use an airship to search through Europe maybe parts of Africa."


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 17, 2007)

> Ask everyone in the world to search their neighbour's house and see if she's hidden in the cupboards or something.



You know, that would actually work.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2007)

There was an article in the Sunday Times colour suppliment about the McCanns.

Nothing new really, a bit about british police dogs and how they were used and then misinterpreted.


----------



## zoltan (Dec 17, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> You know, that would actually work.



Isnt this what you do when your cat goes missing ?

Im always seeing home made posters urging everyone to check their sheds for Tibbles/ Mr Fluffy/ eric etc etc etc


----------



## dessiato (Dec 17, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> You know, that would actually work.


well I've just looked in all mine and she still isn't in any of them, so it's down to you lot to do the same now.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 17, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> well I've just looked in all mine and she still isn't in any of them, so it's down to you lot to do the same now.


 
You're supposed to check next door's shed and cupboards, not your own.


----------



## moomoo (Dec 17, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> You know, that would actually work.




You haven't seen my pantry!

There could be 10 missing children hidden in there and I'd never know.


----------



## ch750536 (Dec 17, 2007)

▪ Idea/Suggestion Seventy One: Get Rick Astley Re-release the song Never Gonna Give You Up. Because we're never gonna give her up, Never gonna let her down,Never gonna run around and desert you, Never gonna say goodbye, Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you. - Need help on this one please contact me if you can help.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 17, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> You're supposed to check next door's shed and cupboards, not your own.


sorry, as soon as I have a neighbour I'll go round and have a look.


----------



## purves grundy (Dec 17, 2007)

> Idea/Suggestion Seventy: Barrel rolls save lives. Have an air show in support of Maddie


"Barrel rolls save lives"


----------



## rollinder (Dec 17, 2007)

> People can get their children tattooed and tagged (or surgically embedded... same-day out patient) with radio transmitters. This is a superior form of ID and location checking for your child's security. Once the children are 18, they can have either removed at their choice.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 18, 2007)

This one i like


▪ Idea/Suggestion Seventy Three: In the next edition of Merlin's Premier League Sticker Album, have the top player's sticker for each club replaced with a sticker of Maddy eg. Steven Gerrard for Liverpool - Need help on this one please contact me if you can help.


----------



## T & P (Dec 18, 2007)

*Idea/Suggestion Thirty: Why not try Helium filled balloons with photo's & messages tied to them & let them fly all over the EU & other parts of the world. - Need help on this one please contact me if you can help.*


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 18, 2007)

OMFG !!!


http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/305036


----------



## bluestreak (Dec 18, 2007)

If the Portugies police did not care, what do you think made them care / try and find her
The McCann family
The growing support from the UK
The world wide support
Witness / Leads


----------



## dessiato (Dec 18, 2007)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> OMFG !!!
> 
> 
> http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/305036


that is a very badly written and designed poll, presumably written by someone who has little understanding of English, or at least no spell checker.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 18, 2007)

Well I voted.

She's dead
She's dead
She's dead
She's dead
They're not going to stop
They're not going to stop
They're not going to stop
She's dead
She's dead
They're not going to stop
They're not going to stop
She's dead
She's dead
She's dead
She's dead
Yes I would like to enlarge my pneis and fr33 vi@gr@


----------



## invisibleplanet (Dec 18, 2007)

Best - a childless woman stole her and she's alive and well.
First Worst - she's lying in a shallow grave.
Second Worst - a copycat Priklopil-paedophile stole her and she's being reared in a basement and enduring what could be a lifetime of sexual assault.


----------



## kyser_soze (Dec 18, 2007)

weltweit said:
			
		

> Nothing new really, a bit about british police dogs and how they were used and then misinterpreted.



What, they weren't bilingual police dogs and so were unable to communicate with the Portuguese police in the style of Lassie?


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Best - a childless woman stole her and she's alive and well.
> First Worst - she's lying in a shallow grave.
> Second Worst - a copycat Priklopil-paedophile stole her and she's being reared in a basement and enduring what could be a lifetime of sexual assault.


 
Best: Madeleine's abductors disposed of her in a sewer, where she is being raised by kindly rats. She will emerge as a feral adult, swearing terrible revenge on the childsnatchers in shrill squeaks. When she has tracked them down and nibbled them to death she will take up costumed crimefighting and bring other villains to justice.


----------



## selamlar (Dec 18, 2007)

Yup.  Thats definately better!


----------



## spacemonkey (Dec 18, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> Best - a childless woman stole her and she's alive and well.
> First Worst - she's lying in a shallow grave.
> Second Worst - a copycat Priklopil-paedophile stole her and she's being reared in a basement and enduring what could be a lifetime of sexual assault.



I'm not sure you have 'first & second worst' the right way around. 

I notice the express is still running it front page....she was abducted in March, any idea how many of the days the express have had this sotry as front page news since then?


----------



## Crispy (Dec 18, 2007)

Maurice Picarda said:
			
		

> Best: Madeleine's abductors disposed of her in a sewer, where she is being raised by kindly rats. She will emerge as a feral adult, swearing terrible revenge on the childsnatchers in shrill squeaks. When she has tracked them down and nibbled them to death she will take up costumed crimefighting and bring other villains to justice.


Awesome. I'd wear a yellow ribbon if that happened.


----------



## T & P (Dec 18, 2007)

spacemonkey said:
			
		

> I'm not sure you have 'first & second worst' the right way around.
> 
> I notice the express is still running it front page....she was abducted in March, any idea how many of the days the express have had this sotry as front page news since then?


 I'd say on at least 80% of their front pages since the child dissparead.

I noticed a couple of weeks ago that the Sky News website had finally decided to take down the 'Madeleine' permanent link that incredibly had been placed between 'UK News' and 'World News' since March. They published a number of letters from readers about the removal of the link, most of them furious that the link had gone. I guess the whole episode tells you everything you need to know about the editorial focus of that channel and the people who watch it.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Dec 18, 2007)

spacemonkey said:
			
		

> I'm not sure you have 'first & second worst' the right way around.
> 
> I notice the express is still running it front page....she was abducted in March, any idea how many of the days the express have had this sotry as front page news since then?


Saves them from reporting how many Iraqi/Palestinian/Israeli/Afghani kids* have been murdered by adult-induced conflict, i suppose 




*and the rest


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 18, 2007)

I think that her parents may have made up the story of her abduction amd she could be alive and well, like a sort of kid's version of John Darwin.


----------



## T & P (Dec 21, 2007)

> Kate and Gerry McCann have been inundated with hundreds of Christmas gifts for their missing daughter Madeleine.


 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/12/21/mccanns-receive-hundreds-of-presents-for-maddy-89520-20261515/


Why, in the name of god? Why?


----------



## KeyboardJockey (Dec 21, 2007)

T & P said:
			
		

> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/12/21/mccanns-receive-hundreds-of-presents-for-maddy-89520-20261515/
> 
> 
> Why, in the name of god? Why?



Because the British public are emotionally led unthinking morons perhaps?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 21, 2007)

What's the point in giving presents to someone who's dead? Is this some kind of revival of ancient egyptian burial customs?


----------



## wishface (Dec 21, 2007)

Haven't we arrested professor plum yet?


----------



## dessiato (Dec 21, 2007)

what are the McCanns going to do with all those presents? Give them to a children's charity?


----------



## stavros (Dec 21, 2007)

They could put them in the waiting room of where they work as Drs. That's if they ever actually do any flippin' work ever again.

Edited to add that they'll probably fail the CRB check for care of children now.


----------



## mikeinworthing (Dec 21, 2007)

Well as long as Papingo got the dosh into the right account, Maddie will be home for Christmas.  

Maddie might be home for Christmas. It's just not up to me any longer.


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 21, 2007)

dessiato said:
			
		

> what are the McCanns going to do with all those presents? Give them to a children's charity?



Surely they must, as they are not having a Christmas  this year


----------



## john x (Dec 22, 2007)

bi0boy said:
			
		

> Surely they must, as they are not having a Christmas  this year



Selfish sods! What about their other two kids?  

john x


----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 22, 2007)

I dreamt I saw the McCanns in an Aldi car park. I walked past them. They looked sad.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 22, 2007)

Went in wh smiths yesterday and saw somebody had a written a book about Maddie.    It was in the biography section..


----------



## mikeinworthing (Dec 22, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I dreamt I saw the McCanns in an Aldi car park. I walked past them. They looked sad.



Were they parked in a disabled space?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 22, 2007)

mikeinworthing said:
			
		

> Were they parked in a disabled space?



They were parked in front of the store, so I imagine they were.

The must have been disabled by grief.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 22, 2007)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Went in wh smiths yesterday and saw somebody had a written a book about Maddie.    It was in the biography section..



Imagine getting that for Christmas. You would have to be proper sick and/or weird to think that is a good gift. 

Merry Christmas, here is a book about a murdered toddler!


----------



## Wilf (Dec 22, 2007)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Imagine getting that for Christmas. You would have to be proper sick and/or weird to think that is a good gift.
> 
> Merry Christmas, here is a book about a murdered toddler!


Ch. 2 The Wilderness Years


----------



## May Kasahara (Dec 22, 2007)

Living in Leicester, we get double Madeleine Madness every time they do (or don't do ) something else. This morning when I staggered across the road for the paper, there was an extra front page of COME HOME MADDY    on the racks, and we've just had their tv appeal reported twice in a row, once on national and then on local news.


----------



## dlx1 (Dec 22, 2007)

Front page of the mail today had a photo of Madeleine opening Christmas prezzy 
see they must know were she is to take that photo.


----------



## Gingerman (Dec 22, 2007)

Is this going to be an annual xmas event then?,the McCann Christmas message


----------



## selamlar (Jan 7, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Went in wh smiths yesterday and saw somebody had a written a book about Maddie.    It was in the biography section..




Turn to the end and find out what happens!


----------



## wishface (Jan 7, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Went in wh smiths yesterday and saw somebody had a written a book about Maddie.    It was in the biography section..


are you serious?


----------



## T & P (Jan 7, 2008)

selamlar said:
			
		

> Turn to the end and find out what happens!


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 7, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Ch. 2 The Wilderness Years



FFS  

D   )


----------



## T & P (Jan 8, 2008)

*Apologies for the source, but...*

*



Madeleine the movie: McCanns in talks over missing daughter's story

The McCanns are set to turn the story of their daughter into a film.

Kate and Gerry are in negotiations with the world's largest talent and entertainment agency, IMG, in a deal which could be worth millions. 

The money would help fund the search for Madeleine amid fears that the £1.2 million raised from public donations will soon run out.

A source close to the McCanns said: "We would only get involved with something done sensitively and considerately."
 If a deal is done with IMG, it would involve using the same team that made Touching The Void, an award-winning drama-documentary about the fight for survival of two British climbers lost on a mountain.
		
Click to expand...

 *http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=506750&in_page_id=1770


Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?


----------



## the button (Jan 8, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?


_Honey, I killed the kid_?


----------



## T & P (Jan 8, 2008)

the button said:
			
		

> _Honey, I killed the kid_?


 Very good


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 8, 2008)

the button said:
			
		

> _Honey, I killed the kid_?


----------



## the button (Jan 8, 2008)

No point speculating about the name of the film, anyway. Chris Langham's probably got it on his pooter already.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 8, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=506750&in_page_id=1770
> 
> 
> Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?



How to kill Children and influence people


----------



## the button (Jan 8, 2008)

The Babykillers


----------



## The Groke (Jan 8, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Went in wh smiths yesterday and saw somebody had a written a book about Maddie.    It was in the biography section..




Must have been a pretty short book.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 8, 2008)

Just awful isn't it? 

I can't see how this puts her parents in a good light at all. 
Equally I can see a lot of Portuguese people scratching their heads at the British mentality. 

I reckon we need a director before a title... 

David Lynch?


----------



## The Groke (Jan 8, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> OMFG !!!
> 
> 
> http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/305036




ROFL:

The best one is:


"Gerry McCann said they belive Madeleine is more alive then dead, how much do you think (A = alive D = Dead)
A-100 D-0
A-90 D-10
A-80 D-20
A-70 D-30
A-60 D-40
A-50 D-50
A-40 D-60
A-30 D-70
A-20 D-80
A-10 D-90
A-0 D-100"

I reckon she is about 70% dead myself.


----------



## selamlar (Jan 8, 2008)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> how much do you think QUOTE]
> 
> 
> That, of course, is the pertinant question.


----------



## the button (Jan 8, 2008)

Badgers said:
			
		

> I reckon we need a director before a title...
> 
> David Lynch?


 

*Mr & Mrs McCann, earlier*


----------



## Paul Russell (Jan 8, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?



"Maddie McCann and the Butterfly of Hope?"


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 8, 2008)

The McCanns had better sack their utterly shit spin doctor and maybe, just maybe, hire  a good lawyer instead.


----------



## tendril (Jan 8, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?



Lolita 2008 - cute 'n' blonde


----------



## dlx1 (Jan 8, 2008)

child alone - _what was we thinking 
_

Fame


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 8, 2008)

Catch Me If You McCann 
Heaven McCann Wait 
Any Which Way You McCann


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

In Bed With Maddy


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 8, 2008)

The Outlaw Maddie McCann.

The Good, The Bad and the Maddeline.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 8, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> In Bed With Maddy


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jan 8, 2008)

Whats happened????? have they got more evidence against them??


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

Sweaty Betty said:
			
		

> Whats happened????? have they got more evidence against them??


What makes you think that?


----------



## Crispy (Jan 8, 2008)

Who even gives a shit, at this point?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2008)

Crispy said:
			
		

> Who even gives a shit, at this point?





Nobody. I find it hard to believe that the Mcanns themselves care anymore (except for ocaisonal pangs of fear about being found out)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

Do people really think they did it?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Do people really think they did it?




I don't know about 'people' but among my acquaintances the consensus is that they sedated her, she died, they hid the body.


----------



## dlx1 (Jan 8, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Do people really think they did it?


I do


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

Only idiots can have a solid opinion either way


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Only idiots can have a solid opinion either way




well nobodies saying 'My judgment on the situation is 100% correct' are they


It's opinions.


----------



## dlx1 (Jan 8, 2008)

you shut up you not aload to have an opinion as it then wrong one


----------



## ddraig (Jan 8, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=506750&in_page_id=1770
> 
> 
> Perhaps someone could support this heart-warming move by suggesting a title for this film?


fuckin sick!
u really couldn't make it up
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2237213,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11




			
				granuiad said:
			
		

> [Talks on a lucrative film deal were held amid concern the £1.2m fund dedicated to finding the four-year-old, who vanished in Portugal last May, is rapidly running out.






			
				granuiad said:
			
		

> The board of Madeleine's Fund is due to meet this week and will discuss the proposal. Mitchell said the film may have a "cinema feel", and would be key part of replenishing Madeleine's Fund.
> 
> "If in theory a large film were to be made our lawyers would make sure our commercial interests are protected," he said. "Madeleine's Fund is just over £1m. The money is going on investigators and advertising. It's dwindling. The money is going. I would imagine we've got a few months left. It's not going to last the year unless we get more money in."
> 
> In addition to a film deal, Mitchell said it was a book deal was possible "at some point down the line", as part of efforts to find Madeleine.


that story mentions the £1.2million fund 'dwindling' and 'running out' a few times then goes on tho say there's only a million left    forfucksake


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 8, 2008)

Home Alone 4
or
For A few Tapas More
or
Gerry McCann's Day Off


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2008)

Weekend at Maddies


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 8, 2008)

Let's hand it over to the Coen Bros:


No Country For Young Girls

I'd hate to see Coormac McCarthy set free on the screenplay


----------



## TheDave (Jan 8, 2008)

I knew it would happen, I just fucking knew it.


----------



## stavros (Jan 8, 2008)

"Tapas Or Not Tapas, That Is The Question".


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 8, 2008)

Who would play Maddy? I bet it would be an American kid.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

SaskiaJayne said:
			
		

> Who would play Maddy? I bet it would be an American kid.


Warwick Davis or Verne Troyer in a wig


----------



## cyberfairy (Jan 8, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Warwick Davis or Verne Troyer in a wig


Genesis P Orridge


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2008)

Lost in Spain


----------



## Nemo (Jan 8, 2008)

Far from the Maddie Crowd?


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 8, 2008)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Far from the Maddie Crowd?


That's the winner!


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 8, 2008)

Maddie In Manhattan.


----------



## Augie March (Jan 8, 2008)

twisted said:
			
		

> Let's hand it over to the Coen Bros:
> 
> 
> No Country For Young Girls



Alternatively:

O Maddie, Where Art Thou?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 8, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Lost in Spain


 Lost in Morrocco


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> Nobody. I find it hard to believe that the Mcanns themselves care anymore (except for ocaisonal pangs of fear about being found out)



You big twit


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2008)

Crispy said:
			
		

> Who even gives a shit, at this point?



_'Oh yeh man I'm so cool, like who even gives a shit man?'_

Fucking bereaved parents taking up your TV time! How dare they! 

Why not moderate the board and keep that affected bollox to yourself!


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> _'Oh yeh man I'm so cool, like who even gives a shit man?'_
> 
> Fucking bereaved parents taking up your TV time! How dare they!
> 
> Why not moderate the board and keep that affected bollox to yourself!



Haha you'll do well here asshole!


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 8, 2008)

The Hunt For Mad's Not Over

Don't Tell Mom the Babysitters Fled

Raiders of the Lost Child

And the sequel.... Upon her safe return...

Every body after three...one, two, three...

Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Maddie!


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 8, 2008)

Dude, Where's My Kid?


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 8, 2008)

Catch Me If You McCann


----------



## mauvais (Jan 8, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Catch Me If You McCann


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 8, 2008)

I know this story's been going on for way too long but I can't help pitying a bunch of so called intelligent people who laugh about a little girl getting murdered.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 8, 2008)

Noone calls _me _intelligent so I get off scot free


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 8, 2008)

But if we didn't laugh, we'd cry


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 8, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I know this story's been going on for way too long but I can't help pitying a bunch of so called intelligent people who laugh about a little girl getting murdered.



Shut it you po-faced twit.

Nobody is laughing *about* a child getting murdered, they're laughing at the ridiculous media circus that acccompanies it.


----------



## snadge (Jan 8, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I know this story's been going on for way too long but I can't help pitying a bunch of so called intelligent people who laugh about a little girl getting murdered.




If you know she's been murdered don't you think you should tell the police,  the police of which country is anyones guess though.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 8, 2008)

And if we cried _enough _we could maybe star in the film.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 8, 2008)

whatever


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 8, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> whatever



I bet you cry every time you hear 'Candle In The Wind'


----------



## moomoo (Jan 8, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> I bet you cry every time you hear 'Candle In The Wind'




Doesn't everyone?


----------



## MsShirlLaverne (Jan 8, 2008)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Doesn't everyone?


Only because it's so painful on the ears


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 8, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Nobody is laughing *about* a child getting murdered, they're laughing at the *ridiculous media circus* that acccompanies it.



Spot on, except I'm not even laughing about it either.


----------



## bi0boy (Jan 8, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I know this story's been going on for way too long but I can't help pitying a bunch of so called intelligent people who laugh about a little girl getting murdered.



Obviously if she had murdered we wouldn't be laughing about it, but there is new evidence coming up all the time that was abducted so may be alive.

For example the Mirror reports that a man who stayed in the apartment before the McCanns saw a 'non-British' man outside


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Shut it you po-faced twit.
> 
> Nobody is laughing *about* a child getting murdered, they're laughing at the ridiculous media circus that acccompanies it.



That's just prissy. If you are going to have a hoot don't blame the media.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2008)

Ted Striker said:
			
		

> The Hunt For Mad's Not Over


----------



## snadge (Jan 8, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> That's just prissy. If you are going to have a hoot don't blame the media.


  

I don't know if that's you being serious or not, either way it's funny.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2008)

Remember folks, this thread will be 12 months old in May.  Get your ribbons ready.


----------



## snadge (Jan 8, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

>





> Originally Posted by Ted Striker
> The Hunt For Mad's Not Over



just got that one, fucking superb.


----------



## purves grundy (Jan 8, 2008)

Maddie Max? 

Mr. Clifford could help promote it.


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 9, 2008)

SaskiaJayne said:
			
		

> Who would play Maddy? I bet it would be an American kid.




Yeah, Stewie Griffin.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm sure this could be engineered into historical revisionism, a political crisis, and then war, with a bit of careful manipulation. Unfortunately I've never felt that much of a need for a coordinated air campaign against the Portuguese.


----------



## *Miss Daisy* (Jan 9, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> Remember folks, this thread will be 12 months old in May.  Get your ribbons ready.


 

sorry but couldnt help but snigger


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2008)

mauvais said:
			
		

> . Unfortunately I've never felt that much of a need for a coordinated air campaign against the Portuguese.


i fuckin did after the last World Cup


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 9, 2008)

mauvais said:
			
		

> I'm sure this could be engineered into historical revisionism, a political crisis, and then war, with a bit of careful manipulation. Unfortunately I've never felt that much of a need for a coordinated air campaign against the Portuguese.



I'm sure it could be arranged.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 9, 2008)

Anyway I'm a lot more annoyed that quotes aren't in italics any more, I think kidnapping a small child off the street in protest is the only way to solve this. 
who's with me??


----------



## pogofish (Jan 9, 2008)

Somebody got this card recently:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1812722189&size=l


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Its rubbish. Why post it?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

snadge said:
			
		

> I don't know if that's you being serious or not, either way it's funny.



Serious! What a weasley wimpy excuse this whole 'I'm laughing at the media' is.

There is without a doubt an undercurrent of resentment to the McCann's through this thread.....but you lot are dense enough to think that in someway you didn't buy in!


----------



## The Groke (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Serious! What a weasley wimpy excuse this whole 'I'm laughing at the media' is.
> 
> There is without a doubt an undercurrent of resentment to the McCann's through this thread.....but you lot are dense enough to think that in someway you didn't buy in!




Have you actually read the thread?

 


For my part, I am not laughing at the media - I personally find the abduction and murder of young girls just _hilarious_


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Serious! What a weasley wimpy excuse this whole 'I'm laughing at the media' is.
> 
> There is without a doubt an undercurrent of resentment to the McCann's through this thread.....but you lot are dense enough to think that in someway you didn't buy in!


LOL.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> Have you actually read the thread?



Yes. Why confused?

Please explain what you see and I don't.


----------



## The Groke (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Please explain what you see and I don't.



The point?


----------



## selamlar (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Yes. Why confused?
> 
> Please explain what you see and I don't.



Many, many things.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Yes. Why confused?
> 
> Please explain what you see and I don't.


What you're missing is the willingness to follow the herd in order to be accepted.


----------



## selamlar (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> What you're missing is the willingness to follow the herd in order to be accepted.


Oh the irony!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> What you're missing is the willingness to follow the herd in order to be accepted.



I imagine you're pisstaking, but in any case, if 'we' really were 'all' doing the 'following the herd' thing. then then it would be the media herd we'd be following, and the tenor of relentless McCann-spin-doctor inspired campaigning through Daily Express/Mail/Mirror/Evening Standard headlines would go unquestioned here. If we were (media) herd following like that, there'd be mass Urban outrage at any _suggestion_ that the saintly parents of the saintly Maddy might in any way be other than purer than purer and absolutely innocent ... 

Personally I can't begin to understand why the McCanns' spin doctors think that the announcement plans for a film _at this particular time_  is going to attract more sympathy and support. It's a blatant and obvious media distraction campaign, distraction from .... other stuff around this case.


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 9, 2008)

ddraig said:
			
		

> fuckin sick!
> u really couldn't make it up
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2237213,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11
> 
> ...


Gosh if every family with a missing kid had only a million  talk about fuckin crass


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 9, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I imagine you're pisstaking, but in any case, if 'we' really were 'all' doing the 'following the herd' thing. then then it would be the media herd we'd be following, and the tenor of relentless McCann-spin-doctor inspired campaigning through Daily Express/Mail/Mirror/Evening Standard headlines would go unquestioned here. If we were (media) herd following like that, there'd be mass Urban outrage at any _suggestion_ that the saintly parents of the saintly Maddy might in any way be other than purer than purer and absolutely innocent ...
> 
> Personally I can't begin to understand why the McCanns' spin doctors think that the announcement plans for a film _at this particular time_  is going to attract more sympathy and support. It's a blatant and obvious media distraction campaign, distraction from .... other stuff around this case.


I don't give a shit what the media says about any of it.
As a father I find it extremely distasteful to laugh about a small child being killed (or abducted). 
And you know as well as I do that if the tone of this thread had started differently then everyone would have just as happily fallen into line with that.


----------



## The Groke (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> As a father I find it extremely distasteful to laugh about a small child being killed (or abducted).



No-one is.


Also, by uttering the "as a.....<parent>" line, you automatically lose any credibility you may have had and any chance of being taken seriously.

 




			
				Pavlik said:
			
		

> And you know as well as I do that if the tone of this thread had started differently then everyone would have just as happily fallen into line with that.




No it wouldn't


----------



## subversplat (Jan 9, 2008)

"As a father...."


----------



## The Groke (Jan 9, 2008)

subversplat said:
			
		

> "As a father...."




heh - see above...


----------



## subversplat (Jan 9, 2008)

As a professional child abductor I find it very distasteful for you all to take the piss out of my job


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 9, 2008)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> Also, by uttering the "as a.....<parent>" line, you automatically lose any credibility you may have had and any chance of being taken seriously.


no credibility on urban? I should just kill myself now yeah?


----------



## The Groke (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> no credibility on urban? I should just kill myself now yeah?




As an Urbanite, I find that remark very hurtful.


----------



## purves grundy (Jan 9, 2008)

subversplat said:
			
		

> As a professional child abductor I find it very distasteful for you all to take the piss out of my job


----------



## Augie March (Jan 9, 2008)

The humour here is in the blatent absurdness of newspaper headline after headline after headline, 24/7 news coverage and a seemingly omnipresent poster campaign of 'that' face that's along the lines of the best advertising campaigns from any corporate giant.

The headline "Now it's Maddy: The Movie" the other day was perhaps the crescendo in over 6 months of media saturization of the case, that has reduced the whole story to a kind of sick running joke seemingly designed to sell more newspapers.

It's like Diana, September 11th etc etc. Any kind of tragedy present is complety off-set by the endless media coverage and the hysterical public reaction. The neccessity to laugh at such events when you see them debated and discussed ad infinitum everytime you turn on the TV or open up a newspaper, I would've thought, is a perfectly natural human reaction to such surreality.


----------



## abigail_silk (Jan 9, 2008)

Augie March said:
			
		

> The humour here is in the blatent absurdness of newspaper headline after headline after headline, 24/7 news coverage and a seemingly omnipresent poster campaign of 'that' face that's along the lines of the best advertising campaigns from any corporate giant.
> 
> The headline "Now it's Maddy: The Movie" the other day was perhaps the crescendo in over 6 months of media saturization of the case, that has reduced the whole story to a kind of sick running joke seemingly designed to sell more newspapers.
> 
> It's like Diana, September 11th etc etc. Any kind of tragedy present is complety off-set by the endless media coverage and the hysterical public reaction. The neccessity to laugh at such events when you see them debated and discussed ad infinitum everytime you turn on the TV or open up a newspaper, I would've thought, is a perfectly natural human reaction to such surreality.



Ecxellent post.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 9, 2008)

subversplat said:
			
		

> As a professional child abductor I find it very distasteful for you all to take the piss out of my job









Subversplat, yesterday


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jan 9, 2008)

subversplat said:
			
		

> As a professional child abductor I find it very distasteful for you all to take the piss out of my job



tsk.. you managed to let someone do an artists impression before you got away...


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> IAnd you know as well as I do that if the tone of this thread had started differently then everyone would have just as happily fallen into line with that.



On here?! Crikey, people bend over backwards to disagree on here! 

FFS Even Maggie threads get one or two non-believers!


----------



## Crispy (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> _'Oh yeh man I'm so cool, like who even gives a shit man?'_
> 
> Fucking bereaved parents taking up your TV time! How dare they!
> 
> Why not moderate the board and keep that affected bollox to yourself!



Disgusting Opportunistic Media Circus here

Missing Child there

Guess which one I meant?

Yes there's tragedy in this story, but it's a tiny little shrivelled husk, surrounded by this monstrous media creation. Millions of children die in hideous ways every year, yet this one deserves some sort of special treatment and global defence force? Give me a break.

PS: I don't watch TV, or read newspapers, so none of my time has been taken up. THANK FUCK.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> no credibility on urban? I should just kill myself now yeah?


No, no, wait till the second anniversary.  Dammit, give your act some _meaning_.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2008)

Augie March said:
			
		

> The humour here is in the blatent absurdness of newspaper headline after headline after headline, 24/7 news coverage and a seemingly omnipresent poster campaign of 'that' face that's along the lines of the best advertising campaigns from any corporate giant.
> 
> The headline "Now it's Maddy: The Movie" the other day was perhaps the crescendo in over 6 months of media saturization of the case, that has reduced the whole story to a kind of sick running joke seemingly designed to sell more newspapers.
> 
> It's like Diana, September 11th etc etc. Any kind of tragedy present is complety off-set by the endless media coverage and the hysterical public reaction. The neccessity to laugh at such events when you see them debated and discussed ad infinitum everytime you turn on the TV or open up a newspaper, I would've thought, is a perfectly natural human reaction to such surreality.


Good post, well put.  Yes, this thread *is *about the media coverage - and also to some extent about public displays of grief/hysteria.  It is indeed about the way the media operates this as a kind of sick joke.  Though, to be honest, so are _we _- in the way the Brass Eye thing on paedos was both sick and sattire.  That's the nature of sick jokes though, they are both offensive and transgressive - and would indeed offend the victims families and others.  But sometimes they are justified - or, if nothing else, a natural reaction.  Fine lines.


----------



## T & P (Jan 9, 2008)

Stop the press: the McCanns deny they are planning to do a movie after all...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0959072220080109


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 9, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> Stop the press: the McCanns deny they are planning to do a movie after all...
> 
> http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL0959072220080109



I bet the Hallmark Channel is pissed off.


----------



## starfish2000 (Jan 9, 2008)

I just find the fact that they have surrounded themselves with such an amount of PR and  a Lobbyist and all this powerful political machinery, very sinister. I'd have said Gerry was a Mason, but then he's a Catholic, so he can't be.

But they are well connected arent they? I mean if I was an MP, I'd kill for the media control they seem to have in the UK

I think there involved I really do, the fact that the detective agency has uncovered all these new witnesses and that Robert Murat bloke has been hounded beyond belief, yet nothing has surfaced.

I just think the Mc Canns are throwing a big smokescreen out to the world in order to distract people from the fact they are the number 1 suspects and rightly so IMHO.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 9, 2008)

Twit


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Twit


indeed.

less uninformed speculation! more sick jokes about dead kids!

(speaking as a father...)


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 9, 2008)

back to the film title then,


Fiddler In The Yoof

Carry On Noncing


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Fiddler In The Yoof


nice


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 9, 2008)

killer b said:
			
		

> nice




That's the musical version starring Michael Ball and Martine McCutcheon as the McCanns, and Matthew Kelly as Robert Murat.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 9, 2008)

Murat on a hot thin yoof


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That's the musical version starring Michael Ball and Martine McCutcheon as the McCanns, and Matthew Kelly as Robert Murat.


and jeanette crankie as maddeline?


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 9, 2008)

Who gets to play Aunt Philomena??

Anne Widdicombe??


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 9, 2008)

killer b said:
			
		

> and jeanette crankie as maddeline?



Good idea, and i think Gillian McKeith would work as a stand-in.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Jan 9, 2008)

killer b said:
			
		

> indeed.
> 
> less uninformed speculation! more sick jokes about dead kids!
> 
> (speaking as a father...)


They are making a new car, it takes 5 adults and one kid in the boot...........the Renault McCann.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 9, 2008)

Stobart Stopper said:
			
		

> They are making a new car, it takes 5 adults and one kid in the boot...........the Renault McCann.



ROFLMAO


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 9, 2008)

Maddyshack (Algarve-based paedo/golf comedy thriller)

Nonce & Noncability


----------



## CharlieAddict (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Maddyshack (Algarve-based paedo/golf comedy thriller)


----------



## john x (Jan 9, 2008)

Stobart Stopper said:
			
		

> They are making a new car, it takes 5 adults and one kid in the boot...........the Renault McCann.



God is that joke STILL doing the rounds?  

john x


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Maddyshack (Algarve-based paedo/golf comedy thriller)



Fuck sake, I was gonna do that one but thought it was shite


----------



## Jessiedog (Jan 9, 2008)

john x said:
			
		

> God is that joke STILL doing the rounds?
> 
> john x


Was funny the first time though.


About a minute ago, for me.





Woof


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Swarfega said:
			
		

> The point?


 
I'll take that as no you can't then. 

Slimey green git


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

starfish2000 said:
			
		

> I just find the fact that they have surrounded themselves with such an amount of PR and  a Lobbyist and all this powerful political machinery, very sinister. I'd have said Gerry was a Mason, but then he's a Catholic, so he can't be.
> 
> But they are well connected arent they? I mean if I was an MP, I'd kill for the media control they seem to have in the UK
> 
> ...



What guff!!

Do you write everything that comes into your head?

This is exactly what I mean


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> What guff!!
> 
> Do you write everything that comes into your head?
> 
> This is exactly what I mean


 
well this is Urban.....


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I imagine you're pisstaking, but in any case, if 'we' really were 'all' doing the 'following the herd' thing. then then it would be the media herd we'd be following, and the tenor of relentless McCann-spin-doctor inspired campaigning through Daily Express/Mail/Mirror/Evening Standard headlines would go unquestioned here. If we were (media) herd following like that, there'd be mass Urban outrage at any _suggestion_ that the saintly parents of the saintly Maddy might in any way be other than purer than purer and absolutely innocent ...
> 
> Personally I can't begin to understand why the McCanns' spin doctors think that the announcement plans for a film _at this particular time_  is going to attract more sympathy and support. It's a blatant and obvious media distraction campaign, distraction from .... other stuff around this case.



Blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh!

Another one - its any thought that crosses your mind isn't it?

Wuur wuur mass media huur!! spin doctors wuur!!


----------



## Nemo (Jan 9, 2008)

Out of interest, Mr M, why do you feel entitled to tell people what they're thinking? Are you some kind of telepath?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh!
> 
> Another one - its any thought that crosses your mind isn't it?
> 
> Wuur wuur mass media huur!! spin doctors wuur!!



oh dear, u smell funny, like a returner  
if not then you are maybe in the wrong place unless u enjoy banging your head against a wall


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Out of interest, Mr M, why do you feel entitled to tell people what they're thinking? Are you some kind of telepath?



I knew you were going to say that


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

ddraig said:
			
		

> oh dear, u smell funny, like a returner
> if not then you are maybe in the wrong place unless u enjoy banging your head against a wall



You can smell over the internet?


----------



## Nemo (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> I knew you were going to say that


Did you know how you were going to answer?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> You can smell over the internet?


 

I believe Mr. Ddraig was employing that popular rhetorical device known as metaphor. You might have heard of it


----------



## ddraig (Jan 9, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> I believe Mr. Ddraig was employing that popular rhetorical device known as metaphor. You might have heard of it



maybe it's just like 10, or something  
and yes i smell ta mr m


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Let me just try and articulate what I am trying to say to you before the next volley of infantile abuse and (slightly) smart comebacks.

We don't know what happened
Murder by the parents is though pretty unlikely given the timeframes, the witnesses and given the couple's stamina to remain in the public eye
In which case their behaviour should be viewed through the lens of desperate and frightened parents.

What behaviour would be 'normal'? What would we do, or how would we react? How far would we prostitute ourselves to try and get our kid back?

I'd say all bets were off.

Whether interested or not it seems reasonable to maintain a bit of sympathy and you might even take the view that as citizens of this country abroad you may wish to be supportive. 

Equally you can just ignore it and as is pointed out here about once a page millions of other children die or go hungry each day. 

What seems unreasonable and premature is to supply an unending stream of spite [I'm not really meaning the jokes here] and unfounded speculation. 

There's the 'I'm just laughing at the media excuse'
The 'its because they are posh excuse' [they are not thickos]
'Working class children would have been taken into care blah blah' [no not for the home alone in sight of the dinner table they wouldn't]
Millions of children die in the third world every day [sure and you've got the compassion fatigue for them too given the reactions to anything as mild as comic relief]
They have 'evil' spin doctors excuse
Its getting like Diana, so its only sad bastards precipitating their own grief that care excuse
There's the 'this is how we deal with tragedy' excuse [HAHAHAHA]

etc.

You pretend its the media, but its the McCann's that get the real spite, despite Kate McCann seemingly disintegrating in front of you.

So what does it say about you?!


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> I believe Mr. Ddraig was employing that popular rhetorical device known as metaphor. You might have heard of it



Have you any idea how poncey you sound?!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Have you any idea how poncey you sound?!


 

I was doing my Donna Ferrentes impression.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

Is she as annoying as me then?


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> So what does it say about you?!



That I'm fucking bored of it.

I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.

After a couple of weeks I'd take them down.

I wouldn't call Max Clifford, start a charity, enlist Beckham and any other dickhead celeb I can get my hands on to whine for me on international TV, and then try and blame it all on the police and the locals.

So stop defending them, you tiresome tit.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That I'm fucking bored of it.
> 
> I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.
> 
> ...


top post!

mr m, if you read this thread from the start u might get a better idea about urban humour (and it'll keep u occupied!)
also this is just one of many threads on maddeleine mcann, some of them were serious ones at the time it happened etc
i suggest digging them out


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That I'm fucking bored of it.
> 
> I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.
> 
> ...



Let hope you never breed then if that's your attitude.

Stop attacking them and I'll stay neutral, you silly little nerd, acting all tough!


----------



## ddraig (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Let hope you never breed then if that's your attitude.
> 
> Stop attacking them and I'll stay neutral, you silly little nerd, acting all tough!


where has he attacked them?

and if u hadn't noticed, it's a bulletin board where people post 'their' opinions.
do you get it yet?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> *Let hope you never breed then if that's your attitude.*
> 
> Stop attacking them and I'll stay neutral, you silly little nerd, acting all tough!


I hope your tumble off the moral highground wasn't too painful...

By the way do you _seriously _think, for _one fucking second_, that posters on here are really amused by the fate of the child herself?


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 9, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.
> 
> After a couple of weeks I'd take them down.
> 
> I wouldn't call Max Clifford, start a charity, enlist Beckham and any other dickhead celeb I can get my hands on to whine for me on international TV, and then try and blame it all on the police and the locals.


you very clearly don't have a child do you.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jan 9, 2008)

they done it - you can see it in their eyes!


----------



## scifisam (Jan 9, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> you very clearly don't have a child do you.



Or a dog, by the sounds of it. 

I'm not going to get involved in this whole thing again. I'm just bored enough to wonder why people keep bringing up this 'photogenic child' thing. #

She wasn't particularly photogenic - she was ordinary, and the picture that's doing the rounds the most is particularly unflattering. 

Change tack, people!


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm bored shitless of it too, but its not quite like losing a dog, is it? If I lost my kid I'd do anything within my power to keep the story in the media, as would most parents. I don't blame the McCanns for doing that at all. I do blame the media for the totally sensationalist and disproportionate coverage of this story though, and am not surprised at the backlash and the jokes - i've laughed at them myself. There is a 15 year old Irish girl who went missing at her home in Spain a week ago - her poor parents were on the Irish news tonight saying that her story has had no UK press coverage, and the UK expat community aren't even aware she is missing, and I find that pretty sick. That is why people are taking the piss - there are plenty of Maddys out there, and the press doesn't give a shit.





			
				JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That I'm fucking bored of it.
> 
> I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.
> 
> ...


----------



## Augie March (Jan 9, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> We don't know what happened



Fair enough.




			
				Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Murder by the parents is though pretty unlikely given the timeframes, the witnesses and given the couple's stamina to remain in the public eye
> In which case their behaviour should be viewed through the lens of desperate and frightened parents.



Oh, but you have an idea though eh? 




			
				Mr Moose said:
			
		

> What seems unreasonable and premature is to supply an unending stream of spite [I'm not really meaning the jokes here] and unfounded speculation.



Unfounded speculation, very naughty. You, of course, know much more about the case than every other newspaper reader and television viewer in the country then judging by your statement above, yes?


----------



## scifisam (Jan 9, 2008)

@Chairman Meow - to be fair, a fifteen-year-old is a dfferent matter; fifteen-year-olds do often run off on their own backs, three-year-olds might, but would be unlikely to get more than a few yards. 

I saw the headlines about them getting a movie; my first thought was 'what the fuck are they doing?' 

Then I realised that the 'they' in that thought should have been whoever is considering a movie deal with them. Sure, maybe this is their way of getting extra help or publicity or something (stupid, IMO, but everyone deals with grief dfferently), but the people dealing with them have no excuse.

Why the fuck is anyone even considering making a movie of this? Who would watch it anyway? I'm interested in reading discussion board topics about the subject sometimes, because the way people have reacted to the story is interesting - but I don't read the many, many non-stories about it in the news. When I buy newspapers I look at the front page and decide which to buy depending on whether the stories in it look interesting; if a paper has a Maddy story on the front page, I am far less likely to buy it.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 9, 2008)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> That is why people are taking the piss - there are plenty of Maddys out there and the press doesn't give a shit.


There are plenty of 'jokes' on this thread that have nothing to do with the press. 
So a few people on urban75 have a sick sense of humour.  
It's not going to affect my life too much but it'd bring me down to their level if I stood by and said nothing. 

I'm not going to spend my life arguing about it though.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 9, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I imagine you're pisstaking, but in any case, if 'we' really were 'all' doing the 'following the herd' thing. then then it would be the media herd we'd be following, and the tenor of relentless McCann-spin-doctor inspired campaigning through Daily Express/Mail/Mirror/Evening Standard headlines would go unquestioned here. If we were (media) herd following like that, there'd be mass Urban outrage at any suggestion that the saintly parents of the saintly Maddy might in any way be other than purer than purer and absolutely innocent ...
> 
> Personally I can't begin to understand why the McCanns' spin doctors think that the announcement plans for a film at this particular time  is going to attract more sympathy and support. It's a blatant and obvious media distraction campaign, distraction from .... other stuff around this case.






			
				Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh blurgh!
> 
> Another one - its any thought that crosses your mind isn't it?
> 
> Wuur wuur mass media huur!! spin doctors wuur!!




Do you really live in South London Mr Moose?

It's possible that you do, it's equally possible though that you live Up North.

I'm reluctant to reply til I know, because 'Mrs Moose" (Northern version) is a  good personal friend, and so, if you're Northern, are you.

ETA : Interesting points raised by you in post no. 1203. May get to respond to some of em, once I know who you are, or aren't  ...


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2008)

4thwrite said:
			
		

> I hope your tumble off the moral highground wasn't too painful...
> 
> By the way do you _seriously _think, for _one fucking second_, that posters on here are really amused by the fate of the child herself?



No, I have never said that, try to keep up. 

I think that they judge the parents in a number of inappropriate ways because, despite the rhetoric of urban cool, they are too hung up on the coverage.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 9, 2008)

Oh I quite agree, but it was just an example - there are plenty of little kids that go missing too. And the grief of the parents looked just as raw to me, yet the press coverage was nowhere near proportionate. These parents were pointing out that there is zero press coverage of their daughter, whereas maddie has had fucking moon landing coverage - it must really stick in their craw. Not the Mccanns fault perhaps, but if I was the parent of a missing child I'd be totally pissed off.




			
				scifisam said:
			
		

> @Chairman Meow - to be fair, a fifteen-year-old is a dfferent matter; fifteen-year-olds do often run off on their own backs, three-year-olds might, but would be unlikely to get more than a few yards.
> 
> I saw the headlines about them getting a movie; my first thought was 'what the fuck are they doing?'
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Do you really live in South London Mr Moose?
> 
> I'm reluctant to reply til I know, because 'Mrs Moose" (Northern version) is a  good personal friend, and so, if you're Northern, are you.



Yes and no, I don't know your friend.

My reply to you was unnecesarily flippant in hindsight, so I apologise for the tone!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 10, 2008)

I do think Mr Moose is right about the extraordinary amount of high-minded spite directed towards the McCanns. Sick jokes are what makes the world go round though and for some, provide a tiny bit of relief from the sheer awfulness of this terrible world


----------



## Augie March (Jan 10, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I do think Mr Moose is right about the extraordinary amount of high-minded spite directed towards the McCanns.



This is true.

However if you're going to start moaning about people firing off unfounded speculations, the least he can do is not then give his own unfounded speculations about the case.

Kinda makes the point irrelevant in my book.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 10, 2008)

_Image removed. This one was over the line - Crispy_


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2008)

Ok, but I'm not doing what you say.

I don't know anymore than anybody else. I'm just saying that there are reasonable grounds not to suspend the presumption of innocence.


----------



## dublx (Jan 10, 2008)

Edited cos theres a crowd already forming outside my gaff for daring to suggest such a thing.


----------



## starfish2000 (Jan 10, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> What guff!!
> 
> Do you write everything that comes into your head?
> 
> This is exactly what I mean




Well go ask your MP if he's impressed by the PR Job Clarence Mitchell is doing?

My friend is PR to some pretty big blue chip IT clients and she's amazed by it, the fact they have the Murdoch Press onside to such an extent, I mean does Mr Brown have them onside to such an extent?

Again another condescending put down rather than trying to actually debate.......Yawn!


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 10, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> _Image removed. This one was over the line - Crispy_


----------



## mrs quoad (Jan 10, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> _Image removed. This one was over the line - Crispy_


lol.

It's funny because it's about child rape _but the parents might have been dodgy_.

lol.

Child rape.

lol.

for fuck's cunting sake.

[/deeply irritated / sickened by all this unbelievable madeleine 'joke' bullshit]


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 10, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I do think Mr Moose is right about the extraordinary amount of high-minded spite directed towards the McCanns.



Do you mean on Urban specifically?

Disagree it's 'spite'.  Exasperated impatience possibly -- and not principally against the McCanns either.

My earlier point was essentially that such exasperation was a counterreaction to the predominant media climate. Which isn't just a presumption of the McCanns' innocence, but an often outraged _assumption_ on the media's part. Assuming, in huge headlines often, that it's simply *impossible* for them to be anything other than 100% innocent.

ETA : I've been making points of the above kind, but have not been joining in the film title flippancy at all.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 10, 2008)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> lol.
> 
> It's funny because it's about child rape _but the parents might have been dodgy_.
> 
> ...



Its only funny because it has already been taken so far by newspapers and that.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 10, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Yes and no, I don't know your friend.
> 
> My reply to you was unnecesarily flippant in hindsight, so I apologise for the tone!



OK, cheers for that. FYI there's a very well liked poster on the forum whose boardname is moose, a personal friend of several of us. Her hubby rarely (if ever??) posts though -- I didn't really think you were him, was just probing really .


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 10, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> was just probing really




Not on this thread you don't! (speaking as a father)


----------



## Passdout (Jan 10, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Not on this thread you don't! (speaking as a father)


 

I mean


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2008)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> Its only funny because it has already been taken so far by newspapers and that.



No, its not funny at all. But there we go again it seems to pass for some kind of satire on the media!!

Its just sick. What kind of idiot would spend their breathing hours on earth taking the time and trouble, BOB2009?

At least 'Renault McCann' follows some of the rules of humour.

Whats the joke here? Its funny she remained a Virgin because she may be dead?


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 10, 2008)

Alright Moose, since you like gags that follow the rules of humour I've got one especially for you:

What do you get if you kidnap a 4 year old girl and lock her in the boot of your car?












































An erection


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 10, 2008)

that's fucking nasty.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2008)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> that's fucking nasty.


 
i've heard worse


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 10, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Alright Moose, since you like gags that follow the rules of humour I've got one especially for you:
> 
> What do you get if you kidnap a 4 year old girl and lock her in the boot of your car?
> 
> ...



I'm really starting to wonder if i want to be associated with this site at all with shit like this being posted.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 10, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> i've heard worse



so have i but thats still a bit disgusting


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2008)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> so have i but thats still a bit disgusting


 
true dat


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 10, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> No, its not funny at all. But there we go again it seems to pass for some kind of satire on the media!!



I wouldn't find it funny if there wasn't such a maniacal hysteria surrounding the entire case.


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 10, 2008)

Speaking as a father, I must admit it's an old joke which i altered especially for my indignant friend Moosey.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 10, 2008)

Well I laughed (speakng as a mother).


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 10, 2008)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Well I laughed (speakng as a mother).



People like you make me sick.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 10, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Speaking as a father, I must admit it's an old joke which i altered especially for my indignant friend Moosey.


you're just a fucking twat.
but no worse than some of the other dickheads on the this thread


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 10, 2008)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> People like you make me sick.



People like you make me laugh.


----------



## editor (Jan 10, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I'm really starting to wonder if i want to be associated with this site at all with shit like this being posted.


Bit harsh to judge the entire community on one unpleasant fuckwit joke in bad taste, no?

It's not like the pages are stuffed full of such nasty 'humour' every day, is it?


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 11, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> Bit harsh to judge the entire community on one unpleasant fuckwit joke in bad taste, no?
> 
> It's not like the pages are stuffed full of such nasty 'humour' every day, is it?


I wasn't judging the entire community but theres a lot more than one bad taste joke on this thread.
Do you find jokes about raping and killing 4 year olds funny?

I'm quite aware that as a relative newbie I dont have much of a voice on urban but I've still got a right to question the standards of a forum that I regularly post on.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 11, 2008)

You have just as much as right as anyone else



You can question standards as much as you like, but if people find it funny they find it funny.

It is the hysteria around this that I find funny. In fact, even your righteous statements about how it is so wrong make it a tiny bit more funny. For me.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 11, 2008)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> In fact, even your righteous statements about how it is so wrong make it a tiny bit more funny. For me.


I pity you


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I pity you



As a father?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I pity you



Thats a shame for you.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> No, its not funny at all. But there we go again it seems to pass for some kind of satire on the media!!
> 
> Its just sick. What kind of idiot would spend their breathing hours on earth taking the time and trouble, BOB2009?
> 
> ...




Nah i stole it and reposted it. im far to busy laughing at stuff to make pictures and that....


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> I wouldn't find it funny if there wasn't such a maniacal hysteria surrounding the entire case.



So you think sexual abuse of children is a reasonable subject for a gag because you're a bit fed up wiv da medja?

I think you just like making the gags. The justifications are a hoot.

Got anything you actually believe in?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

Dillinger4 said:
			
		

> You have just as much as right as anyone else
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So say if it was racist? I'd say they should fuck off the board.

We all have limits - I'd respect your right for a laff better - and god knows I like a sick joke or two, if you'd respect that different people hold different limits that are also valid.


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> I'm quite aware that as a relative newbie I dont have much of a voice on urban but I've still got a right to question the standards of a forum that I regularly post on.


You have as much right as anyone to voice your opinion and report posts if you feel that they overstep the mark.

I didn't like the joke either - it was disgusting - but felt your comments concerning the entire site were a little over the top. If anyone came here and started posting up an endless stream of paedo jokes, they'd be gone pretty quick.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> Bit harsh to judge the entire community on one unpleasant fuckwit joke in bad taste, no?
> 
> It's not like the pages are stuffed full of such nasty 'humour' every day, is it?



What's your role then? - what do you actually moderate? 

Where does U75 draw the line?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> What's your role then? - what do you actually moderate?
> 
> Where does U75 draw the line?


 









http://www.urban75.org/info/faq.html


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> So you think sexual abuse of children is a reasonable subject for a gag because you're a bit fed up wiv da medja?
> 
> I think you just like making the gags. The justifications are a hoot.
> 
> Got anything you actually believe in?


I refer you to my earlier post about sick jokes and why people make them


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> http://www.urban75.org/info/faq.html



I'm obliged Omar but I want to hear it from the man direct. I want to _parlay_


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Do you mean on Urban specifically?


No, in general and in the media, though there's a few people doing it on here too


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 11, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> I didn't like the joke either - it was disgusting - but felt your comments concerning the entire site were a little over the top.


If you're the man in charge why is it still there then?
I dont feel I made any comments concerning the entire site.
Have a look through the last few pages of this thread. There's more than one paedo joke. Is that really the image you want for Urban?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> I'm obliged Omar but I want to hear it from the man direct. I want to _parlay_


 
  it's like Prop Joe is on the thread with us


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I refer you to my earlier post about sick jokes and why people make them



Yeh, sure they can be cathartic, that's not an issue.

I'm saying DON"T POST THE SICK JOKES THAT I DON'T LIKE!!


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> it's like Prop Joe is on the thread with us



Exactly. You wouldn't just read his FAQ's. You'd want to look the mutha in the eyes whilst holding his testicles firmly.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> If you're the man in charge why is it still there then?
> I dont feel I made any comments concerning the entire site.
> Have a look through the last few pages of this thread. There's more than one paedo joke. Is that really the image you want for Urban?



C'mon mod - answer this reasonable and righteous poster.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Yeh, sure they can be cathartic, that's not an issue.
> 
> I'm saying DON"T POST THE SICK JOKES THAT I DON'T LIKE!!


You don't have to read them


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> If you're the man in charge why is it still there then?
> I dont feel I made any comments concerning the entire site.
> Have a look through the last few pages of this thread. There's more than one paedo joke. Is that really the image you want for Urban?


I don't run the site on my own, I don't dictate everything that can be posted (although there are rules about this in the FAQ)  and if I removed every single thing I personally didn't like, well, there'd be a lot less posts and, frankly, a lot less posters.

There are currently over 5.3 million posts on urban. I doubt if more than 10 of those contain paedo jokes, so I can't say I'm too worried about the site's 'image' being tarnished.

I suggest you put the poster on ignore so you won't have to read any more of their comments again. However, if they suddenly turn into a one-man paedo joke machine, you can rest assured that they will eventually be banned.


----------



## editor (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Where does U75 draw the line?


Just over there.

*points.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> Just over there.
> 
> *points.



Boo. Too liberal.

More censorship required. 

You think there is going to be a backlash if you remove photoshop'd 'jokes' enquiring into a four-year old's virginity?


----------



## joustmaster (Jan 11, 2008)

some one post the pope john paul II joke agian


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 11, 2008)

Either Everything is funny or nothing is funny.... or something.


----------



## moomoo (Jan 11, 2008)

I think the jokes on this thread are way out of order, but to be fair to the ed, as with most posts, unless they are reported it can't be presumed that he has seen them.  Except now, because he has read the thread of course.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 11, 2008)

Just got here. That one was over the line and I've removed it. The rest can stay, unless there's anything really offensive I've missed.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Either Everything is funny or nothing is funny.... or something.



No. There's having beliefs and opinions and there is conflict about which you sometimes have to take sides. 

Shake that nihilism out of yer boots.

But you're right in one sense in that there is nothing funny about your posts or your tagline.


----------



## Augie March (Jan 11, 2008)

Pavlik said:
			
		

> Do you find jokes about raping and killing 4 year olds funny?



Humour's a funny thing (no pun intended). One man's laughter is another's downright distain. The 'erection' joke is a prime example of this. The first time I heard the original, Maddy-less incarnation of that joke, I laughed. I told it to other people, some laughed, some didn't. It's a fine line and I think the humour, for me at least, in the joke comes precisely from the fact that I _shouldn't _ find it funny. It's the 'don't laugh' scenario, your brain is telling you not to laugh at such a sick joke, but that just makes me want to laugh out loud even more.

However, I guess it's the kind of joke that works better in public, face-to-face scenarios. It's the kind of joke that feeds on people's reactions to it as opposed to actually being funny in any conventinal sense. And it helps if you're telling it to friends, who are fully aware you're not laughing at child rape, but purely at the shock value of the joke. This as opposed to a bunch of randoms over the internet, who could quite easily take the joke just on face value and (perhaps unfairly) label you as being a distasteful cunt. Which is exactly why I'd probably refrain from telling such a joke on here. Well most of the time anyway, unless I'm in a cheeky mood.  

I'd also recommend watching a documentary called The Aristocrats about a particular offensive joke that has become a kind of, behind closed doors, comedian in-joke for many years. The joke is re-told by about 100 different comics in the film, in varying styles and forms. And each comic puts their own spin on the story in the joke, although the punchline is always the same. Regardless of how offended you may be by the joke itself (and it does cross many a line in the film), it probably explains better the nature of such jokes, better than what I'm doing here.


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 11, 2008)

editor said:
			
		

> I suggest you put the poster on ignore so you won't have to read any more of their comments again.


I was considering putting a few people on ignore but I might end up on a forum of child killers if I dont know whats going on round me.

I'm only here for the photography competition and the pm's really.
I just pass the time in between mixing it up in the forums.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> No. There's having beliefs and opinions and there is conflict about which you sometimes have to take sides.
> 
> Shake that nihilism out of yer boots.
> 
> But you're right in one sense in that there is nothing funny about your posts or your tagline.



something other words, blah blah make the rest up yourself and stuff.


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 11, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> You think there is going to be a backlash if you remove photoshop'd 'jokes' enquiring into a four-year old's virginity?



That's a reasonable point, but the thing is with censorship is when you start you never know where it's going to end.

Before you know it you won't even be allowed to make jokes about raping nine-year olds.


----------



## T & P (Jan 11, 2008)

Meanwhile the circus continues at full steam:



*US TV psychics to join hunt for Madeleine*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=TDU5RU3C3OXVBQFIQMGCFF4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/10/nmaddy210.xml


*Madeleine lookalike 'for hire'*
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/maddie/article675986.ece

Sorry for the above source, but LOL


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2008)

T & P said:
			
		

> ]
> 
> 
> *Madeleine lookalike 'for hire'*
> ...


Jesus christ! Proof that it's not us that are the real sickos!


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 11, 2008)

Kate & Gerry could use the 'fighting fund' to rent her out for special occasions.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jan 11, 2008)

I think sick jokes in general - as exemplified by ones that appear after celebrity deaths - rely on shock factor. Few of them are inherently funny or work as stand alone jokes. They rely on the shock value of mocking a taboo subject. Saying this as someone who often tells them, its usually to get a rise out of people or surprise them with something thought unsay-able.  But usually when the moments passed or if the person doesn't know who you're talking about they fail miserabley. And of course there are people who take massive offence too (like the ones on this thread). 

The Maddy jokes are there partly as a reaction to being told how to think and feel by the media and partly the usual reasons. She has been given celebrity status as her parents have sought it . Now they are not normal people are valid targets for the usual ridicule. They didn't have to play it that way - but they did.


----------



## wreckhead (Jan 11, 2008)

*self-delete* daft joke then just read the last few pages of the thread


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 14, 2008)

how Maddie may have looked yesterday....






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=508004&in_page_id=1770


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 14, 2008)

I think this would be more accurate:


----------



## T & P (Jan 14, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I think this would be more accurate:


 
 but  *



















* and no, it is not laughing at the death of a child


----------



## Pavlik (Jan 14, 2008)

*unsubscribes from thread*
but each to his own and all that


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 14, 2008)

Seeya then  

Looks like there's a vacancy for 'Fathers For Maddie' spokesman


----------



## Disaster (Jan 14, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> how Maddie may have looked yesterday....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't know why they bother. That child was dead the day she went missing.


----------



## john x (Jan 14, 2008)

Disaster said:
			
		

> I don't know why they bother.



To sell more papers?  

john x


----------



## T & P (Jan 15, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> how Maddie may have looked yesterday....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


 Or...










 

I knew he was a wrong 'un...


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jan 19, 2008)

So after 8 months they've decided this is who took her. Looks like a pantomime baddie to me


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jan 20, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> So after 8 months they've decided this is who took her. Looks like a pantomime baddie to me


----------



## DJ Squelch (Jan 20, 2008)




----------



## johnnymarrsbars (Jan 20, 2008)

its bob from twin peaks!!!


----------



## wishface (Jan 20, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> So after 8 months they've decided this is who took her. Looks like a pantomime baddie to me


Isnt George Harrison dead?


----------



## butterfly child (Jan 20, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That I'm fucking bored of it.
> 
> I don't have a young photogenic child so i'm not sure how I'd react, but if i lost my dog and it was my fault I would put up missing posters on lampposts and hope someone got in contact.
> 
> ...



So you think the McCanns should have put up a few posters - lost, our child - and then given up after a couple of weeks?

You're the tiresome tit


----------



## Nemo (Jan 20, 2008)

Is anyone else getting uneasy with the tone of the press statements the family's spokespeople have been making in this case? They almost seem to be arrogating to themselves the powers of the police force the way they're talking.


----------



## butterfly child (Jan 20, 2008)

I think Mr Moose put up a fucking top post back on page whatever..

Yes, I find the media circus a bit tiresome. 

Yes, the McCanns made an error of judgement that has ended in a terrible situation for them and their family.

I imagine I'd move heaven and earth trying to find a child of mine that had been taken away from me. And if that meant persuading people who make the headlines to help me in my attempts, I'd fucking well give it a go.


----------



## agricola (Jan 20, 2008)




----------



## Nemo (Jan 20, 2008)

agricola said:
			
		

>


That's uncanny.


----------



## chymaera (Jan 20, 2008)

Nemo said:
			
		

> Is anyone else getting uneasy with the tone of the press statements the family's spokespeople have been making in this case? They almost seem to be arrogating to themselves the powers of the police force the way they're talking.




I forced myself to watch the press conference this morning.
I am not happy about the situation at all for similar reasons to you.


----------



## detective-boy (Jan 20, 2008)

Nemo said:
			
		

> They almost seem to be arrogating to themselves the powers of the police force the way they're talking.


The more I hear from the Metodo 3 firm they have employed (and the more I hear of them from contacts in the private investigation world), the more I fear they are being had over by a bunch of charlatans.  No competent, professional investigator would make the announcements about the progress of their investigation that these clowns have (especially, but not exclusively, the "we'll have her home by Christmas" quote).

Working from the outside, any professional's first advice to the family would be "There is a _huge_ limit on what we can do - the police have access to lots of the evidence which any investigation would need to begin with and it is extremely unlikely that they will share that with us, at least at this stage".

If asked, instead of mounting a "competing" investigation, my professional advice would have been to pursue a two-pronged strategy:  (1) Establish and maintain professional, investigator-to-investigator contact with the police, emphasising a wish to assist them in any way possible (e.g. by assisting with / carrying out possible lines of enquiry beyond those possible within the capability / resources of the police themselves) and (2) Providing a professional assessment of the updates and information provided by the police, providing the family with a professional, independent assessment of the progress / competence of the police investigation.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2008)

DB is essentially saying thet the McCann's private investigators are rubbish.

Rivalled, IMO, only by the rubbishness of their spindoctors.

The more these spindoctors try to exploit stubborn tabloid/popular media refusal (in screaming headlines) to see the McCanns as anything other than 100% saintly, the more they undermine their clients' position, in the eye of anyone moderately media-sceptical and in the eyes of anyone faintly intelligent anyway. Spindoctors are supposed to be media experts --experts  my arse.

About a million pages ago on this thread, I said that one day the McCanns would live to regret the way their child's _absence_  has become -- at her parents' and their spindoctors' instigation -- a media cause celebre and the centre of insane levels of increasingly counterproductive publicity.

That day will come ....


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 20, 2008)

*FIND HER!*


note: other children are available to be found

http://www.missingkids.co.uk


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2008)

butterfly child said:
			
		

> Yes, I find the media circus a bit tiresome.



The media circus, in collaboration with the McCanns themselves and their spindoctors, are entirely responsible for the McCanns's current position and for most of the scepticism the McCanns are now experiencing.



> I imagine I'd move heaven and earth trying to find a child of mine that had been taken away from me. And if that meant persuading people who make the headlines to help me in my attempts, I'd fucking well give it a go.



What good is their insanely incompetent spindoctoring doing them?

As DJ Squelch said above, that poor child was dead the moment she went 'missing', and her parents probably know that perfectly well.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

> So after 8 months they've decided this is who took her. Looks like a pantomime baddie to me



And equally fictional. Doesn't exist.


----------



## cybertect (Jan 21, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

>



Every news report I've heard about this has described him with a 'handlebar moustache'.

Surely, that is a Zapata moustache, not a handlebar?


----------



## keybored (Jan 21, 2008)

agricola said:
			
		

>



Nice fit-up


----------



## T & P (Jan 21, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:
			
		

>


 I'm sure I've seen that face in a few Scooby Doo cartoons.


----------



## Front101 (Jan 21, 2008)

^ that face could've been lifted entirely from that Peadogeddon Brasseye. 

I nearly wet myself laughing when they showed it on some headline roundup Sunday morning..


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 21, 2008)

As much as this new "it's definitely HIM!" development enthralls me, how can anyone really take it seriously at this stage in the game?


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 21, 2008)




----------



## Dan U (Jan 21, 2008)

Ted Striker said:
			
		

> As much as this new "it's definitely HIM!" development enthralls me, how can anyone really take it seriously at this stage in the game?



the 'friend of the mcann's' who identified him in the screws as the guy she saw walking off with a kid in pyjama's is the same person who, when interviewed earlier this year, said - 



> In the Panorama interview, Tanner said she lived with the burden of knowing that in all probability she could never identify the man she glimpsed only briefly that night.
> 
> "He had his face turned away from me, sort of sideways and it was very dark. I just didn't see it properly I wish to God I had," she said



http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2244186,00.html

the power of suggestion? or is it normal for people to have memories rejogged like this (that's a question for DB and others as much as a cynical point tbh)


----------



## TheDave (Jan 21, 2008)

Ted Striker said:
			
		

>



Now that is uncanny.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 21, 2008)

TheDave said:
			
		

> Now that is uncanny.



UnMccanny, surely?!


----------



## lilac (Jan 22, 2008)

Hi - Where do I start? I've been lurking on and off here for years, this case is the only thing that has compelled me to be brave enough to post!!

I am amazed at the way the British press and media are behaving, in not ever questioning the fact that the Mccanns are prime suspects in their daughter's disappearance, and only promoting the abduction story as fed them by Clarence Mitchell. Only very recently have newspaper comments sections been allowing 'Mccann negative' opinions to show - Who's to say what the truth is but there's something very wrong with the take the media have on this story. 

I've put a link in this post to the Forums of the Daily Mirror which I stumbled accross, which is one of few places where comment is fairly uncensored which you might be interested in. A lot of the stuff is noise but there are some good, thought provoking threads within. One thread which will never be far from the first page is 'A Story for Christmas', well worth a read...... and questions everything (at length!) that is decidedly strange about this whole case, to do with the press, media and government.

Thanks!

http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31


----------



## selamlar (Jan 22, 2008)

Bloody hell, you have been lurking for a long time!

Welcome aboard!

<waves>


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 22, 2008)

Now _that_ is a a busy forum :shocked:


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 22, 2008)

agricola said:
			
		

>


Amazing frontpage. Note the assertion of fact with absolutely no evidence...amazing. Just adding one little ? would've brought that frontpage into the realms of actual journalism...


----------



## CharlieAddict (Jan 22, 2008)

lilac said:
			
		

> http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=31



lol!!


----------



## Crispy (Jan 22, 2008)

lilac said:
			
		

> Hi - Where do I start? I've been lurking on and off here for years, this case is the only thing that has compelled me to be brave enough to post!!



 You win the lurker prize. No contest. Congratulations


----------



## wishface (Jan 22, 2008)

It's Jason King!

That picture is a nineteenth century criminologists' wet dream.

'note the pronounced teeth watson!'


----------



## Giles (Jan 22, 2008)

Why doesn't everyone just give up? 

The amount of energy and effort being wasted on this whole circus is ridiculous.

Giles..


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 22, 2008)

Giles said:
			
		

> Why doesn't everyone just give up?
> 
> The amount of energy and effort being wasted on this whole circus is ridiculous.
> 
> Giles..




I've given up looking. I had been checking the kitchen cupboards and the bit behind the gas meter every day, sometimes even twice a day. Small children can get into some pretty small spaces, so you never know where they're going to turn up.
I even managed to walk past a family today without stopping them and gazing into the child's face to check for 'those eyes'.


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 22, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> I've given up looking. I had been checking the kitchen cupboards and the bit behind the gas meter every day, sometimes even twice a day. Small children can get into some pretty small spaces, so you never know where they're going to turn up.
> I even managed to walk past a family today without stopping them and gazing into the child's face to check for 'those eyes'.



Ha!


----------



## detective-boy (Jan 22, 2008)

Dan U said:
			
		

> the power of suggestion? or is it normal for people to have memories rejogged like this


Witness accounts and descriptions, unless there is a very significant period of observation and / or a specific reason to note a description (such as a realisation at the time that something was wrong and, hence, a deliberate effort to remember what they looked like), are notoriously difficult.

There is no reason to suspect that the original account was wrong (i.e. they had a very poor look).  Therefore any subsequent detailed recall should be treated with extreme caution.  If this picture did come from the witness who gave that description of the incident then it is probably not worth the paper it is drawn on.  A competent investigator would first interview the witness and assess their capability of recalling the facial features of the suspect.  If it's anything less than about 75% recall no E-fit, etc would be made as it would be considered to be more likely to mislead the investigation than to assist it.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 22, 2008)

Were Hawkwind playing anywhere nearby?


----------



## john x (Jan 23, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> And equally fictional. Doesn't exist.



And even if he does exist, what has he got to do with Madeleine's disappearence? 

How has someone who 'was a bit foreign looking' and 'was acting a bit suspiciously' THREE WEEKS before she disappeared suddenly become the cheif suspect?  

john x


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

Bogeyman spirited up by 'friends' of the McCann's to become the centre of hysterical NoTW publicity making this imaginary or irrelevant character chief suspect. All part of a deliberate strategy devised by the McCanns' spindoctors and their 'private investigators', with the compliant popular media playing a key role. Purpose : to distract attention from the identity of the *actual* people the Police continue to consider chief suspects.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

lilac said:
			
		

> I am amazed at the way the British press and media are behaving, in *not ever questioning the fact that the Mccanns are prime suspects in their daughter's disappearance, and only promoting the abduction story as fed them by Clarence Mitchell. Only very recently have newspaper comments sections been allowing 'Mccann negative' opinions to show - Who's to say what the truth is but there's something very wrong with the take the media have on this story. *
> 
> I've put a link in this post to the Forums of the Daily Mirror which I stumbled accross, which is one of few places where comment is fairly uncensored which you might be interested in. A lot of the stuff is noise but there are some good, thought provoking threads within. One thread which will never be far from the first page is 'A Story for Christmas', well worth a read...... and questions everything (at length!) that is decidedly strange about this whole case, to do with the press, media and government.
> 
> ...



Welcome aboard from lurkerdom, lilac -- stick around 

That's an excellent post. No time to check the Mirror forums now but may check them out another time ... I hope the discussion on those forums is more sceptical/questioning than the paper's own front page coverage, sounds like it is ...

To be media-sceptical about this is *not* to assume that the McCanns are guilty. It *is* to question the assumption by most of the _media_ that the McCann's are incapable of being anything other than 110% saintly and innocent.

An assumption reflected by some contributors to this thread IMO.


----------



## lilac (Jan 23, 2008)

Crispy said:
			
		

> You win the lurker prize. No contest. Congratulations



OOooo What's my prize?

Sorry, not a faulty link in my previous post, it would seem that that section of the Mirror forum has been pulled! I wonder who it's upset?


----------



## Giles (Jan 23, 2008)

lilac said:
			
		

> OOooo What's my prize?
> 
> Sorry, not a faulty link in my previous post, it would seem that that section of the Mirror forum has been pulled! I wonder who it's upset?



That is quite major, in the sense that I glanced into that forum and it was HUGE and had threads going back quite a while. They have let it exist for ages, and then decided to remove it completely. 

Suddenly they have just removed the whole thing. 

I wonder if something is about to happen in this case? Maybe they arrested that bloke in the drawing!

Giles..


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 23, 2008)

.


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 23, 2008)

Giles said:
			
		

> I wonder if something is about to happen in this case? Maybe they arrested that bloke in the drawing!
> 
> Giles..



I though George Harrison was dead?


----------



## selamlar (Jan 23, 2008)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

> I though George Harrison was dead?



Thats what 'they' wanted you to think.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 23, 2008)

Sadly, due to persistent and serious abuses, we will no longer be hosting discussions regarding Madeleine McCann on this website. We do not take this action lightly, believing this website should be a place for free and frank discussion across the broadest possible range of subjects. But the level of debate on the Maddy forums has gone way beyond what we consider acceptable, with several recent incidents of extremely abusive postings, both against fellow users and the McCanns. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour from a small handful of malign voices and have taken the unprecedented decision to block all further discussion on the McCanns. We remind all users of our guidelines for mirror.co.uk, which can be found here: http://www.mirror.co.uk/forums Any further abuse of the spirit of this decision will result in users being immediately banned from our website. Mirror.co.uk is a family website. We want to encourage debate, even argument, across our forums. We are confident this decision will be understood and welcomed by the vast majority of our right-minded users.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 23, 2008)

That'll translate as 'trolled to fuckery' then


----------



## T & P (Jan 23, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Sadly, due to persistent and serious abuses, we will no longer be hosting discussions regarding Madeleine McCann on this website. We do not take this action lightly, believing this website should be a place for free and frank discussion across the broadest possible range of subjects. But the level of debate on the Maddy forums has gone way beyond what we consider acceptable, with several recent incidents of extremely abusive postings, both against fellow users and the McCanns. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour from a small handful of malign voices and have taken the unprecedented decision to block all further discussion on the McCanns.


 Presumably abusive postings against the useless Portuguese dagoes were alright, though


----------



## starfish2000 (Jan 23, 2008)

She's clearly been abducted by the Guitarist from Del Amitri

I always thought them to be a sinister band


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 23, 2008)

starfish2000 said:
			
		

> She's clearly been abducted by the Guitarist from Del Amitri
> 
> I always thought them to be a sinister band




Tapas bar staff put up signs saying 'bar closed tonight'
And gardeners turn off their hoses and pack up their tools
Tourists padlock the gates
For security guards to patrol
And bachelors phone up their friends for a 'drink'
While the married ones go to a 'party'

And they'll all be lonely tonight and lonely tomorrow

Journalists time please, you know we cant serve anymore
Now the traffic lights change to stop, when theres nothing to go
And by five o' clock everythings dead
And every third man is a suspect
And doctors children sleep in their beds
Like the doped white mice in the college lab

Nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all
The needle returns to the start of the song
And we all sing along like before

And we'll all be lonely tonight and lonely tomorrow


----------



## starfish2000 (Jan 23, 2008)

I just spat coffee all over my Laptop


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jan 23, 2008)

That is well funny!!!!!!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Sadly, due to persistent and serious abuses, we will no longer be hosting discussions regarding Madeleine McCann on this website. We do not take this action lightly, believing this website should be a place for free and frank discussion across the broadest possible range of subjects. But the level of debate on the Maddy forums has gone way beyond what we consider acceptable, with several recent incidents of extremely abusive postings, both against fellow users and the McCanns. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour from a small handful of malign voices and have taken the unprecedented decision to block all further discussion on the McCanns. We remind all users of our guidelines for mirror.co.uk, which can be found here: http://www.mirror.co.uk/forums Any further abuse of the spirit of this decision will result in users being immediately banned from our website. Mirror.co.uk is a family website. We want to encourage debate, even argument, across our forums. We are confident this decision will be understood and welcomed by the vast majority of our right-minded users.



"Right minded users" ??


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

DotCommunist said:
			
		

> That'll translate as 'trolled to fuckery' then



Maybe, never had a chance to check.

But equally possibly (or additionally) : maybe too many posters questioning the 'McCanns = Saints who can't be questioned' line favoured by the Mirror's front page and editorial and 'news' coverage... ???


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2008)




----------



## DJ Squelch (Jan 23, 2008)

lol.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jan 23, 2008)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

>


----------



## Giles (Jan 23, 2008)

I glanced at the Mirror forums - was shocked by sheer volume of posts, and depth of "knowledge" that some posters seemed to have!

There were PAGES of threads, some with 1000 posts, dating back god knows how long. And they just deleted the whole thing.

Many seemed to be quoting non-UK media sources which they reckoned were saying that the Portuguese cops know what they are doing, and have not given up, and are likely to arrest the McCanns soon  

Interesting to see if there was any truth in any of it, or if they were all just conspiracy theory nuts.

Giles..


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jan 23, 2008)

Giles said:
			
		

> I glanced at the Mirror forums - was shocked by sheer volume of posts, and depth of "knowledge" that some posters seemed to have!
> 
> There were PAGES of threads, some with 1000 posts, dating back god knows how long. And they just deleted the whole thing.
> 
> ...



yes, there seemed to be alot of knowledge not printed in papers, but id say there was a fair share of nutjobs in the mix as well, look at this place


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

Yes, that's the trouble, all this will attract out and out CT loons.

Doesn't mean it isn't right to be heavily media sceptical though.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 23, 2008)

I had a peek earlier and no it wasn't me who complained.

It was pretty staggering and yet a fascinating insight into Britain's rotten heart. 

Out and out abuse of the McCann's as , 'known' perpetrators, unlike the weak assed 'just satirising the meeja' abuse you get on here. 

 57 varieties of crackpot theories, such as the McCann's had beem preparing for the 'crime' since 1992. That's only 10 years before her birth.

This country eh?


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 23, 2008)

lilac said:
			
		

> Hi - Where do I start? I've been lurking on and off here for years, this case is the only thing that has compelled me to be brave enough to post!!




and a good first post it was too?   

I feel a little hurt though.    
I tried so hard to lure you lurkers out on the lurker amnesty thread... I used my bestest kind trustworthy smile too... 

now get in there!  Once you pop, you can't stop.


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 23, 2008)

> Sadly, due to persistent and serious abuses, we will no longer be hosting discussions regarding Madeleine McCann on this website. We do not take this action lightly, believing this website should be a place for free and frank discussion across the broadest possible range of subjects. But the level of debate on the Maddy forums has gone way beyond what we consider acceptable, with several recent incidents of extremely abusive postings, both against fellow users and the McCanns. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour from a small handful of malign voices and have taken the unprecedented decision to block all further discussion on the McCanns. We remind all users of our guidelines for mirror.co.uk, which can be found here: http://www.mirror.co.uk/forums Any further abuse of the spirit of this decision will result in users being immediately banned from our website. Mirror.co.uk is a family website. We want to encourage debate, even argument, across our forums. We are confident this decision will be understood and welcomed by the vast majority of our *right-minded users*.


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 23, 2008)

Mr Richard 'Littlejohn' Moose said:
			
		

> This country eh?



Oh yes, we're going to hell in a handcart...


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 23, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> Sadly, due to persistent and serious abuses, we will no longer be hosting discussions regarding Madeleine McCann on this website. We do not take this action lightly, believing this website should be a place for free and frank discussion across the broadest possible range of subjects. But the level of debate on the Maddy forums has gone way beyond what we consider acceptable, with several recent incidents of extremely abusive postings, both against fellow users and the McCanns. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour from a small handful of malign voices and have taken the unprecedented decision to block all further discussion on the McCanns. We remind all users of our guidelines for mirror.co.uk, which can be found here: http://www.mirror.co.uk/forums Any further abuse of the spirit of this decision will result in users being immediately banned from our website. Mirror.co.uk is a family website. We want to encourage debate, even argument, across our forums. We are confident this decision will be understood and welcomed by the vast majority of our *right-winged users*.


----------



## untethered (Jan 23, 2008)

PacificOcean said:
			
		

>



I think you'll find that the people who read the Mirror are the real working class rather than the "cod left". As such, they have many views and opinions not shared by middle-class politics students.


----------



## PacificOcean (Jan 23, 2008)

untethered said:
			
		

> I think you'll find that the people who read the Mirror are the real working class rather than the "cod left". As such, they have many views and opinions not shared by middle-class politics students.



I am as far removed from a middle-class politics student as you could imagine.

Buying the Mirror is one thing (which I do), logging on to a web-site another.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 23, 2008)

untethered said:
			
		

> "cod left".



If they met the real working class would they get a battering?


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 23, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> If they met the real working class would they get a battering?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 23, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> Oh yes, we're going to hell in a handcart...



'Whoosh' for Jerry. 

As for Richard Littlejohn  I suppose 'Nazi' is next? Ironic as you seem to spend your time here shouting opinions down.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 23, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

>



Shame - post's passed in the ether. I feel all churlish now.


----------



## JerryLundegaard (Jan 23, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Shame - post's passed in the ether. I feel all churlish now.



That's OK, I think I can safely say that I occupy the moral high ground now. It feels strange but I think I like it.


----------



## Nemo (Jan 23, 2008)

JerryLundegaard said:
			
		

> That's OK, I think I can safely say that I occupy the moral high ground now. It feels strange but I think I like it.


Watch out for ethical altitude sickness.


----------



## untethered (Jan 23, 2008)

Doesn't the Portguese legal system mean that the McCanns have to prove that they _didn't_ do it?

All very confusing!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 23, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> I had a peek earlier and no it wasn't me who complained.
> 
> It was pretty staggering and yet a fascinating insight into Britain's rotten heart.
> 
> ...



I haven't had a chance to look at those forums.

The thing with lunatic Conspiracy Theorists, which some of that forum's denizens *sound* as if they are, is that they act as the opposite pole from all the spindoctoring and mainstream media coverage. ANY notion that the McCanns might, just might,  not be as 110% innocent and saintly as presented, is rubbished by the mainstream coverage, while any notion that they're innocent at all is liable to be jeered at and conpiracised about by the conspiranoid 'sleuths'

The truth lies somewhere inbetween I'd hazard a *guess*, but I don't buy the commonly accepted notion that it's utterly outrageous to treat such saintly long suffering figures as the McCanns as suspects, the Police have designated them thus for a reason.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 24, 2008)

The guy from that sketch has been ruled out or something....


----------



## Augie March (Jan 24, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> The guy from that sketch has been ruled out or something....



Penny Crayon couldn't make him real.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 24, 2008)

nah he was real, they have talked to him, a few weeks after she went missing and then again this week... looking shifty is not a crime tho.


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 24, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I haven't had a chance to look at those forums.
> 
> The thing with lunatic Conspiracy Theorists, which some of that forum's denizens *sound* as if they are, is that they act as the opposite pole from all the spindoctoring and mainstream media coverage. ANY notion that the McCanns might, just might,  not be as 110% innocent and saintly as presented, is rubbished by the mainstream coverage, while any notion that they're innocent at all is liable to be jeered at and conpiracised about by the conspiranoid 'sleuths'
> 
> The truth lies somewhere inbetween I'd hazard a *guess*, but I don't buy the commonly accepted notion that it's utterly outrageous to treat such saintly long suffering figures as the McCanns as suspects, the Police have designated them thus for a reason.



Good post and tbh the maddest of the CTs seem no worse than that clown from the PI firm that the McCanns have hired.


----------



## selamlar (Jan 24, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:
			
		

> nah he was real, they have talked to him, a few weeks after she went missing and then again this week... looking shifty is not a crime tho.



What, really?

 

I had no idea actual people looked like that!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2008)

I bet his resemblance to the sketch is *well* approximate. In fact the NoTW sketch was so cartoonish, caricatureish even, that my inital reaction was that the person didn't exist and wa a made up pantomime figure ...

I wonder what the McCann's PR-spinmeisters, and the NoTW, now have to say about the Police stating they're not interested in him?

Twisted : cheers. Mr Moose has been trying to write off all Urban media scepticism and McCann-spindoctor-scepticism as something worse than it is : ie scepticism, pure and simple,  at whether what we're being spoonfed by people with vested interests, amounts to the whole truth.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 24, 2008)

FFS William are posts featuring jokes about child abuse media scepticism?

The joke is that you are not even broadly sceptical yourselves. You lap up the whole narrative day in, day out and its derailing your compassion and belief in innocent til proven guilty.

Baa baa. You are being called.


----------



## Augie March (Jan 24, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Baa baa. You are being called.








He's being called what?


----------



## starfish2000 (Jan 24, 2008)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I bet his resemblance to the sketch is *well* approximate. In fact the NoTW sketch was so cartoonish, caricatureish even, that my inital reaction was that the person didn't exist and wa a made up pantomime figure ...
> 
> I wonder what the McCann's PR-spinmeisters, and the NoTW, now have to say about the Police stating they're not interested in him?
> 
> Twisted : cheers. Mr Moose has been trying to write off all Urban media scepticism and McCann-spindoctor-scepticism as something worse than it is : ie scepticism, pure and simple,  at whether what we're being spoonfed by people with vested interests, amounts to the whole truth.



Is Mr Moose actually Gerry McCann?

Or is he someone they know?

They are very well connected people y'know


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2008)

Mr Moose said:
			
		

> FFS William are posts featuring jokes about child abuse media scepticism?



OK fair pullup, you will notice though that none of MY posts involved any such 'jokes'



> The joke is that you are not even broadly sceptical yourselves. You lap up the whole narrative day in, day out and its derailing your compassion and belief in innocent til proven guilty.
> 
> Baa baa. You are being called.



This is bollocks actually. The baa-baa-gulible-sheep are those who just drink in the Saintly McCanns/Martyred Child/Evil Bogeyman Abductor-Stranger 'Watching Over Us All'  scenario without seeng fit to question whether they're being given a fully accurate picture or not. 

The mainstream narrative in the vast majority of coverage in the mainstream media (the popular part of it anyway!) is to start with a _built in pre-assumption_ that the McCanns are incapable of being anything other than totally and utterly innocent. To paint them entirely in the role that they and their aggressively hyperactive spindoctors want, long suffering parents whose child has been abducted by evil monsters and bogeymen. This MAY turn out to contain part of the truth. But that scenario excludes any other possibilities, alternative scenarios, which may or not be have some validity to them as well.

To question and be sceptical about the predominant media image of the story is *not* to _assume_ that the McCanns are guilty or in some way culpable -- I, for instance, do NOT _assume_ that. Innocent til proven guilty? Of course. But the presumption of innocence does not exclude wholesale the possibility, however theoretical, of some degree of culpability in their child's disappearance -- which they may or may not have. They ended up designated as chief suspects for reasons that weren't just a matter of sinister foreign-corrupt-swarthy-Portuguese-Police plotting, as the media keep implying with their outrage. 'How DARE our National Heroes the McCanns be interviewed or questioned by these dodgy foreign coppers?' is the prevailing tone of most headlines ...

To be sceptical about what we're being fed is the reverse of baa baa -- I have no wool on my back!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2008)

starfish2000 said:
			
		

> Is Mr Moose actually Gerry McCann?
> 
> Or is he someone they know?
> 
> They are very well connected people y'know



Well he might be part of their network at least .... I wonder whether part of the spin campaign is to 'persuade'  designated McCann-supportive types to post on bulletin boards?  

</not entirely serious, but not entirely pisstaking either!  >


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2008)

Advice to the McCanns. Sack your incompetent charlatans of spindoctors, sack your 'private investigators', and hire a good lawyer ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 25, 2008)

Better clarify that above post I suppose.

It's only common sense that the McCanns hire a good lawyer, if they haven't done so already-- they're chief suspects and it remains possible they may  *really* need that lawyer's services. This is just as much the case if --as we must presume -- they're innocent of anything at all. But the reasons the Police consider it _possible_ they might bear _some degree_ of responsibility for their child's disppearance are not entirely made up out of nothing are they -- there's some forensic and some circumstantial backing for them being questioned and designated suspects. That remains the case whether they're completely innocent or not. So yes, they need a lawyer.

What they do NOT need is a bunch of turbocharged hyperactive spindoctors spinning franticly away in unholy alliance with the popular, sensationalist  press to invent stuff. Stuff, for example, like that Bogeyman Ogre of a stranger-abductor,  that pantomime NoTW character, who was 'sketched' from someone's 'overvivid imagination' by an associate of the McCanns not by the Police, this man's existence in that exaggerated form was always highly dubious and his relevance it seems was utterly negligible. To make up such fairytales just increases doubts about the McCanns, increases suspicion of them among many halfway sceptical, thoughtful people. Likewise the near hysterical spinning that it's *utterly outrageous!!!* !!!1!!!1!!!1 that the Police should dare (in their swarthy foreign corrupt Portuguese manner) to want to question the saintly, long suffering McCanns-- this sort of populist, xenophobic image manipulation pisses a significant minority off and leads half way independent minded people to ask some tough questions of the prevailing tone of coverage. 

THAT's media scepticism Mr Moose -- do you not share any of it at all?

In short these spindoctors are incompetent wankers who are in unholy collusion with the sensationalist liars of the popular press, an alliance which is acting entirely counterproductively to the stated purpose of these 'Spokespeople', totally against the McCanns best longer term interests.

And as for those incompetent morons of 'private investigators', read detective boy's earlier withering destruction of their 'skills' and weep ...

Like I said from the first time I posted on this thread many many pages ago, the McCanns will live to regret the whirlwind they've actively encouraged to be whipped up.


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 25, 2008)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...70&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
Im sure the McCann PR machine will conjure up another "suspect"


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 25, 2008)

Gingerman said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...70&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
> Im sure the McCann PR machine will conjure up another "suspect"



Get this into your heads you sensationalist Daily Mail bigots --just because the man's scruffy and has dreads does not mean the Police are obliged to be interested in him. Which they're not.

ABSOLUTELY ZERO in that story to suggest anything other than that some 'respectable holidaymakers' (Daily Mail reading demographic?) saw a scruffy dready man and thought he was 'acting suspiciously'.

 x 10,000 ....


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 25, 2008)

Hmm William - task for the day is for you to put up a post without the word 'spindoctor' in it!

You talk about 'media scepticism' as if it was invented on these boards. Of course I'm a media sceptic. I wouldn't trust the kuntz in the tabloid press to get the TV listings right. There isn't a word, an account, or an observation that doesn't come lensed through their fucking lies and their hatreds.

Which is why, I must confess at this point that I hardly ever read any of it! 

The distinct feeling I do get, from seeing the headlines, the TV news and the endless pictures of Kate McCann looking progressively more aged and broken is that it would make little odds to the press if they were found 'guilty'. 

There's a story there, whatever it is, that can be endlessly re-hashed and any theme exploited. You want an Angel... there you go..you want an uppity, psychotic whore, suits you sir.

The pursuit of the McCann's on their return to Britain will have told them that they have a tiger by the tail. Any apparent backing of the 'saintly McCann's' is a mirage. I am sure there are pages of attacks and character assasination already written waiting to roll in the event of... I doubt that the cynicism that I object to on here would even register against that of the press. 

So I don't really care what the 'spin doctors' do. I don't believe the press particularly capable of even relaying their press releases accurately. My point is your concern about them is just another media narrative. You think you are outside of it, but you are not. IGNORE IT ALL.

I don't know what I would have done in the McCann's shoes. They are amateurs under pressure. Held up to the light they are never going to look good. I do believe in a presumption of their innocence, rightly or wrongly and that means the most probable cause is that there is a 'bogeyman' out there. Whether he looks like he played in the bundesliga in the 1970's is another matter.


----------



## T & P (Jan 25, 2008)

Mr Moose said:


> I don't know what I would have done in the McCann's shoes. They are amateurs under pressure. Held up to the light they are never going to look good. I do believe in a presumption of their innocence, rightly or wrongly and that means the most probable cause is that there is a 'bogeyman' out there. Whether he looks like he played in the bundesliga in the 1970's is another matter.


You might believe in the presumption of innocence, but that doesn't mean the most probable cause is that there is a bogeyman out there. All it means is that you are giving them the benefit of the doubt.

The most probable cause is and has always been that it was the parents wot did it. That's what history in general and the few confirmed released facts of this case would suggest.

It might be perfectly possible the parents had nothing to do with it of course. We might never know, and certainly do not know at this point. Nor that it has stopped the press from deciding the McCanns must be innocent, that the Portuguese police are incompetent and corrupt fools, and that any aspects of the investigation that appear to point to the McCanns being involved are "vile slurs" (copyright every single British newspaper, even the broadsheets).

The parents should be considered as suspects. There is nothing wrong with that at all. They should not be accused of having been involved without proof, but they shouldn't be defended blindly while at the same time attacking and insulting anyone who dare suggest otherwise.

Quite a few of us are sick to fucking death of this sorry spectacle and the time-honoured British media maxim that as far as crimes abroad are concerned, Everybody is Guilty Until Proven British.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 25, 2008)

T & P said:


> The most probable cause is and has always been that it was the parents wot did it. That's what history in general and the few confirmed released facts of this case would suggest.



Well that's not actually true in this case, but don't let it stop you running away with it. I'm hardly defending them blindly and I think you'll find that I have been called numerous more names here than I dish out. 

Jerry L will be along in a few moments to call me some more  MUPPET!!

Sure, parents are the most likely perps of child murder, but they don't _always_ do it! I bet you still think Lindy Chamberlain killed her baby.

And if you are sick to fucking death of it - you know what to do!! And when you do it try to have an original thought or two in your head!!


----------



## T & P (Jan 25, 2008)

Mr Moose said:


> And if you are sick to fucking death of it - you know what to do!!


 I'd really love being able to set alight every single newspaper, TV station and other media outlet HQs in the country to prevent further Maddie stories, but somehow I doubt I'd be successful in silencing them all. Thanks for the encouragement nonetheless.



> And when you do it try to have an original thought or two in your head!!


 Perhaps you could offer some insight on what such thoughts should be?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 25, 2008)

Wouldn't dream of it.

On a friendlier note though - this is, in retrospect, fascinating. 

I'm not trying to push the innocence angle. More that its history repeating in many ways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance


----------



## Schmetterling (Jan 25, 2008)

Hmmmm! 
A lot of new postings on this thread in the last few days.
A lot of new posters on Urban.
A lot of keyboard monkeys.
This has nothing to do with the Mirror closing its Madelein Forum ... ?


----------



## twistedAM (Jan 25, 2008)

Mr Moose said:


> I don't know what I would have done in the McCann's shoes. They are amateurs under pressure.



That's the crux in many ways. They put a lot of pressure on themselves. 
They made lots of mistakes by being hostile to the Portuguese authorities. They certainly took bad advice somewhere along the line or maybe Gerry just thought he knew best.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 25, 2008)

Compare and contrast this excelent post, which I thoroughly endorse :



T & P said:


> You might believe in the presumption of innocence, but that doesn't mean the most probable cause is that there is a bogeyman out there. All it means is that you are giving them the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> The most probable cause is and has always been that it was the parents wot did it. That's what history in general and the few confirmed released facts of this case would suggest.
> 
> ...




with this bit of Mr Moose's reaction :




			
				Mr Moose said:
			
		

> Sure, parents are the most likely perps of child murder, but they don't always do it!



Spot the difference?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 25, 2008)

T & P said:


> The most probable cause is and has always been that it was the parents wot did it. That's what ... the few confirmed released facts of this case would suggest.
> 
> They should not be accused of having been involved without proof



Er?....Saying its the 'probable cause' is not an accusation?...

Whats your point again Will?


----------



## marshall (Jan 25, 2008)

Schmetterling said:


> Hmmmm!
> A lot of new postings on this thread in the last few days.
> A lot of new posters on Urban.
> A lot of keyboard monkeys.
> This has nothing to do with the Mirror closing its Madelein Forum ... ?



I lurked on that mirror maddy forum and on the whole it was utterly fruitcake and usually disintegrated into pro and anti McCann abuse (although nowhere near as abusive as it gets on here). But there was some thought-provoking stuff too with the Panorama programme thread about the case asking why the producers had chosen to use the Velvets ‘Heroin’ as part of the musical score, along with theme from Twin Peaks (wasn’t it Laura Palmer’s dad who killed her?). Implication was that journos in this country were sitting on loads of stuff and some of the articles translated from portugese/euro press suggested there was more of an honest debate about involvement of mcCanns in disappearance than there is the UK.  Anyway mirror forum was full of stuff like this, along with McCann connections to G. Brown/drugs/swingers/clones/loads of bonkers stuff that wouldn’t last 2 secs on here. Entertaining over a lunch hour.


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Jan 25, 2008)

Mr Moose said:


> Wouldn't dream of it.
> 
> On a friendlier note though - this is, in retrospect, fascinating.
> 
> ...




i couldnt give a shit whether they have done it or not, the whole thing is a sham

what sticks in my throat is the way they have been treated, what just coz they are bloody GP's......its bollox, as im sure i would have been allowed as a suspect in my own childs murder to get off the plane and resume a happy life with my remaining kids

are social services still involved with the children???


----------



## Aldebaran (Jan 25, 2008)

Is this media circus still going on??

I feel for you UK'ers... 


well... a little bit anyway.


----------



## Augie March (Feb 11, 2008)

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=98231&in_page_id=34



> A retired art teacher has created a picture of missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann using postage stamps.



That's not an odd way to spend your retirement.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 11, 2008)

read that that M3 or whatever are spunking 50K a month on expenses..... lol


----------



## T & P (Feb 11, 2008)

I reckon _he_ has her


----------



## May Kasahara (Feb 11, 2008)

Trapped behind his wall of stamps


----------



## T & P (Mar 17, 2008)

*Madeleine sighting in Australia after man is seen in public with young blonde girl*



> SYDNEY police were sent into a flutter today when a member of the public called in thinking they'd spotted missing British girl Madeleine McCann in the CBD.
> 
> Rail staff appeared to shadow a middle-aged man wearing a black beret and a little, blonde girl until police arrived at Town Hall train station to question the pair.
> 
> But police say the report turned out to be a false alarm.



http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23389038-421,00.html


Expect a rise in the number of sightings as the first anniversary of the child's disappearance approaches.

If you have a small blonde girl, you might consider dyeing her hair brown for a bit, to save yourselves hassle...


----------



## LJo (Mar 17, 2008)

Expect a slump in the number of shite non-stories as the McCanns start legal proceedings against Express Group Newspapers.

They have already all been pulled from the Express site.

http://www.express.co.uk/search/Madeleine McCann


----------



## bi0boy (Mar 17, 2008)

How long before Maddy is found on these sort of lists?


----------



## john x (Mar 18, 2008)

T & P said:


> *Madeleine sighting in Australia after man is seen in public with young blonde girl*



Go to any beach in Oz and you will see countless men with young blonde girls. 

john x


----------



## laptop (Mar 18, 2008)

LJo said:


> Expect a slump in the number of shite non-stories as the McCanns start legal proceedings against Express Group Newspapers.
> 
> They have already all been pulled from the Express site.
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/search/Madeleine McCann



Even better: http://www.express.co.uk/search/madeleine

All your Madeleines are belong to lawyers


----------



## YouSir (Mar 18, 2008)

The default text of the Daily Express search engine: 'Princess Diana'. Sigh.


----------



## laptop (Mar 19, 2008)

> The Daily and Sunday Express, along with the Daily Star and Daily Star Sunday are to pay a "substantial" sum...
> 
> The Daily Express is to carry a full front-page apology in Wednesday's paper... for suggesting Kate and Gerry McCann were involved in their daughter's disappearance.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7303801.stm




Or, as _Private Eye_ put it: lawyer to Richard Desmond - "you're fucked".

To the tune of several million, apparently.

Of course, they weren't involved.


----------



## frogwoman (Mar 19, 2008)

YouSir said:


> The default text of the Daily Express search engine: 'Princess Diana'. Sigh.



I know


----------



## frogwoman (Mar 19, 2008)

I think most of those suggestions on the madeilenemccann.co.uk website are jokes i mean look at the last one!  

▪ Idea/Suggestion Seventy Two: People can get their children tattooed and tagged (or surgically embedded... same-day out patient) with radio transmitters. This is a superior form of ID and location checking for your child's security. Once the children are 18, they can have either removed at their choice. - Need help on this one please contact me if you can help.


----------



## T & P (May 3, 2008)

*well you lot wanted to talk about something else...*

Predictably, the 1st anniversary of the her disappearance has conjured up new acts of silliness...








> *Anger Over 'Grotesque' Madeleine Doll*
> 
> Tempers have flared outside the village church in Praia da Luz over a "grotesque" mannequin of how missing Madeleine McCann would look at 18.
> 
> ...



http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1314925,00.html


----------



## story (May 3, 2008)

Yes, I think that qualifies as Madeleine Madness.


----------



## rollinder (May 3, 2008)

what about the parents (algedly) vowing to find her themselves?


----------



## bi0boy (May 3, 2008)

Oh I'm sure she will turn up in a wee while.


----------



## Vash (May 4, 2008)

T & P said:


> Predictably, the 1st anniversary of the her disappearance has conjured up new acts of silliness...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That artists a suspect!  Haven't you seen Carry on screaming.


----------



## rapattaque (May 4, 2008)

I found my flatmate in the living room on the internet yesterday asking Jeeves if he knew where Maddy was. No luck.


----------



## 1927 (May 4, 2008)

I see the BBC are showing a film this afternoon called Madeline! Nice planning that by the beeb what with it being the anniversary and all!!


----------



## Dillinger4 (May 4, 2008)

1927 said:


> I see the BBC are showing a film this afternoon called Madeline! Nice planning that by the beeb what with it being the anniversary and all!!



I thought that as well.


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 4, 2008)

I was wondering if the showing toinight of "Flood", about a huge disaster hitting London, was timed to coincide with the possibility of Boris becoming mayor.


----------



## stavros (May 4, 2008)

1927 said:


> I see the BBC are showing a film this afternoon called Madeline! Nice planning that by the beeb what with it being the anniversary and all!!



Hehe, I saw this too. No doubt the Express will use it to rant against "the tax" of the TV license and the Beeb "not representing the people".


----------



## john x (May 4, 2008)

Did they find her yet?

Don't we all have to pry for her to be found?

john x


----------



## dweller (May 5, 2008)

whenever I see this thread I think of


----------



## hendo (May 5, 2008)

stavros said:


> Hehe, I saw this too. No doubt the Express will use it to rant against "the tax" of the TV license and the Beeb "not representing the people".


 
They cancelled it.


----------



## stavros (May 5, 2008)

dweller said:


> whenever I see this thread I think of



Or this;


----------



## Augie March (Jul 1, 2008)

Case closed.

And that's the end of that chapter.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 1, 2008)

Augie March said:


> Case closed.
> 
> And that's the end of that chapter.



Yep. the perpetrators have escaped justice.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2008)

The express will have to find another way to shift papers then, after milking this latest development for a week or too.


----------



## Limejuice (Jul 1, 2008)

Sasaferrato said:


> Yep. the perpetrators have escaped justice.


Yes, true.

Amid all the bollocks, somewhere there's a little girl, or her remains, and one or more adults walking around, perhaps looking over their shoulder, reading the latest reports and feeling a little more comfortable.


----------



## Woollyredhat (Jul 1, 2008)

It's still not over yet, they said they would re-open the case should any new evidence develop, so I presume new leads will be investigated. They just aren't searching either way, which at the same time is still bad.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jul 1, 2008)

Surely we must be in for another child murder or celebrity death to shift this summers' newspapers - the silly season is nearly upon us!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2008)

or another celebrity paedo/sexpest shocka


----------



## Woollyredhat (Jul 1, 2008)

Pete Doherty perhaps? Pete Doherty romps a man.
Or maybe Boris will get up to mischief in the night and get caught with a bunch of hookers. Getting BJ'ed.


----------



## Giles (Jul 1, 2008)

rollinder said:


> what about the parents (algedly) vowing to find her themselves?



Well, they ought to know where they put her.........

Giles..


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jul 1, 2008)

Woollyredhat said:


> Pete Doherty perhaps? Pete Doherty romps a man.
> Or maybe Boris will get up to mischief in the night and get caught with a bunch of hookers. Getting BJ'ed.



all ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ im afraid... John Leslie is all tapped out too..


----------



## PacificOcean (Jul 1, 2008)

Amy Winehouse is looking odds on favourite to be this summer's dead celeb.


----------



## PacificOcean (Jul 1, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> The express will have to find another way to shift papers then, after milking this latest development for a week or too.



Nah, normal service will be resumed at the Express.

It will be back to the conspiriloon Diana stories, House prices, muslims and of course the weather.


----------



## il_bastardo (Jul 1, 2008)

Woollyredhat said:


> Pete Doherty perhaps? Pete Doherty romps a man.
> Or maybe Boris will get up to mischief in the night and get caught with a bunch of hookers. Getting BJ'ed.



getting "Boris Johnsoned" hmmm? wonder what that particular sex act involves... getting spanked in time to the beat of military marches?


----------



## Augie March (Jul 1, 2008)

il_bastardo said:


> getting "Boris Johnsoned" hmmm? wonder what that particular sex act involves... getting spanked in time to the beat of military marches?



More likely faffing around for 20 minutes not having a clue what you're doing, then falling off the bed, getting back up, making your apologies and then legging it to the nearest exit.


----------



## il_bastardo (Jul 1, 2008)

Augie March said:


> More likely faffing around for 20 minutes not having a clue what you're doing, then falling off the bed, getting back up, making your apologies and then legging it to the nearest exit.



....with your trousers still round your ankles


----------



## stavros (Jul 1, 2008)

The Express has actually managed to come up with some imaginative bullshit recently for their front page, but whilst the daily Maddie-athon was horrendous, I do kind of miss Diana-Monday. Where's Mad Mo to spout more of his crazy conspiracies?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 1, 2008)

Limejuice said:


> Yes, true.
> 
> Amid all the bollocks, somewhere there's a little girl, or her remains, and one or more adults walking around, perhaps looking over their shoulder, reading the latest reports and feeling a little more comfortable.



Someone who gets away with a crime like that; remember, we are not talking about a well balanced individual here, is vey likely to do it again.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2008)

Obviously the Mcanns couldn't off another sprog, they'd have to go further afield


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 5, 2008)

Woollyredhat said:


> They just aren't searching either way, which at the same time is still bad.


How is it "bad"?  They have undoubtedly reached the point where all meaningful leads have been exhausted.  What do you expect them to do?  Randomly keep looking in people's cupboards just on the off-chance?

The media encourage this failure of people to realise that there is a limit to what can meaningfully be done in _any_ investigation and there comes a point where there is nothing more which can be justified _even if we still do not know what happened_.

We have finite resources in this world.  Sad though it is, we must draw a line in the sand when everything _reasonable_ has been taken as far as possible.

Good practice would be to have a full investigative review before ending the active phase of the investigation and that the case should be re-examined after an appropriate period of time (usually 3 to 5 years) to see if renewed publicity brings in new information (perhaps as a result of changed alliegances amongst suspects/witnesses) or if scientific advances mean that exhibits which yielded nothing at the time may give up some new information on re-examination.  Whether or not the Portugese police follow this good practice I do not know but the UK has for the last ten years or so.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 5, 2008)

had to laugh at the Sun headline 'NOW CLEAR THE MCANNS'


poor logic is poor


----------



## T & P (Jul 5, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> How is it "bad"?  They have undoubtedly reached the point where all meaningful leads have been exhausted.  What do you expect them to do?  Randomly keep looking in people's cupboards just on the off-chance?
> 
> The media encourage this failure of people to realise that there is a limit to what can meaningfully be done in _any_ investigation and there comes a point where there is nothing more which can be justified _even if we still do not know what happened_.
> 
> We have finite resources in this world.  Sad though it is, we must draw a line in the sand when everything _reasonable_ has been taken as far as possible.


 ^ this.

In fact you could argue that other investigations and other people's lives are being put at risk by continuing to devote police resources to a cause that was all but lost many months ago.


----------



## detective-boy (Jul 5, 2008)

T & P said:


> In fact you could argue that other investigations and other people's lives are being put at risk by continuing to devote police resources to a cause that was all but lost many months ago.


Indeed.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 11, 2008)

hello, I've been away for nearly a year. Can anyone just sum up in a few sentences how this thread's been going?
Cheers.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jul 11, 2008)

billy_bob said:


> hello, I've been away for nearly a year. Can anyone just sum up in a few sentences how this thread's been going?
> Cheers.



Maddy still dead. Papers bore on about it. That's it.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 15, 2008)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7507357.stm
Shame it was'nt a few million


----------



## snadge (Jul 16, 2008)

Sasaferrato said:


> Someone who gets away with a crime like that; remember, we are not talking about a well balanced individual here, is vey likely to do it again.





The McAnns are trying for another?


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2008)

Did anyone see the recently released evidence that Madeline might be in Holland? 

Apparently a woman saw a girl with a man or woman and the girl said her name was madeline and she had been taken from her mother. Was part of evidence recently released as the portugese closed their investigation down.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 7, 2008)

There was something on the news this morning that British Detectives thought there was a possibility that she ahd been kidnapped to order by a Belgian paedophile ring.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2008)

yeah cos if i worked in a store and a kid said to me i have been taken from my mother i would contact the polie 2-3 months later or something.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2008)

Belushi said:


> There was something on the news this morning that British Detectives thought there was a possibility that she ahd been kidnapped to order by a Belgian paedophile ring.




Sounds like a cake


----------



## weltweit (Aug 7, 2008)

B0B2oo9 said:


> yeah cos if i worked in a store and a kid said to me i have been taken from my mother i would contact the polie 2-3 months later or something.



They didn't wait to contact the police. The police waited to act or pass on the information to Madeline's family.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2008)

Wrong, the woman in the store saw the maddie story 2-3 months later then contacted the fuzz...


----------



## HackneyE9 (Aug 7, 2008)

Belushi said:


> There was something on the news this morning that British Detectives thought there was a possibility that she ahd been kidnapped to order by a Belgian paedophile ring.



Yeah. 'Cos rather than steal a local Belgian girl, much easier to travel to Portugal, steal one there, then travel back across Continental Europe with her.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 7, 2008)

Theres some odd history surrounding allegations of Belgian paedophile rings, which is why it grabbed my attention that British detectives thought it could be a possibility.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2008)

weltweit said:


> Did anyone see the recently released evidence that Madeline might be in Holland?


Yes.  And the bit that police turned up and spoke to the woman and child and found no reason to intervene.

There have been hundreds, if not thousands of sightings.  They can't all be right (many are nearly simultaneous).  The chances are that none are.

And the "stolen to order by Belgian Paedophile ring" story needs to be read in the light of the fact that the intelligence was rated as "Not known directly to the source and cannot be corroborated".


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2008)

Belushi said:


> There was something on the news this morning that British Detectives thought there was a possibility that she ahd been kidnapped to order by a Belgian paedophile ring.


Was that BBC Breakfast?  Did I look good?


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 7, 2008)

HackneyE9 said:


> Yeah. 'Cos rather than steal a local Belgian girl, much easier to travel to Portugal, steal one there, then travel back across Continental Europe with her.



Maybe they knew there was a good chance she wouldn't be traced  by the local cops?


----------



## Belushi (Aug 7, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Was that BBC Breakfast?  Did I look good?



Mate I had it on in the background so I didnt really pay attention! if I'd have known there was an urbanite on I would have been glued to the set


----------



## starfish2000 (Aug 7, 2008)

This is just the Clarence Mitchell PR thing. I'm sure the portugese cops are idiots as they didnt seal off the crimescene. But Kate and Gerry still want their slot on the GMTV sofa. So anything coming from that camp will just be spin.

I'm more interested in the 48 questions Kate refused to answer, if she were to answer them I'd have a bit more sympathy towards them


----------



## nuffsaid (Aug 7, 2008)

starfish2000 said:


> I'm more interested in the 48 questions Kate refused to answer, if she were to answer them I'd have a bit more sympathy towards them




Did you actually click on any of the available news links to the questions she refused to answer (plus the one she did) because it makes it quite flipping clear why she refused. No I'm not doing your homework for you go and read yourself.


----------



## HackneyE9 (Aug 7, 2008)

Belushi said:


> Theres some odd history surrounding allegations of Belgian paedophile rings, which is why it grabbed my attention that British detectives thought it could be a possibility.



There's deffo a lot of dodgy paedophilia in Belgium - the Marc de Troux case and the more recent double killing in Liege. But I would point you to the fact that all the victims were local Belgian girls.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 7, 2008)

nuffsaid said:


> Did you actually click on any of the available news links to the questions she refused to answer (plus the one she did) because it makes it quite flipping clear why she refused. No I'm not doing your homework for you go and read yourself.



yes I agree, although she maybe did make herself look more suspicious by not answerign them..


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 7, 2008)

_angel_ said:


> Maybe they knew there was a good chance she wouldn't be traced  by the local cops?



I assume you try to be funny, but for those involved in this investigation it isn't quite so hilarious. 
I saw an interview with one of the investigators of this (really old) suggestion. He explained that when they asked the Portuguese about necessary information to be able to further their tracking of the rumor, they ran into closed doors. It came simply down to the conclusion that if you have no tools, and you ask those who have them to hand them over and they not  answer your call, you can not do finish the job for which the tools are a an absolute necessity. 

Months ago a foreigner was with his girlfriend in a restaurant somewhere in Belgium and you guess it: with a little blond girl.
Same stupid scenario "sighting of Madeline in Belgium!!"
The foreigner was traced down with girlfriend and all, the kid was one of his relatives and he had absolutely no idea the Belgian investigators tried for weeks to find him just to have that confirmed. 

I wonder how many scenarios are going to be written to keep the UK tabloids happy. I am positive that they fake a lot of such "sightings" themselves at the most weird locations, not caring in the least about the resources that go into their investigations.

Wake up.  99,99% chances are that the child is long dead, a sad reality.
99% chances she just woke up and ran to the beach and got washed away with a wave. It is the same drama for everyone involved, but not worth for over a year tabloid attention and that is more than enough reason why this ignored as a possibility.

salaam.


----------



## T & P (Aug 7, 2008)

HackneyE9 said:


> There's deffo a lot of dodgy paedophilia in Belgium - the Marc de Troux case and the more recent double killing in Liege. But I would point you to the fact that all the victims were local Belgian girls.


 It might have happened, but if a paedophile ring based in Belgium really had arranged for a girl to be kidnapped, it seems highly illogical they would choose to do the deed nearly 2000 miles away and have to transport her through at least 4 countries. Are there no little girls in Belgium, or the surrounding countries?


----------



## Jessiedog (Aug 8, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> 99% chances she just woke up and ran to the beach and got washed away with a wave.
> 
> salaam.



I don't think so.


Woof


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 8, 2008)

what's happening with all the money raised?


----------



## DeadManWalking (Aug 8, 2008)

weltweit said:


> Did anyone see the recently released evidence that Madeline might be in Holland?
> 
> Apparently a woman saw a girl with a man or woman and the girl said her name was madeline and she had been taken from her mother. Was part of evidence recently released as the portugese closed their investigation down.



I read that the girl in the shop, said that her name was Maddy, a name that the family never used apparently.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 8, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> I assume you try to be funny, but for those involved in this investigation it isn't quite so hilarious.



Why would you think that?




> Wake up.  99,99% chances are that the child is long dead, a sad reality.
> 99% chances she just woke up and ran to the beach and got washed away with a wave. It is the same drama for everyone involved, but not worth for over a year tabloid attention and that is more than enough reason why this ignored as a possibility.
> 
> salaam.




They seem to think she couldn't have climbed out the window (why I don't know) I would have thought there'd be a body if she was in the sea (you'd have thought that would be the first place they looked) But then again, the investigation hasn't been exactly brilliantly handled by the police.

I can't help thinking if this had happened in the UK, there'd have been a strong chance of her being found, by now.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 8, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> Wake up.  99,99% chances are that the child is long dead, a sad reality.
> 99% chances she just woke up and ran to the beach and got washed away with a wave. It is the same drama for everyone involved, but not worth for over a year tabloid attention and that is more than enough reason why this ignored as a possibility.



I don't think so.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> Wake up.  99,99% chances are that the child is long dead, a sad reality.


Correct.



> 99% chances she just woke up and ran to the beach and got washed away with a wave.


No correct.  It is a _possibility_ but it is nowhere near the most likely.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2008)

DeadManWalking said:


> I read that the girl in the shop, said that her name was Maddy, a name that the family never used apparently.


You are too good for the Sun Scum, Mr Poirot!


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2008)

_angel_ said:


> I can't help thinking if this had happened in the UK, there'd have been a strong chance of her being found, by now.


Not necessarily.  If there was an "innocent" explanation, probably.  But if there was an abduction (which has got to be near the top of the list of possibilities) or, alternatively, she came to some harm and there was a cover-up by parents (again something which has to be near the top of the list) then it is just as likely no trace would ever be found in the UK or anywhere else.

What I think we could be sure of is that if this had happened in the UK, we would have been far more sure of what the scene had to tell us.  Although there is _always_ an issue with delays in realising that a possible crime scene needs to be secured*, I think it would have happened significantly sooner in the UK and, when it was, it would have been secured and examined better.

*:  The Soham girls were treated as a missing person enquiry for at least 24/48 hours.  The alternative is an immediate securing of scenes (including the missing kids homes usually) and treating of parents, etc. as possible suspects in every missing child case, something that would be both excessive and subject to serious criticism in the vast majority of cases where the child has just wandered off and resources should be searching for them, not securing scenes.


----------



## Riklet (Aug 8, 2008)

So the blame game's still kinda going on? Everyone from "inept Portuguese police" to uncaring Dutch people, for not calling in helicopters and Interpol as soon as they heard the name "Maddie" being uttered in public.

Poor lil' tyke, but in the end this has all just been good for media dividends....


----------



## Vash (Aug 8, 2008)

Maddies easy to see in that picture shes the only one with a photo head.  

'My names Maddie, they took me from my Holiday' is clearly Munchauseneque attention seeking.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 8, 2008)

dead girl is dead...


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 8, 2008)

Vash said:


> Maddies easy to see in that picture shes the only one with a photo head.


*Rings private detective's hotline *


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Correct.
> 
> 
> No correct.  It is a _possibility_ but it is nowhere near the most likely.



Why not?

child left alone
parents think they all sleep
child wakes up
wants her parents
was that day with parent on beach
finds way back to beach
remembers playing in the water and parent swimming (or whatever that can be attractive to go into the water)
goes in the water
waves come
undercurrent sweeps child from her feet
child gets dragged in
drowns
disappears in the depth of the sea.

Very likely scenario in my view. 
Much more likely than an abductor unseen approaching a holiday resort's lodge, knows where to find the child, enter the place without waking up any of the children, take a sleeping child out of bed and get away with it unseen and unheard while the child doesn't make a sound. Even if the abductor drugged her, it's a stranger scenario than simply assume the kid woke up and went on a fatal adventure.

salaam.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> Why not?


1. Kids don't do that a lot (in the middle of the night anyway)
2. No history of wandering off (so far as we know)
3. Wouldn't have been easy to get out of the apartment
4. Unlikely not to be seen wandering about (and a child of that age on their own would be _noticed_)
5. Bodies aren't usually lost entirely in the sea
6. How did Cuiddle Cat get on the high shelf?

I suspect there is also more that we simply don't know too.


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> Why not?
> 
> child left alone
> parents think they all sleep
> ...



I wouldn't say that was very likely, more like a possibility, just like this: 

child left alone
parents think they all sleep
child wakes up
wants her parents
remembers watching cartoon about aliens with parents
goes outside and looks at night sky
passing UFO sees abandoned child outside at night
lands on ground and alien emerges 
asks Maddy where her mummy is
Maddy isn't sure
alien considers best course of action to take girl to safer place
UFO departs with Maddy to Tau Ceti IV


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 9, 2008)

Shippou-Chan said:


> dead girl is dead...



evil


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> 1. Kids don't do that a lot (in the middle of the night anyway)
> 2. No history of wandering off (so far as we know)
> 3. Wouldn't have been easy to get out of the apartment
> 4. Unlikely not to be seen wandering about (and a child of that age on their own would be _noticed_)
> ...



1. My kids do. 
2. Every kid that feels alone wants parents or other carer, let alone if they are in a strange environment.
3. Why not? If a complete stranger can come in, a kid that knows where the doors are can far easier get out
4. Little child . Darkness. Music and people talking/laughing/making fun etc.. etc.. Not difficult for little kid to be left unseen. Much more difficult for adult carrying a kid to be left unseen.
5. They can get lost at all possible manners. Don't know what the sea life  is like over there, but there are also ships... who cann mold a body to shreds. 
6. Have no clue what you talk about.

salaam.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> 6. Have no clue what you talk about.


The kids toy, which it was sleeping with, was found on a high shelf she couldn't have reached.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 9, 2008)

Wasn't it about 9 pm in the evening? If she was going to wander, wouldn't she stay in the bright lights of the resort complex rather than wandering into the dark and scary night towards the sea?

Does seem a bit odd though, that the police and media seemed to concentrate so much on the abductor theory (well it would suit the press better I guess with the "paedo on every corner" hysteria) rather than the possibility that she wandered off and drowned.



Aldebaran said:


> Why not?
> child left alone
> parents think they all sleep
> child wakes up
> ...


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Paul Russell said:


> Wasn't it about 9 pm in the evening? If she was going to wander, wouldn't she stay in the bright lights of the resort complex rather than wandering into the dark and scary night towards the sea?


Theorising about what is or is not "most likely" is a total waste of time.  It may help in _prioritising_ enquiries ... but unless some actual facts are established, nothing can be ruled in or ruled out.  Unfortunately the media _love_ theories and _hate_ facts.  



> Does seem a bit odd though, that the police and media seemed to concentrate so much on the abductor theory (well it would suit the press better I guess with the "paedo on every corner" hysteria) rather than the possibility that she wandered off and drowned.


Remember that all you know is what the papers have chosen to print.  I would be extremely surprised if the police had not investigated that possibility as far as they could as well (in fact, I remember some coverage of searches of beaches, etc. at the time).

The police had some inconsistencies which led them to continue to pursue the possible involvement of the parents.  They also had some meaningful lines of enquiry they could take further.  That does not seem to be the case with the "wandering off" theory - what else could they meaningfully do having done the basics and found nothing?


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> The kids toy, which it was sleeping with, was found on a high shelf she couldn't have reached.



OK, that is a good point but it can also be due to stress related memory gap of the parents, or someone who later went to check on the children could have put it there because it was dropped on the floor or what not. You do such things without thinking and when later questioned about it under such dramatic circumstances , stress makes your memory the more foggy.

salaam.


----------



## Paul Russell (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> That does not seem to be the case with the "wandering off" theory - what else could they meaningfully do having done the basics and found nothing?



Yeah, fair point on that. I should have said just the press for that, if you see what I mean, as the whole abductor thing makes a much better story, of course.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Aug 9, 2008)

More pantomime villians -





no they didn't


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 9, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:


> More pantomime villians -
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The female drawing looks like the first result from google image search: Evil hard faced cow


----------



## Belushi (Aug 9, 2008)

Only a wrong 'un would sport that moustache.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Aldebaran said:


> OK, that is a good point but it can also be due to stress related memory gap of the parents, or someone who later went to check on the children could have put it there because it was dropped on the floor or what not. You do such things without thinking and when later questioned about it under such dramatic circumstances , stress makes your memory the more foggy.


You can add as many theories as you like to explain inconsistencies in your chosen version of events ...


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 9, 2008)

I think we should hold a sponsored Tapas night to raise money for the Maddie appeal


----------



## DJ Squelch (Aug 9, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> I think we should hold a sponsored Tapas night to raise money for the Maddie appeal



Yeah i'm up for it. Can't find a babysitter though, nevermind I'm sure they'll be fine on their own.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 9, 2008)

DJ Squelch said:


> Yeah i'm up for it. Can't find a babysitter though, nevermind I'm sure they'll be fine on their own.



yeah give em a few sedatives, they'll be fine. If any of em die you can just dump the body and start a newspaper appeal ennit.


----------



## Aldebaran (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> You can add as many theories as you like to explain inconsistencies in your chosen version of events ...



For as far as I know, theories is all there is to go with. If not, she would be found by now or at least it would be found out what happened to her.

salaam.


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> 1. Kids don't do that a lot (in the middle of the night anyway)
> 2. No history of wandering off (so far as we know)
> 3. Wouldn't have been easy to get out of the apartment
> 4. Unlikely not to be seen wandering about (and a child of that age on their own would be _noticed_)
> ...



1 : yes they do - many do it half asleep wandering to or in areas that they know quite well , if you have ever worked in a childrens home you would se that this happens quite a lot even more so when a child has been overtired or excited before sleep .

2: The lady in the appartment above (Mrs Fenn) and staff gave a statement that the child "hid" from her parents on previous days , the McCanns admitted  themselves in answer to Mrs Fenns / Tapas staff statement that Maddy wandered off the night before and wouldnt rest , she was found hiding in the hedges around the appartment by the swimming pool apparently.
Thats wandering off in my book.
Its on youtube TV video interview and they were asked why they didnt think she had just wandered off again this time and  instead straight away thought abduction - Kate replied that she "just knew" but couldnt say why because of the secrecy laws , the papers speculated that this was because the toy was found in a place that Maddy could not reach.

3: The patio doors were unlocked above the steps at the front facing the Tapas bar and swimming pool , all the Tapas party have stated this , they say it was to allow easy checking , it is possible due to the heat that because the bedroom door was shut , they also left this partly open making exit even easier.
There was no stair guard fitted at the top of the stone steps although Warner do supply these for those with children.
The Patio doors were almost new and would slide open easily anyway unlike the shutter on the window in the childs bedroom.

4: This is true BUT it is a very very quiet village / area , I have stopped in Lagos on several occasions and know the area very well , at that time of night it IS possible ,  the stone steps from the appartment do end up in the road totally  invisible to the Tapas bar that is surrounded by a 9 foot wall.
Although its a shortish walk for an adult to the beach of light and the sea from the steps  , it is a long way though for a tired drowsy child so it does seem unlikely that she could have made it there but not impossible.
IMHO I believe that something else could have happened if she did wake / wander off  and I would have thought falling down those awful stone steps must have been a high possibility (especially if waking up drowsy) the individual  steps at these appartments are very very high for a 3 year old and coming down increadibly steep without a parents hand to hold.
Strange though that the sniffers picked up  the scent of maddy towards the beach for 400 mtrs then it stopped

5 : No but who knows where it could have been washed up if it somehow did get to the sea there are many small islands / caves and rocks , impossibility Id have thought to have checked them all and although they checked the caves and pipes under the clifftops the PJ  have not stated that a full search was ever attempted .
Maybe they think that IF there was a body dumped at sea it would have been waeightd down and will turn up eventually and maybe a full search of all surrounding areas which would presumably have to be done many times would be pretty much fruitless not to mention  too costly.

6 : there was / is no high shelf in the bedroom acording to the investigation photos - that remains one of the "strange" quotes or red herrings during the investigation , the cuddlecat was left on the bed as in the final release papers


Most the piccys can be found here...

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id141.html

Ive always found it strange that they decided that it was an abduction straight away and Im puzzled by the washing of the cuddlecat as mothers  I know that have lost a child would murder someone for washing thier childs stuff which they usually  keep in bottom drawers for many years .

I also find it strange that the PJ found the bed that Maddy was sleeping in was undisturbed (pictures taken and in final report) and even if the "abducter" didnt disturb them whilst stealing the child the as a parent the first thing I would have done without thinking  is to have pulled the covers back , I find lots of things strange in this case very very much like the Jon Bonet Ramsey case.


One thing I am sure about is that things would have been very very different if the Parents had not left the children alone and thier tale that they could clearly see them from the Tapas bar has been shown to be untrue , the 9 foot wall stops that even with the hedges now cut back , besides that the kiddies room was at the opposite side of the building totally invisible to anyone in the resturaunt.

I guess as with Jon Bonet Ramsey we will never know what happened to the poor girl and I have to admit I am fed up with these parents parading themselves as "perfect" parents and the UKs / Worlds spokespersons for childrens care and wellbeing .

A little truth from them wouldnt go amiss now that they can no longer use the secrecy excuse.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Aug 9, 2008)

According to the redtops, it seems, everyone's now an expert on Danish Paedo Rings ?!?!


----------



## topaz (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> 1 : yes they do - many do it half asleep wandering to or in areas that they know quite well , if you have ever worked in a childrens home you would se that this happens quite a lot even more so when a child has been overtired or excited before sleep .
> 
> 2: The lady in the appartment above (Mrs Fenn) and staff gave a statement that the child "hid" from her parents on previous days , the McCanns admitted  themselves in answer to Mrs Fenns / Tapas staff statement that Maddy wandered off the night before and wouldnt rest , she was found hiding in the hedges around the appartment by the swimming pool apparently.
> Thats wandering off in my book.
> ...



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

new dna evidence has ruled the parents out.


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

topaz said:


> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml
> 
> new dna evidence has ruled the parents out.



Thats not new evinence its from 2004 / 2005 and we STILL dont know what happened and probably never will and the parents were not very forthcoming with information  in that case either  employing a high profile team of lawyers to shield them from questioning.

Im not sold on the Ramsey parents being  responsible anyway but I felt that they too were hiding something , it always strikes me as odd parents refusing to answer questions about a missing or (in the Ramsey case)  dead children


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 9, 2008)

What did they refuse to answer Weller. I seen a video of the mother being interviewed and she didn't seem to avoid anything (despite the police repeatedly lying to her about DNA evidence).


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

Mikey77 said:


> What did they refuse to answer Weller. I seen a video of the mother being interviewed and she didn't seem to avoid anything (despite the police repeatedly lying to her about DNA evidence).



Who are you on about the Ramsey case or McCann 


Either way the cases are too deep to discuss in full here but Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions , they are in final report and can be googled etc or below in a translated version.

The Ramsey case is way too involved to discuss in this thread of course but its all been done elsewhere many times and as Patsy died of cancer in 2006 its not something I wish to discuss any longer , I was just pointing out that in that case too people have not had what some would call "closure" even though a body was found and many years later the conspiracies still persist.

The 48 unanswered questions put to Kate as in the final investigation report ..

1- On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2- Did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)

3- (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?

4- Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?

5- How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?

6- Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?

7- Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8- Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9- When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?

10- What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?

11- Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12- Who contacted the authorities?

13- Who took place in the searches?

14- Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?

15- Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?

16- What does “we let her down” mean?

17- Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?

18- How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19- During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?

20- Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21- Who did you phone after the occurrence?

22- Did you call Sky News?

23- Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24- Did you ask for a priest?

25- By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26- Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?

27- What was your behaviour that night?

28- Did you manage to sleep?

29- Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30- What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?

31- Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34- As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35- What is your medical specialty?

36- Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37- Did you work every day?

38- At a certain point you stopped working, why?

39- Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40- Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?

41- Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42- In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43- In the case files you were forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

44- When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45- When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46- When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47- When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48- Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?

- Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardizing the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

- “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.”


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> 1 : yes they do  < snip Marathon speculation >


No matter how much you try and "prove" theories, you will never succeed.  She _could_ have wandered off and drowned ... but loads of other things could have happened too.  All I'm saying is it is less likely (not impossible - less likely) than other scenarios.

How many children wander off in the middle of the night and end up dead in the sea?

How many children come to harm due to accidents at home, especially when left unsupervised?

How many children are abducted by strangers?


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> it always strikes me as odd parents refusing to answer questions about a missing or (in the Ramsey case)  dead children



I was referring to the Ramsay case. If you didn't wish to discuss it because the mother died then why mention it at all.


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> No matter how much you try and "prove" theories, you will never succeed.  She _could_ have wandered off and drowned ... but loads of other things could have happened too.  All I'm saying is it is less likely (not impossible - less likely) than other scenarios.
> 
> How many children wander off in the middle of the night and end up dead in the sea?
> 
> ...



EVERYTHING here is speculation upto to and including YOUR own comments its just that you like to make out that you are the only one who can make justified comments 

Many children also fall down stairs after waking in a drowsy slumber looking  thier parents it was a very high casulty in children and thats why we (the sensible parents) have used stair guards for many years.

Wooden stairs usually also have unserlay / carpet on them so a child is not usually hurt badly if there is no stairguard.

What sort of parent leaves children at home with a patio door unlocked or even open that leads to a set of 10 foot stone steps without even a stair guard .

I would say its a highly probable senario / accident waiting to happen especially when the child has told you they all woke up and were  crying and nobody came the night before (something they only disclosed after 2  witness  statements appeared) how both  parents could go out on the razz again the next night leaving then again after that beggars belief.

Whether any of these other senarios are more or less probable than an abduction is neither here or there really now but as far as I am concerned  the more that comes out of the final report and from thier own account its poor parenting on so many levels in my book.

They have suffered if they are innocent of all else besides neglect but these are not the type of parents I want parading and promoting childcare / welfare even if they are  truely innocent of a childs  death / disapearance  

If they are so much into childcare and welfare lets see all the money from the forthcoming films / books / tv interviews be put to helping other children , theres little chance of doing anything for Maddy now regardles of how much money is spent.


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

Mikey77 said:


> I was referring to the Ramsay case. If you didn't wish to discuss it because the mother died then why mention it at all.




Erm Ive told you why I mentioned it but Ive  also mentioned that there is a wardrobe in the appartment bedroom  it doesnt mean that I want to discuss Ikea  MDF alternatives for Potuguese holiday appartments  here in a Maddy thread .

Some things I may wish to discuss more than others but thats my choice   I dont like discussing furniture and I dont like discussing the Ramsey case but like to mention it once in a while for those that may then wish to look it up .

Start a Ramsey thread if you really want to discuss it , I guarantee it will die within a few posts after turning into a slugfest bun fight 
I will join you no problem and add what I feel I want too , when I want too 

If you can add YOUR ideas to the below in another thread I might post yet again my thoughts - maybe 

Meanwhile NOTHING was proven there either regardless of the tabloids  printing inconclusive sensationalist speculative tripe .... hmm pretty simular 



> On August 16, 2006, 41-year-old John Mark Karr, a former school teacher, was arrested in Bangkok, Thailand on five-year-old child-pornography charges from Sonoma County, California. Authorities reportedly tracked him down using the Internet after he sent e-mails regarding the Ramsey case to Michael Tracey, a journalism professor at the University of Colorado.[10] Once apprehended, he confessed to being with JonBenét when she died, stating that her death was an accident. When asked if he was innocent, he responded, "No."
> 
> However, Karr's DNA did not match that found on JonBenét Ramsey's body. On August 28, 2006, prosecutors announced that no charges would be filed against him for the murder of JonBenét Ramsey.[11][12][13] In early December 2006, Department of Homeland Security officials reported that federal investigators were continuing to explore whether Karr had been a possible accomplice in the killing.
> 
> No evidence has ever come to light that placed the then-married Alabama resident Karr near Boulder during the Christmas 1996 crime. Evidence linking Karr to the killing is highly circumstantial in nature. For instance, handwriting samples taken from Karr were said to match the ransom note. In particular, his technique for writing the letters E, T and M were described by the media as being very rare.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> EVERYTHING here is speculation upto to and including YOUR own comments its just that you like to make out that you are the only one who can make justified comments


Except that I don't "speculate" about what happened.  All I have done is suggest that some theories _are more likely_ than others, based on previous experience (general and personal).


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 9, 2008)

> For instance, handwriting samples taken from Karr were said to match the ransom note. In particular, his technique for writing the letters E, T and M were described by the media as being very rare.


Handwriting evidence is notoriously unreliable ... at very best you'll get a "probable" match (where there are "highly probable" and "certain" categories above that).

(As illustrated by this scene:

FSS Laboratory, Lambeth.  Lunchtime.  Group of handwriting dept staff on their way out:

Liaison officer:  Where are you lot going?
Handwriting staff:  Lunch.
No you're not.
Yes, we are.
You're not.
(Angrier) Yes we are.
No.  You're _probably_ going to lunch ...)


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> Except that I don't "speculate" about what happened.  All I have done is suggest that some theories _are more likely_ than others, based on previous experience (general and personal).



lol ... no you really do speculate and give your own VIEWS on a lot of things you just think its covered up by your "ill tell you how it all works with my all seeing eye "  truth is we all have real life experiance  ,  detectives  or not   

In your 5 points you speculated when there is no need now , I answered some of those points with facts from the released documents  , you in  your role as forum detective should have known that the statements and full details of the case (all 40,000 pages) have now been released on dvd via the PJ and that some have already been translated making some things that were just media speculation now beyond any reasonable doubt .

The truth is , for me at least that your agenda in a lot of posts is quite plain  and IS speculation on your part 
When it concerns your ideas / teachings / rulebook Vs  others real life experiance  - regardless of what the law says SHOULD happen or HAS happened to discount others views as not valid because they have not served in a crime realted role as yourself just makes you look bitter about something.

Its either that or its a disrespect for other peoples viewpoints and a need to shout people down as f***wits  , yours too matey is just a viewpoint in a forum dont raise your pedestal too high its unwarranted , probably less so as youve had the "blinkers" installed 

Forgive me if I skip getting involved in your last post but  it looked like something you should probably discuss with the other "ex'es" down the  "club" or if you really need to cut / explain / discount certain lines  out of a Wiki cut and pasted quote maybe add this knowledge  to the actual wiki page - you're probably a fun guy ......at xmas at least  .....lol


----------



## ymu (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> 2: The lady in the appartment above (Mrs Fenn) and staff gave a statement that the child "hid" from her parents on previous days , the McCanns admitted  themselves in answer to Mrs Fenns / Tapas staff statement that Maddy wandered off the night before and wouldnt rest , she was found hiding in the hedges around the appartment by the swimming pool apparently.
> Thats wandering off in my book.
> Its on youtube TV video interview and they were asked why they didnt think she had just wandered off again this time and  instead straight away thought abduction - Kate replied that she "just knew" but couldnt say why because of the secrecy laws , the papers speculated that this was because the toy was found in a place that Maddy could not reach.


Is this in the evidence that's been released? It's very strange, if true - taking no precautions to prevent it happening again, and concluding that it was abduction so quickly.


----------



## Vash (Aug 9, 2008)

Today The express was the only newspaper that didn't have the Olympics, Gerogia or BB on the front cover.  It had Maddy its a shame it didn't have Diana on it as well if it did I'd have probably bought it and framed it.


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

ymu said:


> Is this in the evidence that's been released? It's very strange, if true - taking no precautions to prevent it happening again, and concluding that it was abduction so quickly.



Well everyone must have seen the videos and questioning about the morning before when the girl asked "why didnt you come last night when we were crying" 

They admitted that happening after Mrs Fenns leaked statement on every program they went on .....If you can leave a child alone again after that theres no hope  is there , Mrs Fenn said the children or one of them at least were crying for over an hour till they returned.

..but obviously a lot of this waking up / hiding / acting up before bedtime , bathtime  etc is very usual and not out of the ordinary for children especially when aged 3 .

To be truthful many children play up around bed or bath time so it should not be shocking especially when excited and on holiday away from home 

The details are going to be very sketchy at the moment as 40,000 pages of portuguese is going to take sometime translating I suppose  I presume its all in portuguese as the final pdf detailing main points was .

Thats widely availible on the net in its original unaltered form which is free for all to view under Portuguese law .. the 40,000 pages only go to people with interest but I heard that over 2000 were applied for last monday by press etc etc.. looks like the PJ are going to need a knockoff nigel to help with the dvd burning 

I personally do not want to see anymore in the papers Id be quite happy for it to all fade away now and some paperspace given to other neglected or missing kids  , this child has 99.99 % gone thats for sure.

I suspect though this will run and run slowly releasing and spinning each page of the investigation and investigating again every sighting from months ago until the money stops coming in.


Does anyone really believe that a calculated abducter ring that have travelled to Portugal to fill a p*do "specialist" order would then take the child into a shop in Belgium and let her wander off to speak to the shopkeeper on her own , whats the matter with  these publicity seeking wierdos , not forgetting that one of the reasons the PJ discounted it was that the woman said she called herself maddy ... a name the family and girl never used , now they believe there is a reason to investigate these sort of sightings months later even though some of them kept thier sightings to themselves for months for some unknown reason..... Jeez 

Really how much more


----------



## stavros (Aug 9, 2008)

Vash said:


> Today The express was the only newspaper that didn't have the Olympics, Gerogia or BB on the front cover.  It had Maddy its a shame it didn't have Diana on it as well if it did I'd have probably bought it and framed it.



I've heard of some people playing Express Bingo, where the front page has any or all of the following; Maddie, Diana, houseprices, "families", free shit, anti-tax rants, anti-immigrants rants, anti-EU rants, racist/sexist/homophobic bullshit, etc.


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 9, 2008)

Weller said:


> Erm Ive told you why I mentioned it but Ive  also mentioned that there is a wardrobe in the appartment bedroom  it doesnt mean that I want to discuss Ikea  MDF alternatives for Potuguese holiday appartments  here in a Maddy thread .



But you didn't mention "Ikea MDF alternatives for Potuguese holiday appartments" in your earlier post. You did however mention the Ramsay parents avoiding questions. Anyway, I don't like you very much now, so I would rather you put your head up your bum than reply to me.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 9, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> evil



i try


----------



## Weller (Aug 9, 2008)

Mikey77 said:


> But you didn't mention "Ikea MDF alternatives for Potuguese holiday appartments" in your earlier post. You did however mention the Ramsay parents avoiding questions. Anyway, I don't like you very much now, so I would rather you put your head up your bum than reply to me.



Feelings mutual Mikey77 I didnt like your forcefull tone requesting I comply with your wishes or explain myself , I had a feeling of being in the Lord Of The Flies ....but I do still have 76 other Mikeys to talk to eh 

Wtf should I HAVE to answer questions on anything to you , why dont you do your own googling am I expected to be your wiki bitch or something 

Im sure you will survive without my views on Jon Benet Ramsey in this thread  and I will just have to find some way of picking myself up now you have broken our long and fullfilling friendship , it will be hard but I'll cope ... somehow  

Goodbye then I was sort of hoping we might be having some sort of Jon Benet Ramsey BBQ seminar get together or something .. oh well cant have it all 

You really think I want to discuss something that annoyed me more than this media frenzied McCann bullshite , now the Ramsey  mother has died there is no point imo pursuing it ,  it has been debated with much hatred over the years and is much to complicated  a case to discuss quickly in a McCann thread , I also dont like discussing parents who do this to thier kids but thats my choice but wont stop me mentioning thier name when I feel like it.......  there is something not quite right with this piccy of the ramsey girl and I hate what they did to her even before the fateful night   just as much as I hate the parents that force thier young kids to go on xfactor..







Antichrist Television Blues ...

http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=olk8feBYHeg


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Aug 9, 2008)

rekon they did it, you can tell just by looking etc..


----------



## bi0boy (Aug 9, 2008)

This one won't stop running. I predict a scandal in 2023 involving murder, Maddy and prominent politician


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 10, 2008)

Weller said:


> Wtf should I HAVE to answer questions on anything to you , why dont you do your own googling am I expected to be your wiki bitch or something



Why post anything here at all then? Everything you have said is probably available somewhere on the net. Put your hot air up your bum, then sit on a barbecue on your own. I would rather not meet you for a get-together because you seem like a horrible, judgemental scroat.


----------



## Weller (Aug 10, 2008)

Mikey77 said:


> Why post anything here at all then? Everything you have said is probably available somewhere on the net. Put your hot air up your bum, then sit on a barbecue on your own. I would rather not meet you for a get-together because you seem like a horrible, judgemental scroat.



Thats a shame coz I'd saved you a nice big sausage 

Do you somehow maybe think that this internet and all the people on it are here just to serve your happiness via your demands 

Input something of your own in the thread rather than just assulting me  playground style  because I  wont bow to your instructions  

Take a look at yourself before you consider others as judgemental ...

Bye then I'll eat the sausage whilst you find your Ramsay argument thread you so wish to take part in it aint ganna happen with me here .


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 10, 2008)

Weller said:


> Bye then I'll eat the sausage whilst you find your Ramsay argument thread you so wish to take part in it aint ganna happen with me here .



Yeah, I thought you sounded like a sausage muncher. Only a reprobate of sausage munching tendancies would spend his time on forums discussing missing kiddie cases from all over the world. Sicko!


----------



## Weller (Aug 10, 2008)

Mikey77 said:


> Yeah, I thought you sounded like a sausage muncher. Only a reprobate of sausage munching tendancies would spend his time on forums discussing missing kiddie cases from all over the world. Sicko!




Then why are you here yourself in this thread requiring details about the Ramsay case , seems to have got your goat for some reason with one quick mention of it ?

Now whos judgemental , its a little bit over the top dont you think that you consider   that all those that eat sausages are reprobates , ped*s or sickos isnt it 

Are you also suggesting that anyone (including all in this thread)  is a sicko if they have discussed any missing kiddie case when that includes  just about everyone thats picked up a paper or watched TV in the past year seeing all this media bullshite  unfortunately there probably isnt many left that havent been forced to discuss it at some time  since May3rd last year despite there being other news happening.. does that make them all sickos too ?

What is it that disturbs you about sausages  anyway , did someone do something nasty to you with a sausage once? or would someone not put the sausage where you wanted them to put it 

Either way there are places you can go to discuss it but a thread about the  McCann family probably isnt the best


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 10, 2008)

Weller said:


> truth is we all have real life experiance


Pity you don't demonstrate that then, isn't it ...


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 10, 2008)

Weller said:


> ... if you really need to cut / explain / discount certain lines  out of a Wiki cut and pasted quote maybe add this knowledge  to the actual wiki page...


What the _fuck_ are you wittering on about, prick?  I've never cut and pasted anything from Wiki-fucking-pedia, encycopedia to the terminally fucking ignorant.  

Perhaps you should take your medication ...


----------



## Weller (Aug 10, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> What the _fuck_ are you wittering on about, prick?  I've never cut and pasted anything from Wiki-fucking-pedia, encycopedia to the terminally fucking ignorant.
> 
> Perhaps you should take your medication ...



BELOW IS THE WIKI QUOTE I POSTED AGAIN ...Bit in red is what you then cut - re-quoted presumably in an attempt to correct or educate me  , I do not control wiki and am not interested in your blinkered nit picking viewpoints that usually turn into playground swearing tantrums if you dont get the last word or fail to convince.

I was merely pointing out to another poster that the news story link posted about "the killer having been found" or "dna ruling the parents out" was very  out of date and that details are on wiki about the Ramseys including many newer links - also that  I personally have no wish to discuss them in a McCann thread  so Fuck you too .

Not very astute are you for a detective  , so have your "Prick" back  do you really think anyone is seriously hurt by your name calling any longer , I usually ignore your posts as I see you as a spoilt child banging his fists on the floor screaming expletives everytime people do not agree with you .
Your constant shouting that every one must be  fucking idiots or on drugs if they dont agree with your posts is very boring and your elevation of yourself to a higher position than anyone else is very much unwarranted  , in my opinion that alone makes me instantly dismiss any of your posts as a worthwhile read for me

Maybe you should quit being so terminally ignorant yourself  , are you still a detective?  do you shout and loose your temper much at work as well like a child that cannot have a biscuit , do they offer anger management or perhaps you should take the  medication you keep suggesting others take or maybe thats one of the reasons you are no longer "serving" .

Just another  out of touch  Net DickTective - one of many but you have  a bigger chip on your shoulder than most  



> On August 16, 2006, 41-year-old John Mark Karr, a former school teacher, was arrested in Bangkok, Thailand on five-year-old child-pornography charges from Sonoma County, California. Authorities reportedly tracked him down using the Internet after he sent e-mails regarding the Ramsey case to Michael Tracey, a journalism professor at the University of Colorado.[10] Once apprehended, he confessed to being with JonBenét when she died, stating that her death was an accident. When asked if he was innocent, he responded, "No."
> 
> However, Karr's DNA did not match that found on JonBenét Ramsey's body. On August 28, 2006, prosecutors announced that no charges would be filed against him for the murder of JonBenét Ramsey.[11][12][13] In early December 2006, Department of Homeland Security officials reported that federal investigators were continuing to explore whether Karr had been a possible accomplice in the killing.
> 
> No evidence has ever come to light that placed the then-married Alabama resident Karr near Boulder during the Christmas 1996 crime. Evidence linking Karr to the killing is highly circumstantial in nature. For instance, handwriting samples taken from Karr were said to match the ransom note.  In particular, his technique for writing the letters E, T and M were described by the media as being very rare.



Have another dig or lambaste me with another of your usual swearing  tantrums if you so wish we both know there is no end to that once you enter one of your disgusting "up on your pedestal" tirades looking down on all those  disagreeing with you as  Fu*cking thickos with no life experiance ... so  I shall not reply to you again .. no point this threads about the McCanns and Maddy not your juvenille outbreaks   or the Ramseys.

Its Sunday go watch another  CSI dvd 

Or maybe do as usual and see how many condesending foul remarks you can add to your next post , its water off a ducks back


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 10, 2008)

Weller said:


> BELOW IS THE WIKI QUOTE I POSTED AGAIN ...Bit in red is what you then cut - re-quoted presumably in an attempt to correct or educate me ...


Oh right ... so you are slagging me off because YOU cut and paste from Wikipedia ... prick.  

And if you actually read what I posted about it, you'd see I was merely pointing out that what was being presented as strong evidence was, perhaps, not so strong at all.  But, hey, you'd fucking know that anyway, being the font of all knowledge about everything, wouldn't you.  

Just fuck off, eh?  



> in my opinion that alone makes me instantly dismiss any of your posts as a worthwhile read for me


Why don't you just fucking do that then, eh?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Aug 10, 2008)

wow  this thread is getting cheery


maddie is the new 9/11


----------



## stavros (Aug 10, 2008)

Shippou-Chan said:


> maddie is the new 9/11



More like Diana reincarnated. Maddie is the missing toddler of peoples' hearts.


----------



## Weller (Aug 10, 2008)




----------



## Dan U (Aug 10, 2008)

she's been in Venezuala and Brussels lately so shes well travelled


----------



## Mikey77 (Aug 10, 2008)

detective-boy said:


> What the _fuck_ are you wittering on about, prick?  I've never cut and pasted anything from Wiki-fucking-pedia, encycopedia to the terminally fucking ignorant.





There's a good wiki article on sausage munchers mind you. They spend a lot of their time on the internet discussing child murders and abductions apparently.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 11, 2008)

After wtching some of those youtube videos I think kate is guilty.
Could be wrong, just my feeling.
I also found the Jonbenet (how exactly do you pronounce that?!) fascinating. Why do I find these child abductions so interesting!I can watch these vids all night. Am I tapped or soemthing.
Also, does Kate McCann ever stop saying 'Ya know, ya knoooowww....'


----------



## stavros (Aug 11, 2008)

The Express has now managed to have her on the front cover every day for a week now, although they're still some way short of their 3 month Marathon of last year.


----------



## fogbat (Aug 11, 2008)

Shippou-Chan said:


> wow  this thread is getting cheery
> 
> 
> maddie is the new 9/11



Holographic tapas bar, an' all


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 11, 2008)

stavros said:


> The Express has now managed to have her on the front cover every day for a week now, although they're still some way short of their 3 month Marathon of last year.



Since they got sued, they're barley trying


----------



## stavros (Aug 11, 2008)

Teaboy said:


> Since they got sued, they're barley trying



Maybe we should sue them for false advertising, in putting "newspaper" above their title.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Aug 11, 2008)

stavros said:


> Maybe we should sue them for false advertising, in putting "newspaper" above their title.



That's nothing, the expresses own tagline reads "The Worlds Greatest Newspaper". You must at least be able to sue them for that.


----------



## Giles (Aug 12, 2008)

Sugarmouse said:


> After wtching some of those youtube videos I think kate is guilty.
> Could be wrong, just my feeling.
> I also found the Jonbenet (how exactly do you pronounce that?!) fascinating. Why do I find these child abductions so interesting!I can watch these vids all night. Am I tapped or soemthing.
> Also, does Kate McCann ever stop saying 'Ya know, ya knoooowww....'



Mrs McCann, recently:







Giles..


----------



## pk (Aug 12, 2008)

Maybe I've missed some stunning piece of fabricated evidence, but I have seen nothing to indicate guilt on the part of the McCanns at all, all I see is a destroyed family looking for their daughter.

And a corrupt and ignorant fat Portugese cop who fucked up the investigation.


----------



## g force (Aug 12, 2008)

And a money-grabbing PR spin doctor being employed by the family....presumably paid for by the Maddie fund.


----------



## Gingerman (Aug 12, 2008)

And wankers wallowing in some-one elses misery.


----------



## pk (Aug 12, 2008)

Gingerman said:


> And wankers wallowing in some-one elses misery.



Yup, possibly the ugliest aspect of the whole sorry affair, apart from the abduction itself...

The Daily Express must love it when a kid goes missing. Bunch of cunts. Glad they got sued.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 12, 2008)

Giles said:


> Mrs McCann, recently:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was going put that on a 'funny pic' thread on another forum I go on.then I thought I will likely get slated!!!


----------



## editor (Aug 12, 2008)

Sugarmouse said:


> After wtching some of those youtube videos I think kate is guilty.





pk said:


> Maybe I've missed some stunning piece of fabricated evidence, but I have seen nothing to indicate guilt on the part of the McCanns at all, all I see is a destroyed family looking for their daughter.


As far as I can see, there's absolutely no evidence to indicate their involvement in the disappearance of their daughter.

Apart from Detective Inspector Sugarmouse's expert analysis of YouTube videos, of course.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 12, 2008)

editor said:


> As far as I can see, there's absolutely no evidence to indicate their involvement in the disappearance of their daughter.
> 
> Apart from Detective Inspector Sugarmouse's expert analysis of YouTube videos, of course.



I is sure allowed to give an opinion aren't I.
I hadn't followed the story before,it was my first experience of it so to speak.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 12, 2008)

Sugarmouse said:


> I is sure allowed to give an opinion aren't I.
> I hadn't followed the story before,it was my first experience of it so to speak.



No offence, but I hope you're never on a jury if I'm in court.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 12, 2008)

_angel_ said:


> No offence, but I hope you're never on a jury if I'm in court.



Unlikely


----------



## The Redeemer (Aug 18, 2008)

Don't get me started on this. It makes me really angry that one girl can get all this attention when there are hundreds of other abducted children that get none at all. No one really cares a shit about Madeline. People just use it as a way to proclaim how grand they are for caring for a little girl. The tabloids are loving it. The whole country is actually thriving on it. If you ask me, the public's attitude is almost as disgusting as whatever whoever talk her did to her. And you can count on the fact that he killed her. he probably felt he had no choice.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 18, 2008)

you are an oddball. Somehow I don't find the publics attitude as disgusting as you. Oh its more than a bit hypocritical and etc but it's hardly as bad as you imply..


----------



## The Redeemer (Aug 18, 2008)

Perhaps disgusting is not the right word. But I dn't think the witch hunt is a good idea. Wouldn't it be a better idea to offer an amnesty to the person who took her if he returned her alive? I bet that's never even been considered because the main concern of the public is that the sick person who did this gets what he deserves. They don't really care about Madeline.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 18, 2008)

The Redeemer said:


> The whole country is actually thriving on it. If you ask me, the public's attitude is almost as disgusting as whatever whoever talk her did to her. And you can count on the fact that he killed her. he probably felt he had no choice.



Errr the whole country is thriving on it. Get a grip. Of course this is a way of flogging newspapers, but to suggest the whole of the country is 'thriving ' on it is just plain silly.


----------



## The Redeemer (Aug 18, 2008)

Yes, ok. I went a little over the top. I just don't like the way people pretend to care when they really don't give a damn.


----------



## Sugarmouse (Aug 18, 2008)

I  agree about it being madness how much publicity this case has got.
I think it fascinates me from all angles, from a sociological /media theory point of view...but then again so does every other similar story.
I dont pretend to care at all..guess if i did i wouldnt have found that 'mrs mccan' picture so funny


----------



## T & P (Sep 5, 2008)

The Scum has just revealed some video footage of the police hounds that "framed" the McCanns. Apparently they howl when they find blood or the scent of death.

Below is one such hound, right next to their car.

Is it me or does that look like a Disney cartoon character? 









The full, shocking story


----------



## Vintage Paw (Sep 5, 2008)

There's this case in the US at the moment where a little girl has gone missing and the mother is in prison on suspicion of doing it. Anyway, apparently MD Michael Baden (of Forensic TV fame) has been talking about the presence of large amounts of chloroform in her car. He said it's often known as party chloroform, in that parents often dose their kids up on it if they want to go out, but because it's so difficult to dose correctly the kids sometimes die.








I'm just sayin'


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Sep 5, 2008)

DotCommunist said:


> you are an oddball. Somehow I don't find the publics attitude as disgusting as you. Oh its more than a bit hypocritical and etc but it's hardly as bad as you imply..



yeah but your probably a pedo innit


----------



## bi0boy (May 22, 2009)

A Sex Convict Man Stayed In A Spanish Town 2007 It Must Be Him!!!!!!!!1!


----------



## T & P (May 22, 2009)

That photo album on the Sky website is pretty pathetic- as is the entire coverage of the case from the beginning, as it happens.

Does Sky still pretend to be a serious News broadcaster? It might as well be rebranded The Sun on the Telly Channel.


----------



## joustmaster (May 22, 2009)

bi0boy said:


> A Sex Convict Man Stayed In A Spanish Town 2007 It Must Be Him!!!!!!!!1!


can't be him, he has lips.


----------



## the button (May 22, 2009)

At least he's British. British paedophiles -- best in the world.


----------



## Chairman Meow (May 22, 2009)

the button said:


> At least he's British. British paedophiles -- best in the world.



Belgian shurely?


----------



## IC3D (May 22, 2009)

T & P said:


> That photo album on the Sky website is pretty pathetic- as is the entire coverage of the case from the beginning, as it happens.
> 
> Does Sky still pretend to be a serious News broadcaster? It might as well be rebranded The Sun on the Telly Channel.



The interactive 3d Fritzl house for example


----------



## frogwoman (May 23, 2009)

ffs who cares lol? tbh im sick to death of hearing about this, NOBODY cares any more! i mean its terrible she went missing and everything but this is so stupid ...


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jul 24, 2009)

So she died of Swine Flu and the parents covered it up, with the help of Michael Jackson.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 24, 2009)

bouncer_the_dog said:


> So she died of Swine Flu and the parents covered it up, with the help of Michael Jackson.



It is suspicious that maddie disappeared, then later on Michael Jackson died, and also that Swine Flu happened.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jul 24, 2009)

Dillinger4 said:


> It is suspicious that maddie disappeared, then later on Michael Jackson died, and also that Swine Flu happened.



OMG.. yeah


----------



## kyser_soze (Jul 24, 2009)

> Does Sky still pretend to be a serious News broadcaster?



When did this pretending happen?

It's nearly summer, so unless the MJ stories drag out over the summer, be prepared for Return of Maddie, or some other little kid being kidnapped...


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 24, 2009)

Return of Maddie sounds like a zombie movie


----------



## christonabike (Jul 24, 2009)

> or some other little kid being kidnapped...



You know too much

Rings Sky to tell........


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 24, 2009)

CNN just announced they are starting excavations at the Neverland ranch


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 24, 2009)

What the fuck?


----------



## thchep (Jul 25, 2009)

type eddie keela 5a into youtube to see cadaver dog indicating a corpse was present ni the mcannns flat...they know exactly what happened which is why they hired the shitiest detectives in spain to help find her...i hope the pair of them have sleepless nights and never find peace again.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 6, 2009)

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/madeleine+mccann+new+efit+appeal+/3298257

been a while.


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 6, 2009)

B0B2oo9 said:


> http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/madeleine+mccann+new+efit+appeal+/3298257
> 
> been a while.


Indeed.  Have been trying to think what the "strictly operational reasons" there may be why they cannot even give a suggestion of what this woman is meant to have said to the witness ...


----------



## T & P (Aug 6, 2009)

That woman is as much of a Victoria Beckham lookalike as my auntie...


----------



## detective-boy (Aug 7, 2009)

T & P said:


> That woman is as much of a Victoria Beckham lookalike as my auntie...


* Rings The Sun newsdesk ("Don't worry about the cost, we'll ring you straight back ...") with hot Victoria Beckham lookalike aunt story immediately *


----------



## jakejb79 (Aug 7, 2009)

I reckon they are saying she looks like Victoria Beckham, so her parents could cast her in a re enactment, but i must say it seems to me her parents really want to be famous.


----------



## T & P (Aug 7, 2009)

"Maddie: The Movie". Featuring Clive Owen and Keira Knightley as the McCanns, and Victoria Beckham as the evil kidnapper.

Can't wait...


----------



## T & P (Oct 21, 2009)

The madness that will never end, it seems...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/8317910.stm


----------



## Corax (Oct 21, 2009)

T & P said:


> The madness that will never end, it seems...
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/8317910.stm



Until they 'fess up.

One word: cadavarine.


----------



## deadringer (Oct 21, 2009)

could become a collectors item..........


----------



## chico enrico (Oct 21, 2009)

deadringer said:


> could become a collectors item..........



or an 'identifying signifier' amongst connoisseurs of _La Nouvelle Beaujolais._


----------



## john x (Oct 21, 2009)

T & P said:


> The madness that will never end, it seems...



Not sure it is madness. 

Her family were Everton fans and the club is playing in Portugal, where she allegedly disappeared

Better than sticking up posters everywhere telling people to look in their sheds.

john x


----------



## Zabo (Oct 21, 2009)

Give it a few more years and it will be made into an Opera.


----------



## Jessiedog (Oct 21, 2009)

Zabo said:


> Give it a few more years and it will be made into an Opera.



I think they've already been on Oprah, haven't they?





Woof


----------



## stavros (Oct 21, 2009)

T & P said:


> "Maddie: The Movie". Featuring... Victoria Beckham as the evil kidnapper.
> 
> Can't wait...



I was thinking Angelina Jolie or Madonna. They collect small children, and Portugal's not far from Africa.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 21, 2009)

T & P said:


> "Maddie: The Movie". Featuring Clive Owen and Keira Knightley as the McCanns, and Victoria Beckham as the evil kidnapper.
> 
> Can't wait...



Directed by Roman Polanski


----------



## stavros (Oct 21, 2009)

Soundtrack featuring Jerry Lee Lewis, R Kelly, Michael Jackson and Gary Glitter.


----------



## deadringer (Oct 21, 2009)

stavros said:


> Soundtrack featuring Jerry Lee Lewis, R Kelly, Michael Jackson and Gary Glitter.



produced by bill wyman....


----------



## deadringer (Oct 21, 2009)

pete townsend is 'researching' for the book........


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 21, 2009)

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor is fapping over the DVD cover.


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Oct 22, 2009)

deadringer said:


> could become a collectors item..........



I found myself wondering how long it would be before they start appearing on eBay


----------



## Sadken (Oct 22, 2009)

How did she end up supporting Everton?


----------



## stavros (Oct 24, 2009)

Chris Langham could be in the film too.

On this theme, why hasn't there been a decent satire on corpse worshipping? Maddie would be a prime target, as would Jacko, Jade Goody, any number of musicians, and the Queen of Dead People's Hearts, Diana. It would be ripe for a Morris/Iannucci piss-take.


----------



## claphamboy (Oct 24, 2009)

The truth is out there......









blonde, blue eyed......









perfect for.......


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 24, 2009)

stavros said:


> Chris Langham could be in the film too.
> 
> On this theme, why hasn't there been a decent satire on corpse worshipping?



Weekend at Bernie's wasn't good enough for you?


----------



## stavros (Oct 25, 2009)

Idris2002 said:


> Weekend at Bernie's wasn't good enough for you?



Not seen it. Reading the blurb, I was thinking of something more modern, specifically looking at the British tabloid slant.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 14, 2010)

sorry for the link, but it's the first story i found when looking for stuff about the new libel court case or some shit...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...-snatch-story-fairytale-libel-trial-told.html


----------



## T & P (Jan 14, 2010)

I see the Express has been publishing big-font front page headlines reporting the allegations the copper in question made. Payback for the libel damages it had to pay last year?


----------



## john x (Jan 14, 2010)

B0B2oo9 said:


> sorry for the link, but it's the first story i found when looking for stuff about the new libel court case or some shit...
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...-snatch-story-fairytale-libel-trial-told.html








I know it's been nearly three years now, but she could try to look a bit more interested. 

john x


----------



## T & P (Jan 14, 2010)

john x said:


> I know it's been nearly three years now, but she could try to look a bit more interested.
> 
> john x


 And he's struggling to contain a yawn.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2010)

That Tapas is heavy on the stomach, I know I've felt the need for a lie down after feasting on it with four of my bredrins


----------



## subversplat (Jan 15, 2010)

b3ta has outdone itself this week...

http://www.madeleinecountdown.com/

Oh my.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 15, 2010)

absolutely no shame whatsover over at b3ta


----------



## FoxyRed (Jan 15, 2010)

subversplat said:


> b3ta has outdone itself this week...
> 
> http://www.madeleinecountdown.com/
> 
> Oh my.



That is seriously disgusting. 


I really do feel sorry for these two. They will never be able to stop looking for her. Imagine how you would feel in their position? They left their children in the apartment and their child allegedly got taken, they will have to live with that guilt for the rest of their lives. So publicly, they probably feel like they can never give up to show the world that they are good parents and it was a mistake. 

I do hope they find her but somehow I think she is dead by now. Too much media exposure for the kidnappers to take. Would be like running around with a hot potato in your hands everyday.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 15, 2010)

Vixen said:


> *That is seriously disgusting. *
> 
> 
> I really do feel sorry for these two. They will never be able to stop looking for her. Imagine how you would feel in their position? They left their children in the apartment and their child allegedly got taken, they will have to live with that guilt for the rest of their lives. So publicly, they probably feel like they can never give up to show the world that they are good parents and it was a mistake.
> ...



Isn't it


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 15, 2010)

Even better than the Charlotte Church countdown 

Did anyone do one for Emma thingy from Harry Potter?


----------



## subversplat (Jan 15, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> Even better than the Charlotte Church countdown
> 
> Did anyone do one for Emma thingy from Harry Potter?


Googling "Emma Watson Countdown" found this: http://www.redpac.com/legality/



> The next young hottie you have no chance with is...



Well at least they're under no illusions!


----------



## joustmaster (Jan 15, 2010)

was there any evidence at all that she was taken?
i can't remember.


----------



## subversplat (Jan 15, 2010)

joustmaster said:


> was there any evidence at all that she was taken?
> i can't remember.


Well, she's not there, for starters....


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 19, 2010)

DotCommunist said:


> absolutely no shame whatsover over at b3ta



None here tbf.


----------



## Giles (Feb 19, 2010)

Some people are properly twisted. FFS!

Giles..


----------



## T & P (Mar 4, 2010)

Oh dear dear dear...


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 4, 2010)

T & P said:


>


She's not aged a day ... which is rather unfortunate, as she should have done ...


----------



## cutandsplice (Mar 5, 2010)

detective-boy said:


> She's not aged a day ... which is rather unfortunate, as she should have done ...


Maybe the aliens put her in stasis?


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 6, 2010)

Saw some shite on this in the Sun yesterday (found abandoned on a train - I long ago promised _never_ to give Murdoch a single penny.) ... as they are (marginally) more intelligent that the Star they had noticed this slight problem and helpfully printed a "time aged" image of Maddie which looked spookily like (a) the non-time aged Maddie and (b) the image of "Maddie" in the TV show still ... but which looked nothing like the "time-aged Maddie" images they've been peddling previously ...


----------



## 5t3IIa (Mar 6, 2010)

FoxyRed said:


> That is seriously disgusting.
> 
> 
> I really do feel sorry for these two. They will never be able to stop looking for her. Imagine how you would feel in their position? They left their children in the apartment and their child allegedly got taken, they will have to live with that guilt for the rest of their lives. So publicly, they probably feel like they can never give up to show the world that they are good parents and it was a mistake.
> ...



Do you know that 'alledgedly taken' means you're saying that they 'took' her?


----------



## detective-boy (Mar 6, 2010)

5t3IIa said:


> Do you know that 'alledgedly taken' means you're saying that they 'took' her?


No it doesn't.

It means that there is no definitive evidence as to what happened, to the point where someone would be justified in making an assertion to any sort of level of provability (civil (balance of probabilities) or criminal (beyond all reasonable doubt)).

"Allegedly" simply acknowledges that there is there is nothing to _prove_ that there were any abductors involved any more than there is to prove any other alternative (i.e. that she wandered off on her own, that she came to some harm whilst unattended and her death was covered up or that she was deliberately harmed by her parents).  Just because you point out that one particular explanation has not been proved, it does not mean that any other one has been.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 11, 2012)

Happens to the best of us...

*David Cameron's daughter Nancy left behind at pub*


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18391663


----------



## Kanda (Jun 11, 2012)

Yet another U Turn by Cameron...


----------



## nastybobby (Jun 11, 2012)

Camerons' = 'Troubled Family'. Social Services need to become involved ASAP!


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 12, 2012)

Ah, my most successful thread rears its contentious head once again. 

2007 - good times.

(apart from the Madeleine thing obviously....)


----------



## shygirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Report on new developments on BBC news just managed to completely omit that the McCanns left their children alone while they were out dining.  You simply could not imagine this kind of sympathetic coverage if the parents had been w/c.  Yeah, the point has been made millions of times, but each time it happens, it makes me fucking sick.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

The 'timeline' seems to have changed too?  

If it ever turns out the Mcann couple did this after all the stuff that has gone there will be carnage. I don't know what happened but it is an awful business.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 13, 2013)

I genuinely can't believe grown adults (aside from the McCanns) still pander to the notion that this case is solveable/about a living person/still newsworthy.

It really does boggle the mind.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 13, 2013)

Is it just me, or does anyone else experience feelings of guilt arising from the almost complete empathy failure those parents arouse when on the telly?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Did the family EVER receive a visit from social services in their home town?  If not, why the fuck not?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 13, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Is it just me, or does anyone else experience feelings of guilt arising from the almost complete empathy failure those parents arouse when on the telly?


 
I really want to believe them.  I sometimes wonder if my resentment of the privileges afforded to the m/classes in situations where their w/c counterparts would be hung out to dry has some bearing on how I view this case.  But surely, they can't be lying, they're still fighting to find out what happened after all this time?  If they were guilty, wouldn't they just want to let things lie?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

The whole thing is shit. I would wager the Portuguese tourist boards advertising spend in the UK had dropped somewhat. 

There was parental neglect which seems to have been glossed over. Dr David Payne's comment is awkward reading at best. The sniffer dog and timeline thing is really odd. Not saying the parents did it but for many (especially the media) they seem to be held up as battling angels. 

There is a racist, classist and sexist theme when children go missing and a white, blonde, upper middle class girl is top billing for the media for sure. 

I wonder how much money has been donated and spent since she went missing. If she is found and the parents are innocent (of the murder not the neglect) then I am sure it is worth it.


----------



## purenarcotic (Oct 13, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Did the family EVER receive a visit from social services in their home town?  If not, why the fuck not?



Iirc, they did.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

shygirl said:
			
		

> Did the family EVER receive a visit from social services in their home town?  If not, why the fuck not?



I can't recall. Any sources anyone?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 13, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> Iirc, they did.


 
Its' really odd that they left their twin babies to go to see the Pope.  If I had lost a child, you'd have to tear me from the remaining two.  Bizarre.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

Portugal criminal code (131) covers neglect/abandonment. 

It is hard to establish the UK social services position. The kids were left totally alone in another country, so not a measure of them as parents over years in the UK. 

Social services apparently did visit them in the UK but made no statement. There is stuff on the Web from various people but of course social services can't/shouldn't get involved in public media mudslinging. 

They still have children in their care so I doubt serious parent fail was found. No doubt the services have a close watch on them along with a lot of people.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

shygirl said:
			
		

> Its' really odd that they left their twin babies to go to see the Pope.  If I had lost a child, you'd have to tear me from the remaining two.  Bizarre.



I am very irresponsible as a human being. Never kept that a secret for a moment. But even I would never ever have done what they did, it was fucking selfish and lazy. Would not do it in the UK with neighbours I knew, let alone abroad.


----------



## twentythreedom (Oct 13, 2013)

Portugese plod blatantly think the parents were somehow involved


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

twentythreedom said:
			
		

> Portugese plod blatantly think the parents were somehow involved



If (and I would not post it) a poll was started on U75 asking... 

1. They did not kill her
2. They did kill her

How would the % split based on the evidence/statements available?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 13, 2013)

Badgers said:


> I am very irresponsible as a human being. Never kept that a secret for a moment. But even I would never ever have done what they did, it was fucking selfish and lazy. Would not do it in the UK with neighbours I knew, let alone abroad.



They left the twins with McCann's sister and her husband.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

Spymaster said:
			
		

> They left the twins with McCann's sister and her husband.



Really?


----------



## tar1984 (Oct 13, 2013)

twentythreedom said:


> Portugese plod blatantly think the parents were somehow involved



There is a documentary on youtube with the original lead detective, who was thrown off the case (he thinks for political reasons).  

He reckons they are guilty as sin.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2013)

Sorry if I have missed some facts Spy. I don't have a telly or read papers. 

My understanding is the group of (9?) adults went out for dinner in a place 50 yards away and were supposed to take turns checking back on children.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 13, 2013)

Badgers said:


> Sorry if I have missed some facts Spy. I don't have a telly or read papers.
> 
> My understanding is the group of (9?) adults went out for dinner in a place 50 yards away and were supposed to take turns checking back on children.



Ah, no, I think you're right about that. I thought you were responding to Shygirl's post regarding their trip to see the pope.



> They have left their two-year-old twins in the Algarve with Mr McCann's sister, Trish Cameron, and her husband Sandy, deciding they were too young to take on the trip to Italy.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6701819.stm


----------



## Badgers (Oct 14, 2013)

Yeah. No worries. To be honest it is more selfish/stupid than real neglect in my eyes. Parents can't watch children every minute of the day and nor should they. I just think I would have planned around my children if they were with me? Is that a big ask of them?


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Its' really odd that they left their twin babies to go to see the Pope.  If I had lost a child, you'd have to tear me from the remaining two.  Bizarre.



That's a bit glib if you don't mind me saying. If I'd lost one of my kids I'd have done ANYTHING to have got it back, including going to meet the Pope for the extra publicity it might bring. Their other kids were perfectly safe.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Badgers said:


> Yeah. No worries. To be honest it is more selfish/stupid than real neglect in my eyes. Parents can't watch children every minute of the day and nor should they. I just think I would have planned around my children if they were with me? Is that a big ask of them?



No, I don't think so. I think I'd probably agree with the selfish/stupid thing and they have to live with that. But that aside, assuming the McCann's weren't involved in their daughters disappearance (innocent unless proven guilty and all that), we're still talking about a family who've been through the most heartbreaking experience imaginable, losing a child, and I find the class based shit that folk like Shygirl tag to this really shabby.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:
			
		

> That's a bit glib if you don't mind me saying. If I'd lost one of my kids I'd have done ANYTHING to have got it back, including going to meet the Pope for the extra publicity it might bring. Their other kids were perfectly safe.



If my kid went missing I would keep myself at least 100 miles from the Pope at all times.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> That's a bit glib if you don't mind me saying. If I'd lost one of my kids I'd have done ANYTHING to have got it back, including going to meet the Pope for the extra publicity it might bring. Their other kids were perfectly safe.



It's more than glib, it's a mean-spirited, agenda laden, load of old pish.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> That's a bit glib if you don't mind me saying. If I'd lost one of my kids I'd have done ANYTHING to have got it back, including going to meet the Pope for the extra publicity it might bring. Their other kids were perfectly safe.


 
It isn't glib.  One of your children disappears, you're not gonna leave the others for more than a few hours so soon if her disappearance.  As a mum, I simply know I could not bear to be parted from the remaining children.  Its a very primitive, instinctive thing.  I was very surprised when they flew off to Rome.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Badgers said:


> If my kid went missing I would keep myself at least 100 miles from the Pope at all times.



I dunno. Given the track records of some of their clerics, the Vatican might not be a bad place to look for abducted kids.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

her





Spymaster said:


> No, I don't think so. I think I'd probably agree with the selfish/stupid thing and they have to live with that. But that aside, assuming the McCann's weren't involved in their daughters disappearance (innocent unless proven guilty and all that), we're still talking about a family who've been through the most heartbreaking experience imaginable, losing a child, and I find the class based shit that folk like Shygirl tag to this really shabby.


 
I've been honest in admitting that the class element of the media handling of this case, which isn't shit, as you say, may have influenced me. I think its rather nasty of you to say that my posts are shabby.   I want to believe this is a genuine abduction case.  But there  are anomalies which raise questions for me.  What we're doing here is exploring some of these issues.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

What hurts me too is that Maddie had asked why her parents hadn't come for them the previous night when they (the children) were crying.  As a mother, if I had made the mistake once of leaving my children, only to be told by them that they were upset, I couldn't have done it the very next night.  Of course, this doesn't mean that they are guilty of anything but neglect, but it still upsets me to think of those kids left alone.   My friend once came to the pub with me, and when we got back to hers, her child was wondering around outside in a very distressed state.   I didn't know she'd left him alone, and was really upset for the child.  I don't think she ever did it again.


----------



## Piston (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> What hurts me too is that Maddie had asked why her parents hadn't come for them the previous night when they (the children) were crying.  As a mother, if I had made the mistake once of leaving my children, only to be told by them that they were upset, I couldn't have done it the very next night.  Of course, this doesn't mean that they are guilty of anything but neglect, but it still upsets me to think of those kids left alone.   My friend once came to the pub with me, and when we got back to hers, her child was wondering around outside in a very distressed state.   I didn't know she'd left him alone, and was really upset for the child.  I don't think she ever did it again.



I think they only think of themselves. Neither of them have ever showed any real emotion about the whole thing.

I won't be bothering to watch Crimewatch this time. I'm not really in to fiction.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)




----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 14, 2013)

A lot of people seem to have it in for the McCanns and for no rational reason. They clearly made a catastrophic mistake at the onset, but parents are always having to make decisions about their children's safety and without knowing the full situation at the time, there's nothing to say that they acted any more irresponsibly than anyone else. But for them that one decision has destroyed their lives and they and they will have to carry that forever.

I can't think of a worse nightmare than the one they've been through and I wouldn't criticise anything they've done subsequently to keep Madeleine's disappearance in the public eye. These whispers and and little digs behind their backs are both unfair pointless.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> no rational reason



You think there is no cause for suspicion to be directed at them?


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> I can't think of a worse nightmare than the one they've been through and I wouldn't criticise anything they've done subsequently to keep Madeleine's disappearance in the public eye. These whispers and and little digs behind their backs are both unfair pointless.


 
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect



> In an interview with Crimewatch, Kate McCann said: "We are not the ones that have done something wrong here. It's the person who has gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family."


 
This is the reason why so many people can't take to the McCann's.  Leaving kids that young alone is just not on and they seem utterly unapologetic about it.


----------



## Giles (Oct 14, 2013)

I don't get why people imagine that they would kill their own kid. 

They may have been irresponsible to leave their kids on their own, but why all this speculation that they killed her themselves? 

Giles


----------



## ddraig (Oct 14, 2013)

because that never happens does it?
and who is saying that here anyway?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

Johnny Vodka said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect
> 
> 
> 
> This is the reason why so many people can't take to the McCann's.  Leaving kids that young alone is just not on and they seem utterly unapologetic about it.


 Yes. Last night I was struggling to put my finger on why I had never reacted empathetically to the McCann's innumerable media appearances, but you've hit the nail on the head there; their apparent inability to express remorse for their mistake does seem somehow un-natural.

As for the on-going comment about the 'class' angle; if the resort had been on the costas and the restaurant had been McDs etc. I do think the (scum) media agenda would have been quite different.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> I don't get why people imagine that they would kill their own kid.
> 
> They may have been irresponsible to leave their kids on their own, but why all this speculation that they killed her themselves?
> 
> Giles



It's not that people think they killed her, it's the lack of contrition mixed with the constant, and ultimately pointless, plugging of it in the public eye that perhaps encourages people to have little sympathy with them.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 14, 2013)

Every time I go on holiday with friends, I leave my son asleep inside the building while I eat dinner outside with the other adults.
Every time I go camping, he's asleep on his own inside the tent. As are all the other children on the campsite. It's what people do on holiday. 

Would I do that if I were in an apartment complex? I think I probably wouldn't but I can't say, hand on heart, with all my friends saying _Oh the children will be FINE_ that I wouldn't have done it in the days before she was abducted.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

ddraig said:


> because that never happens does it?
> and who is saying that here anyway?




me, guilty as sin imo


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> me, guilty as sin imo



All the medics I know through my family say that they think the parents did it. When I press them, and ask if there's some telling detail that points the finger in their direction, though, they can't come up with one. . .


----------



## susie12 (Oct 14, 2013)

I don't think they murdered her but that there was an accident which they covered up.


----------



## rioted (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> me, guilty as sin imo


you, guilty as sin imo

and a nasty little shit to boot imo


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> It's not that people think they killed her, it's the lack of contrition mixed with the constant, and ultimately pointless, plugging of it in the public eye that perhaps encourages people to have little sympathy with them.



Why is the plugging pointless? If your kid had vanished wouldn't you do absolutely everything in your power to keep the issue in the public eye?says, 

And "lack of contrition"about leaving the kids alone? That must haunt them every day of their lives. They don't need to be on tv in sackcloth and ashes. As Trashie says, people leave kids alone sometimes, this was the 1 in a million time something went wrong. And they're being punished for that mistake in the cruelest way imaginable.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 14, 2013)

Badgers said:


> You think there is no cause for suspicion to be directed at them?


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Every time I go on holiday with friends, I leave my son asleep inside the building while I eat dinner outside with the other adults.
> Every time I go camping, he's asleep on his own inside the tent. As are all the other children on the campsite. It's what people do on holiday.
> 
> Would I do that if I were in an apartment complex? I think I probably wouldn't but I can't say, hand on heart, with all my friends saying _Oh the children will be FINE_ that I wouldn't have done it in the days before she was abducted.


 
If the kids know where to find the parents when they wake up it's not such a problem. "I'll be outside eating dinner on the veranda with mummy if you need us dear".

Going down the road to a bar leaving the kids with no way to get to you if they wake up and have problems is a different kettle of fish.

I remember waking up as a kid once to be comforted by a B&B owner when my dad had gone AWOL and it was deeply distressing. I might easily have wandered out onto the street and been done away with.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> I don't think they murdered her but that there was an accident which they covered up.


 
Has anyone read about the Smith family from Ireland?  They walked past a man carrying a child through the town, but didn't think anything of it.  Following their return to Ireland, they watched the 10 pm news and were startled when they saw Gerry McCann leaving the aeroplane carrying one of the children, as he fitted their recollection of the man they saw that night.  They immediately contacted Leicestshire police to give a statement, and also flew back to Portugal to give statements there.  Check it out.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Every time I go on holiday with friends, I leave my son asleep inside the building while I eat dinner outside with the other adults.
> Every time I go camping, he's asleep on his own inside the tent. As are all the other children on the campsite. It's what people do on holiday.



You and pretty much every parent I know of.

They've made an error of judgement of the kind that many parents make daily and are having to deal with thermonuclear consequences as well as inverted class bigots who don't like them because they're relatively wealthy doctors, or because they seem too composed and don't publicly self-flagellate enough to be genuine victims.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> me, guilty as sin imo



Come on then. Why?

What evidence draws you to this conclusion?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> As for the on-going comment about the 'class' angle; if the resort had been on the costas and the restaurant had been McDs etc. I do think the (scum) media agenda would have been quite different.


 
I think that's bollocks.

The media didn't attack April Jones's mother for allowing her 5 year old to roam her estate at night.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> I don't think they murdered her but that there was an accident which they covered up.



What evidence draws you to this conclusion?


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Has anyone read about the Smith family from Ireland?  They walked past a man carrying a child through the town, but didn't think anything of it.  Following their return to Ireland, they watched the 10 pm news and were startled when they saw Gerry McCann leaving the aeroplane carrying one of the children, as he fitted their recollection of the man they saw that night.  They immediately contacted Leicestshire police to give a statement, and also flew back to Portugal to give statements there.  Check it out.


 
Maybe he went to sell her to the gypsies?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Come on then. Why?
> 
> What evidence draws you to this conclusion?




Gerry looks like he did it.


this is why I am unsuited for jury service though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Why is the plugging pointless? If your kid had vanished wouldn't you do absolutely everything in your power to keep the issue in the public eye?


 
If it happened to me, you wouldn't be able to open a paper or turn on the telly without seeing me plugging away.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Check it out.



How about some links?


----------



## susie12 (Oct 14, 2013)

> What evidence draws you to this conclusion?



Plainly there is not enough evidence for charges, but the film of the dogs searching the apartment and car gave me pause for thought and I also think the attitude of both of them is odd and has been all the way through.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think that's bollocks.
> 
> The media didn't attack April Jones's mother for allowing her 5 year old to roam her estate at night.



Fair enough, but I think the media 'climate' has changed somewhat over the intervening 6 years. But this comes down to opinions, speculation and perception, doesn't it?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Maybe he went to sell her to the gypsies?


 
Silly comment.  If anything untoward has happened, and I hope it hasn't, then I think the cover up scenario is the most likely.  If those children had been sedated, the parents would not wish for that to come out.  It seems ridiculous typing it, but who would have imagined that Hazel would murder and then hide his partner's grand-daughter's body in the attic?  Or, indeed, any of the murders carried out by close relatives?  Its anathema to even think these things.  Those who are critical of any questioning of the account given by this family need to ask themselves if they felt similarly when Tia Sharp was said to be missing. Many people suspected Hazel from the start.  Were they open to a barrage of criticism and ridicule for this?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> As for the on-going comment about the 'class' angle; if the resort had been on the costas and the restaurant had been McDs etc. I do think the (scum) media agenda would have been quite different.



Nonsense.

Praia de Luz is a modest resort on the Algarve that's long been a favourite of British families. It's not posh at all.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> I don't think they murdered her but that there was an accident which they covered up.


 
Why would they do that though?


----------



## susie12 (Oct 14, 2013)

> Why would they do that though?



Panic, fear, not wanting to lose their careers as doctors.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If it happened to me, you wouldn't be able to open a paper or turn on the telly without seeing me plugging away.



For 7 years? Reopened cases, police jollys to the Algarve (who must know they're on to a loser), spending your whole life playing a constant game with the media (who have form for hacking your phone)?

At what point does it become too much?

*At this point I'm probably sounding like an emotional fascist - it's merely an opinion of what I'd (think) I'd do, and my disbelief that this has gone on for so long.

If I hear "Police want to speak to a local Cabbie that saw a dodgy looking man wrestle a small blond screaming girl through the next town though only just thought of it as relevant...Cameron to send the entire Met over to investigate" again I think I will punch my TV.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> How about some links?


 
Will try to do this later, as not great with stuff like that, and have to get ready for work now.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> Plainly there is not enough evidence for charges, but the film of the dogs searching the apartment and car gave me pause for thought and I also think the attitude of both of them is odd and has been all the way through.



So because the car and apartment was searched, you know .... for a missing kid, that's suspicious? And again with the "attitude" thing. 

Fuck me, it's good to see trial by media alive and well.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Has anyone read about the Smith family from Ireland?  They walked past a man carrying a child through the town, but didn't think anything of it.  Following their return to Ireland, they watched the 10 pm news and were startled when they saw Gerry McCann leaving the aeroplane carrying one of the children, as he fitted their recollection of the man they saw that night.  They immediately contacted Leicestshire police to give a statement, and also flew back to Portugal to give statements there.  Check it out.



That's a very telling detail. But I could see a competent lawyer demolishing it under cross-examination? It was dark - then when you watched the 10 pm news it was months later (I think that's right) - can you really be sure the man you saw was Mr. McCann, Mr. Smith?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> For 7 years? Reopened cases, police jollys to the Algarve (who must know they're on to a loser), spending your whole life playing a constant game with the media (who have form for hacking your phone)?


 
Damn right I would




			
				Ted Strike said:
			
		

> At what point does it become too much?


 
The day I die.




			
				Ted Strike said:
			
		

> *At this point I'm probably sounding like an emotional fascist - it's merely an opinion of what I'd (think) I'd do, and my disbelief that this has gone on for so long.


 
Really hate to use this line, but do you have kids?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> For 7 years? Reopened cases, police jollys to the Algarve (who must know they're on to a loser), spending your whole life playing a constant game with the media (who have form for hacking your phone)?
> 
> At what point does it become too much?
> 
> ...



in fairness, when discussing this the other night both me and the person to whom I was speaking concluded that without a body you'd probably neve let go of a spark of hope


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> If those children had been sedated ....



Is there even a reasonable suspicion of this, apart from the fact that the parents are doctors?


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> That's a very telling detail. But I could see a competent lawyer demolishing it under cross-examination? It was dark - then when you watched the 10 pm news it was months later (I think that's right) - can you really be sure the man you saw was Mr. McCann, Mr. Smith?


 
Exactly. If they "didn't think anything of it" at the time they can't be expected to remember his face.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Is there even a reasonable suspicion of this, apart from the fact that the parents are doctors?



I remember it as being widely reported as fact at the time.


----------



## susie12 (Oct 14, 2013)

> So because the car and apartment was searched, you know .... for a missing kid, that's suspicious? And again with the "attitude" thing.
> Fuck me, it's good to see trial by media alive and well.



I was talking about the responses of the dogs trained to sniff out bodies and blood.  Trial by media is an emotive phrase but there are things about this matter that dont't add up.  You don't know they're innocent any more than I know they're guilty.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> I remember it as being widely reported as fact at the time.


 
So do I, but 5ml of Calpol won't kill a child, but because they are doctors some people have made a leap that something much stronger had been administered.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> That's a very telling detail. But I could see a competent lawyer demolishing it under cross-examination? It was dark - then when you watched the 10 pm news it was months later (I think that's right) - can you really be sure the man you saw was Mr. McCann, Mr. Smith?


Or by simply pointing to the evidence of the other seven people eating a meal with GM, the waiters and other staff and the other diners who all place him elsewhere at that point.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> I was talking about the responses of the dogs trained to sniff out bodies and blood.  Trial by media is an emotive phrase but there are things about this matter that dont't add up.  You don't know they're innocent any more than I know they're guilty.


 
Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> That's a very telling detail. But I could see a competent lawyer demolishing it under cross-examination? It was dark - then when you watched the 10 pm news it was months later (I think that's right) - can you really be sure the man you saw was Mr. McCann, Mr. Smith?



It's not a telling detail at all. It seems like highly speculative testimony recounted months after the event.   

Can they even be sure it was the same day that she disappeared? 

Can they be sure it was Madeleine and Gerry?

Was Gerry carrying Madeleine back to the apartment?

Etc, etc.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> I remember it as being widely reported as fact at the time.



I don't. I remember it being discussed, again speculatively, perhaps on here.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I don't. I remember it being discussed, again speculatively, perhaps on here.


In most mainstream media accounts and formed sections of C4 Cutting Edge documentary


----------



## clicker (Oct 14, 2013)

I can understand the speculation - it's human nature. But have never been able to work out how people think she was killed / found dead by her parents at some stage during their meal...then one of them managed to get her body out of the apartment, take it somewhere where she wasn't found and return to finish a meal before pretending she'd been discovered missing at 10pm. I just dont see how they could have physically done that.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> I was talking about the responses of the dogs trained to sniff out bodies and blood.



What were those responses?



> Trial by media is an emotive phrase but there are things about this matter that dont't add up.



Like what? Their "attitude" on tv? 



> You don't know they're innocent any more than I know they're guilty.



I know they haven't been charged with anything relating to the disappearance. I know they seem to be doing everything they can to keep he issue to the forefront of the media. I haven't seen ANY reasonable discussion that in any way implicates them. The friends that were with them corroborate their stories ....

What have you got?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> Praia de Luz is a modest resort on the Algarve that's long been a favourite of British families. It's not posh at all.



OK...but I was offering a speculative/hypothetical perception, that's all. Obviously, you've every right to call it nonsense, but that does sound like an categorical assertion to me. I actually do think it is quite within the realms of credibility to imagine that the scum press might well have monstered a less obviously middle-class couple who had left their kids alone.


----------



## ddraig (Oct 14, 2013)

do you think would you give as much of a shit/be as defensive if they weren't doctors spy?


----------



## dessiato (Oct 14, 2013)

I can't help but wonder about all the other kids who've disappeared since this case started, and who is fighting their cases in the media, with the government, and the police for them to be found. Tragic as this case is, let's not forget the others who don't have the same publicity.


----------



## marshall (Oct 14, 2013)

Whether accident, murder or neither, surely the practicalities of disposing of a child’s body in an unfamiliar, foreign town, late at night, when you’re in an emotive state (which they would be, in either scenario) makes the idea of the McCanns being guilty highly unlikely. And they disposed of her body so well that locals, police dogs, etc still haven’t found a single trace of any remains…I just can’t see it. I think the likelihood of her still being alive is actually very high.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In most mainstream media accounts and formed sections of C4 Cutting Edge documentary



Media bullshit from what I can gather:



> The McCanns did not denying ever giving their children Calpol and in fact they told the police that they had purchased Calpol to take on vacation with them.
> 
> In a TV interview, Kate's father, Brian Healy, spoke about Calpol.  Segment starts at 0.42:-
> 
> ...


----------



## susie12 (Oct 14, 2013)

> What have you got?



As I said, the positive reactions of the dogs in the room.  There are apparently discrepancies in the timings of the accounts given by their friends.  It is perfectly possible that there was an accident which they covered up but obviously without a body it's very unlikely that we'll ever know what really happened.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

marshall said:


> Whether accident, murder or neither, surely the practicalities of disposing of a child’s body in an unfamiliar, foreign town, late at night, when you’re in an emotive state (which they would be, in either scenario) makes the idea of the McCanns being guilty highly unlikely.* And they disposed of her body so well that locals, police dogs, etc still haven’t found a single trace of any remains*…I just can’t see it. I think the likelihood of her still being alive is actually very high.




there is such a thing as competent murderers who get away with it, so I'd not take lack of corpse as anything concrete.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> As I said, the positive reactions of the dogs in the room.


 
Dogs reacting means nothing. What did they actually find? Blood?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Media bullshit from what I can gather:


Sorry, thought you were on about the Smith story.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> It's not a telling detail at all. It seems like highly speculative testimony recounted months after the event.
> 
> Can they even be sure it was the same day that she disappeared?
> 
> ...



You are of course right, I should have a "a telling detail at first sight".



Spymaster said:


> I don't. I remember it being discussed, again speculatively, perhaps on here.



It occurs to me that if they did bring serious sedatives out with them, then that's the sort of thing they could have been struck off for.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Dogs reacting means nothing. What did they actually find? Blood?


Dogs reacting does mean something. What it means depends on how they reacted and where and when.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes



Beat me to it!


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Dogs reacting does mean something. What it means depends on how they reacted and where and when.


 
No, it means nothing unless they find something tangible.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Oct 14, 2013)

dessiato said:


> I can't help but wonder about all the other kids who've disappeared since this case started, and who is fighting their cases in the media, with the government, and the police for them to be found. Tragic as this case is, let's not forget the others who don't have the same publicity.


Couldn't agree more.  It's an insane use of police resources driven by the media.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> in fairness, when discussing this the other night both me and the person to whom I was speaking concluded that without a body you'd probably neve let go of a spark of hope



There's a 'spark of hope' and there's the hyper-PR onslaught for 7 years. It's a circus.

I suppose it's understandable, though still very alien to my notion of what most people would do - of course that doesn't make it 'wrong' iyswim.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> No, it means nothing unless they find something tangible.


That's a different sort of meaning isn't it? Dogs react because of something. That means something. It might not mean there is a body or blood or whatever a certain theory demands it means, but it means something. It might mean for example that handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Couldn't agree more.  It's an insane use of police resources driven by the media.



Quite.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> No, it means nothing unless they find something tangible.


The reaction of a dog is an *indication* of "something", nothing more nothing less and, without hard evidence to back it up, is meaningless.


----------



## marshall (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> there is such a thing as competent murderers who get away with it, so I'd not take lack of corpse as anything concrete.



I guess. But I doubt it was premeditated, they were on unfamiliar ground and...sorry, just can't see they'd even know where to start, tbh.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's a different sort of meaning isn't it? Dogs react because of something. That means something. It might not mean there is a body or blood or whatever a certain theory demands it means, but it means something. It might mean for example that handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes.


 
It doesn't mean anything in the context of this case. Or any criminal investigation. Dog's can't testify. Maybe they liked the carpet?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> There's a 'spark of hope' and there's the hyper-PR onslaught for 7 years. It's a circus.
> 
> I suppose it's understandable, though still very alien to my notion of what most people would do - of course that doesn't make it 'wrong' iyswim.


Have to say that your notion of what most parents would do appears very alien to me and doesn't match up very closely with any parents i know that have suffered the only comparable thing i can imagine - bereavement. In fact, your expectations of possible reactions seem pretty bizarre to me.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> It doesn't mean anything in the context of this case. Or any criminal investigation. Dog's can't testify. Maybe they liked the carpet?


Now you're getting it. A reaction might _mean _they like the carpet.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

Fuchs66 said:


> The reaction of a dog is an *indication* of "something", nothing more nothing less and, without hard evidence to back it up, is meaningless.


 
Everything is an indication of something. We're talking about a criminal investigation, and only certain things are meaningful in that context.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Now you're getting it. A reaction might _mean _they like the carpet.


 
But it can't be taken to mean anything of significance in this case so is best ignored. Kapische?


----------



## clicker (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> there is such a thing as competent murderers who get away with it, so I'd not take lack of corpse as anything concrete.


I agree - but if a parent finds their child dead unexpectedly, mid meal with friends, I just can't see them being able to act 'competently'. Unless the speculation is that her murder was planned beforehand by parent(s), it wasn't an accident and the place to dispose of the body was already well sourced? And I think that even less unlikely than them being able to act 'competently' off the cuff.What I think ,stands for bugger all in the greater scheme of things - but have never been able to tie them into it in the timescale afforded to them.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> But it can't be taken to mean anything of significance in this case so is best ignored. Kapische?


Depends on what the experts and handlers have decided the dogs reactions meant. And their appears to be some professional disagreement here.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Have to say that your notion of what most parents would do appears very alien to me and doesn't match up very closely with any parents i know that have suffered the only comparable thing i can imagine - bereavement. In fact, your expectations of possible reactions seem pretty bizarre to me.



Of the 1,000's of people I know that have gone through a similar experience to the McCanns...

You're probably right though - on reflection my disbelief is not aimed the parents, more the ensuing media/police resource thrown at it. It's become the Lord Lucan of our time.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> But it can't be taken to mean anything of significance in this case so is best ignored. Kapische?


if it means nothing, why do the police employ them? and surely the police would realise what a complete waste of time these dogs were every time they used them?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

ddraig said:


> do you think would you give as much of a shit/be as defensive if they weren't doctors spy?



I just think there's an inherent unfairness in the way some people are viewing this. Shygirl, to her credit, has admitted that the class issue may be affecting her thought process and she's far from the only one.

A couple have lost their daughter, ffs, and the speculation that the parents were involved seems to be based on little more than their perceived "attitude" in media appearances, the fact that they are doctors and may have had access to or knowledge of sedatives, and other equally circumstantial stuff (dogs sniffing the car, jeezus ).

If there's any evidence that the McCann's were involved I'll certainly change my position. But at the moment there isn't.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

> Unless the speculation is that her murder was planned beforehand by parent(s), it wasn't an accident and the place to dispose of the body was already well sourced?



thats where I'm at- although as I say I have nothing to go on other than my gut feeling about the look of guilt on Gerry's face. That look of guilt could also be his guilt of having left his kid alone and then she dissapeared though.

Without straying into complete loon territory I can't speculate. Just an opinion- as I said, I'd make a shit juror


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Depends on what the experts and handlers have decided the dogs reactions meant. And their appears to be some professional disagreement here.


 
Dog reactions aren't admissible in court, so unless they yield further evidence such as DNA, statements from humans or the like, then they mean nothing. The professionals can talk all they want, but unless that admissible evidence comes to light, the reactions mean nothing in the context of this case.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 14, 2013)

some of the comments on this thread are severely fucked, there has never been any evidence that the McCann's killed their child and yet just because some people don't like how they appear on tv, that they don't "look sad enough", it's grand to make such claims, some even appear to do this motivated from sort of idiotic "class" perspective. Yes, if it had been some poor single mother on an estate who'd popped to her local on the corner, she'd have been slated across the media, but that's an argument for not being a judgmental cock and engaging in what amounts to essential victim blaming. 

The idea that people need to look and react in a certain way in order to be legitimate victims is repellent and all too common, especially in cases of rape, where the victim doesn't match the "ideal victim" criteria.


----------



## clicker (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I'd make a shit juror


yep me too.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> equally circumstantial stuff (dogs sniffing the car, jeezus ).


most evidence is circumstantial. apart from witness accounts.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

clicker said:


> I can understand the speculation - it's human nature. But have never been able to work out how people think she was killed / found dead by her parents at some stage during their meal...then one of them managed to get her body out of the apartment, take it somewhere where she wasn't found and return to finish a meal before pretending she'd been discovered missing at 10pm. I just dont see how they could have physically done that.


 I share all the stuff about the media and the way a white middle class couple have been treated - and I also share what people have said about GM's public pronouncements not being 'right'.  Same time, what you say above is pretty significant.  When it comes to means, motive and opportunity, the timeline (from what I remember of it) means their 'opportunity' was limited.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> if it means nothing, why do the police employ them? and surely the police would realise what a complete waste of time these dogs were every time they used them?


 
They employ them to find actual evidence, like blood, DNA, or to garner confessions or further witness statements. Certainly not a waste of time, but they appear to have been unsuccessful in this case.


----------



## Callum91 (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> some of the comments on this thread are severely fucked, there has never been any evidence that the McCann's killed their child and yet just because some people don't like how they appear on tv, that they don't "look sad enough", it's grand to make such claims, some even appear to do this motivated from sort of idiotic "class" perspective. Yes, if it had been some poor single mother on an estate who'd popped to her local on the corner, she'd have been slated across the media, but that's an argument for not being a judgmental cock and engaging in what amounts to essential victim blaming.
> 
> The idea that people need to look and react in a certain way in order to be legitimate victims is repellent and all too common, especially in cases of rape, where the victim doesn't match the "ideal victim" criteria.


Well said


----------



## Fuchs66 (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Everything is an indication of something. We're talking about a criminal investigation, and only certain things are meaningful in that context.


I was pretty much agreeing with you, just to be clear.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> most evidence is circumstantial. apart from witness accounts.




forensics and cctv don't count as circumstantial do they?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> thats where I'm at- although as I say *I have nothing to go on other than my gut feeling about the look of guilt on Gerry's face.*
> 
> Without straying into complete loon territory ....



You've already done that.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> if it means nothing, why do the police employ them? and surely the police would realise what a complete waste of time these dogs were every time they used them?



Because detection isn't a science, and detectives don't necessarily understand, or accept, the logic of double-blind controlled trials.

If the dog amplifies the handler's intuitions, from time to time it'll produce a result, and they'll go on using them.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> some of the comments on this thread are severely fucked, there has never been any evidence that the McCann's killed their child and yet just because some people don't like how they appear on tv, that they don't "look sad enough", it's grand to make such claims, some even appear to do this motivated from sort of idiotic "class" perspective. Yes, if it had been some poor single mother on an estate who'd popped to her local on the corner, she'd have been slated across the media, but that's an argument for not being a judgmental cock and engaging in what amounts to essential victim blaming.
> 
> The idea that people need to look and react in a certain way in order to be legitimate victims is repellent and all too common, especially in cases of rape, where the victim doesn't match the "ideal victim" criteria.



Excellent post.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I just think there's an inherent unfairness in the way some people are viewing this. Shygirl, to her credit, has admitted that the class issue may be affecting her thought process and she's far from the only one.
> 
> A couple have lost their daughter, ffs, and the speculation that the parents were involved seems to be based on little more than their perceived "attitude" in media appearances, the fact that they are doctors and may have had access to or knowledge of sedatives, and other equally circumstantial stuff (dogs sniffing the car, jeezus ).
> 
> If there's any evidence that the McCann's were involved I'll certainly change my position. But at the moment there isn't.



Coming back to this, on a bit more reflection it does seem bogus. Even if they had raided the hospital pharmacy (something that would have required fraud to do and to cover up) how would they have got the strong stuff through customs?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> They employ them to find actual evidence, like blood, DNA, or to garner confessions or further witness statements. Certainly not a waste of time, but they appear to have been unsuccessful in this case.


there were two dogs, only one of which is employed to find blood, etc., which it did, behind the settee. the other dog was to trace the presence of a dead body.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> some of the comments on this thread are severely fucked, there has never been any evidence that the McCann's killed their child and yet just because some people don't like how they appear on tv, that they don't "look sad enough", it's grand to make such claims, some even appear to do this motivated from sort of idiotic "class" perspective. Yes, if it had been some poor single mother on an estate who'd popped to her local on the corner, she'd have been slated across the media, but that's an argument for not being a judgmental cock and engaging in what amounts to essential victim blaming.
> 
> The idea that people need to look and react in a certain way in order to be legitimate victims is repellent and all too common, especially in cases of rape, where the victim doesn't match the "ideal victim" criteria.


Spot on - it's just the inversion of people going _oh he looks the type_ when some mum or dad whose kid has been killed or missing make an appeal on tv or something. Actually it's like that only massively extended over many years.

edit: or using the class baiting Jade Goody was subjected to when it became public she had cancer to go and laugh at posh cancer sufferers.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> forensics and cctv don't count as circumstantial do they?


i think forensics does.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Excellent post.


 Yes. That's made me think I need to go away and give this a little more thought.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> Coming back to this, on a bit more reflection it does seem bogus. Even if they had raided the hospital pharmacy (something that would have required fraud to do and to cover up) how would they have got the strong stuff through customs?




'do you have anything to declare'

'yes the very strong medicines I plan to dope my children with'


not likely is it, if we were following that line then there is no chance they would have declared. You hide it in your luggage and take the gamble.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Wilf said:


> When it comes to means, motive and opportunity, the timeline (from what I remember of it) means their 'opportunity' was limited.



It was miniscule. Yet they managed to dispose of the body so effectively that despite the enormous search effort it's still hidden 7 years on?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> forensics and cctv don't count as circumstantial do they?



Forensics can be circumstantial. 

My fingerprint on a glass in a hotel room may put me at the scene (or the glass could have been moved there from somewhere else), but that doesn't mean I shot the bloke on the floor.


----------



## Dan U (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So do I, but 5ml of Calpol won't kill a child, but because they are doctors some people have made a leap that something much stronger had been administered.



every parent ever would be in the shit if it did.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 14, 2013)

you get the impression some people really want the McCann's to have killed her, as if the case is just a fictional tv movie and they want a really satisfying twist. There's probably some wanky point to be made about news coverage as entertainment as well.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

laptop said:


> If the dog amplifies the handler's intuitions, from time to time it'll produce a result, and they'll go on using them.


from time to time wouldn't really justify the thousands spent in training the things. i know the police are idiots but i doubt their accountants are.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> the other dog was to trace the presence of a dead body.


 
How many dead bodies did it find? The fact some people think it thought a body had been there is meaningless because it's not admissible evidence.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> there were two dogs, only one of which is employed to find blood, etc., which it did, behind the settee. the other dog was to trace the presence of a dead body.


Still only an indication, not evidence in any way.

Also I thought the blood found was shown later to not belong to Madeleine!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> That's a bit glib if you don't mind me saying. If I'd lost one of my kids I'd have done ANYTHING to have got it back, including going to meet the Pope for the extra publicity it might bring. Their other kids were perfectly safe.


The audience with the pope was a very good move on the part of the McCanns, especially given the grip Catholicism has in Portugal - it effectively sent a message to the Portuguese people that "these folks are just like us, and the pontiff believes in them".  it effectively drew public sympathy even from those who didn't particularly give the McCanns' narrative much credence.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> how would they have got the strong stuff through customs?


hmm, thats a puzzler. also puzzling is the fact that cocaine and heroine are made abroad. how does that get here? mystifying.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> from time to time wouldn't really justify the thousands spent in training the things. i know the police are idiots but i doubt their accountants are.



Organisational inertia: and accountants are prone to take expert opinion over evidence, too.

I have a feeling that the accountants will catch up in the next decade or two. Just a feeling, mind.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

How can I stop getting email alerts for this thread?

My phone is dinging its nuts off.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Badgers said:


> If my kid went missing I would keep myself at least 100 miles from the Pope at all times.



If my kid went missing in continental Europe, Vatican City is pretty much the* first* place I'd go, given how many paedophiles the Church harbours.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> her
> 
> I've been honest in admitting that the class element of the media handling of this case, which isn't shit, as you say, may have influenced me. I think its rather nasty of you to say that my posts are shabby.   I want to believe this is a genuine abduction case.  But there  are anomalies which raise questions for me.  What we're doing here is exploring some of these issues.



Yeah, but Spymaster is middle class, so of course he's going to take offence at you attacking his people!


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Fuchs66 said:


> Also I thought the blood found was shown later to not belong to Madeleine!


that was what 'the times' published before any results were found by the lab. the results were a bit more complicated than that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

rioted said:


> you, guilty as sin imo
> 
> and a nasty little shit to boot imo



Said someone acting like a "nasty little shit".


----------



## revol68 (Oct 14, 2013)

oh look it's discokermit playing up to type. 

Fine to speculate about the McCann's killing their kid, the kid they've spent the guts of a decade searching for.
Make a judgement based on video evidence that a driver confronted by a gang of aggressive asshole bikers was justified in driving through them as they try to get into his car, with his kid seated in it, and you're rushing to conclusions.

your "prolier than thou" shit is played out, it's just reactionary, irrational posturing.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yeah, but Spymaster is middle class ....



 I wish someone had told my parents!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> you get the impression some people really want the McCann's to have killed her, as if the case is just a fictional tv movie and they want a really satisfying twist. There's probably some wanky point to be made about news coverage as entertainment as well.


 That's true and in some cases it's been plotted by newspaper editors - waves of sympathetic coverage, followed by 'he's guilty, look at his 'tells' and body language' > libel payouts > back to sympathy.  As with TV drama it has little nuggets in there, he certainly did look shifty in the odd clip, but then these things rarely are neat and tidy.  But ultimately for him/them tobe guilty would involve some Columbo like plot.  Reality is she almost certainly was abducted and it's very sad.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> How many dead bodies did it find? The fact some people think it thought a body had been there is meaningless because it's not admissible evidence.


if it was there just to find dead bodies, they wouldn't have taken the dog around the apartments and the cars, would they? do you think the police expected to find her body hidden under the bed or summat?


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> if it was there just to find dead bodies, they wouldn't have taken the dog around the apartments and the cars, would they? do you think the police expected to find her body hidden under the bed or summat?


 
Well, they hoped to find evidence. But they didn't.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Fine to speculate about the McCann's killing their kid,


where?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Well, they hoped to find evidence. But they didn't.


what evidence did they hope to find with the cadaver dog?


----------



## toggle (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> thats where I'm at- although as I say I have nothing to go on other than my gut feeling about the look of guilt on Gerry's face. That look of guilt could also be his guilt of having left his kid alone and then she dissapeared though.
> 
> Without straying into complete loon territory I can't speculate. Just an opinion- as I said, I'd make a shit juror



I'm very wary about judging parent reactions in situations like this. The public responses to Lindy Chamberlain come to mind. or reactions to rape victims who don't act like a victim 'should'.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think that's bollocks.
> 
> The media didn't attack April Jones's mother for allowing her 5 year old to roam her estate at night.



I think that was more to do with territoriality on the part of the media, to be fair.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> if it was there just to find dead bodies, they wouldn't have taken the dog around the apartments and the cars, would they? do you think the police expected to find her body hidden under the bed or summat?



Dead body/child hiding/hidden.

I would have thought that the first thing the old bill would do would be to thoroughly search the last place she was known to be, with dogs.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> what evidence did they hope to find with the cadaver dog?


 
I've said this already. Evidence associated with a dead body and the movement of same. This could include forensic evidence and also witness statements.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> where?



you're standing in it


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

susie12 said:


> Panic, fear, not wanting to lose their careers as doctors.



So perhaps what you're positing isn't so much a "covered-up accident" theory, as a narrative where the McCann parents were complicit in negligence (i.e. they weren't *actively and delberately* negligent, but rather acted in a way that failed to consider Madeleine's safety) that led to Madeleine McCann's death?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Dead body/child hiding/hidden.


 i would say that the police were a hundred percent certain the body wasn't in the apartment or the car well before they flew the dog over from england to check the places out. it wasn't in there to find a dead body.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

revol68 said:


> you're standing in it


this is just rubbish. bellend.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Really hate to use this line, but do you have kids?



Only when no other meat course is being offered for dinner.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Really hate to use this line, but do you have kids?


you still crying for jimmy savile, you cunt?


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Oct 14, 2013)

Johnny Vodka said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/14/british-detectives-efits-madeleine-mccann-suspect
> 
> 
> 
> This is the reason why so many people can't take to the McCann's.  Leaving kids that young alone is just not on


 
And I should add, for all sorts of reasons - accidents, fire, etc, probably more likely than being abducted.  Also remember their kids even younger than Maddy were left in that room.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Like what? Their "attitude" on tv?



As any halfway decent investigative interviewer (police or otherwise) will happily tell people, the "attitude(s)" people adopt when under public or private scrutiny *should not* be taken as indicative of anything more than the person being *aware* that they're under scrutiny, and controlling their behaviour in a way that makes them feel more comfortable with the scrutiny.

What's far more important is whether their story is consistent over time (it's generally expected for consistency to lessen over time, as new details come to mind); whether new details emerge over time (which should be expected, because memory isn't a "rewind and play again" facility, it's a reconstructive process where new stimuli can trigger old details to emerge) and whether evidence emerges that dents the McCann narrative (most of the evidence _pro_ a McCann parents murder has been strictly circumstantial, and only glancingly relevant, so far).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> you still crying for jimmy savile, you cunt?


 
You still here, shouting your mouth off with a pile of bollocks that spew out from it, you cunt?


----------



## scifisam (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> if it means nothing, why do the police employ them? and surely the police would realise what a complete waste of time these dogs were every time they used them?



Because the dogs could find something that is significant and that find is then used in evidence. In this case, they didn't.

In the months after all this happened, I looked into other reports of missing children and I honestly didn't find class to be related to how much publicity there was for finding a child so young. 

Class did seem to play into it a bit with teenagers - which make up the bulk of missing kids, and it's shitty that middle-class teenagers are searched for more than others - but with young kids there's a huge media search regardless of class or race, because it's so unusual. Teenagers do go missing of their own accord so are a very different kind of search.

There are very few missing kids under 12 to make a comparison with, for a start, but all that there were were hugely publicised. 

Anyone remember Ben Needham, the little British boy who went missing in Greece? Many of you probably do, and that happened in the eighties. That family wasn't middle-class - the Mum was a teenager, living with her Dad, a builder - and they had huge publicity. Enormous. 

As huge as the McCanns' missing daughter? TBH, with the lack of the internet, I'd say it was about as big as it could be. His picture was everywhere at Brit-frequented holiday resorts I went to for years after and the news would regularly update with pictures of what he would look like now.

The McCanns aren't even using their own money for the search because GP wages, while very good, are not exactly a bottomless pit of funds for a search this big. 

There's also a Ben Needham fund which has presumably helped with some of the searching. And some of the extra publicity for Madeleine's disappearance has come precisely in the form of criticising her parents for leaving her alone and suspecting them of doing it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> There's a 'spark of hope' and there's the hyper-PR onslaught for 7 years. It's a circus.
> 
> I suppose it's understandable, though still very alien to my notion of what most people would do - of course that doesn't make it 'wrong' iyswim.



TBF, it's impossible to gauge how people might react. For you a "hyper-PR onslaught" might seem alien, and pretty much the antithesis of people being able to find closure, but for others it might seem perfectly natural.  I can think of several cases where the family of a dead or missing person acted to keep the case within public awareness - the nurse who "fell off a balcony" in Saudi; the woman "killed by animals" in a Kenyan game reserve; Jean McConville - because "letting it go" won't give *them* closure.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

scifisam said:


> Because the dogs could find something that is significant and that find is then used in evidence. In this case, they didn't.


i don't believe that's how the cadaver dog works. what it finds isn't some object. it detects the past presence of a dead body.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i don't believe that's how the cadaver dog works. what it finds isn't some object. it detects the past presence of a dead body.


 
With the aim of finding that body or evidence that it was there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> most evidence is circumstantial. apart from witness accounts.



Even witness accounts aren't the be-all and end-all of "classy" evidence, given the nature of human memory, and the fact that people almost invariably reconstruct memories in such a way that they integrate post-event data into the "memory".  There are no "pure" eyewitness testimonies, just testimonies that may have a greater or lesser degree of "contamination" from post-event sources.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> forensics and cctv don't count as circumstantial do they?



With forensics, some of that is pretty much down to *interpretation* of data, so while not circumstantial, some forms of scientific forensic evidence are open to question as to relevance.
CCTV footage, if properly timestamped etc, is a different story.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Even witness accounts aren't the be-all and end-all of "classy" evidence, given the nature of human memory, and the fact that people almost invariably reconstruct memories in such a way that they integrate post-event data into the "memory".  There are no "pure" eyewitness testimonies, just testimonies that may have a greater or lesser degree of "contamination" from post-event sources.


exactly. circumstantial evidence is often more reliable than eyewitness accounts. to dismiss evidence as 'circumstantial' comes from watching too much telly.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> 'do you have anything to declare'
> 
> 'yes the very strong medicines I plan to dope my children with'
> 
> ...



You'd be foolish to, though, as if you're taking medication to an EU state, and you neglect to take a letter from the prescribing doctor confirming that you have that medication for treatment of a particular issue, you can be turned back.
Each time I've used Eurostar, I've always travelled with such a letter in my pocket, and shown it when security have seen medication in my baggage.
Why would either of the McCanns jeopardise a holiday by smuggling some benzos or whatever, when airport security are officious Jobsworth wankers of the first order?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> With the aim of find that body or evidence that it was there.


i don't think that's how it works.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i don't think that's how it works.


 
You think a lot don't you?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> exactly. circumstantial evidence is often more reliable than eyewitness accounts. to dismiss evidence as 'circumstantial' comes from watching too much telly.



Well it depends on if and how it's corroborated, but you're right, I should have used "spurious" rather than "circumstantial".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I wish someone had told my parents!



Your parents were good proletarians.
You, however, have betrayed their proud proletarian heritage!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> How can I stop getting email alerts for this thread?
> 
> My phone is dinging its nuts off.



Top righthand of screen, where your username is. Click on it, then on "alert preferences", where you can stop the software alerting you to each new message/reply.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Why would either of the McCanns jeopardise a holiday by smuggling some benzos or whatever, when airport security are officious Jobsworth wankers of the first order?


i'm not saying they smuggled anything. if you were to smuggle anything anywhere though, smuggling mild sedatives on a flight of holidaymakers on a short flight to portugal, by two doctors, would be a piece of piss. most of the security is waiting round the flights coming in from the carribean and south america looking for women without shoes.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> You think a lot don't you?


a bit more than you, apparently.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Top righthand of screen, where your username is. Click on it, then on "alert preferences", where you can stop the software alerting you to each new message/reply.



I've unchecked the box for email alerts and I'm not receiving them for any other threads. Just this one.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

toggle said:


> I'm very wary about judging parent reactions in situations like this. The public responses to Lindy Chamberlain come to mind. or reactions to rape victims who don't act like a victim 'should'.



Quite.  Expecting a "typical" reaction is pointless, because there are no "typical" reactions, except in the mind of the person surveying (in whatever format or situation) the victim.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I've unchecked the box for email alerts and I'm not receiving them for any other threads. Just this one.



Xenforo has it in for you, then!


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> a bit more than you, apparently.


 
Do you want to be a detective when you grow up?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i'm not saying they smuggled anything. if you were to smuggle anything anywhere though, smuggling mild sedatives on a flight of holidaymakers on a short flight to portugal, by two doctors, would be a piece of piss. most of the security is waiting round the flights coming in from the carribean and south america looking for women without shoes.



So do you subscribe to the "did her in accidentally" theory then, Kerm?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Xenforo has it in for you, then!



It's fucking annoying. I can't turn the phone down as I'm working and it's bleeping about twice a minute!


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Do you want to be a detective when you grow up?


wow. trying to make me look juvenile by acting in an incredibly juvenile manner.
well done. the irony in this post has a bold beauty that will be difficult to surpass.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> So do you subscribe to the "did her in accidentally" theory then, Kerm?



That's always fallen into the "possible but not probable" category for me, not based on any "reading" of the parents and how they may have acted, but on the complexity of the logistics that would have been required to dispose of a body effectively while a) being under scrutiny by their fellow holiday-makers, and b) being scrutinised by the police.
I know a lot of folk have had a bit of a quiet sneer over the years about the Portuguese criminal justice system, but inquisitorial systems tend to be stronger on the investigative process than adversarial systems, not weaker.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> So do you subscribe to the "did her in accidentally" theory then, Kerm?


i dunno. i certainly don't think they did it deliberately though.


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> wow. trying to make me look juvenile by acting in an incredibly juvenile manner.
> well done. the irony in this post has a bold beauty that will be difficult to surpass.


 
You're the one harping on about something you appear to know nothing about, despite your continued protestations to the contrary.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

oh fuck off you twat.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's always fallen into the "possible but not probable" category for me, not based on any "reading" of the parents and how they may have acted, but on the complexity of the logistics that would have been required to dispose of a body effectively while a) being under scrutiny by their fellow holiday-makers, and b) being scrutinised by the police.



This is the main thing isn't it.

They'd have had to discover the body of their dead daughter, and in a presumably distraught state, think calmly and rationally enough to evaluate the consequences to their careers, then _magically dispose of it in under an hour_, leaving no trace whatsoever for 7 years, without being questioned by any other tourists, and fooling the cops.

It seems extraordinarily improbable to me.

And some say "something doesn't add up" about the McCanns!


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> 'do you have anything to declare'
> 
> 'yes the very strong medicines I plan to dope my children with'
> 
> ...





discokermit said:


> hmm, thats a puzzler. also puzzling is the fact that cocaine and heroine are made abroad. how does that get here? mystifying.



Point taken. But consider this: if they'd swiped some gear from the hospital stores, the records would have to have been fiddled with.

It's not inconceivable that could happen, and it's not inconceivable that it might be covered up. But we'd need some evidence of same. . .


----------



## Giles (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> Coming back to this, on a bit more reflection it does seem bogus. Even if they had raided the hospital pharmacy (something that would have required fraud to do and to cover up) how would they have got the strong stuff through customs?



Through customs? What "customs"? 

They flew from one EU member state to another, so there wouldn't be any "customs".

And anyway, most routine luggage inspections would not be so detailed as to checking and analysing individual medical products.

And even more anyway, what is "the strong stuff"? 

Anyone can buy valium etc, or Z-drug sleeping tablets, online, and possession of these, or other sleeping medication is not in any way a crime.

Giles


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> Through customs? What "customs"?
> 
> They flew from one EU member state to another, so there wouldn't be any "customs".
> 
> ...



Dugs take dugs man.

I refer you to VP's post above.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> Point taken. But consider this: if they'd swiped some gear from the hospital stores, the records would have to have been fiddled with.
> 
> It's not inconceivable that could happen, and it's not inconceivable that it might be covered up. But we'd need some evidence of same. . .



I think it's reasonably safe to presume that if Kate and Gerry had wanted to drug their daughter they probably could have.

But why would anyone want to go there?

They've denied it completely and there's bugger all evidence to suggest that they're lying.

This whole line seems to be a canard thrown in by mischief making journalists with nothing more than the imagination to link doctors to medicines.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I think it's reasonably safe to presume that if Kate and Gerry had wanted to drug their daughter they probably could have.
> 
> But why would anyone want to go there?
> 
> ...



That's what I'm trying to say. Just because you're a doc it doesn't mean you can prescribe yourself anything you like (you could in my Da's day, but things are tighter now).


----------



## FunkyUK (Oct 14, 2013)

These E-fits that have been released today... why are they only being seen today?  how the fuck is anyone supposed to remember someone they saw fleetingly 6 years ago, and why were'nt they given sooner?  have the efits been adjusted for age?


----------



## Epico (Oct 14, 2013)

FunkyUK said:


> These E-fits that have been released today... why are they only being seen today?  how the fuck is anyone supposed to remember someone they saw fleetingly 6 years ago, and why were'nt they given sooner?  have the efits been adjusted for age?



Not to mention how vague they look.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

FunkyUK said:


> These E-fits that have been released today... why are they only being seen today?  how the fuck is anyone supposed to remember someone they saw fleetingly 6 years ago, and why were'nt they given sooner?  have the efits been adjusted for age?



Nuts isn't it? 

I doubt I'd recognise a photograph of the bloke sat opposite me for 15 minutes on the tube this morning. 

An Efit of some random fella that I may or may not have seen briefly, many years ago? No chance.


----------



## clicker (Oct 14, 2013)

I reckon they are hoping more that someone will think it looks like someone they know now, not someone they saw at the time of the incident - they'll name the name and the detection process will work backwards to eliminate the named person from the place of the incident. The pics are so vague though...probably most people know someone who vaguely look like that.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

Which brings back the question: what the hell do they expect to happen this time round that hasn't been brought up before?

The UK (or any) police have no business being there. It's absurd.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> Which brings back the question: what the hell do they expect to happen this time round that hasn't been brought up before?
> 
> The UK (or any) police have no business being there. It's absurd.


They don't necessarily expect anything in terms of results beyond knowing that they did all they could think of and all that was in their power to find their missing daughter.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> They don't necessarily expect anything in terms of results beyond knowing that they did all they could think of and all that was in their power to find their missing daughter.



Too easy mention not leaving them unattended in the first place 

As I mentioned before, it's not so much the McCanns reaction I find absurd, but the surrounding police (and to a lesser extent media) circus around it all.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> Too easy mention not leaving them unattended in the first place
> 
> As I mentioned before, it's not so much the McCanns reaction I find absurd, but the surrounding police (and to a lesser extent media) circus around it all.


Perhaps they realise that was not a good move now and and are moving heaven and earth to try and make up for it. Taunting them over it isn't really a good response.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Whatever really happened, they have a life sentence now.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Perhaps they realise that was not a good move now and and are moving heaven and earth to try and make up for it. Taunting them over it isn't really a good response.



I didn't realise they were on here? I take it back...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Perhaps they realise that was not a good move now and and are moving heaven and earth to try and make up for it. Taunting them over it isn't really a good response.


 Yep. Whatever the class dynamics, whatever the media shit, whatever the McCanns babysitting failures, they have lost their fucking daughter.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> Through customs? What "customs"?
> 
> They flew from one EU member state to another, so there wouldn't be any "customs".
> 
> ...



Airport security - what some of us older posters still quaintly think of as "customs", because back in the day, the only checks (until the late '70s) were done by customs.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Airport security - what some of us older posters still quaintly think of as "customs", because back in the day, the only checks (until the late '70s) were done by customs.


----------



## Giles (Oct 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Airport security - what some of us older posters still quaintly think of as "customs", because back in the day, the only checks (until the late '70s) were done by customs.



Yeah, OK. 

My experience of intra-EU flights in recent years is that I don't recall EVER being asked to open my luggage for inspection, apart from the "security" people asking me to remove a laptop computer or other electronic device and to put it through the scanner on its own. 

I've never had someone do the "traditional" customs search of suitcases, and neither has anyone I've been travelling with.

It seems that (unless you're arriving from a known "drug smuggling" country), they are only bothered about scanning for bombs and weapons.

Giles


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> Yeah, OK.
> 
> My experience of intra-EU flights in recent years is that I don't recall EVER being asked to open my luggage for inspection, apart from the "security" people asking me to remove a laptop computer or other electronic device and to put it through the scanner on its own.
> 
> ...



Yeah, but these are people who seem to set a lot of store by "face", and the saving thereof. Would they risk losing that via a frivolous attitude to "mother's little helpers"?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Perhaps they realise that was not a good move now and and are moving heaven and earth to try and make up for it. Taunting them over it isn't really a good response.



Having had a bit of a think about this...I'm pretty sure there's a big difference between discussing the victims' media demeanour and taunting them over their loss. Perhaps this sort of analysis is unfair, but there have been quite a few instances over the last few years in which the victim presented by the media (& police) have turned out to be perpetrators. (Not that I'm implying anything of the sort in this case...merely offering the context in which we view victims offered media exposure) I accept that it is unfair to have any expectation of how a victim will present themselves, but if it differs from what we personally might expect we're bound to notice. This does not necessarily translate into victim blaming; I don't blame or accuse the McCann's - I've got no idea what happened to their daughter so it would be absurd to make such an accusation.

Reflecting on the 'class' issue and this case; I still think that a similar case with an obviously less middle class couple would have drawn more approbrium from the scum press, but I do think the McCann's professional status has resulted in wilder theories about their ability/motive for infanticide.

Fact is, we all of us react to how people come across and, though I feel very sorry for their loss, I've consistently been disconcerted by their many media appearences and the 'circus' that they've had around them at times.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Nuts isn't it?
> 
> I doubt I'd recognise a photograph of the bloke sat opposite me for 15 minutes on the tube this morning.
> 
> An Efit of some random fella that I may or may not have seen briefly, many years ago? No chance.


 
I think the point of them is for people to recognize the person today, not six years ago. Police are wondering why this person never came forward to help with their enquiries and eliminate themselves as a possible suspect. Assuming the bloke hasn't changed massively then somebody may recognise him.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Having had a bit of a think about this...I'm pretty sure there's a big difference between discussing the victims' media demeanour and taunting them over their loss. Perhaps this sort of analysis is unfair, but there have been quite a few instances over the last few years in which the victim presented by the media (& police) have turned out to be perpetrators. (Not that I'm implying anything of the sort in this case...merely offering the context in which we view victims offered media exposure) I accept that it is unfair to have any expectation of how a victim will present themselves, but if it differs from what we personally might expect we're bound to notice. This does not necessarily translate into victim blaming; I don't blame or accuse the McCann's - I've got no idea what happened to their daughter so it would be absurd to make such an accusation.
> 
> Reflecting on the 'class' issue and this case; I still think that a similar case with an obviously less middle class couple would have drawn more approbrium from the scum press, but I do think the McCann's professional status has resulted in wilder theories about their ability/motive for infanticide.
> 
> Fact is, we all of us react to how people come across and, though I feel very sorry for their loss, I've consistently been disconcerted by their many media appearences and the 'circus' that they've had around them at times.


Yes, no problem with any of that, but that sort of analysis is world away from _well they should have looked after their kids better_.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Report on new developments on BBC news just managed to completely omit that the McCanns left their children alone while they were out dining.  You simply could not imagine this kind of sympathetic coverage if the parents had been w/c.  Yeah, the point has been made millions of times, but each time it happens, it makes me fucking sick.



Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents. Had there been someone there, it wouldn't have happened.

As far as I'm aware neither of the McCanns have said 'this is our fault', which it patently is.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> No, I don't think so. I think I'd probably agree with the selfish/stupid thing and they have to live with that. But that aside, assuming the McCann's weren't involved in their daughters disappearance (innocent unless proven guilty and all that), we're still talking about a family who've been through the most heartbreaking experience imaginable, losing a child, and I find the class based shit that folk like Shygirl tag to this really shabby.



Had the parents been a couple from a working class background, Social Services would have been meeting them from the plane to take the other children into care. It isn't shabby, it is an accurate forecast of the outcome.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents. Had there been someone there, it wouldn't have happened.
> 
> As far as I'm aware neither of the McCanns have said 'this is our fault', which it patently is.



If that is what happened to the child, I think it is truer to say that the abduction was made possible because she was left unattended by her parents. In which case the little girl was abducted because someone criminally stole her away.

Otherwise, I do agree that it is important to acknowlege this element of the tragedy.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, no problem with any of that, but that sort of analysis is world away from _well they should have looked after their kids better_.



Yep, but essentially they should have. They wouldn't do the same again, would they? That's not taunting, just what I regard as a valid observation.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 14, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents.


 
Are you claiming that the abductor was some sort of vigilante social worker, meting out justice to careless parents?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> Had the parents been a couple from a working class background, Social Services would have been meeting them from the plane to take the other children into care.



Balls.




			
				Sasaferrato said:
			
		

> It isn't shabby, it is an accurate forecast of the outcome



Balls.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i don't believe that's how the cadaver dog works. what it finds isn't some object. it detects the past presence of a dead body.



I thought you meant police dogs in general. But "cadaver dogs," if that really is a thing, could potentially detect body parts or blood that humans couldn't. Then you dig up the ground, break through the wall, etc, and find what the dogs found by smell.



Giles said:


> Yeah, OK.
> 
> My experience of intra-EU flights in recent years is that I don't recall EVER being asked to open my luggage for inspection, apart from the "security" people asking me to remove a laptop computer or other electronic device and to put it through the scanner on its own.
> 
> ...



My daughter has been searched on nearly every flight we've ever been on. I only say "nearly" because she wasn't searched when she was three. Each time subsequent to that, she's been taken aside and searched. I can only assume that searching a white blonde pale-skinned British child must tick some boxes to make the searchers seem less like they're profiling. 

The McCanns would have been taking a huge risk to travel with anything dodgy, esp. since they could have just given legal adult-sized sleep medication to a very small child. Any parent could do that, not just doctors.

And hell, if they'd overdosed their kids and their older daughter had died because of it, hey, kids get in places they're not supposed to and eat things that look like sweeties. A much more likely back-up plan even thought up on the spur of the moment than "let's dump the body somewhere no-one will find it in this place we don't really know! Where we'll be in public! Then go for dinner!"


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> It isn't glib.  One of your children disappears, you're not gonna leave the others for more than a few hours so soon if her disappearance.  As a mum, I simply know I could not bear to be parted from the remaining children.  Its a very primitive, instinctive thing.  I was very surprised when they flew off to Rome.


I don't think you can generalise like this about people's behaviour, in *any* context. History is replete with examples of people who have done paradoxical, perverse, strange, predictable, weird, or just plain crazy things in response to stressful scenarios, and the more stressful it gets, the more paradoxical the behaviours can tend to be.

This idea that someone sitting behind a keyboard on the Internets can pronounce on behalf of all humanity how people "should" react (because, make no mistake, that's what your doing) is a little too "common sense" Daily Mailesque for comfort, in my view.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> What evidence draws you to this conclusion?


Evidence? EVIDENCE? She doesn't need evidence when she has a Firmly-Held Opinion


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Will try to do this later, as not great with stuff like that, and have to get ready for work now.


Top tip. Make a note of the links on which you are basing your assertions on at the time. Suddenly having loads to do when someone asks you to back up your claim tends to look slightly dodgy, at least until you are able to come up with the links. And even then, it just looks as if you bought time to go on a mad scramble to find something after the fact that supports your claim.

HTH.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Reflecting on the 'class' issue and this case; I still think that a similar case with an obviously less middle class couple would have drawn more approbrium from the scum press, but I do think the McCann's professional status has resulted in wilder theories about their ability/motive for infanticide.
> .


 Class is certainly central to the media story, the persistence of the story etc.  But it's about the problems of applying the general to the specific (which I'm not suggesting you are doing, btw).  I remember in the early days of the Shannon Matthews hunt, the community seemed to be making all the running, doing the searches, maintaining publicity. Remember some of them, rightly, contrasting the efforts they were having to make Vs the national media push to 'find maddie'. I also remember myself agreeing with them.  Of course that case didn't play out how it seemed.  Class effects are in play in all of this, but never straightforwardly and never in ways that really help you work out who did what.
Edit: and with apologies for the statement of the bleedin obvious in the last sentence.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Balls.
> 
> 
> 
> Balls.



You are, of course, perfectly entitled to your opinion. Forgive me, if on this occasion, I don't agree.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> You are, of course, perfectly entitled to your opinion. Forgive me, if on this occasion, I don't agree.



You are forgiven, old boy. 

But you could have a go at substantiating your assertion by providing examples where otherwise loving and decent parents have had their kids summarily taken into care for a similar one-off lapse in judgement.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Top tip. Make a note of the links on which you are basing your assertions on at the time. Suddenly having loads to do when someone asks you to back up your claim tends to look slightly dodgy, at least until you are able to come up with the links. And even then, it just looks as if you bought time to go on a mad scramble to find something after the fact that supports your claim.
> 
> HTH.


 
  I accept it can look that way.  I start work at 12, I really HAD to get ready.  For the record, I don't ever feel the need to 'go on a mad scramble' to find stuff to back up my argument.  Some posters on here may recall my frequent ineptness at dealing with IT, damn, I couldn't even upload a bloody photo yesterday of something for recycling.  My manager has left the office, so I shall now TRY to post the link.  If I don't succeed, its not because it doesn't really exist.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Evidence? EVIDENCE? She doesn't need evidence when she has a Firmly-Held Opinion


 
If you're referring to me, what do I need to give evidence of?  The furthest I've gone on here is to say that perhaps there was an accidental death and a cover up.  Not the first person on this planet to suggest that as a possibility.  And I qualified that by saying that I hope this is not the case.  I will most happy to have to eat my words if there is a different outcome.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 14, 2013)

I feel sorry for them as people, as it must be difficult to lose a child - regardless of whether they should have arranged proper babysitting.  It would be good if the child was found alive of course, but I don't really care about them or their child if I'm honest, and find the pair of them quite irritating.  I suspect the kid is dead anyway - these things don't normally have a happy ending.

Couldn't they just have another child and shut up about it?

(that was a joke by the way!)


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I don't think you can generalise like this about people's behaviour, in *any* context. History is replete with examples of people who have done paradoxical, perverse, strange, predictable, weird, or just plain crazy things in response to stressful scenarios, and the more stressful it gets, the more paradoxical the behaviours can tend to be.
> 
> This idea that someone sitting behind a keyboard on the Internets can pronounce on behalf of all humanity how people "should" react (because, make no mistake, that's what your doing) is a little too "common sense" Daily Mailesque for comfort, in my view.


 
If you read my posts carefully, no-where did I state that the family "should" have behaved in a particular way.  I said that I found it bizarre that parents who had lost one child would then contemplate a separation from the others so soon after the event.  I accept what you say about people reacting in very different and sometimes unexpected ways, but please don't misquote me.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> I feel sorry for them as people, as it must be difficult to lose a child - regardless of whether they should have arranged proper babysitting.  It would be good if the child was found alive of course, but I don't really care about them or their child if I'm honest, and find the pair of them quite irritating.  I suspect the kid is dead anyway - these things don't normally have a happy ending.
> 
> Couldn't they just have another child and shut up about it?
> 
> (that was a joke by the way!)



Hmmmm call me a misery, but that wasn't exactly a side-splitter, was it?


----------



## RedDragon (Oct 14, 2013)

I suspect they're well aware of the mistakes they made and I admire their commitment to finding her - irrespective of their class allowing them access to a disproportionate chunk of resources.


----------



## RedDragon (Oct 14, 2013)

RedDragon said:


> I suspect they're well aware of the mistakes they made and I admire their commitment to finding her - irrespective of their class allowing them access to a disproportionate chunk of resources.



ETA: As a couple they give me the creeps.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

RedDragon said:


> I suspect they're well aware of the mistakes they made and I admire their commitment to finding her - irrespective of their class allowing them access to a disproportionate chunk of resources.


 Looking at this, I think that we might need to say "...irrespective of their class _*and ethnicity*_ allowing them..."


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

RedDragon said:


> I suspect they're well aware of the mistakes they made and I admire their commitment to finding her - irrespective of their class allowing them access to a disproportionate chunk of resources.


it's utterly bewildering as there are many cases in this country falling within the purview of the metropolitan police which could have benefited from a team of detectives and two years investigation with an apparently unlimited budget. hell, the cops might even have solved a mugging or three and several bike thefts with the resources they've decided to throw at an event which happened in the jurisdiction of another state.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> If you're referring to me ....



He wasn't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Looking at this, I think that we might need to say "...irrespective of their class _*and ethnicity*_ allowing them..."


there's a lot of vietnamese people on that list


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Couldn't they just have another child and shut up about it?
> 
> (that was a joke by the way!)



 You're better than that.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> You're better than that.


 
It _was_ a joke though, and my post did say I felt sorry for them as a couple, even if I find them irritating.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> You're better than that.


and there are better madeleine jokes


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> It _was_ a joke though, and my post did say I felt sorry for them as a couple, even if I find them irritating.


'irritating' is rather a weak word, isn't it


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 14, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> and there are better madeleine jokes


 
The one I first thought of was far more offensive, but I decided not to post it.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 14, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> 'irritating' is rather a weak word, isn't it


 
Perhaps, but it feels about right for how I see them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> The one I first thought of was far more offensive, but I decided not to post it.


pm pls


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2013)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Perhaps, but it feels about right for how I see them.


what's wrong with vex or pique?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> If you read my posts carefully, no-where did I state that the family "should" have behaved in a particular way.  I said that I found it bizarre that parents who had lost one child would then contemplate a separation from the others so soon after the event.  I accept what you say about people reacting in very different and sometimes unexpected ways, but please don't misquote me.


I read your post very carefully, and I beg to differ. What you said was this:


> It isn't glib. One of your children disappears, *you're not gonna leave the others for more than a few hours so soon if her disappearance*. As a mum, I simply know I could not bear to be parted from the remaining children. Its a very primitive, instinctive thing. I was very surprised when they flew off to Rome.


There is an abundantly clear implication in the bolded statement that you expect the behaviour you describe to be the normal and correct way to behave. That's as near as "should" as makes no difference.

You then go on to support it with the classical anecdote thing - "As a mum, I couldn't possibly...", as if your personal reaction or parental status must be typical or is of any relevance or significance at all. And then you cap it off with that oh-so-wonderful "primitive, instinctive" trope - the refuge of mumsnet and Daily Mail opinionistas all.

Look around you. Look at the way parents - hell, not just parents but PEOPLE - behave around you. "Primitive"? "Instinctive"? They all behave the same way? Rubbish.

You just cannot generalise that way. You did. That was what I was questioning and suggesting was "common sense" Daily Mailism.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> If you're referring to me,


I wasn't.


shygirl said:


> what do I need to give evidence of?  The furthest I've gone on here is to say that perhaps there was an accidental death and a cover up.  Not the first person on this planet to suggest that as a possibility.  And I qualified that by saying that I hope this is not the case.  I will most happy to have to eat my words if there is a different outcome.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I accept it can look that way.  I start work at 12, I really HAD to get ready.  For the record, I don't ever feel the need to 'go on a mad scramble' to find stuff to back up my argument.  Some posters on here may recall my frequent ineptness at dealing with IT, damn, I couldn't even upload a bloody photo yesterday of something for recycling.  My manager has left the office, so I shall now TRY to post the link.  If I don't succeed, its not because it doesn't really exist.


Of course not. Only a cynic would think so.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I read your post very carefully, and I beg to differ. What you said was this:
> 
> There is an abundantly clear implication in the bolded statement that you expect the behaviour you describe to be the normal and correct way to behave. That's as near as "should" as makes no difference.
> 
> ...


 
Fair enough, I accept that.  Maybe what I hate MOST is being in any way associated with the Daily Mail readership.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 14, 2013)

www.mccannfiles.com - the smiths' sighting.   Looks like the sight is a bit of a loony one, however, it shows press clippings about the Smiths' sighting and subsequent statements.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Fair enough, I accept that.  Maybe what I hate MOST is being in any way associated with the Daily Mail readership.


I can appreciate that, but be assured that I didn't make the comparison lightly! You ticked several naughtily Daily Mailesque boxes in that post, even though I'm sure you had no intention of channelling the vile rag deliberately...


----------



## weltweit (Oct 14, 2013)

What bothers me is the reinvigorated investigation seems only now to think that a sighting of a man carrying a blond girl in pyjamas down a street away from the holiday park, that night, the night that a little blond girl went missing, might be significant!

Why only now?


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 14, 2013)

weltweit said:


> What bothers me is the reinvigorated investigation seems only now to think that a sighting of a man carrying a blond girl in pyjamas down a street away from the holiday park, that night, the night that a little blond girl went missing, might be significant!
> 
> Why only now?



Also the only people that would need to watch Crime watch tonight and be any help at all, would be the people that where there that night, over in that Portugal place.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 14, 2013)

They've said the timeline is noticeably different, but it's not in as much the original inquiry said she was taken between 9pm and 10pm (or if information was accurate 9.30pm and 10pm). What is different is that it's 45 mins later than when one of the group says she saw someone with a child, that time being 9.15pm.


----------



## thriller (Oct 14, 2013)

the e-fit on the right looks like that BBC news reporter


----------



## Smyz (Oct 14, 2013)

A barrister has reported someone boasting of having been introduced to Madeleine recently. An arrest has been made.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-alive-witness-tells-2343495


----------



## weltweit (Oct 14, 2013)

Ok, I may watch crimewatch. First time ever.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

thriller said:


> the e-fit on the right looks like that BBC news reporter



Whereas....the one on the left....hold on, perhaps Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood might takea look at that?


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 14, 2013)

Smyz said:


> A barrister has reported someone boasting of having been introduced to Madeleine recently. An arrest has been made.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-alive-witness-tells-2343495


 
An arrest? The article says a file is set to be prepared, which probably means the police have better things to do.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 14, 2013)

Then underneath there is a link to an updated article from a week later that says someone has been arrested.


----------



## thriller (Oct 14, 2013)

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=C...nL0QXmroGICA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=622


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 14, 2013)

shygirl said:


> www.mccannfiles.com - the smiths' sighting.   Looks like the sight is a bit of a loony one, however, it shows press clippings about the Smiths' sighting and subsequent statements.



Interesting agreement between several witnesses (including McCann's friend) that the man carrying the child was wearing a heavy jacket and yellowish trousers.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 14, 2013)

My wife after a cursory glance said one of the efits looked like Gerry Mccann.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 14, 2013)

I hope they got a baby sitter tonight......


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 14, 2013)

Police guy has the mannerisms and light similar look to David Cameron.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 14, 2013)

Anyone notice how Brass Eye it went?


----------



## Part 2 (Oct 14, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Then underneath there is a link to an updated article from a week later that says someone has been arrested.



Police deny he has anything to do with the McCann case.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...-news/police-deny-manchester-man-held-6180591

How is it I'm not surprised that a barrister was at a party with some charged with possessing drugs and conspiracy to distribute indecent images.


----------



## ibilly99 (Oct 14, 2013)

thriller said:


> the e-fit on the right looks like that BBC news reporter



or former BBC2 controller Roly Keating


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 14, 2013)

I feel so sad after watching that - and also hope that she will be found.   I often think of the parents agony whenever i find myself falling into self pity. Makes your own problems seem like nothing.


----------



## Smyz (Oct 14, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> An arrest? The article says a file is set to be prepared, which probably means the police have better things to do.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-british-man-arrested-2366183


----------



## thriller (Oct 14, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> I feel so sad after watching that - and also hope that she will be found.   I often think of the parents agony whenever i find myself falling into self pity. Makes your own problems seem like nothing.



that's why i didn't watch it myself.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 14, 2013)

thriller said:


> that's why i didn't watch it myself.



. Anything to get more info tho, fresh appeals always a good idea.


----------



## Giles (Oct 14, 2013)

scifisam said:


> My daughter has been searched on nearly every flight we've ever been on. I only say "nearly" because she wasn't searched when she was three. Each time subsequent to that, she's been taken aside and searched. I can only assume that searching a white blonde pale-skinned British child must tick some boxes to make the searchers seem less like they're profiling.



She must look guilty or something! 

Seriously, in numerous trips to Ibiza (which could be seen as a likely flight for people smuggling stuff), some other places in Spain, Italy, Turkey, France, Germany, etc, I've never been subject to a "customs" bag search, and nor has anyone I've been travelling with. 

This is all irrelevant, because (as a doctor would know!) you wouldn't _need_ some serious, restricted-access, controlled drug to make a kid (or an adult) go to sleep. You'd just need any widely used, completely legal sleeping pills. Or Calpol. Or "Night Nurse" etc.

I think this whole "oh they gave her some heavy sedative and killed her" theory is rubbish.

Giles


----------



## weepiper (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> This is all irrelevant, because (as a doctor would know!) you wouldn't _need_ some serious, restricted-access, controlled drug to make a kid (or an adult) go to sleep. You'd just need any widely used, completely legal sleeping pills. Or Calpol. Or "Night Nurse" etc.



Calpol is just paracetamol, it has no sedative effect.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Calpol is just paracetamol, it has no sedative effect.



FFS don't tell the kids that!



Placebos rule...


----------



## Giles (Oct 14, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Calpol is just paracetamol, it has no sedative effect.



I must have been thinking of "Calpol Night" then.

Giles


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

Giles said:


> I think this whole "oh they gave her some heavy sedative and killed her" theory is rubbish.



It's unmitigated shite.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

scifisam said:


> I thought you meant police dogs in general. But "cadaver dogs," if that really is a thing, could potentially detect body parts or blood that humans couldn't. Then you dig up the ground, break through the wall, etc, and find what the dogs found by smell.


no, cadaver dogs, and i'm not making this up (nice of you to suggest i was), detect if a dead body has been present. doesn't find body parts, doesn't find blood. just detects if a body that has been dead for over two hours has been present.
this dog was sent in after the portuguese police had taken their own sniffer dogs in.
another specialist dog that detects blood was also sent in later.


----------



## twentythreedom (Oct 14, 2013)

cbatrtt

Has anyone mentioned the idea that the parents, being doctors, might have drugged the kids to keep them quiet, thus either causing an OD or allowing an abductor easy pickings?

Just saying.

Eta oh I see someone has.....


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> no, cadaver dogs, and i'm not making this up (nice of you to suggest i was), detect if a dead body has been present. doesn't find body parts, doesn't find blood. just detects if a body that has been dead for over two hours has been present.
> this dog was sent in after the portuguese police had taken their own sniffer dogs in.
> another specialist dog that detects blood was also sent in later.



What are you suggesting the possible significance of this is?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> _magically dispose of it in under an hour_, leaving no trace whatsoever for 7 years,


wouldn't the atlantic ocean, just down the road, be an obvious place? don't know what tides are like in that area, or what the tide was doing at that particular time, but it seems the easiest and quickest way to do it.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> no, cadaver dogs, and i'm not making this up (nice of you to suggest i was), detect if a dead body has been present. doesn't find body parts, doesn't find blood. just detects if a body that has been dead for over two hours has been present.



And can you point to some evidence that the dogs can actually do this?

(All the research I've read suggests that the use of sniffer dogs in general is a branch of magic.)


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> What are you suggesting the possible significance of this is?


i wasn't. scifisam seemed to think i had invented cadaver dogs, for some reason. then made up her own job description of what a cadaver dog does, which was incorrect.

the significance to the case is, if the dog is to be trusted (i can't make my mind up), then the girl was killed at least two hours before leaving the apartment.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> wouldn't the atlantic ocean, just down the road, be an obvious place? don't know what tides are like in that area, or what the tide was doing at that particular time, but it seems the easiest and quickest way to do it.



Well there's the problem of getting the body to the ocean and dumping it in without being seen, then getting back to raise the alarm, all in under an hour. Then it's likely to wash up somewhere in a day or two.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 14, 2013)

laptop said:


> And can you point to some evidence that the dogs can actually do this?
> 
> (All the research I've read suggests that the use of sniffer dogs in general is a branch of magic.)



do you mean that its bollocks? where did you hear that?  total tangent but can you point me to any links?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> .... if the dog is to be trusted (i can't make my mind up), then the girl was killed at least two hours before leaving the apartment.



What do you mean by "if the dog is to be trusted"?

What was the outcome of using the dog?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2013)

twentythreedom said:


> cbatrtt
> 
> Has anyone mentioned the idea that the parents, being doctors, might have drugged the kids to keep them quiet, thus either causing an OD or allowing an abductor easy pickings?
> 
> ...


 Doctors.... abductors.... [take 2 physiotherapy jokes at night before retiring ]


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

laptop said:


> And can you point to some evidence that the dogs can actually do this?
> 
> (All the research I've read suggests that the use of sniffer dogs in general is a branch of magic.)


general sniffer dogs and cadaver dogs are two different things.

from wiki,
Cadaver dogs - Some dogs are trained in detecting the odor of decomposing bodies. Dogs' noses are so sensitive that they are even capable of detecting bodies that are under running water[11] Pioneering work was done by Dr. Debra Komar (University of Alberta) in Association with the RCMP Civilian Search Dog Association[12] in this area. The result was the development of training techniques that resulted in near 100% accuracy rates.[13] Her research has been published in the Journal of Forensic Anthropology.

so, if you want to check it out, try the journal of forensic anthropology.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> do you mean that its bollocks? where did you hear that?  total tangent but can you point me to any links?



Turns out the reference I have is the one given above:

Lisa Lit, Julie B. Schweitzer, Anita M. Oberbauer, "Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes", _Animal Cognition_
May 2011, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 387-39:



> Eighteen drug and/or explosive detection dog/handler teams each completed two sets of four brief search scenarios (conditions). Handlers were falsely told that two conditions contained a paper marking scent location (human influence). Two conditions contained decoy scents (food/toy) to encourage dog interest in a false location (dog influence). Conditions were (1) control; (2) paper marker; (3) decoy scent; and (4) paper marker at decoy scent. No conditions contained drug or explosive scent; any alerting response was incorrect.
> 
> ...
> Response patterns differed by condition. There were more correct (no alert responses) searches in conditions without markers. Within marked conditions, handlers reported that dogs alerted more at marked locations than other locations. Handlers’ beliefs that scent was present potentiated handler identification of detection dog alerts. Human more than dog influences affected alert locations. This confirms that handler beliefs affect outcomes of scent detection dog deployments



I have seen more damning quotes from the conclusions of the full paper.

Note that these were dogs trained to find drugs and explosives: I await with interest hypotheses for why any other scent detection is different.

Further, I have in the past looked at the websites of some of the (very few) trainers of cadaver dogs for hire, and they on stylistic grounds alone I formed the impression that they're chancers.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> What do you mean by "if the dog is to be trusted"?
> 
> What was the outcome of using the dog?


by the dog being trusted, i mean the technique of using dogs to detect the presence of death.

the outcome was that the dog indicated a cadaver had been present in the cupboard in the mccanns apartment and behind the settee. also in the passenger footwell of their car and the boot. it also detected the scent on a tshirt belonging to madeleine's brother, her cuddly toy and some of kate's clothing.
it didn't indicate anything in their friends apartments or cars.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

laptop said:


> Turns out the reference I have is the one given above:
> 
> Lisa Lit, Julie B. Schweitzer, Anita M. Oberbauer, "Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes", _Animal Cognition_
> May 2011, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 387-39:
> ...


so, evidence relating to something else and an opinion.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2013)

weltweit said:


> What bothers me is the reinvigorated investigation seems only now to think that a sighting of a man carrying a blond girl in pyjamas down a street away from the holiday park, that night, the night that a little blond girl went missing, might be significant!
> 
> Why only now?



Now ditched...



> Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have shifted the emphasis of their inquiry after discovering that a notorious presumed sighting of the girl being taken away from her holiday apartment was a false lead.
> 
> Detectives from the Met _*now*_ believe that a man with dark, collar-length hair seen carrying a pyjama-clad child almost outside the McCann family's apartment in Praia da Luz, southern Portugal, at about 9.15pm on 3 May 2007 was in fact an innocent British holidaymaker returning his own child from a night creche.



Why only now, again?

...and...



> In the light of what police describe as "a revelation moment," altering six years of thinking about the case, investigating officers now believe Madeleine could have been taken up to _*45 minutes later in the evening*_



Or during dessert, as the latter part of the meal is generally known in restaurants.


----------



## laptop (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> evidence relating to something else



I repeat: I await with interest hypotheses for why any other scent detection is different.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> the outcome was that the dog indicated a cadaver had been present in the cupboard in the mccanns apartment and behind the settee. also in the passenger footwell of their car and the boot. it also detected the scent on a tshirt belonging to madeleine's brother, her cuddly toy and some of kate's clothing.
> it didn't indicate anything in their friends apartments or cars.



Ok. When you say "indicated" you mean the dogs handler believed that a corpse had been present?

Have you got some links regarding this?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Ok. When you say "indicated" you mean the dogs handler believed that a corpse had been present?
> 
> Have you got some links regarding this?


see youtube clip above of dog going nuts at cupboard and car.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

does anyone know why kate mccann refused to answer almost fifty questions asked by the portuguese police? did she ever give a reason?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> see youtube clip above of dog going nuts at cupboard and car.



Ok.

This pretty much blows away the dog thing. Even the handler says it was inconclusive.


----------



## smokedout (Oct 14, 2013)

laptop said:


> (All the research I've read suggests that the use of sniffer dogs in general is a branch of magic.)



I always thought that until some yappy little cunt at waterloo station got me nicked for possession


----------



## discokermit (Oct 14, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Ok.
> 
> This pretty much blows away the dog thing. Even the handler says it was inconclusive.


doesn't really blow away anything but it does limit the usefullnes of the dogs. my post above should have 'traces of human decomposition' rather than 'cadaver', to be strictly accurate. i expect the dogs are more useful at ruling things out, rather than in, if you see what i mean.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 14, 2013)

discokermit said:


> doesn't really blow away anything but it does limit the usefullnes of the dogs. my post above should have 'traces of human decomposition' rather than 'cadaver', to be strictly accurate. i expect the dogs are more useful at ruling things out, rather than in, if you see what i mean.



Sure, but this bit pretty much kills it, afaic:



> .... the dogs alerted to the car which the McCanns hired three weeks AFTER Madeleine disappeared, when the world's press had been tailing the McCanns' every move.  No-one can adequately explain how the McCanns hid a body for three weeks without resorting to ridiculous conspiracy theories.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I always thought that until some yappy little cunt at waterloo station got me nicked for possession



That doesn't rule out that the dog was merely amplifying the handler's intuition about you, as I noted waaay up there ^^^.


----------



## The Pale King (Oct 15, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I always thought that until some yappy little cunt at waterloo station got me nicked for possession



Same! Except it was New Cross. Fucking spaniels.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 15, 2013)

Suspicion against them is surely crazyness.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

I can find surprisingly little actual research on cadaver dogs.

There's one very positive study, but I don't think it deals adequately with the problem of handler expectation - and see the URL that republishes it: www.pawsoflife.org/Library/HRD/Oesterhelweg%201998.pdf‎

Maybe the reason for this is summarised in _The Forensic Anthropology Laboratory _
edited by Michael W. Warren, Heather A. Walsh-Haney, Laurel Freas, CRC Press, 2010, p 79:



> We have noted a tendency for dog handlers to create what we consider to be rather mystical or pseudoscientific explanations for false hits, including "the body may have been dragged through this area" and "the trees must be pulling the odors from further away up into the air."


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, but this bit pretty much kills it, afaic:


yeh, it makes no sense that they hid a body for three weeks but as the smoke analogy in that link points out, traces can end up in all sorts of places.
i'm still not sure it kills it though. ok, the scent of death is easily transferrable, has no indicator as to identity and can come from stuff like an old tooth but why did it only react to certain items and only in the one apartment and car?


----------



## benedict (Oct 15, 2013)

laptop said:


> I repeat: I await with interest hypotheses for why any other scent detection is different.



This is not how science works, you know. A single finding in a single paper with what is effectively an n of 18 doesn't mean you win.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

benedict said:


> This is not how science works, you know. A single finding in a single paper with what is effectively an n of 18 doesn't mean you win.



Which is why I already went looking for other papers.

I found, so far, only one, and a textbook. See above.

The point about _that_ paper was that it dealt with a much-ignored aspect.

The _firm_ conclusion that can be drawn from it is - guess what? - more research is required


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

"Suspect burial excavation procedure: A cautionary tale", _Forensic Science International - _*case report*
Volume 183, Issue 1 , Pages e11-e16, 10 January 2009



> Police received reports of a subsiding ‘grave’, which was evaluated positively using GPR and victim recovery dogs (VRD). After 24
> 
> 
> 
> ...



"Creation of training aids for human remains detection canines utilizing a non-contact, dynamic airflow volatile concentration technique", _Forensic Science International_, Volume 217, Issue 1 , Pages 32-38, 10 April 2012



> Training materials prepared in this manner were tested under a variety of conditions with many HRD canines to demonstrate the efficacy of the new training aids. A high level of correct canine responses to the new training aids was achieved, approaching 90%, with minimal false positives.



My emphasis.

That appears to be it from scholar.google.com for *"cadaver dogs" "false positive"* - bar another textbook.
​


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

thinking about it, i may have let emotion overcome intellect in some respects. i actually want the goncalo amaral version or something like it to be true, because it is by far the least unpleasant version.

if the mccanns had given their children a mild sedative, that wouldn't be too bad. they're doctors, ffs, they know what they're doing. then madeleine wakes up, goes to the window to look for her parents, falls over the back of the settee and dies. kate discovers her, they panick, they dispose of body and end up in a bizarre media frenzy that they get too far into to get out of.

now, that lot is fairly unlikely and full of holes but in my mind puts less blame on the mccanns than the mccann version. that version involves a tragic accident and some selfish, panicky stupidity. their version involves insufficient security procedures and a three year old being abducted for reasons too horrific to think about.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> thinking about it, i may have let emotion overcome intellect in some respects. i actually want the goncalo amaral version or something like it to be true, because it is by far the least unpleasant version.
> 
> if the mccanns had given their children a mild sedative, that wouldn't be too bad. they're doctors, ffs. then madeleine wakes up, goes to the window to look for her parents, falls over the back and dies. kate discovers her, panicks, they dispose of body and end up in a bizarre media frenzy that they get too far into to get out of.
> 
> now, that lot is fairly unlikely and full of holes but in my mind puts less blame on the mccanns than the mccann version. that version involves a tragic accident and some selfish, panicky stupidity. their version involves insufficient security procedures and a three year old being abducted for reasons too horrific to think about.



They are not guilty. Have drink of water and relax a bit.


----------



## benedict (Oct 15, 2013)

laptop said:


> "Suspect burial excavation procedure: A cautionary tale", _Forensic Science International - _*case report*
> Volume 183, Issue 1 , Pages e11-e16, 10 January 2009
> 
> 
> ...



Why are you searching for "false positive" rather than simply surveying available results? I'm on my phone but there seem to be numerous papers with positive results e.g.:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907380700134X

http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/10097372/reload=0;jsessionid=hnjxwK4hHvjhH4CXr7cL.40


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

benedict said:


> Why are you searching for "false positive"



Seems like a decent marker of a paper that actually looks at error rates.

I referenced the first of those above, BTW.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Humberto said:


> They are not guilty. Have drink of water and relax a bit.


wher have i mentioned guilt? guilty of what? who the fuck are you, you cunt? i'm chilled to the fucking bone.


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> wher have i mentioned guilt? guilty of what? who the fuck are you, you cunt? i'm chilled to the fucking bone.


Wind in the abuse a bit please. Ta.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

fair enough. it looks more abusive than it was meant. soz humberto.


----------



## benedict (Oct 15, 2013)

laptop said:


> Seems like a decent marker of a paper that actually looks at error rates.
> 
> I referenced the first of those above, BTW.



Fair enough. There are multiple ways of talking about the results though. 

Just noticed the repeat after I'd posted. Phone issue.


----------



## cathal marcs (Oct 15, 2013)

One thing that i don't get is the class aspect that gets flung around. Gerry McCann may well be an interventional cardiologist, but he wasn't from a well off middle class background. My mum knew Gerry from her time when she worked in the Western Infirmary in Glasgow. As far as I am aware he grew up in Toryglen from a working class irish catholic background, went to state school, got his highers and ended up doing well for himself.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> no, cadaver dogs, and i'm not making this up (nice of you to suggest i was), detect if a dead body has been present. doesn't find body parts, doesn't find blood. just detects if a body that has been dead for over two hours has been present.
> this dog was sent in after the portuguese police had taken their own sniffer dogs in.
> another specialist dog that detects blood was also sent in later.



I didn't intend to imply that you made it up. It's just that "cadaver dogs" only came into the public eye after this case and don't seem particularly reliable when it's just smells they're sensing. Your link later says they do also search for bodies and body parts, not only for smells, which would be an oddly specialist role. Obviously if they found those that'd be pretty solid evidence. 

I guess cops telling a suspect that the dog has sensed something could help persuade a killer to confess, but it wouldn't be very compelling evidence on its own.


----------



## Lemon Eddy (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> now, that lot is fairly unlikely and full of holes but in my mind puts less blame on the mccanns than the mccann version. that version involves a tragic accident and some selfish, panicky stupidity. their version involves insufficient security procedures and a three year old being abducted for reasons too horrific to think about.



Logically I can appreciate that this is correct, but it's one hell of a thing when the best case explanation for a scenario is that the parents accidentally killed their child.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 15, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Having had a bit of a think about this...I'm pretty sure there's a big difference between discussing the victims' media demeanour and taunting them over their loss. Perhaps this sort of analysis is unfair, but there have been quite a few instances over the last few years in which the victim presented by the media (& police) have turned out to be perpetrators. (Not that I'm implying anything of the sort in this case...merely offering the context in which we view victims offered media exposure) I accept that it is unfair to have any expectation of how a victim will present themselves, but if it differs from what we personally might expect we're bound to notice. This does not necessarily translate into victim blaming; I don't blame or accuse the McCann's - I've got no idea what happened to their daughter so it would be absurd to make such an accusation.
> 
> Reflecting on the 'class' issue and this case; I still think that a similar case with an obviously less middle class couple would have drawn more approbrium from the scum press, but I do think the McCann's professional status has resulted in wilder theories about their ability/motive for infanticide.
> 
> Fact is, we all of us react to how people come across and, though I feel very sorry for their loss, I've consistently been disconcerted by their many media appearences and the 'circus' that they've had around them at times.



The 'class issue' raised in respect of the McCann's is a bizarre little twist. Clearly they are a successful couple, but,up until their daughter went missing they were still ordinary. Kate has a scouse accent she never lost, not normally a badge of honour amongst yer actual middle classes and dressed her daughter in an Everton shirt, a club with the social cachet of a piece of coley.

It's just another excuse to hate.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

editor said:


> Wind in the abuse a bit please. Ta.



Eh? _Abuse_ is moderated here now? 

When did that happen?


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> thinking about it, i may have let emotion overcome intellect in some respects. i actually want the goncalo amaral version or something like it to be true, because it is by far the least unpleasant version.
> 
> if the mccanns had given their children a mild sedative, that wouldn't be too bad. they're doctors, ffs, they know what they're doing. then madeleine wakes up, goes to the window to look for her parents, falls over the back of the settee and dies. kate discovers her, they panick, they dispose of body and end up in a bizarre media frenzy that they get too far into to get out of.
> 
> now, that lot is fairly unlikely and full of holes but in my mind puts less blame on the mccanns than the mccann version. that version involves a tragic accident and some selfish, panicky stupidity. their version involves insufficient security procedures and a three year old being abducted for reasons too horrific to think about.



Actually, it's considered seriously unethical for a doctor to treat his or her own children, whether with sedatives or anything else. The problem is that the doctor who is also a parent can't look at his or her child as just another patient, and can't actually think about their case in the same way they would an ordinary patient. And without being able to think that way, they're not able to think effectively about the patient, and so they're not able to treat the patient effectively.

(NB, not saying that the McCann's did sedate their kids - as someone pointed out upthread, there doesn't seem to be actual evidence for that. Just saying that that sort of thing wouldn't be a case of "no big deal", it would be a big deal).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 15, 2013)

The UK police have said that they aren't treating them as suspects. Clearly they are satisfied with their version of events and timings regarding where they were whilst having the meal they were eating, because if they were not they would surely have Mr McCann as a prime suspect. Did the Crimewatch reconstruction show how they thought Madeleine was taken from the apartment?


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Eh? _Abuse_ is moderated here now?
> 
> When did that happen?


We've always warned posters when they're going over the top with personal abuse, and it's something you'll see mentioned in the FAQ if you care to read it.


----------



## dessiato (Oct 15, 2013)

Johnny Vodka said:


> And I should add, for all sorts of reasons - accidents, fire, etc, probably more likely than being abducted.  Also remember their kids even younger than Maddy were left in that room.


That is a good point to remember. Maddy was the eldest in that room.

This case came up when I was still living in Portugal, then, as now, my Portuguese friends fail to understand why any parent would leave their kids alone, and therefore, and to some extent, blame the McCanns for "allowing" this to happen to the child.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

editor said:


> We've always warned posters when they're going over the top with personal abuse ...



LOL! Like fuck! 

There are any number of threads on here with personal abuse exponentially worse than what Kerm posted up there, with nary a sniff of a mod. 

And since when did the faq's have any relevance to what gets posted here?


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> LOL! Like fuck!


We don't read every single post and can only act upon what we see or what is reported. Kindly take this to the feedback forum if you wish to pursue it.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> There are any number of threads on here with personal abuse exponentially worse than what Kerm posted up there, with nary a sniff of a mod.


now you see the cross i have to bear.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

editor said:


> Kindly take this to the feedback forum if you wish to pursue it.



Is that in the faq's too?

What a load of bollocks.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> now you see the cross i have to bear.



Looks like you're on the boss's shit list!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

Humberto said:


> They are not guilty. Have drink of water and relax a bit.


you seem rather emotionally invested in this incident.


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Is that in the faq's too?


Yes, it's covered under rule one: "don't be a dick."
Please take this to the feedback forum if you wish to discuss it further.


----------



## laptop (Oct 15, 2013)

dessiato said:


> my Portuguese friends fail to understand why any parent would leave their kids alone



Lest we forget: this is also not understood by the laws of the UK, though how far away is "alone" would be a matter for the court.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

editor said:


> Please take this to the feedback forum if you wish to discuss it further.



No thanks, and I'll let the thread get back on track. It was fine until you started chucking your weight around.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> fair enough. it looks more abusive than it was meant. soz humberto.



No problem. 

Read your post all wrong anyway so my fault.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> It was fine until you started chucking your weight around.


more evidence we need a poster's union.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

discokermit said:


> more evidence we need a poster's union.


perhaps a posters' union would be more effective


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps a posters' union would be more effective


maybe. i suppose it just being my union wouldn't work very well. posters' union it is then!


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 15, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps a posters' union would be more effective


 
A posters' onion would only lead to tears.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> A posters' onion would only lead to tears.


i offer no opinion on any such vegetable


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 15, 2013)

A posters' bunion would end in defeat.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 15, 2013)

Badgers said:


> The whole thing is shit. I would wager the Portuguese tourist boards advertising spend in the UK had dropped somewhat.
> 
> There was parental neglect which seems to have been glossed over. Dr David Payne's comment is awkward reading at best. The sniffer dog and timeline thing is really odd. Not saying the parents did it but for many (especially the media) they seem to be held up as battling angels.
> 
> ...



Yep. The classist thing is a big feature here...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 15, 2013)

Lemon Eddy said:


> Logically I can appreciate that this is correct, but it's one hell of a thing when the best case explanation for a scenario is that the parents accidentally killed their child.


It's not, and this is the danger of goal directed reasoning: a narrative gets woven around the facts, and, like the Man In The Moon, once it's been pointed out, the risk is that people stop being able to see it as just a load of facts or craters. 

At the risk of pissing lots of people off, this is EXACTLY how conspiracy theories (and miscarriages of justice) happen, and why an innocent until proven guilty justice system is the only way to go.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 15, 2013)

What if this is linked to Saville and the peadophile ring?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

I think it's best if we all pretend the above post never happened.


----------



## 1%er (Oct 15, 2013)

There is a thread about drug dogs here, but it didn't mention cadaver dogs. There is also this study from Australia (again drugs) that says "that means four out of five times the dogs are getting it wrong" [I believe this is in a public place].

This is not the sort of report you will see published all over the place for reasons that should be obvious, not least the fact that a dog indication is "considered reasonable grounds for a search", if the report is correct surely those "reasonable grounds" would be lost.

It is a subject of interest to many and I am sure more research will be made public at some point.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Yep. The classist thing is a big feature here...


 - and it's a legitimate and indeed obvious dimension of the media story (and maybe the reason this is still being discussed).  However, particularly after revol's telling off yesterday, most people are manging to separate that out from the issue of what actually happened.  For me, it's simply a practical thing, can't see how they _could have_ done it.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 15, 2013)

Wilf said:


> - and it's a legitimate and indeed obvious dimension of the media story (and maybe the reason this is still being discussed).  However, particularly after revol's telling off yesterday, most people are manging to separate that out from the issue of what actually happened.  For me, it's simply a practical thing, can't see how they _could have_ done it.



Not them but people they knew...it was just something a mate said to me earlier today, the idea that they are connected via their class background to various social circles.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Not them but people they knew...it was just something a mate said to me earlier today, the idea that they are connected via their class background to various social circles.



Can you decipher this for me please?

Are you saying that someone the McCann's knew, abducted Madeleine, because of ..... err ... something to do with their class?


----------



## Lemon Eddy (Oct 15, 2013)

existentialist said:


> It's not, and this is the danger of goal directed reasoning: a narrative gets woven around the facts, and, like the Man In The Moon, once it's been pointed out, the risk is that people stop being able to see it as just a load of facts or craters.



Sorry, but could you please try reading what was written.  I am not saying it is the most likely hypothesis.  I am saying that it is a terrible thing when  the least harrowing of the scenarios available is that she died peacefully through an accidental overdose of a sedative, rather than the nightmarish scenario of abducted by a child abuser.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 15, 2013)

shygirl said:


> her
> 
> I think its rather nasty of you to say that my posts are shabby.   I want to believe this is a genuine abduction case.  But there  are anomalies which raise questions for me.  What we're doing here is exploring some of these issues.




I'm not. I'm just here for the Papal gags.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Can you decipher this for me please?
> 
> Are you saying that someone the McCann's knew, abducted Madeleine, because of ..... err ... something to do with their class?



Well I don't buy it and find it a bit like suggesting 9/11 was an inside job but that idea was they're connected via their class social circle to the ring. Think my friends are probably smoking too much weed these days...


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Think my friends are probably smoking too much weed these days...



Sounds like they're banging-up crack too.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

I would def post what my mates on weed think about this case on here. It'd let me get out of posting nonsense and help move the thread long.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 15, 2013)

Just watched the reconstruction on playback and there was very little on terms of new ideas as to how they think she was taken from the apartment. 

Still no hypothesis on how someone got in or out of the apartment.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

Was the reconstruction aiming to do that? For you, on telly?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just watched the reconstruction on playback and there was very little on terms of new ideas as to how they think she was taken from the apartment.
> 
> Still no hypothesis on how someone got in or out of the apartment.



Well there was speculation that she'd been nicked via the window, and that other burglaries had been committed in a similar fashion, but that's hardly important is it? The main thrust was the possible shift in the timeline that brought the other fella into play.


----------



## Looby (Oct 15, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just watched the reconstruction on playback and there was very little on terms of new ideas as to how they think she was taken from the apartment.
> 
> Still no hypothesis on how someone got in or out of the apartment.



They'd left the doors and I think the windows unlocked so it wouldn't have been too hard.


----------



## LiamO (Oct 15, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Not them but people they knew...it was just something a mate said to me earlier today, the idea that they are connected via their class background to various social circles.



Despite it's nameToryglen (WHere Gerry McCann comes from) is not renowned for it's collection of high-society Tories and society's movers and shakers.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 15, 2013)

This remains a very strange case in many ways.  And assuming the police know a lot more then they are letting on its interesting that they went with crimewatch, they must think the person(s) they are looking for is British.


----------



## LiamO (Oct 15, 2013)

I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
I must not post on this abortion of a thread.

etc etc


----------



## brogdale (Oct 15, 2013)

sparklefish said:


> They'd left the doors and I think the windows unlocked so it wouldn't have been too hard.



Off course they did. Locking the kids in on their own could have created a death trap, if anything had gone wrong...


----------



## Manter (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Can you decipher this for me please?
> 
> Are you saying that someone the McCann's knew, abducted Madeleine, because of ..... err ... something to do with their class?


All middle class people know each other, dontcha know.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 15, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> ...


 
I believe there is an ignore thread option now.  But go on, it might be fun............


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> I must not post on this abortion of a thread.
> ...


But look at me while i'm not doing it.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 15, 2013)

sparklefish said:


> They'd left the doors and I think the windows unlocked so it wouldn't have been too hard.



From what I can tell they'd left the shutters closed and the window too. It was shown there was no forced entry from the outside so if someone did leave they opened them both, picked up a sleeping child and climbed out onto the street outside. There were no forensics on the window, frame or ledge such as footmarks, fingerprints etc. other than Mrs McCann's.


----------



## Smyz (Oct 15, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just watched the reconstruction on playback and there was very little on terms of new ideas as to how they think she was taken from the apartment.
> 
> Still no hypothesis on how someone got in or out of the apartment.


You just watched the reconstruction and not the rest of it?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 15, 2013)

If the police explained that bit I missed it. Possible with a toddler jumping on me


----------



## BigMoaner (Oct 15, 2013)

some weird stuff told in the police interviews by one of the Tapas 7 about another of the Tapas 7 being a bit noncey - read *KATHERINA ZACHARIAS account:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm*

odd, if you ask me.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 15, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> From what I can tell they'd left the shutters closed and the window too. It was shown there was no forced entry from the outside so if someone did leave they opened them both, picked up a sleeping child and climbed out onto the street outside. There were no forensics on the window, frame or ledge such as footmarks, fingerprints etc. other than Mrs McCann's.


 Courtesy Wiki (so must be correct!)...


> The McCanns put the children to bed around 19:00. All three were sleeping in a bedroom overlooking a car park and garden area, near the back door of the apartment and the street, on the opposite side of the apartment block from the resort, tapas restaurant and swimming pool.[28] There was one window, shuttered, looking onto the car park. Madeleine's bed was on the other side of the room.[26] The twins slept in travel cots and Madeleine in a single bed, with her princess blanket and a pink soft toy, Cuddle Cat. She was wearing a pair of short-sleeved, pink-and-white Marks and Spencer's Eeyore pyjamas.[29]
> 
> The parents left the apartment at 20:30 to dine with their friends at the resort's open-air tapas restaurant, which lay 50-metres (160 ft) on the other side of the pool, a walk of 30–45 seconds.[30] They left the apartment's sliding patio doors closed, but not locked; the doors faced the swimming pool, but also led to a small set of stairs and a gate, which in turn led to a public road on the non-resort side of the apartment block.[31]


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

BigMoaner said:


> some weird stuff told in the police interviews by one of the Tapas 7 about another of the Tapas 7 being a bit noncey - read *KATHERINA ZACHARIAS account:
> 
> http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm*
> 
> odd, if you ask me.


What exactly is the noncey bit?


----------



## BigMoaner (Oct 15, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What exactly is the noncey bit?



do control find and type in "two or three days had gone by" and read from there


----------



## BigMoaner (Oct 15, 2013)

here it is. badly translated by porto police:

Two or three days had gone by, we were all staying in Majorca where, in general terms, we had fun (Page 3) with our children. Possibly, around the fourth or perhaps the fifth day abroad, I remember an incident that stayed recorded in my head. I say this in this way, because I have thought numerous times about the incident that I am about to describe since that date.

One night, when we were on holiday, the adults, in other words, the couples that I mentioned were on a patio outside the house where we were staying. We had been eating and drinking.

I was sitting between Dave and Gerry whom I believe were both talking about Madeleine. I don't remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like ?she?, referring to Madeleine, ?would do this?.

When he mentioned ?this?, Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, whilst with the other hand he circled his nipple, with a circulating movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner there being an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing.

I remember that I was shocked at this, and looked at Gerry, and also at Dave, to see their reactions. I looked around (page 4) to see ?did anyone else hear this, or was it just me?. There was a nervous silence noted in the conversations of all the others and immediately afterwards everyone began talking again.

I never spoke to anyone about this, but I always felt that it was something very strange and that it wasn't something that should be done or said.

Apart from this, I remember that Dave did the same thing once again. When I refer to this, I want to mention again that it was during a conversation, in which he was talking about an imaginary situation, though I could not say precisely what it was about. I believe that he was talking about his own daughter, L., though I'm not certain. He slid one of his fingers in and out of his mouth, while the other hand drew a circle around his nipple in a provocative and sexual manner. I believe that he was referring to the way that L., would behave or would do it.

I believe that he did this later on, during the holidays, but I cannot be sure. The only time, besides this one, that I was with Dave and Fiona was several weeks after the holidays, when Savio and I met up with Gerry, Kate, Dave and Fiona at a restaurant in Leicester.

I am absolutely certain that he said what he said and that he made the gestures I referred to, but that could have occurred in the restaurant in Leicester, even though (page five) I believe that it was later on, in Majorca. When I heard Dave saying and doing this a second time, I took it more seriously.

I remember thinking whether he looked at the girls in a different way from me or from the others. I imagined that maybe he had visited Internet sites related to small children. In short, I thought that he might be interested in child pornography on the internet.

During our holidays, I was more attentive at the bath times after hearing Dave saying that.

During our holidays in Majorca, it was the fathers who took care of the children baths. I had the tendency to walk close to the bathroom, if it was Dave bathing the children. I remember telling Savio to took care to be there, in case it was Dave helping to bathe the children and, in particular, my daughter E. I was very clear about this, as having heard him say that had disturbed me, and I did not trust him to give bath to E. alone.

When I heard Dave say that a second time, it reinforced what I already thought in relation to his thoughts about girls. During our stay in Majorca, Dave and his wife, Fiona, accompanied by their daughter L., took Madeleine (page 6) with them to spend the day, in order to give Kate and Gerry a bit of rest and time to be with the twins. When I say this, it is not that I was worried about Madeleine's safety, since she was also with Fiona and L., and also with Dave, as far as I know.

As I have already mentioned, I was only with Dave and Fiona on one occasion, after Majorca, and I have not spoken to them since then. In the last two years, we have met, as a family, with the MCCANN, every now and then. This mainly happens on the children's birthdays, a time when we meet up.

The first time I heard of the terrible news about Madeleine's disappearance through the radio, my thoughts went immediately to Dave. I asked Savio if Dave was also on holidays with the MCCANN in Portugal but he did not know.

I watched the TV thoroughly, and seeing the news coverage, I noticed that Dave was there, because I saw him, in the background, on the television images during the first days after Madeleine?s disappearance. Based upon that, I believed that he was on holidays with the MCCANN in Portugal.

Today, Wednesday, 16th of May of 2007, at 17:40, I gave DC Brewer an A4 page containing 2 photographic images. I am going to refer to these images as (Ref KZG/1) (element of proof) that may (page seven) be presented as means of proof, if necessary. These photographs were taken during the holidays in Majorca. In the photographs, Dave is wearing a white T-shirt and the woman in the photograph corresponds to his wife Fiona. The man who is holding the glass of wine in the photograph is Stuart. These photographs were taken while we were in Majorca.


----------



## youngian (Oct 15, 2013)

Here a blabbermouth from a different continent contributing some back of a fag packet bullshit


Her qualification is as a "former US prosecutor" but doesn't say why such an eminent individual left her job.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2013)

BigMoaner said:


> do control find and type in "two or three days had gone by" and read from there


Oh god.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Well there was speculation that she'd been nicked via the window, and that other burglaries had been committed in a similar fashion, but that's hardly important is it? The main thrust was the possible shift in the timeline that brought the other fella into play.



You seen that Spanish doc about how it was actually neglect and she died trying to get out of the window?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 15, 2013)

Fan my brow. So it was Dave, after all. Will this thread be able to claim the reward?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

BigMoaner said:


> here it is. badly translated by porto police:
> 
> Two or three days had gone by .... <snip>



I really don't know WTF to make of that.

Any opinions, butchersapron , discokermit  ?


----------



## Smyz (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I really don't know WTF to make of that.
> 
> Any opinions, butchersapron , discokermit  ?


It just means that one of the women in the group suspected one of the men in the group of having an unhealthy interest in young girls and thought she should mention it.

It doesn't make it possible for him to have disposed of the body any more than it was possible for the McCanns.


----------



## xenon (Oct 15, 2013)

...


----------



## weltweit (Oct 15, 2013)

Interesting that after the crimewatch program apparently a number of independent callers mentioned the same person. Well perhaps it is interesting, I suppose only time will tell.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

weltweit said:


> Interesting that after the crimewatch program apparently a number of independent callers apparently mentioned the same person. Well perhaps it is interesting, I suppose only time will tell.


i got all my mates to phone up naming the same person i never got on with at school


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

Smyz said:


> It just means that one of the women in the group suspected one of the men in the group of having an unhealthy interest in young girls and thought she should mention it.
> 
> It doesn't make it possible for him to have disposed of the body any more than it was possible for the McCanns.



Yeah, but .....


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, but .....


weak.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I really don't know WTF make of that.
> 
> Any opinions, butchersapron , discokermit  ?


 
I recall this from a couple of years ago, in amongst some ridiculous conspiracy theories about satanic abuse, links to government figures and all manner of weird things.  Man does sound like a nonce, tho'.


----------



## petee (Oct 15, 2013)

youngian said:


> Here a blabbermouth from a different continent contributing some back of a fag packet bullshit


i like that, describes anyone on fox really



youngian said:


> Her qualification is as a "former US prosecutor" but doesn't say why such an eminent individual left her job.


http://andjusticeforsome.blogspot.com/2009/08/wendy-murphys-bio.html


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2013)

petee said:


> i like that, describes anyone on fox reallyl


and more than a few people here


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 15, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I recall this from a couple of years ago, in amongst some ridiculous conspiracy theories about satanic abuse, links to government figures and all manner of weird things.  Man does sound like a nonce, tho'.


On the basis of a half-heard conversation?. It's Paedogeddon!


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 15, 2013)

I might be naive but what's with the nipple circling? Sounds like something from Brass Eye.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 15, 2013)

BigMoaner said:


> here it is. badly translated by porto police:
> 
> Two or three days had gone by, we were all staying in Majorca where, in general terms, we had fun (Page 3) with our children. Possibly, around the fourth or perhaps the fifth day abroad, I remember an incident that stayed recorded in my head. I say this in this way, because I have thought numerous times about the incident that I am about to describe since that date.
> 
> ...


 
Definitely sounds dodgy, but perhaps no more than that.


----------



## youngian (Oct 15, 2013)

petee said:


> http://andjusticeforsome.blogspot.com/2009/08/wendy-murphys-bio.html





> Foreward by Bill O'Reilly



I'm getting the picture. No doubt he has some well informed views on the McCann case.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 15, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> I might be naive but what's with the nipple circling? Sounds like something from Brass Eye.



Sounds like bollocks to me.

She went on _*2 holidays*_ with nipple-circling, finger-sucking, (potential) paedo's, and didn't warn anyone.

Have I got this right?

Seems astonishing.


----------



## LiamO (Oct 15, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> But look at me while i'm not doing it.



It's a comment on how seductive/enticing it might be to get drawn into this mind-bogglingly stupid speculation and quantum-leap extrapolation... and infantile judgementalism...or alternatively the shooting-down of the same by others.

... and how some people on here might perhaps take a long, deep look at themselves and reflect on what they are capable of writing. 

My final post on this abortion of a thread.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 15, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i got all my mates to phone up naming the same person i never got on with at school



So, no-one phoned, then?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Sounds like bollocks to me.
> 
> She went on _*2 holidays*_ with nipple-circling, finger-sucking, (potential) paedo's, and didn't warn anyone.
> 
> ...



Seems to me like "Dave" (probably fortunately for everyone) hadn't spent much time around small children, and was interpreting fairly normal actions (basic stimulus/response actions like touching oneself in places that have lots of nerve-endings) that all kids do as somehow sexual.  I'm also sure "Dave" wouldn't have remarked about how many small boys rub their crotches with big grins on their faces as being something sexual, because like I said above, it's just innocent stimulus/response stuff.

"Dave" sounds like either he's naive as fuck, or a bit of a weirdo, but that doesn't make him a kidnapper and/or molester and/or murderer.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 15, 2013)

LiamO said:


> It's a comment on how seductive/enticing it might be to get drawn into this mind-bogglingly stupid speculation and quantum-leap extrapolation... and infantile judgementalism...or alternatively the shooting-down of the same by others.
> 
> ... and how some people on here might perhaps take a long, deep look at themselves and reflect on what they are capable of writing.
> 
> My final post on this abortion of a thread.



Self-righteous as ever, eh?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Sounds like bollocks to me.
> 
> She went on _*2 holidays*_ with nipple-circling, finger-sucking, (potential) paedo's, and didn't warn anyone.
> 
> ...


wasn't it one holiday, the first time she met him, and a meal in a restaurant where he was also there.

it is very odd though. these people seem to have been very close to the mccanns. doctors too.

also, people seem to think this woman was one of the tapas seven but she wasn't. she learned of events from the television. though her husband knew kate from university and they had all been on holiday together, they weren't on this particular holiday.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 15, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the basis of a half-heard conversation?. It's Paedogeddon!


 
Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Seems to me like "Dave" (probably fortunately for everyone) hadn't spent much time around small children, and was interpreting fairly normal actions (basic stimulus/response actions like touching oneself in places that have lots of nerve-endings) that all kids do as somehow sexual.  I'm also sure "Dave" wouldn't have remarked about how many small boys rub their crotches with big grins on their faces as being something sexual, because like I said above, it's just innocent stimulus/response stuff.
> 
> "Dave" sounds like either he's naive as fuck, or a bit of a weirdo, but that doesn't make him a kidnapper and/or molester and/or murderer.


he is a father and was apparently very popular with the children. took part in bathing and looking after other children.


dunno about this site but there are several witness statements there. the one by yvone martin is particularly odd,

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id236.html


----------



## discokermit (Oct 15, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?


also, yvone martin, who works in social services and child protection, saw a man she thought she had seen before in relation to her work, as a suspect or witness. she later identified him as david payne.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 15, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> I might be naive but what's with the nipple circling? Sounds like something from Brass Eye.


As if WE would know something like that! What do you think we are, perverts?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Yvonne Martin clearly had concerns, but she didn't come across as acting wholly appropriately in questioning the family and trying to get Kate on her own.  Her motives may have been good, but, whatever her credentials, she was on holiday and had  not been invited by the family or the police to intervene.  Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh here?

That said, her statements are unsettling.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Sounds like bollocks to me.
> 
> She went on _*2 holidays*_ with nipple-circling, finger-sucking, (potential) paedo's, and didn't warn anyone.
> 
> ...


 
You never witnessed behaviour that you couldn't quite put your finger on, that you would nevertheless keep in the back of your mind?  Just to be on the safe side.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

when the fuck this this case turn into some sort of JFK assassination for people obsessed with paedos.

the palpable pleasure arsholes are taking in throwing up their half baked stories as to what really happened is fucking creepy not to mention the questionable mentality of those projecting some really fucked up motives onto the parents.

"when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you" and all that comes to mind.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

you're fucking creepy, you weird cunt.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

Yes I'm a creepy weirdo, not the person who sits and works through various scenarios that would lead to a wee girls murder/abduction but actually posts his "preferred" scenario onto a message board.


discokermit said:


> thinking about it, i may have let emotion overcome intellect in some respects. i actually want the goncalo amaral version or something like it to be true, because it is by far the least unpleasant version.
> 
> if the mccanns had given their children a mild sedative, that wouldn't be too bad. they're doctors, ffs, they know what they're doing. then madeleine wakes up, goes to the window to look for her parents, falls over the back of the settee and dies. kate discovers her, they panick, they dispose of body and end up in a bizarre media frenzy that they get too far into to get out of.
> 
> now, that lot is fairly unlikely and full of holes but in my mind puts less blame on the mccanns than the mccann version. that version involves a tragic accident and some selfish, panicky stupidity. their version involves insufficient security procedures and a three year old being abducted for reasons too horrific to think about.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Yes I'm a creepy weirdo, not the person who sits and works through various scenarios that would lead to a wee girls murder/abduction but actually posts his "preferred" scenario onto a message board.


wouldn't you prefer to think an accidental death rather than abduction and murder?

maybe not. wasn't it you who posted that weird noncey stuff before? some teen off the telly or summat you were wanking yourself silly over? that was you, wasn't it?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

discokermit said:


> you're fucking creepy, you weird cunt.



Yeah, he's got ginger pubes and a funny- shaped cock.

But he's right on this.


----------



## BigMoaner (Oct 16, 2013)

the human mind is intrigued by mystery. get off your high horse!


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, he's got ginger pubes and a funny shaped cock.
> 
> But he's right on this.


how's that?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?


We have a sense of proportion. 

Scary, isn't it?


----------



## komodo (Oct 16, 2013)

Yvonne Martin sounds well dodgy. What are the 'official papers' she says she had from the British Police that she showed the McCanns? What kind of professional randomly shows up at a scenario like this like this 'to help' when they can't even speak Portuguese nor have any specific skills to offer. Her ' help' seems to be more of a would-be Miss Marple telling the Portuguese police how to do their job.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 16, 2013)

Bahnhof Strasse said:
			
		

> So do I, but 5ml of Calpol won't kill a child, but because they are doctors some people have made a leap that something much stronger had been administered.



This is the angle I don't get. Being doctors means that if they did sedate their kids, and it's a big if, the kids would be significantly *less* likely to have an accidental overdose given their parents are qualified in medicine.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> This is the angle I don't get. Being doctors means that if they did sedate their kids, and it's a big if, the kids would be significantly *less* likely to have an accidental overdose given their parents are qualified in medicine.



Like I said, earlier, there's no good reason for believing this! I know of a case (not in my house, btw) where a qualified doctor sent his son to school with meningitis because he assumed the lad was malingering, and faking illness to escape from the classroom. When he got to the classroom the teacher took one look at him and said "this boy is seriously ill".

That's an example of what I talked about in my earlier post - when doctors look at their own kids, they see their own kids, not patients. That's why it's not ethical to treat your own children.

(And of course, there seems to be no hard evidence that the kids in this case were sedated).


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 16, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:
			
		

> Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents. Had there been someone there, it wouldn't have happened.
> 
> As far as I'm aware neither of the McCanns have said 'this is our fault', which it patently is.



Coping mechanisms.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 16, 2013)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> Like I said, earlier, there's no good reason for believing this! I know of a case (not in my house, btw) where a qualified doctor sent his son to school with meningitis because he assumed the lad was malingering, and faking illness to escape from the classroom. When he got to the classroom the teacher took one look at him and said "this boy is seriously ill".
> 
> That's an example of what I talked about in my earlier post - when doctors look at their own kids, they see their own kids, not patients. That's why it's not ethical to treat your own children.
> 
> (And of course, there seems to be no hard evidence that the kids in this case were sedated).



But meningitis shares symptoms with other ailments so is far easier to get wrong than administering a dose of a drug which is a routine procedure.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents. Had there been someone there, it wouldn't have happened.
> 
> As far as I'm aware neither of the McCanns have said 'this is our fault', which it patently is.


Maybe if they had this hey, _i'm christian everyone_ type would deign to show some charity, some compassion?


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> But meningitis shares symptoms with other ailments so is far easier to get wrong than administering a dose of a drug which is a routine procedure.



I'd say a routine procedure performed on holiday, on someone you shouldn't be performing it on, has its own risk of going wrong.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?


Have you actually read the statements?



> I can say that Dave was a pleasant person. I do not remember him having any unusual characteristics.
> 
> During the holidays Dave never behaved in an inappropriate manner with Madeleine or with any of the other children. Dave was popular with the children and I took this to be because he was a close friend to the family.
> 
> ...


what the fuck is wrong with you ?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

discokermit said:


> how's that?



Because this whole thing is getting completely out of hand.

Some people so want to believe that the McCann's were involved that they are trying to shape every utterance into a scenario that fits that agenda.

First they accidentally overdosed the kid .... you know .... cos they're doctors, and magically disposed of her body in less than an hour, but when that's shown to be highly unlikely they become paedophile facilitators in cahoots with "Dave The Nonce".

We are now very firmly in conspiraloon territory, ffs. 

And all the while, by far the most likely scenario according to _all the evidence_ is that someone sneaked in and abducted her.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Because this whole thing is getting completely out of hand.
> 
> Some people want to believe that the McCann's were involved and are trying to shape every utterance into a scenario that fits.
> 
> ...


i think maybe the reason people do that is because people breaking in somewhere and stealing a child is a pretty rare thing to happen. murder, rape, peadophilia etc, are all crimes where the victim is usually known by the offender.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 16, 2013)

So has urban solved this mystery yet, or what?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You never witnessed behaviour that you couldn't quite put your finger on, that you would nevertheless keep in the back of your mind?  Just to be on the safe side.



Not potentially paedophilic stuff, no.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies. * what the fuck is wrong with you people?*



A belief in "innocent until proven guilty"?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> A belief in "innocent until proven guilty"?


bourgeois.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2013)

Innocent until asked to leave the party.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> This is the angle I don't get. Being doctors means that if they did sedate their kids, and it's a big if, the kids would be significantly *less* likely to have an accidental overdose given their parents are qualified in medicine.



Being scrupulously reasonable, I'm not sure you can actually draw that conclusion, and for the following reasons:


Almost all dosage data is calculated with reference to an "average" young adult male. Extrapolations of dosage by bodyweight taken from that dosage data are guesswork, rather than clinically-verified data.
Some medications can have a different effect curve on children than adults.
Some medicines that have a sedative effect, will also dampen the central nervous system, which can cause respiratory depression.

Basically, unless either of the McCanns had experience with sedating children with a particular medication, they would not have been able to predict the side-effects.  

Medications prescribable to children are limited.  The first two reasons I give above, are why.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

discokermit said:


> bourgeois.



Says the driver of the ultimate _bourgeois_ aspirational vehicle.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe if they had this hey, _i'm christian everyone_ type would deign to show some charity, some compassion?



What's it those Christian folk say again?  Oh yeah, something about "let he that is without sin, cast the first stone", I believe!
Odd how many of them forget that one, isn't it?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> What's it those Christian folk say again?  Oh yeah, something about "let he that is without sin, cast the first stone", I believe!
> Odd how many of them forget that one, isn't it?


Yep, not much christian in this christian.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> Have you actually read the statements?
> 
> what the fuck is wrong with you ?


 
What, cos the doctor said he was a nice man? And that means what in relation to inappropriate comments/actions about little girls?


----------



## BigMoaner (Oct 16, 2013)

think about it though, what a weird, weird gesture to be making around small kids.


----------



## Yelkcub (Oct 16, 2013)

I keep reading the thread title as "Madeleine McMadness'


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?



You've got to be kidding. 

The woman admits there's no context to the gestures and her husband says he saw them once but seems to consider Payne a thoroughly decent chap.

But it sounds like "paedophilic tendencies" to internet sleuth Shygirl.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Not potentially paedophilic stuff, no.


 
I have on many occasions.  I don't do/say anything with it, but keep it in the back of my mind. And my concerns have very often been vindicated.   Having worked in education/youth/child protection for the past 20 odd years, perhaps I'm more tuned in to these things.  This and my own experiences and knowing about many of women friends' experiences as children.

I accept that I may have gone too far here in speculating about and discussing some of the links and allegations regarding the doctor.  Think it better to bow out now.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> You've got to be kidding.
> 
> The woman admits there's no context to the gestures and her husband says he saw them once but seems to consider Payne a thoroughly decent chap.
> 
> But it sounds like "paedophilic tendencies" to internet sleuth Shygirl.


 
Actions that appear to be simulating oral sex and nipple rubbing?  Nothing to worry about?   Now I'm out.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> What, cos the doctor said he was a nice man? And that means what in relation to inappropriate comments/actions about little girls?


No, because one of the doctors said:



> At the time I did not feel the gesture was referring to Madeleine.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You never witnessed behaviour that you couldn't quite put your finger on, that you would nevertheless keep in the back of your mind?  Just to be on the safe side.



Yes I have. Improper behaviour, IMHO, between a 14/15yo and a 30yo.. it's now being investigated by police three years later.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Having worked in education/youth/child protection for the past 20 odd years, perhaps I'm more tuned in to these things


With that level of experience, I find your tendency to leap to kneejerk conclusions based on stereotyped assumptions even more disturbing.


----------



## peterkro (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Being scrupulously reasonable, I'm not sure you can actually draw that conclusion, and for the following reasons:
> 
> 
> Almost all dosage data is calculated with reference to an "average" young adult male. Extrapolations of dosage by bodyweight taken from that dosage data are guesswork, rather than clinically-verified data.
> ...


I see what you're saying however even a very bad GP let alone two would be able to keep a kid alive in most overdose situations unless it was a real attempt to kill which seems unlikely.I have no idea what happened in this case but it seems nearly everyone involved has behaved in very odd ways.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Actions that appear to be simulating oral sex and nipple rubbing?  Nothing to worry about?   Now I'm out.



I read that differently. That Payne was imitating gestures made by children.

Even if he was making inappropriate gestures in Majorca, how does that make him guilty of abducting Madeleine in Portugal 2 years later or indicate the involvement of the McCann's?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

My gut has served me very well over the years.  And my practice, if I say so myself, is of a high standard.   As I said earlier, I wouldn't act on anything without evidence/disclosure.  I thought it was ok to explore things on here, didn't think I was acting in any official capacity.  Posters speculate and comment on all manner of things on here.  But I will think this whole thing through and be more circumspect in future.  Damn, a couple of posts earlier I said I was out of here, but didn't think it right to ignore your comments.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I read that differently. That Payne was imitating gestures made by children.
> 
> Even if he was making inappropriate gestures in Majorca, how does that make him guilty of abducting Madeleine in Portugal 2 years later?


"Once a peado, always a peado". And some people just have a paedar that's better than ours: WHY MUST WE ALWAYS DOUBT THEM? It's almost as if we WANT kids to be abused, murdered, or abducted!!1!


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I read that differently. That Payne was imitating gestures made by children.
> 
> Even if he was making inappropriate gestures in Majorca, how does that make him guilty of abducting Madeleine in Portugal 2 years later or indicate the involvement of the McCann's?


 
Huh?  I haven't said anything about his guilt or otherwise in M's disappearance.  Please don't muddle me with other posters.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> "Once a peado, always a peado". And some people just have a paedar that's better than ours: WHY MUST WE ALWAYS DOUBT THEM? It's almost as if we WANT kids to be abused, murdered, or abducted!!1!


 
Speak for yourself.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Huh?  I haven't said anything about his guilt or otherwise in M's disappearance.



Your insinuation was pretty clear. You said that he displayed "paedophilic tendencies" on a thread about a missing child. 

What did you mean by that then?


----------



## Thora (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I have on many occasions.  I don't do/say anything with it, but keep it in the back of my mind. And my concerns have very often been vindicated.   Having worked in education/youth/child protection for the past 20 odd years, perhaps I'm more tuned in to these things.  This and my own experiences and knowing about many of women friends' experiences as children.
> 
> I accept that I may have gone too far here in speculating about and discussing some of the links and allegations regarding the doctor.  Think it better to bow out now.


If you had dinner with/went on holiday with someone who did something that made you feel they had an sexual interest in toddlers and probably used child porn, would you really just keep it at the back of your mind and let this man bathe your daughter?  If someone said or did something that made me uncomfortable I would not be handing over my children to them.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Your insinuation was pretty clear. You said that he displayed "paedophilic tendencies" on a thread about a missing child.
> 
> What did you mean by that then?


 
Exactly what I said.  I was discussing his actions, NOT his involvement with a missing child.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 16, 2013)

BigMoaner said:


> think about it though, what a weird, weird gesture to be making around small kids.


Where is the statement does it say the were around small kids?


This thread is either conspiraloonery or trolling, I'm not sure which.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Your insinuation was pretty clear. You said that he displayed "paedophilic tendencies" on a thread about a missing child.
> 
> What did you mean by that then?


i thought shygirl meant like leadership tendencies only to do with the sexual abuse of young children


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I read that differently. That Payne was imitating gestures made by children.
> 
> Even if he was making inappropriate gestures in Majorca, how does that make him guilty of abducting Madeleine in Portugal 2 years later or indicate the involvement of the McCann's?


because everyone agrees this was planned in advance


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> First they accidentally overdosed the kid .... you know .... cos they're doctors,


like you're unaware of the annual 'killing season' when new drs are let loose on the wards or the regular and dreary appearances of doctors before the medical council for being shit


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Thora said:


> If you had dinner with/went on holiday with someone who did something that made you feel they had an sexual interest in toddlers and probably used child porn, would you really just keep it at the back of your mind and let this man bathe your daughter?  If someone said or did something that made me uncomfortable I would not be handing over my children to them.


 
That goes without saying.  As a parent, whenever I've had those feelings or concerns about someone's behaviour, I was vigilent.  I wouldn't let anyone bathe my child, unless I trusted them 100% and even then I would probably take care of that stuff myself.  We know from the sheer scale of people who report that they had experience of inappropriate touching/comments or sexual abuse as children that there are very many people around with paedophilic tendencies in society.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought shygirl meant like leadership tendencies only to do with the sexual abuse of young children


 
What does this mean?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> What does this mean?


it means a tendency to interfere with little children. what did you mean?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

The leadership thing?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

I'm not getting the joke, if it is one.


----------



## Thora (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> That goes without saying.  As a parent, whenever I've had those feelings or concerns about someone's behaviour, I was vigilent.  I wouldn't let anyone bathe my child, unless I trusted them 100% and even then I would probably take care of that stuff myself.  We know from the sheer scale of people who report that they had experience of inappropriate touching/comments or sexual abuse as children that there are very many people around with paedophilic tendencies in society.


In which case it seems very odd to me that this woman would let someone she thinks is a paedophile anywhere near her kids, let alone let him bathe them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I'm not getting the joke, if it is one.


let's move on then, these things are never so amusing when they need be explained. now, what did you mean by paedophilic tendencies?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Exactly what I said.  I was discussing his actions, NOT his involvement with a missing child.



So what do you see as the relevance of those actions?

And what did you mean by this:



> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls. To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies. what the fuck is wrong with you people?


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> So what do you see as the relevance of those actions?
> 
> And what did you mean by this:


 
I didn't.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Thora said:


> In which case it seems very odd to me that this woman would let someone she thinks is a paedophile anywhere near her kids, let alone let him bathe them.


 
The statements make it clear she asked her husband to never allow this man near to her daughter during bath times.  She said that the guys covered the childrens' bathtimes, so asking her husband to take care of their daughter's bath time would eliminate the risk.  I think she might also have asked him to keep the door shut.


----------



## Thora (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> The statements make it clear she asked her husband to never allow this man near to her daughter during bath times.  She said that the guys covered the childrens' bathtimes, so asking her husband to take care of their daughter's bath time would eliminate the risk.  I think she might also have asked him to keep the door shut.


She says she walked close to the bathroom if Dave was doing bathtime, and asked her husband to be around if Dave was bathing her daughter.  Still seems a very _relaxed_ attitude to a paedo bathing small children to me.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I didn't.



Now you're confusing me.

Why are you making an issue of Dave if you don't think it's relevant to Madeleine?

And why did you say "what the fuck is wrong with you people?"?

Sorry but you're not making any sense.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Thora said:


> She says she walked close to the bathroom if Dave was doing bathtime, and asked her husband to be around if Dave was bathing her daughter.  Still seems a very _relaxed_ attitude to a paedo bathing small children to me.


 
Agreed, though I'm sure I read that she asked him to bathe their daughter.  Personally, I wouldn't have taken care of it myself.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 16, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yep, not much christian in this christian.



I thought Sas followed Judaism?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> I thought Sas followed Judaism?


 
_Everything_ followed Judaism.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> I thought Sas followed Judaism?


Not any more.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 16, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe if they had this hey, _i'm christian everyone_ type would deign to show some charity, some compassion?



If only they would wear the "Find Maddie" pink rubber bracelet of support, it would make such a difference. But will they?

Edit
Speaking as an aunt and a great-aunt, and former waitress, I find that highly questionable.


----------



## Looby (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> My gut has served me very well over the years.  And my practice, if I say so myself, is of a high standard.   As I said earlier, I wouldn't act on anything without evidence/disclosure.  I thought it was ok to explore things on here, didn't think I was acting in any official capacity.  Posters speculate and comment on all manner of things on here.  But I will think this whole thing through and be more circumspect in future.  Damn, a couple of posts earlier I said I was out of here, but didn't think it right to ignore your comments.



Have you ever looked at websleuths? They love wild speculation and keyboard crime solving over there. ; )


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> My gut has served me very well over the years.  And my practice, if I say so myself, is of a high standard.   As I said earlier, I wouldn't act on anything without evidence/disclosure.  I thought it was ok to explore things on here, didn't think I was acting in any official capacity.  Posters speculate and comment on all manner of things on here.  But I will think this whole thing through and be more circumspect in future.  Damn, a couple of posts earlier I said I was out of here, but didn't think it right to ignore your comments.


I have said nothing about the standard of your practice. For all I know, it is of an excellent standard. It is not your practice that I was referring to, but your attitudes. I work with plenty of people who could also claim 20 years' experience working in child protection whose attitudes are equally suspect.

I train people in child protection, and one of the aspects we lead heavily on is that child protection is like assembling a jigsaw. Each piece may be insignificant on its own, but might form part of a bigger picture that IS significant, so it's important not to discount a piece of information.

However, it is just as important not to pick up a piece, and spend half an hour squinting at it, turning it upside-down, holding it up to the light, and then declaring that it looks like it has "paedophilic tendencies" - that serves no-one well.

And in this case, we don't even know if the piece actually exists, or whether it's part of the same jigsaw.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I have on many occasions.  I don't do/say anything with it, but keep it in the back of my mind. And my concerns have very often been vindicated.   Having worked in education/youth/child protection for the past 20 odd years, perhaps I'm more tuned in to these things.  This and my own experiences and knowing about many of women friends' experiences as children.
> 
> I accept that I may have gone too far here in speculating about and discussing some of the links and allegations regarding the doctor.  Think it better to bow out now.



Using your job in an attempt to lend a veneer of credibility to your irrational knee-jerk prejudices is beneath contempt. That, coupled with the fact that earlier on in the thread you openly admitted that you allowed social class to colour you judgement, leads me to the conclusion that you're not fit to look after a goldfish.The thought that you've got any kind of influence over the fates of vulnerable children genuinely horrifies me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Using your job in an attempt to lend a veneer of credibility to your irrational knee-jerk prejudices is beneath contempt. That, coupled with the fact that earlier on in the thread you openly admitted that you allowed social class to colour you judgement, leads me to the conclusion that you're not fit to look after a goldfish.The thought that you've got any kind of influence over the fates of vulnerable children genuinely horrifies me.


speaking as a librarian i have to agree with frances


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

UrbaneFox said:


> If only they would wear the "Find Maddie" pink rubber bracelet of support, it would make such a difference. But will they?
> 
> Edit
> Speaking as an aunt and a great-aunt, and former waitress, I find that highly questionable.


i tried dowsing with one of these 'find maddie' things but without success.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

Teaboy said:


> _Everything_ followed Judaism.


except buddhism


----------



## magneze (Oct 16, 2013)

kabbes said:


> So has urban solved this mystery yet, or what?


As far as I can tell, it was "Paedo Dave" wot did it.


----------



## Sirena (Oct 16, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> except buddhism


 ...and maybe a couple of hundred thousand years of civilization and its various spiritual practices....


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Using your job in an attempt to lend a veneer of credibility to your irrational knee-jerk prejudices is beneath contempt. That, coupled with the fact that earlier on in the thread you openly admitted that you allowed social class to colour you judgement, leads me to the conclusion that you're not fit to look after a goldfish.The thought that you've got any kind of influence over the fates of vulnerable children genuinely horrifies me.



Not that anyone else on this thread is overreacting, eh Frances? 

What exactly are the "irrational knee-jerk prejudices" of Shygirl's that make her "beneath contempt"? As far as I can tell she has merely drawn attention to a statement given to police pertaining to this very case that is in the public domain and has then indicated that she would share the concerns of the person who made the statement and their reasoning in making it. And she has also demonstrated a willingness to back down from a previous position, on the social class thing, that has been criticised and she now admits was mistaken -- something of which not everyone on these boards is capable. What is it about this that makes you horrified?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 16, 2013)

Lots of people have posted quite abhorrent stuff on this thread, Benners but IMO shygirl's contributions stand head and shoulders above the rest. She's used the (inescusible) old saw "as a mum, I...." for one thing. And that by itself is quite enough reason to write her opinions off as unworthy of consideration.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Lots of people have posted quite abhorrent stuff on this thread, Benners but IMO shygirl's contributions stand head and shoulders above the rest. She's used the (inescusible) old saw "as a mum, I...." for one thing. And that by itself is quite enough reason to write her opinions off as unworthy of consideration.



Yeah using empathetic reasoning when trying to understand the statements and logic of other people is a bit wacky, especially when it's women with children doing it about other women with children.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 16, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yeah using empathetic reasoning when trying to understand the statements and logic of other people is a bit wacky.



No but using your own status as a parent to cast aspersions on the behaviour of a couple who are going through something that the majority of parents will (thankfully) never have a clue what it's like to experience is quite deeply fucking abhorrent though.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:
			
		

> No but using your own status as a parent to cast aspersions on the behaviour of a couple who are going through something that the majority of parents will (thankfully) never have a clue what it's like to experience is quite deeply fucking abhorrent though.



I thought they were casting aspersions on leaving kids alone in an apartment abroad, which a lot of people have the option of if they chose.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 16, 2013)

She did more than that.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No but using your own status as a parent to cast aspersions on the behaviour of a couple who are going through something that the majority of parents will (thankfully) never have a clue what it's like to experience is quite deeply fucking abhorrent though.



The aspersions were cast by the persons making the statements to police about a third-party. Shygirl was suggesting she would feel similarly faced with the same situation as described there. Obviously posters on here are not in the best position to adjudicate either way on whether such aspersions were justified given the behavior of the individual concerned.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> She did more than that.



What are you referring to, then?


----------



## weltweit (Oct 16, 2013)

There is hope for the parents. There is no body so it seems quite reasonable that she may be still alive, and there are recent cases of people being kept in captivity being freed many years down the line.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> I thought Sas followed Judaism?



Sas's mother was a Jew, and as "Jewishness" is traditionally a matter of matrilineal descent, then he's a Jew.
That doesn't make him automatically a Yahweh-worshipping follower of Judaism, though!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

Teaboy said:


> _Everything_ followed Judaism.



Sas (or, as he's more widely known, Methuselah) actually preceded Judaism.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I have said nothing about the standard of your practice. For all I know, it is of an excellent standard. It is not your practice that I was referring to, but your attitudes. I work with plenty of people who could also claim 20 years' experience working in child protection whose attitudes are equally suspect.
> 
> I train people in child protection, and one of the aspects we lead heavily on is that child protection is like assembling a jigsaw. Each piece may be insignificant on its own, but might form part of a bigger picture that IS significant, so it's important not to discount a piece of information.
> 
> ...



You've got a jigsaw with paedophiliac tendencies?


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sas's mother was a Jew, and as "Jewishness" is traditionally a matter of matrilineal descent, then he's a Jew.
> That doesn't make him automatically a Yahweh-worshipping follower of Judaism, though!



hes just a very naughty boy


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 16, 2013)

benedict said:


> What are you referring to, then?



Just off the top of my head, these two posts.



> Its' really odd that they left their twin babies to go to see the Pope. If I had lost a child, you'd have to tear me from the remaining two. Bizarre.





> One of your children disappears, you're not gonna leave the others for more than a few hours so soon if her disappearance. As a mum, I simply know I could not bear to be parted from the remaining children. Its a very primitive, instinctive thing. I was very surprised when they flew off to Rome.



Snide insinuations about how the family _ought_ to be behaving with shygirl attempting to use her own status as a mother to lend some gravity to those snide insinuations.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> She did more than that.



Only if you try hard to take offence.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Lots of people have posted quite abhorrent stuff on this thread, Benners but IMO shygirl's contributions stand head and shoulders above the rest. She's used the (inescusible) old saw "as a mum, I...." for one thing. And that by itself is quite enough reason to write her opinions off as unworthy of consideration.


I ripped someone's tits off (metaphorically) on Facebook yesterday for using "as a mum..." as an excuse for some of the nastiest, most viciously judgemental arsewipe I've ever encountered.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yeah using empathetic reasoning when trying to understand the statements and logic of other people is a bit wacky, especially when it's women with children doing it about other women with children.


Nothing about what she was posting was empathic. It was broad-brush "conclusions" based on "stands to reason" type common-sensical arguments and breathtaking presumption. Larded with a nice attempt at trying to pull in some professional credibility.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You've got a jigsaw with paedophiliac tendencies?


Depends which way up you turn the pieces...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sas (or, as he's more widely known, Methuselah) actually preceded Judaism.


You know, if he rips you a new one for your relentless (and very funny) jibes about his antediluvianity, I shall not be surprised


----------



## Smyz (Oct 16, 2013)

She backed off. There's no need for this bullying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

weltweit said:


> There is hope for the parents. There is no body so it seems quite reasonable that she may be still alive, and there are recent cases of people being kept in captivity being freed many years down the line.


of course in british law you no longer need to produce a body to secure a murder conviction


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Just off the top of my head, these two posts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah thanks for this. The quotes show on what feeble ground your claims of shygirl being beneath contempt were based. 

Existentialist - I agree this trope can be used in that way but here shygirl seems to be explaining why her instinctive reaction is to find the parents' behaviour to be 'odd' based on considering how she might feel in the same position.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

Thora said:


> In which case it seems very odd to me that this woman would let someone she thinks is a paedophile anywhere near her kids, let alone let him bathe them.


she didn't. she specifically kept her child away from him. it's in her statement.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 16, 2013)

sparklefish said:


> Have you ever looked at websleuths? They love wild speculation and keyboard crime solving over there. ; )


That is one scary website. Wild speculation based on dubious facts is their hallmark.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> That is one scary website. Wild speculation based on dubious facts is their hallmark.


eh? that's our little game


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

Smyz said:


> She backed off. There's no need for this bullying.


If you're referring to the reactions people are displaying to shygirl's comments, I don't think it is reasonable to characterise them as "bullying". When someone says stuff that's so inflammatory that several people take strong exception to it, and find it worthy of comment, that's not bullying, it's consensus.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Nothing about what she was posting was empathic. It was broad-brush "conclusions" based on "stands to reason" type common-sensical arguments and breathtaking presumption. Larded with a nice attempt at trying to pull in some professional credibility.



To clarify, I didn't mean she was empathic but meant she was using the common form of reasoning "how would I feel if I was in her shoes" that can illuminate ethical quandaries and hypotheticals and is in some circumstances useful, in others less so.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> eh? that's our little game


what they do is really quite something else. Nothing I've ever seen on urban has ever matched the imaginative fantasy capability of websleuths. 

During the Joanna Yeates murder trial they had a poster who went to the trial every day and who then reported back on websleuths, pronouncing judgment on the defendant. It had to be explained several times that such actions were not allowed. When the retired teacher was first arrested, they were building the gallows based on his style of haircut and eccentric taste in knitwear. Posters even did 3D renderings of the flat interior to back-up tenuous arguments.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> If you're referring to the reactions people are displaying to shygirl's comments, I don't think it is reasonable to characterise them as "bullying". When someone says stuff that's so inflammatory that several people take strong exception to it, and find it worthy of comment, that's not bullying, it's consensus.



Clearly the pile-on is not consensual here. I've always got time for your comments existentialist but I have to admit I'm finding it really hard to identify what is so inflammatory about shygirl's contributions.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> eccentric taste in knitwear  .



To be fair, a dead giveaway. I read about this on the David Icke forums.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 16, 2013)

benedict said:


> To be fair, a dead giveaway. I read about this on the David Icke forums.


He was different. That why the media went for him. But he wasn't a murderer.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

benedict said:


> Clearly the pile-on is not consensual here. I've always got time for your comments existentialist but I have to admit I'm finding it really hard to identify what is so inflammatory about shygirl's contributions.


In isolation, perhaps not so much. Maybe it'd be fair to say that, as Urban's representative for that part of the Internet that's playing the whole "as a parent" wild-speculation-and-far-reaching-conclusions game about this whole business, she's probably catching heat on behalf of a fairly hefty constituency.

My own challenges to her started out considered and gentle - but I am struggling not to let my frustration show at what seems to me to be a series of consistently blinkered statements, despite having seemed to have taken my challenges at her earlier ones on board. I won't insist that I am necessarily being scrupulously fair, but that is at least partly because, having seen a tidal wave of the kind of stuff she's saying elsewhere, my patience with comments like hers is exhausted.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

the "speaking as a ......" intro is usually a good warning that what follows will be a load of shit that can't stand up to reason and instead retreats to an imagined place of epistemological privilege, speaking as a Playstation 3 owner, obviously.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> the "speaking as a ......" intro is usually a good warning that what follows will be a load of shit that can't stand up to reason and instead retreats to an imagined place of epistemological privilege, speaking as a Playstation 3 owner, obviously.


Speaking as a counsellor, regular Urban poster, and stunt hatwearer...sorry, what were you saying again?


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

Anyone seen this shit going round Facebook?







This pic (photoshopped, shockingly)  accompanied by "100 REASONS WHY THE PARENTS BELONG IN JAIL" and of course the obligatory baseless and ignorant comments such as;

"Tbh what think maddie was in some sort of pedophile ring but something went rong with a act that was between. Poor maddie and a guy and she ended up dieing . . . Just my theory .. could be provoked from a book i just read though"

The fact it has turned into one of "them" Facebook things should may be make some people on this thread have a fucking word with themselves.


----------



## benedict (Oct 16, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> He was different. That why the media went for him. But he wasn't a murderer.



Oh yeah. I meant that as a joke aside regarding how ridiculous that suggestion was. Guess my 'humour' doesn't translate.

Was is knitwear for Icke or shellsuits? I guess the son of God thing didn't help. Unforgivable that the shit Wogan was permitted to poke fun at a man clearly delusional and undergoing some sort of psychotic break, whatever Icke's later trajectory.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 16, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> speaking as a librarian i have to agree with frances



Is that avatar you dressed as the Witchfinder General?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Anyone seen this shit going round Facebook?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That pic, the "100 REASONS" bullshit, and the comments following it, were what prompted a quite uncharacteristic ripping-into-total-strangers-fest from me, after I'd suggested that the picture was offensively libellous and completely unwarranted, and then been challenged by a bunch of "as a parent, we should keep an open mind, therefore they killed her and hid the body" types...

I'm pruning my friends' list even as we speak.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> That pic, the "100 REASONS" bullshit, and the comments following it, were what prompted a quite uncharacteristic ripping-into-total-strangers-fest from me, after I'd suggested that the picture was offensively libellous and completely unwarranted, and then been challenged by a bunch of "as a parent, we should keep an open mind, therefore they killed her and hid the body" types...
> 
> I'm pruning my friends' list even as we speak.



when you see shit like that, the uncritical passing on of bigoted speculation and the worst of human qualities being paraded as morality and "decency" and from people you otherwise regard as sound, it really makes you want to scream.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Now you're confusing me.
> 
> Why are you making an issue of Dave if you don't think it's relevant to Madeleine?
> 
> ...


 
I was referring to his distasteful comments/actions.  The 'what the fuck is wrong..' comment was


existentialist said:


> I ripped someone's tits off (metaphorically) on Facebook yesterday for using "as a mum..." as an excuse for some of the nastiest, most viciously judgemental arsewipe I've ever encountered.


 
'ripped someone's tits off..'?!  I've have respcted your posts for a long time, but this, is very disappointing.  Deeply misogynistic language/imagery there.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I was referring to his distasteful comments/actions.  The 'what the fuck is wrong..' comment was
> 
> 
> 'ripped someone's tits off..'?!  I've have respcted your posts for a long time, but this, is very disappointing.  Deeply misogynistic language/imagery there.


Oh, *suddenly* you're bothered about language and imagery?


----------



## revol68 (Oct 16, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I was referring to his distasteful comments/actions.  The 'what the fuck is wrong..' comment was
> 
> 
> 'ripped someone's tits off..'?!  I've have respcted your posts for a long time, but this, is very disappointing.  Deeply misogynistic language/imagery there.



oh fuck off you disingenuous wanker.

You post post after post of macabre speculation and sub tabloid titillation around the disappearance of a young girl and then have the nerve to criticise someone for using the phrase "ripped someones tits off". The fact you take that phrase as a literal image rather than simply a saying suggests you have a warped mind, as does your ghoulish fixation on this case.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Oh, *suddenly* you're bothered about language and imagery?[/quote[/quotet
> 
> Steady on there, guys, steady on.  I've read worse comments/on this thread, not sure why I'm taking all the flack for this.  Is this a ganging up mentality thingy going on here.  If I had the time, I'd re-read and offer an explanation of everything I've said.  Some of the more recent personal attacks on my character seem disproportionate to what I've actually posted.
> 
> ...


----------



## discokermit (Oct 16, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Oh, *suddenly* you're bothered about language and imagery?


what the fuck is your problem? 'ripped their tits off'? bizarre.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 17, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Oh, *suddenly* you're bothered about language and imagery?


 
I'm bothered by your misogyny.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I'm bothered by your misogyny.


Bother away. I think the context of my posting history should count for something...unless, of course, that should contradict any preconceived notions you may choose to exercise...


----------



## revol68 (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I'm bothered by your misogyny.



When you see the word fuck in a sentence, do you imagine people having intercourse or do you read it as simply an amplification, something use for affect quite detached from it's literal meaning.

Likewise "I gave them a bollocking" shouldn't be read as misogynistic, no one is being overpowered by a giant ball sack, nor is "chewing the face off" somebody symptomatic of cannibalistic urges.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 17, 2013)

Just the scratch the surface, and all that.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Just the scratch the surface, and all that.


And there you go again...


----------



## discokermit (Oct 17, 2013)

why don't you shut up and fuck off, you pair of cunts.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl I'm the first to point out misogynistic posts usually. existentialist really doesn't have a history of behaving in a misogynistic manner and is not a misogynist.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 17, 2013)

existentialist said:


> And there you go again...


 
I don't actually believe you are, having read your posts over time.  but, it doesn't feel nice does it, personal attacks of that kind.  I'm off now.


----------



## editor (Oct 17, 2013)

Can people please tone the general air of aggressive vitriol down a bit, please? Thanks.


----------



## revol68 (Oct 17, 2013)

I'm amazed this grim train wreck hasn't been banned long ago, people calling each other harsh names is the least problematic thing on it.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I don't actually believe you are, having read your posts over time.  but, it doesn't feel nice does it, personal attacks of that kind.  *I'm off now.*



You said that earlier on.

And "ripped someone's tits off" isn't misogyny. Men have tits as well you know.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 17, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yeah thanks for this. *The quotes show on what feeble ground your claims of shygirl being beneath contempt were based*.
> 
> Existentialist - I agree this trope can be used in that way but here shygirl seems to be explaining why her instinctive reaction is to find the parents' behaviour to be 'odd' based on considering how she might feel in the same position.



The quotes only illustrate shygirl casting aspersions on the behaviour of the McCanns. The beneath contempt bit comes from her using her professional role to lend weight to her nasty little insinuations. A person posting some baseless knee-jerk crap, well, I personally find it a bit distasteful but it's their choice if that's what they want to do. Using the fact that they work in a particular field to try to make their bullshit more credible only serves to undermine not only my respect for them as a poster but also my confidence in their professionalism. AFAIC what remains of shygirl's credibility now hangs in tatters about her.


----------



## coley (Oct 17, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> You said that earlier on.
> 
> And "ripped someone's tits off" isn't misogyny. Men have tits as well you know.


Bugger, I always though of mine as me chest, weighing up now if I now have 'man boobs'  damn urban


----------



## discokermit (Oct 17, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I'm amazed this grim train wreck hasn't been banned long ago, people calling each other harsh names is the least problematic thing on it.


why keep posting on it then? genuinely.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

revol68 said:


> your ghoulish fixation on this case.



This is classic. This case of an unsolved disappearance has garnered more publicity worldwide than probably any other similar incident in history, a fresh multi-million pound inquiry reveals new leads that are broadcast to millions this week in a prime time TV slot, getting global attention, all of which is encouraged by a massive and enduring campaign by the missing girl's family. And you posture about other people commenting on the case being fixated, _while continuing to post on the very same thread_? Seriously, get a hold of yourself.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> The quotes only illustrate shygirl casting aspersions on the behaviour of the McCanns. The beneath contempt bit comes from her using her professional role to lend weight to her nasty little insinuations. A person posting some baseless knee-jerk crap, well, I personally find it a bit distasteful but it's their choice if that's what they want to do. Using the fact that they work in a particular field to try to make their bullshit more credible only serves to undermine not only my respect for them as a poster but also my confidence in their professionalism. AFAIC what remains of shygirl's credibility now hangs in tatters about her.



What are the aspersions being cast in the quotes you dredged up? The "knee-jerk crap"? It seems to me there are no clear insinuations in what you quoted but just an expression of bewilderment at the documented behaviour of the couple. What are you reading between the lines here that so offends, Frances?



> Its' really odd that they left their twin babies to go to see the Pope. If I had lost a child, you'd have to tear me from the remaining two. Bizarre.
> 
> One of your children disappears, you're not gonna leave the others for more than a few hours so soon if her disappearance. As a mum, I simply know I could not bear to be parted from the remaining children. Its a very primitive, instinctive thing. I was very surprised when they flew off to Rome.



Oh, and the "bullshit" about the field shygirl works in relates to an entirely different set of comments regarding a police statement about a different individual, where also she expressed her opinions about how she would feel in a given situation. Your elision of this with the comments above is just sleight of hand.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2013)

"As an intelligent person, I like maths."

Now, you point out the fallacy in that sentence that does not also apply to "as a mum..."


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2013)

"As an Englishman, I have an affinity for cricket" would also work. Invent your own!


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Hmm, two doctors were sufficiently worried that they police to make statements about what they thought was an unhealthy interest in young girls.  To me, it does sound like paedophilic tendencies.  what the fuck is wrong with you people?



What, that people don't feel this case needs more ill-informed speculation?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I was referring to his distasteful comments/actions.  The 'what the fuck is wrong..' comment was



....... ? 

I'll back off a bit because I do think you've been treated quite harshly, but that tends to happen round here when flawed arguments meet shifting goalposts. And "speaking as a ..." is always going to get up peoples noses!

I still don't understand where you're coming from regarding Payne, and it does feel very much that you're looking for any reason whatsoever to vilify/implicate the McCann's with absolutely no evidence but a "gut feeling".

That kind of reasoning, quite rightly, attracts gunfire.

You're free of course, to hold any opinion you like, but I think you should reassess this one.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2013)

anybody who can't see what a blatant 'shop that photo is has no business being on the internet. I'd even question their fitness to operate a car or other heavy machinery


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 17, 2013)

benedict said:


> What are the aspersions being cast in the quotes you dredged up? The "knee-jerk crap"? It seems to me there are no clear insinuations in what you quoted but just an expression of bewilderment at the documented behaviour of the couple. *What are you reading between the lines here that so offends, Frances?*
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and the "bullshit" about the field shygirl works in relates to an entirely different set of comments regarding a police statement about a different individual, where also she expressed her opinions about how she would feel in a given situation. Your elision of this with the comments above is just sleight of hand.



Nothing's being read between the lines. She posted some ill informed speculation, got pulled up for it & now you're huffing and puffing enough hot air to power Richard Branson's next transatlantic balloon attempt. Hang your head in shame Bennibobs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 17, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> You said that earlier on.
> 
> And "ripped someone's tits off" isn't misogyny. Men have tits as well you know.



In "A Man Called Horse", Richard Harris almost gets his tits ripped off.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2013)

Sasaferrato said:


> Absolutely. The little girl was abducted because she was left unattended by her parents. Had there been someone there, it wouldn't have happened.
> 
> As far as I'm aware neither of the McCanns have said 'this is our fault', which it patently is.



This is a persistent, but unfair view and if don't agree ask yourself why you wouldn't apply it in the case of April Jones also abducted away from a parent's view. You wouldn't because it would be utterly unjust and inhumane.

And you should challenge yourself as to what you know about the detail. The tables the adults eat at clearly were close enough for the parents not to feel great separation anxiety.

It's interesting that you quoted this in respect of a post shygirl made about the McCann's and class and yet in the court of public opinion their class and articulation led to suspicion and condemnation. 

It's simple for me. They are innocent across the board until proven guilty. If that turns out to be wrong the principle remains right and we have lost nothing. It isn't ok to trade in innuendo and there is no reason to deny sympathy. 

And most of what we think we know should be treated with reasonable scepticism.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Nothing's being read between the lines. She posted some ill informed speculation, got pulled up for it & now you're huffing and puffing enough hot air to power Richard Branson's next transatlantic balloon attempt. Hang your head in shame Bennibobs.



Like the purple prose, Frances. But there'll be no hanging of heads. Once again you refuse to identify clearly the speculation of which you speak. Obfuscation the order of the day. Time to move on.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 17, 2013)

Listen baby, if you can't see what I'm getting at you're either being wilfully stupid for the sake of indulging your blowhard tendencies (your use of wank-arsed words like obfuscation point that way TBF) or you are just stupid. Neither one is my problem. And who do you think you are telling me when it's time to move on? You're the one who pulled _me _up and now you seek to deny me right of reply y'skinnycuntchya.

The mind quite literally boggles.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

Hey thanks for the heads-up re: obfuscation. Thought it was standard vocab fodder. Didn't realize it was wank-arsed blowhard/stupidity.

The move on reference was to myself.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 17, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> .... y'skinnycuntchya.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

discokermit said:


> why don't you shut up and fuck off, you pair of cunts.


Sorry, I forgot these were your boards.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I don't actually believe you are, having read your posts over time.  but, it doesn't feel nice does it, personal attacks of that kind.  I'm off now.


Don't let the door, etc.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

Anyway. 

I think I've let the disingenuousness and wriggling of some people - on top of the general unpleasantness of the websleuthing on this subject - get on my tits (sic) a little, so I shall wind my neck in a bit, now.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 17, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Oh, *suddenly* you're bothered about language and imagery?



I'm bothered by it too. You talk about someone saying 'As a mum' and then talk of 'ripping her tits off', a part of her body that may have fed her baby?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2013)

Probably best if we all move on with this?

Though, gotta say though...speaking as someone with the internet, that dodgy doctor, the pervy physician...the paedy practitoner....he does look a wrong'un though.


----------



## Dan U (Oct 17, 2013)

You are all nonces tbh. Speaking as a ninja.

More seriously this thread sure got weird.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> I'm bothered by it too. You talk about someone saying 'As a mum' and then talk of 'ripping her tits off', a part of her body that may have fed her baby?


Sorry, the faux-outrage-at-existentialism's-apparent-misogyny train left several hours ago. You'll have to find another cause to become offended at.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 17, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Sorry, the faux-outrage-at-existentialism's-apparent-misogyny train left several hours ago. You'll have to find another cause to become offended at.



you lost me there bruv..


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 17, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> I'm bothered by it too. You talk about someone saying 'As a mum' and then talk of 'ripping her tits off', a part of her body that may have fed her baby?



What about 'being off your tits'? Should that phrase only be used by babies who've started bottle-feeding?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 17, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> you lost me there bruv..


A number of people seem, apparently, to have found themselve all of a fluster to have read the phrase "ripped the tits off (metaphorically)" written by me in an earlier post. So shocked, indeed, that they seem to have stopped reading before they even got to "metaphorically", and then leaped to the same kind of conclusions they seem to be prone to leaping to regarding the McCann's in assuming that the fact that I utter such a phrase automatically makes me a misogynist and therefore incapable of having a valid opinion on anything.

Red Cat appears to have come to the party a little late, and is having fits of the vapours long after everything (including a previously-rather-irritated existentialist) appears to have calmed down. The train done gone. Nothing to see here, move along, etc.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

I can totally understand some people's anger/concern on here regarding the McCann's negligence in leaving very young children 'home alone' and the class/race bias in the media around the amount of publicity a little blonde white girl with middle class parents gets.

Leaving aside the 'whodunit' element the negligence aspect has been glossed over by the media. The kids were three and two - it's not like they were, say, nine and ten.

When it comes to missing or murdered people, I have long thought there is a bias in the media towards the white and middle class, especially in terms of them making the national news. It's not an uncommon view.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> Leaving aside the 'whodunit' element the negligence aspect has been glossed over by the media. The kids were three and two - it's not like they were, say, nine and ten.



Its what a lot of people do when they go on holiday. Kids go to bed so you out for a late drink or a meal. I honestly don't think they were at fault there.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> I can totally understand some people's anger/concern on here regarding the McCann's negligence in leaving very young children 'home alone' and the class/race bias in the media around the amount of publicity a little blonde white girl with middle class parents gets.


 
Yes I understand the concern that the parents left the kids alone.

But no I don't agree with the class arguments. Little April Jones's family were afaict working class and the coverage of their abduction case was massive and not at all critical, despite that April had been out playing without adult supervision. I don't think the class argument holds water and I dislike it anyhow.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Its what a lot of people do when they go on holiday. Kids go to bed so you out for a late drink or a meal. I honestly don't think they were at fault there.


there was a babysitting service and an evening creche available.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2013)

discokermit said:


> there was a babysitting service and an evening creche available.



What you should remember is that you know fuck all about it. Seriously fuck all other than what has been in a thousand grotty newspaper pages.

And so what anyway if there was?


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Its what a lot of people do when they go on holiday. Kids go to bed so you out for a late drink or a meal. I honestly don't think they were at fault there.


 
I think the tapas restaurant/apartment were a lot further apart than the media suggest. It all seemed to be glossed over on Crimewatch. If you look at the maps of the area, they are quite far apart.

If, say, it had been a poolside apartment with the restaurant just outside it would be different, but I still don't think it's acceptable. Those kids were very, very young and the possibility of them waking up to find no adult there was ever-present. Little kids wake up in the night crying for their parents and if they're in the same house/apartment that's fine (if probably very annoying for the parents). If they're imbibing tapas and wine and not within earshot, it's not very nice for the kids, even if nothing drastic happens.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 17, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> I'm bothered by it too. You talk about someone saying 'As a mum' and then talk of 'ripping her tits off', a part of her body that may have fed her baby?



Oh fuck off.

If Existentialist's corespondent had been a geezer, he'd have metaphorically "ripped his bollocks off".

Perspective and context, ffs.

Shygirl transparently played the "misogynist card" to deflect attention from her woeful analysis of these events.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 17, 2013)

And in another argument contrary to the idea that the press give the middle class an easy time, the girl who was found murdered in Bristol, her landlord, a retired lecturer (middle class) was questioned by the police and then wholly pillaried in the media until the real culprit was found and prosecuted.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

weltweit said:


> Yes I understand the concern that the parents left the kids alone.
> 
> But no I don't agree with the class arguments. Little April Jones's family were afaict working class and the coverage of their abduction case was massive and not at all critical, despite that April had been out playing without adult supervision. I don't think the class argument holds water and I dislike it anyhow.


 
Have you ever heard of either of these people without googling them? (very upsetting murder and missing person cases).

Rochelle Holness
Ames Glover.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> Have you ever heard of either of these people without googling them? (very upsetting murder and missing person cases).
> 
> Rochelle Holness
> Ames Glover.


 
Nope, I haven't heard of them, had you or did you google?
Actually I think I have heard of Rochelle Holness.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> And so what anyway if there was?


 
Er, they should maybe have used them, rather than leaving the kids home alone?

It's not rocket science!


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

weltweit said:


> Nope, I haven't heard of them, had you or did you google?
> Actually I think I have heard of Rochelle Holness.


 
Heard of both. They never made the national media. I wonder why.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 17, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> What you should remember is that you know fuck all about it. Seriously fuck all other than what has been in a thousand grotty newspaper pages.
> 
> And so what anyway if there was?


why the aggresive tone?

"what if there was?" ? really?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> I think the tapas restaurant/apartment were a lot further apart than the media suggest. It all seemed to be glossed over on Crimewatch. If you look at the maps of the area, they are quite far apart.
> 
> If, say, it had been a poolside apartment with the restaurant just outside it would be different, but I still don't think it's acceptable. Those kids were very, very young and the possibility of them waking up to find no adult there was ever-present. Little kids wake up in the night crying for their parents and if they're in the same house/apartment that's fine (if probably very annoying for the parents). If they're imbibing tapas and wine and not within earshot, it's not very nice for the kids, even if nothing drastic happens.



Maybe they weren't planning on staying out long? 



oryx said:


> Er, they should maybe have used them, rather than leaving the kids home alone?
> 
> It's not rocket science!



Maybe the kids were asleep and they decided to pop out for a drink. They are supposed to wake them up and take them to creche? Some people might do, a lot wouldn't.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> Er, they should maybe have used them, rather than leaving the kids home alone?
> 
> It's not rocket science!



But you don't know it was the case. You weren't there, didn't sit at the table. You are ignorant, just filled with titbits from the press.

Seems to me the same could happen to a family eating at a table in the garden. People get burgled like that. 

Not rocket science at all is it?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Maybe they weren't planning on staying out long?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the kids were asleep and they decided to pop out for a drink. They are supposed to wake them up and take them to creche? Some people might do, a lot wouldn't.


they went to the same restaurant at the same time every day. they had a table booked.


----------



## Sirena (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> When it comes to missing or murdered people, I have long thought there is a bias in the media towards the white and middle class, especially in terms of them making the national news. It's not an uncommon view.


 
Sadly, I think the bias is about whether the victim is photogenic or not.  Pretty always gets the news.  Suzy Lamplugh, Victoria Climbie, Madeleine McCann and April Jones came from widely differing backgrounds but they all had bonny photos.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Maybe they weren't planning on staying out long?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the kids were asleep and they decided to pop out for a drink. They are supposed to wake them up and take them to creche? Some people might do, a lot wouldn't.


 
I think leaving kids home alone is a lot more widespread than many people think. I really am not judgemental about people having a few jars on holiday when they're in charge of young kids, but leaving them totally alone is not acceptable. The course of events suggests that the checking up wasn't terribly rigorous, as well.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> I think leaving kids home alone is a lot more widespread than many people think. I really am not judgemental about people having a few jars on holiday when they're in charge of young kids, but leaving them totally alone is not acceptable. The course of events suggests that the checking up wasn't terribly rigorous, as well.


 
So someone *was *checking up?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

discokermit said:


> they went to the same restaurant at the same time every day. they had a table booked.


 
Right. Thanks.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> Heard of both. They never made the national media. I wonder why.


Who knows exactly how the national media are motivated, though I suspect they are primarily motivated by circulation, perhaps you will tell me why you think these two were not covered. The three examples I alluded to, first Madeline McCann which had wide coverage where a middle class family was involved, second April Jones where a working class family was involved which also got wide coverage, and thirdly the murdered girl whose name I can't recall right now where a middle class suspect was widely character assassinated in the media, despite being middle class, suggest less class based bias.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 17, 2013)

Sirena said:


> Sadly, I think the bias is about whether the victim is photogenic or not.  Pretty always gets the news.  Suzy Lamplugh, Victoria Climbie, Madeleine McCann and April Jones came from widely differing backgrounds but they all had bonny photos.


Yes, there could well be some truth in that. Sadly.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> But you don't know it was the case. You weren't there, didn't sit at the table. You are ignorant, just filled with titbits from the press.
> 
> Seems to me the same could happen to a family eating at a table in the garden. People get burgled like that.
> 
> Not rocket science at all is it?


 
I think the timeline/distance etc. has been very well documented and not just by the media, by both the Portuguese and British police. You don't need to have been there to know that a) they left very young kids alone and b) the apartment was some way from the restaurant.

I can understand someone challenging speculation about the sniffer dog's reactions, the friends of the family etc. etc. but the whereabouts of the parents and kids are not in dispute.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

weltweit said:


> And in another argument contrary to the idea that the press give the middle class an easy time, the girl who was found murdered in Bristol, her landlord, a retired lecturer (middle class) was questioned by the police and then wholly pillaried in the media until the real culprit was found and prosecuted.



The issue there was that the landlord, Chris Jeffries, could be portrayed as a weirdo due to some nonconventional aspects of his lifestyle and even the way he looked:





This example just suggests that a reductive class-based understanding of how the media frames individuals in the centre of news stories needs added nuance, especially taking into account cultural norms and factors.

The McCanns case actually demonstrates this. On the one hand, an almost perfect image of a white, middle class professional family certainly helped their being presented favorably. But the tide did turn in press coverage and then there were elements introduced such as Kate's "missing tears" and their failure to act in expected ways. Here classic misogynistic tropes ("cold woman" etc.) were combined with the broader feeling that the couple were "odd".




ETA. I mean just look at the pic of Kate they chose to use to illustrate this cover.


----------



## oryx (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> So someone *was *checking up?


 
That's the McCann's story all along.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Its what a lot of people do when they go on holiday. Kids go to bed so you out for a late drink or a meal. I honestly don't think they were at fault there.



Other people have done it, so it's OK? Not the greatest defence of their behaviour, is it? Leaving infant children alone is neglect.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

oryx said:


> That's the McCann's story all along.



Their 'story'? So they are lying?



brogdale said:


> Other people have done it, so it's OK? Not the greatest defence of their behaviour, is it? Leaving infant children alone is neglect.



It may be neglect in your eyes. I would think of it as people feeling relaxed and safe.


----------



## coley (Oct 17, 2013)

Sod it, tried to keep me neb out of this Shyte, but you don't leave young children, or vunerable people of any age, unattended ever, no excuses accepted.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2013)

coley said:


> Sod it, tried to keep me neb out of this Shyte, but you don't leave young children, or vunerable people of any age, unattended ever, no excuses accepted.



Its just been said there was someone checking in.


----------



## benedict (Oct 17, 2013)

For some context on this issue, see the police witness statement of their neighbour, who reports hearing a child in their apartment crying non-stop for 1hr 15mins on May 1, 2007.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> It may be neglect in your eyes. I would think of it as people feeling relaxed and safe.



I'm sure that's not just in my eyes? I'm sure that the 'Tapas 7' felt perfectly relaxed and safe, but their 'home' alone kids weren't.


----------



## coley (Oct 17, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Its just been said there was someone checking in.


Sorry, checking in doesn't cut it, IMO,sorry.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Their 'story'? So they are lying?


 
The inverted commas are yours. A quick look at the accepted version of events will tell you that the McCann's and their friends did regular checks on the children.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Its just been said there was someone checking in.


that wasn't good enough though. was it?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> The inverted commas are yours. A quick look at the accepted version of events will tell you that the McCann's and their friends did regular checks on the children.



So it wasn't neglect then.


----------



## clicker (Oct 18, 2013)

Did any of the tapas 7 have kids with them too? What arrangements were made for them in the evenings or were they taken to the restaurant? It has no bearing on anything ....just wondered.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> So it wasn't neglect then.



Are you for real? You actually think it is acceptable to take that risk with kids?


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> So it wasn't neglect then.


 
I would say it was.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I would say it was.


 hmmm...


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> hmmm...


 
What do you mean, 'hmmmm'?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Are you for real? You actually think it is acceptable to take that risk with kids?



Yes. Its a big world.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Are you for real? You actually think it is acceptable to take that risk with kids?



An added factor is that the patio doors to the apartment with the three young children in were left unlocked.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Yes. Its a big world.


 
Not if you're two years old.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> What do you mean, 'hmmmm'?


i mean, you saying it was neglect. massive HMMMM.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> i mean, you saying it was neglect. massive HMMMM.


 
So are you saying you *don't* think it was neglect?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> So are you saying you *don't* think it was neglect?



most definitely NOT.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

Well yous have answered your own question as to why the McCanns have got away with 'neglect'. Because it wasn't. End of discussion.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

clicker said:


> Did any of the tapas 7 have kids with them too? What arrangements were made for them in the evenings or were they taken to the restaurant? It has no bearing on anything ....just wondered.


i think a few of them had kids. parents would take it in turns to check on all the kids.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> most definitely NOT.


 
 you don't think leaving kids, aged three and two, alone and away from adults for some periods of time, was neglect? You say 'most definitely NOT'.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Are you for real? You actually think it is acceptable to take that risk with kids?



They were asleep in their beds. Not walking tightropes across the grand canyon.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Yes. Its a big world.



I understand the 'Yes' bit of your answer, and can only disagree. But I accept it is an entirely personal interpretation. In similar situations, when my kids were very young, I never left them alone, nor would it have entered my head to do so. 

We'll clearly not find agreement over this issue, and that would explain our different response to the actions of the McCann parents.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Well yous have answered your own question as to why the McCanns have got away with 'neglect'. Because it wasn't. End of discussion.


see ya then!


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Well yous have answered your own question as to why the McCanns have got away with 'neglect'. Because it wasn't. End of discussion.


 
Why do you think it wasn't neglect and why are you assuming people have 'answered their own question'?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> you don't think leaving kids, aged three and two, alone and away from adults for some periods of time, was neglect? You say 'most definitely NOT'.



it was yes, but there should DEFINITELY NOT be any blame placed on the two of them on account of her abduction.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> An added factor is that the patio doors to the apartment with the three young children in were left unlocked.



Understandably, as they'd have all perished if a fire had broken out otherwise. That's why you don't leave infant children on their own in unfamilar settings.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> it was yes, but there should DEFINITELY NOT be any blame placed on the two of them on account of her abduction.



The abduction apparently occured because someone criminally stole the kid away. That could not have occured without the neglectful behaviour of the parents.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> it was yes, but there should DEFINITELY NOT be any blame placed on the two of them on account of her abduction.


 
They're two different things. I do feel very sorry for them as they have lost a daughter, and as I've said previously on this thread, leaving children home alone is more common than most people think. Generally, people who do it don't experience any problems (how their kids feel is something else).

But I can't see how leaving three extremely young children alone isn't negligent. That's not the same as *blaming* them.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> Why do you think it wasn't neglect and why are you assuming people have 'answered their own question'?



Because nobody in the real world until you geniuses brought it up thinks the perfectly good parents of the McCann children are to blame.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Understandably, as they'd have all perished if a fire had broken out otherwise. That's why you don't leave infant children on their own in unfamilar settings.



Yes and yes.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> They're two different things. I do feel very sorry for them as they have lost a daughter, and as I've said previously on this thread, leaving children home alone is more common than most people think. Generally, people who do it don't experience any problems (how their kids feel is something else).
> 
> But I can't see how leaving three extremely young children alone isn't negligent. That's not the same as *blaming* them.



Saying they are negligent IS blaming them.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Because nobody in the real world until you geniuses brought it up thinks the perfectly good parents of the McCann children are to blame.


 
'Perfectly good parents' don't leave toddlers home alone. None of the parents I know would do that.

Re blame - see my response to cheesypoof, above.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Because nobody in the real world until you geniuses brought it up thinks the perfectly good parents of the McCann children are to blame.



Call me old-fashioned, but leaving infant kids alone to go on the piss doesn't sound like 'perfectly good ' parenting to me.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Saying they are negligent IS blaming them.


 
No, it's not. Again see my response to cheesypoof.

They could be leaving young kids unattended, and get away with it, and no-one would blame them.

The kids could have been in the apartment with parents in the next room, and one could have been abducted.

I am saying that their negligence in leaving three toddlers alone has been glossed over by the media.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> 'Perfectly good parents' don't leave toddlers home alone. None of the parents I know would do that.
> 
> Re blame - see my response to cheesypoof, above.



im not a parent but i have a huge problem with others thinking they were bad parents.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

They weren't and aren't bad parents is why.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Call me old-fashioned, but leaving infant kids alone to go on the piss doesn't sound like 'perfectly good ' parenting to me.



I remember it being pretty much standard practice at butlins and places for parents to leave the kids in the chalet of an evening and go to the bar.

Every parent will have done something that others could tut at in disapproval and say "oh but I would _never_ do that" - Everyone takes chances from time to time because the chances are things will probably be alright. On this occasion the McCanns took a chance and things turned out as far away from alright as it's possible to get. That makes them incredibly unlucky, what it doesn't make them is bad parents.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> im not a parent but i have a huge problem with others thinking they were bad parents.





Humberto said:


> They weren't and aren't bad parents is why.



Quite possibly, but they made a bad mistake and error of judgement. Their behaviour was obviously not 'perfectly good', and I don't think it does anyone any favours to pretend otherwise.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Their behaviour was obviously not 'perfectly good', and I don't think it does anyone any favours to pretend otherwise.



hope not.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

or that 'they' would have done a better job.


----------



## coley (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> The inverted commas are yours. A quick look at the accepted version of events will tell you that the McCann's and their friends did regular checks on the children.





Humberto said:


> Because nobody in the real world until you geniuses brought it up thinks the perfectly good parents of the McCann children are to blame.


Sorry, but leaving young children alone so you can go socialising is acceptable?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

coley said:


> Sorry, but leaving young children alone so you can go socialising is acceptable?



yes


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Everyone takes chances from time to time because the chances are things will probably be alright. On this occasion the McCanns took a chance and things turned out as far away from alright as it's possible to get.





Cheesypoof said:


> or that 'they' would have done a better job.



Quite late, so I'm not sure I'm reading you right...but...if by that you're saying would I personally have beahved differently, the answer is yes. I would not have left my infant kids on their own in a foreign holiday complex whilst out on the piss with mates.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Quite possibly, but they made a bad mistake and error of judgement. Their behaviour was obviously not 'perfectly good', and I don't think it does anyone any favours to pretend otherwise.


 
this ^


----------



## coley (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> yes


Fair enough, at least you are honest in your opinion.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Quite late, so I'm not sure I'm reading you right...but...if by that you're saying would I personally have beahved differently, the answer is yes. I would not have left my infant kids on their own in a foreign holiday complex whilst out on the piss with mates.



You will have done other things that people could find fault with though, it's just that you (like most people) have been lucky in that a catastrophe such as that which happened to the McCanns didn't happen to you so no one's been afforded the opportunity to cast stones at you (or aspersions on your parenting).


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

what happened to the McCanns....although the circumstances were EXTREME could have happened to anybody. Anyone could have their child stolen, under SEVERELY unlucky circumstances. They were really good parents who made a mistake.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> When it comes to missing or murdered people, I have long thought there is a bias in the media towards the white and middle class, especially in terms of them making the national news.



Damilola Taylor?

Victoria Climbie?

Stevie Lawrence?

((RIP all))

You're 20 years out of date, mate.

Sure, there have undoubtedly been situations where race has affected media reporting, but it's getting better, much fucking better, and dicks like you trying to reverse engineer racial scenarios to vilify white folk like the McCann's is hardly fucking progressive is it?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> You will have done other things that people could find fault with though, it's just that you (like most people) have been lucky in that a catastrophe such as that which happened to the McCanns didn't happen to you so no one's been afforded the opportunity to cast stones at you (or aspersions on your parenting).



Quite possibly. But there are ways of reducing the chances of bad shit happening to your babies. One of those is not leaving them on their own in an unlocked foreign appartment. That, IMO, is an instance of poor parenting, and for others to declare it as perfectly good is nonsense.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

coley said:


> Fair enough, at least you are honest in your opinion.



Honest, yes...but I can't imagine that the McCann's would agree with him.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 18, 2013)

I don't know why this case seems to bring out something ugly and mean-spirited in a lot of people - if the Moors murders happened today, I think some of the same people would be blaming the parents for not doing enough to teach their kids to stay out of strangers' cars.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, there have undoubtedly been situations where race has affected media reporting, but it's getting better, much fucking better, and dicks like you trying to reverse engineer racial scenarios to vilify white folk like the McCann's is hardly fucking progressive is it?


 
I have no issue with you disagreeing with me but is it really necessary to be so rude and offensive?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I am saying that their negligence in leaving three toddlers alone has been glossed over by the media.



The papers don't want to alienate the parents, who in turn are happy to give them updates. It works for both sides, for the time being.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I have no issue with you disagreeing with me but is it really necessary to be so rude and offensive?


 
And by the way, in case you didn't notice, Stephen Lawrence's mum had to fight like anything to get her son's case taken seriously.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Quite possibly. But there are ways of reducing the chances of bad shit happening to your babies. One of those is not leaving them on their own in an unlocked foreign appartment. That, IMO, is an instance of poor parenting, and for others to declare it as perfectly good is nonsense.



What I'm saying is it was more in the nature of a lapse - No one is a 100% good parent all the time, everyone makes errors of judgement from time to time but that doesn't mean they aren't decent parents & for the most part these lapses don't lead to anything terrible happening. On this occasion the McCanns were about as unlucky as it's possible to be due to an error of judgement on their part but that's no reason to say they weren't good enough parents.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

There are cleverer people than me to point it out but you've all failed to do anything except to point the finger in a pointless, boring unfair cruel manner.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> What I'm saying is it was more in the nature of a lapse - No one is a 100% good parent all the time, everyone makes errors of judgement from time to time but that doesn't mean they aren't decent parents & for the most part these lapses don't lead to anything terrible happening. On this occasion the McCanns were about as unlucky as it's possible to be due to an error of judgement on their part but that's no reason to say they weren't good enough parents.



tbh we none of us know what sort of parents they were/are. All we know is how they parented on that fateful holiday, and it was not good enough for their kids. I think it is in everyone's interest to be open about their failing in that respect.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> tbh we none of us know what sort of parents they were/are. All we know is how they parented on that fateful holiday, and it was not good enough for their kids. I think it is in everyone's interest to be open about their failing in that respect.



You can't blame the parents


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> tbh we none of us know what sort of parents they were/are. All we know is how they parented on that fateful holiday, and it was not good enough for their kids. I think it is in everyone's interest to be open about their failing in that respect.


 
Again, what brogdale said.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> tbh we none of us know what sort of parents they were/are. All we know is how they parented on that fateful holiday, and it was not good enough for their kids. *I think it is in everyone's interest to be open about their failing in that respect.*



I don't think it's in anyones interest. Because everyone fails from time to time, usually though, that failing doesn't lead to catastrophe. Being "open about their failing" amounts to nothing more than vindictive finger pointing IMO.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I have no issue with you disagreeing with me but is it really necessary to be so rude and offensive?



Fuck you.

You're as big a problem as the "institutionally racist" pigs that Doreen Lawrence ultimately exposed.

This attempt to lever racial bias into situations where none exists, spits on Doreen's indefatigability and blocks the progress she fought for.

Wanker.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> You can't blame the parents



There's also the fact that they're on record as saying that their three-year-old daughter had, the previous day, asked them why they weren't there to comfort them for so long when her and her brother and sister were crying in the evening. That would make me think twice about undertaking the same routine for another night.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> There's also the fact that they're on record as saying that their three-year-old daughter had, the previous day, asked them why they weren't there to comfort them for so long when her and her brother and sister were crying in the evening. That would make me think twice about undertaking the same routine for another night.



but a child getting snatched could happen to anyone in a whisker of a moment....no parent is immune.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Fuck you.
> 
> You're as big a problem as the "institutionally racist" pigs that Doreen Lawrence ultimately exposed.
> 
> ...


 
Really reasoned and well-thought out argument - thanks (not). I've reported your post for abuse.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Of course. My point was that even if the general supervision was an understandable lapse or just a relaxed attitude, it's hard to comprehend how a parent would continue the same pattern of behaviour after having your child say this to you.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

I am better than them. I love me.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I've reported your post for abuse.



Woohoo!

Perhaps you should fuck off to that bit of the internet called IagreeWithOryx.com, wrap yourself in cotton wool, and stick your fingers in your ears.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Woohoo!
> 
> Perhaps you should fuck off to that bit of the internet called IagreeWithOryx.com, wrap yourself in cotton wool, and stick your fingers in your ears.


 
Perhaps you should learn to behave like a reasoned adult?


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Humberto said:


> I am better than them. I love me.



The discussion at present is about the supposed negligence or otherwise of leaving children in the scenario outlined above. I'm bringing relevant facts to the table. Care to discuss any of those facts? Or are puerile jabs where we're headed?


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Or are puerile jabs where we're headed?


 
benedict, I think that's already obvious!! I'm in agreement with you btw.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> The discussion at present is about the supposed negligence or otherwise of leaving children in the scenario outlined above. *I'm bringing relevant facts to the table*. Care to discuss any of those facts? Or are puerile jabs where we're headed?



Ok what facts? Lets not fall out.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> Perhaps you should learn to behave like a reasoned adult?



Perhaps you should have read the thread which has dealt with your puerile arguments tenfold, before jumping in and wanking on about racism.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Perhaps you should have read the thread which has dealt with your puerile arguments tenfold, before jumping in and wanking on about racism.


 
I have read the thread, thanks.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I have read the thread, thanks.



Then you're an even bigger cunt than I first thought.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

Giz some facts geniuses


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Then you're an even bigger cunt than I first thought.


 
I might meet you at some point in real life.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I might meet you at some point in real life.



Well thats not scary


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2013)

pahaha


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> I might meet you at some point in real life.



 I'm shitting my pants. Honest.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Oct 18, 2013)

Those moralising about the McCanns behaviour that night....really annoys me.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I'm shitting my pants. Honest.


 
It's not meant as a threat, just that you'd probably be really embarrassed for being so rude and objectionable. If you're like that in real life, I feel sorry for you. Would you call me a cunt & wanker so readily to my face?

We can all sit behind a keyboard and post inane abuse. I'd love to have this argument with you in a pub though admittedly not likely to happen.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Well, the statement I was referring to and for which you mocked me, is referenced here. It's a heartbreaking anecdote in retrospect. It's hard to understand how those comments from their child would not make them rethink their childcare arrangements.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> It's not meant as a threat, just that you'd probably be really embarrassed for being so rude and objectionable. If you're like that in real life, I feel sorry for you. Would you call me a cunt & wanker so readily to my face?
> 
> We can all sit behind a keyboard and post inane abuse. I'd love to have this argument with you in a pub though admittedly not likely to happen.



Just checked your posting history and seen that you're a female.

Yes, I'm embarrassed.

Sorry.


----------



## oryx (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Just checked your posting history and seen that you're a female.
> 
> Yes, I'm embarrassed.
> 
> Sorry.


 
Thanks mate, no hard feelings, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the McCann case.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> Thanks mate, no hard feelings, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the McCann case.



Yep. Same here. Thanks.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Of course. My point was that even if the general supervision was an understandable lapse or just a relaxed attitude,* it's hard to comprehend how a parent would continue the same pattern of behaviour after having your child say this to you.*



Not really. Unless you think it's somehow normal to capitulate to the demands of a three year old regarding your comings and goings.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> that wasn't good enough though. was it?



Presumably parents of most kids to whom something bad has been done thought they were safe when it turns out they were not?  

Presumably anyone who loses their child in a shop may be guilty of a similar recklessness, but it happens.

I'm not aware that any of the other diners ever is quoted as expressing doubt about the arrangements. This is why I think you need have a better idea of the set up and the feel of the place than the varying accounts that go around.

At the worst they made a mistake and surely they have suffered enough for it for you?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Call me old-fashioned, but leaving infant kids alone to go on the piss doesn't sound like 'perfectly good ' parenting to me.



Nasty. They were having a meal not invading Poland.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> A number of people seem, apparently, to have found themselve all of a fluster to have read the phrase "ripped the tits off (metaphorically)" written by me in an earlier post. So shocked, indeed, that they seem to have stopped reading before they even got to "metaphorically", and then leaped to the same kind of conclusions they seem to be prone to leaping to regarding the McCann's in assuming that the fact that I utter such a phrase automatically makes me a misogynist and therefore incapable of having a valid opinion on anything.
> 
> Red Cat appears to have come to the party a little late, and is *having fits of the vapours* long after everything (including a previously-rather-irritated existentialist) appears to have calmed down. The train done gone. Nothing to see here, move along, etc.



There is no evidence of me being in any kind of agitated state at all.

Are you accusing me of being hysterical?


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> What about 'being off your tits'? Should that phrase only be used by babies who've started bottle-feeding?



Breasts represent an aspect of being a mother, whether or not you breastfeed. It is not accidental IMO that he chose the phrase 'ripped her tits off' after getting himself in such a state about mothers who dare to begin sentences with 'Speaking as a mum..'


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Oh fuck off.
> 
> If Existentialist's corespondent had been a geezer, he'd have metaphorically "ripped his bollocks off".
> 
> Perspective and context, ffs.



And if his correspondent had started his sentence with Speaking as a dad...I'd have considered that an attack on his masculinity.

Perspective and context, ffs.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> Perhaps you should learn to behave like a reasoned adult?


Spymaster might take a...robust approach to debate, but coming over all schoolmarm and pretending he hasn't got an argument is a bit futile.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> There is no evidence of me being in any kind of agitated state at all.
> 
> Are you accusing me of being hysterical?


No. But slightly determined to be offended, perhaps. And maybe a touch boat-happy


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> I'm shitting my pants. Honest.


quoted for posterity


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> No. But slightly determined to be offended, perhaps. And maybe a touch boat-happy



It's almost like you're talking about someone else.


----------



## cesare (Oct 18, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> There is no evidence of me being in any kind of agitated state at all.
> 
> Are you accusing me of being hysterical?


You're being very restrained 

I imagined that this morning there'd be a huge graphic of the vapours pic posted on the tread


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> Nasty. They were having a meal not invading Poland.



Not intentionally nasty, and in the cool light of day I would want to retract the phrase "on the piss"; I have no way of knowing whether that it correct.

But, I was responding to an opinion that the McCann's parenting on that holiday had been "perfectly good". I disagree with that assertion, and as others have pointed out, there were/are risks associated with leaving infants alone. Risks, that I would argue, would outweigh the pleasure of a meal out or the cost of a baby-sitter for most parents.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Not intentionally nasty, and in the cool light of day I would want to retract the phrase "on the piss"; I have no way of knowing whether that it correct.
> 
> But, I was responding to an opinion that the McCann's parenting on that holiday had been "perfectly good". I disagree with that assertion, and as others have pointed out, there were/are risks associated with leaving infants alone. Risks, that I would argue, would outweigh the pleasure of a meal out or the cost of a baby-sitter for most parents.



There is no suggestion that cost was an issue. They considered their children safe, which must also apply to many of the high profile cases where young children have been abducted. But no one wishes to bang on about those because it wasn't part of the big narrative.

Unfair in all cases.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> There is no suggestion that cost was an issue. They considered their children safe, which must also apply to many of the high profile cases where young children have been abducted. But no one wishes to bang on about those because it wasn't part of the big narrative.
> 
> Unfair in all cases.



I don't think we'll agree on this, but I feel the need to ask you how you know that they considered the kids to be safe? Is that belief documented in the evidence?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> And if his correspondent had started his sentence with Speaking as a dad...I'd have considered that an attack on his masculinity..



Err, ok.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> I don't think we'll agree on this, but I feel the need to ask you how you know that they considered the kids to be safe? Is that belief documented in the evidence?



You think they'd deliberately leave the kids in an environment they considered unsafe?


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Err, ok.



Ouch!


----------



## trashpony (Oct 18, 2013)

April Jones' mother had no idea where her 5 year old daughter was when she was snatched. But I don't remember the same level of vilification, the same accusations of neglect.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> You think they'd deliberately leave the kids in an environment they considered unsafe?



Don't know; what do you think?

e2a : FWIW, they left their kids in an environment that I would consider unsafe.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 18, 2013)

trashpony said:


> April Jones' mother had no idea where her 5 year old daughter was when she was snatched. But I don't remember the same level of vilification, the same accusations of neglect.


 
There were probably some sad sacks judging her parenting skills somewhere on the internet.


----------



## shygirl (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Oh fuck off.
> 
> If Existentialist's corespondent had been a geezer, he'd have metaphorically "ripped his bollocks off".
> 
> ...



Nothing to do with deflecting attention away from me, it was returning the kinds of slurs that existentialist made towards me.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 18, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> There were probably some sad sacks judging her parenting skills somewhere on the internet.


I'm sure there were. But not on here. Funny, that


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> There were probably some sad sacks judging her parenting skills somewhere on the internet.



There may have been, but perhaps one reason why we've not seen such comment is that Coral Jones very movingly talked about her 'life sentence' of agonising remorse she felt herself over that fateful decision. I'm sure that most parents empathised with that poor woman's agony. 

Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Don't know; what do you think?



No, I absolutely do not think that the McCann's _deliberately_ left the kids in an environment they considered to be unsafe.

Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any more bizarre .....


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.



You didn't see the reconstruction and interview with KM earlier this week then?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> No, I absolutely do not think that the McCann's _deliberately_ left the kids in an environment they considered to be unsafe.
> 
> Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any more bizarre .....


It's quite conceivable that they made a gross error of judgement. With hindsight, that's always easier to say.

I just find the complete lack of any kind of empathy for the situation they ended up in - no matter how much it might have been caused by a failure of theirs - quite depressing.

And as for second-guessing their emotional state judging by how they appear in the hugely artificial environment of TV interviews and the like...


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

Has Kate McCann answered any of the 48 questions yet?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Has Kate McCann answered any of the 48 questions yet?


What 48 questions?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> It's quite conceivable that they made a gross error of judgement. With hindsight, that's always easier to say.



Agreed. Kate accepted that when she broke down in this weeks interview; "how could we have thought that it was ok?"



> And as for second-guessing their emotional state judging by how they appear in the hugely artificial environment of TV interviews and the like...



Astonishing isn't it?


----------



## Dan U (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Has Kate McCann answered any of the 48 questions yet?



these were all over twitter when she was on Crimewatch, some article from years ago in the Mail, although my cursory google shows them being mentioned again recently.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uestions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Agreed. Kate accepted that when she broke down in this weeks interview; "how could we have thought that it was ok?"
> 
> 
> 
> Astonishing isn't it?


I'm not sure. I wonder if this is just bringing out the fingerpointers from the woodwork, or whether we're all, given half the chance, happy to be as self-righteously judgemental about others. Not a comfortable thought either way.


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> What 48 questions?



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

Now I still can't figure out why she wouldn't answer these questions .. would put any doubt to bed IMO.. still unanswered AFAIK


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Dan U said:


> these were all over twitter when she was on Crimewatch, some article from years ago in the Mail, although my cursory google shows them being mentioned again recently.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uestions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html


Ugh. Judges, juries and executioners. All rolled into - quel surprise! - a Daily Mail article.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm
> 
> Now I still can't figure out why she wouldn't answer these questions .. would put any doubt to bed IMO.. still unanswered AFAIK


Sorry, your role in this investigation is...?


----------



## Dan U (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Ugh. Judges, juries and executioners. All rolled into - quel surprise! - a Daily Mail article.



i just read something a bit more recent and apparently she didn't answer as she feared she was being fitted up


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

Exactly the same as yours .. no role .. but posting a serious question.. can anyone explain why a person who's daughter has allegedly been abducted refuse to answer questions posed to them in an investigatory interview?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Dan U said:


> i just read something a bit more recent and apparently she didn't answer as she feared she was being fitted up


It's interesting: most jurisdictions have a "right to silence" rule, for all kinds of good reasons. Yet in the court of public opinion, that apparently counts for nothing: "she didn't answer the questions, so we are entitled to judge her on that basis".


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Exactly the same as yours .. no role .. but posting a serious question.. can anyone explain why a person who's daughter has allegedly been abducted refuse to answer questions posed to them in an investigatory interview?


Why do they need to explain it? And to you, specifically?


----------



## trashpony (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> There may have been, but perhaps one reason why we've not seen such comment is that Coral Jones very movingly talked about her 'life sentence' of agonising remorse she felt herself over that fateful decision. I'm sure that most parents empathised with that poor woman's agony.
> 
> Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.


So the McCanns are more negligent on the basis that they didn't indulge in public self-flagellation to your satisfaction?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 18, 2013)

Whether or not they should have left their kids unattended is entirely irrelevant, frankly.  If you are addressing the fact that they gave an opportunity to an abductor then you are blaming the victim.  If, on the other hand, you are talking about any other kind of alleged negligence then that has nothing whatsoever to do with this case.

I think people like to dwell on this issue of leaving the kids in their room because it makes those pontificating about it feel subconsciously that they have some level of control over their fate.  In short: if they can make the actions of the McCanns in some way responsible for the subsequent abduction, the implicit corollary is that by taking different actions, they might avoid a similar fate.  And that's comforting.  It's wrong, but it's comforting.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2013)

I can think of loads of reasons not to answer those - and other - questions. They only make sense if they are being asked by people who think they're putting someone in the bag - they are not questions designed to uncover what happened, unless they already think the person they are being asked of is guilty of at best a cover up and at worst a murder.


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Why do they need to explain it? And to you, specifically?


Where did I allude that it needed to be specifically explained to me ? I am intrigued as to why she wouldn't answer the questions that were vital in the hunt for her missing daughter


----------



## hegley (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> There may have been, but perhaps one reason why we've not seen such comment is that Coral Jones very movingly talked about her 'life sentence' of agonising remorse she felt herself over that fateful decision. I'm sure that most parents empathised with that poor woman's agony.
> 
> Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.


Are you seriously saying that because they haven't sobbed in public, or shown enough emotion for you, that they haven't reflected on their decision (in private)? 

Do you *really *believe they have less of a 'life sentence' than Coral Jones?

Did this couple weep enough for you?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Where did I allude that it needed to be specifically explained to me ? I am intrigued as to why she wouldn't answer the questions that were vital in the hunt for her missing daughter


In what way were they vital? Have a look at them - they're loaded questions designed to get her to incriminate herself and not relating to the hunt for her daughter. They could only further the hunt if she were in some way guilty.


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> unless they already think the person they are being asked of is guilty of at best a cover up and at worst a murder.


 God forbid if anyone held that thought on this thread


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In what way were they vital? Have a look at them - they're loaded questions designed to get her to incriminate herself and not relating to the hunt for her daughter. They could only further the hunt if she were in some way guilty.


Yup. Coppers ask questions: it's what they do. Doesn't mean that they're the right questions, or necessarily aimed at getting to the truth. And it certainly doesn't mean anyone should be obliged to answer them. Especially not when they're heavily loaded copper-questions.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> God forbid if anyone held that thought on this thread


Eh?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> God forbid if anyone held that thought on this thread


No, you're right: that could never happen.


----------



## juice_terry (Oct 18, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In what way were they vital? Have a look at them - they're loaded questions designed to get her to incriminate herself and not relating to the hunt for her daughter. They could only further the hunt if she were in some way guilty.


Perhaps to rule out the fact that she was not complicit in her daughters disappearance.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Perhaps to rule out the fact that she was not complicit in her daughters disappearance.


Right now, if she knows that she's not and has said so many times over the previous 5 months maybe she doesn't feel like jumping through these hoops again. What you're essentially saying if you follow your logic through here is that innocent people cannot adopt tactics to defend against police attempts to entrap them.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Where did I allude that it needed to be specifically explained to me ? I am intrigued as to why she wouldn't answer the questions that were vital in the hunt for her missing daughter



Because she thought Portuguese plod had an agenda (to blame or implicate her and GM) and if you look at those questions, they certainly seemed to.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Perhaps to rule out the fact that she was not complicit in her daughters disappearance.


For whose benefit?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

oryx said:


> Heard of both. They never made the national media. I wonder why.



Let's face it, there's no need to wonder: Race and class (and sadly, I didn't need to google either case  ).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

weltweit said:


> Who knows exactly how the national media are motivated, though I suspect they are primarily motivated by circulation, perhaps you will tell me why you think these two were not covered. The three examples I alluded to, first Madeline McCann which had wide coverage where a middle class family was involved, second April Jones where a working class family was involved which also got wide coverage, and thirdly the murdered girl whose name I can't recall right now where a middle class suspect was widely character assassinated in the media, despite being middle class, suggest less class based bias.



We can all pull single cases out of our arses to "prove" points.
The real proof of the pudding, however, isn't in single cases, it's in whether or not a trend exists whereby an identifying factor or factors such as class and/or race and/or gender and/or religious affiliation make a difference.

Guess what? There are extant trends for all the factors mentioned above - trends which are very much a reflection of institutional prejudices more generally.  The media is part of the Establishment, and therefore can't *help* but reflect those institutional prejudices.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> The abduction apparently occured because someone criminally stole the kid away. That could not have occured without the neglectful behaviour of the parents.



Inaccurate. It *could* still have happened had the parents been present (there are a fair few cases of abductions of children despite the presence of adults in an adjoining room etc), it'd just have been *less likely*.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 18, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> We can all pull single cases out of our arses to "prove" points.


 
Reminds me of the joke about the businessman who starts talking into his little finger nail.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Let's face it, there's no need to wonder: Race and class (and sadly, I didn't need to google either case  ).



That's right but it's not entirely straightforward as many of the most well known cases recall.

How we view it says a lot about our prejudices. There has always been a backlash of bigoted, pathetic and nasty resentment against the Lawrence's for the exposure their case finally received.

Yet for some what they believe about the McCann's backgrounds and exposure has been a justification for suspension of the presumption of innocence and sympathy in this case. 

There's just no need to create a hierarchy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Damilola Taylor?
> 
> Victoria Climbie?
> 
> ...



C'mon, you've plucked three positive cases (insofar as the victims were represented as people first, rather than as attributes of their identities) from the last quarter of a century.  How many people recall (without googling) the name of the black lad murdered outside the Ed's block for no more reason than the local knife-wielding wankers didn't recognise him; the mixed race girl whose body was found dumped in a Paladin; even the kid stabbed to death about 6 years ago in Stockwell, whose murder was taken by police and the media to be gang-related pretty much on the basis of him being 15, mixed race and living on a council estate?
Race (and class) *do* play a part in how stories are tilted.  Ask any hack, and if they're even halfway honest they'll either admit that it's true or say "I just report stuff through the filter of my media outlet's 'house style' ".


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

that's another odd thing, it gets mentioned in those questions, after discovering the child was missing, kate then left the twins on their own while she went back to the restaurant and announced "we've let her down".
even considering the state she must have been in, this is strange behaviour.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> That's right but it's not entirely straightforward as many of the most well known cases recall.
> 
> How we view it says a lot about our prejudices. There has always been a backlash of bigoted, pathetic and nasty resentment against the Lawrence's for the exposure their case finally received.
> 
> ...



It seems to me that where the McCanns have "caught it" has it's basis in their class position, but in a way that isn't directly attributable to the McCanns themselves. Let me explain: It's been noted here, there and everywhere that the McCanns are, in their lifestyle, income etc, quintessentially middle class professionals.  *Because* of that identification, some people will have greater expectations of "appropriate behaviour" from the McCanns than they might from Joe and Josephine Prole.  We might think "wow, that's ridiculous!", but because we exist within a society where hierarchy is embedded, and where an expectation of "appropriate behaviour" according to one's place in the hierarchy is also embedded, then the McCanns may be said to have been victims of those expectations.

Me, I think they were unwise, even stupid, to leave a child unattended, but I don't believe they acted with malice or criminality aforethought, and I believe that people trying them in the court of public opinion are missing the point.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> that's another odd thing, it gets mentioned in those questions, after discovering the child was missing, kate then left the twins on their own while she went back to the restaurant and announced "we've let her down".
> even considering the state she must have been in, this is strange behaviour.



There's no "normal behaviour" for such occurrences, contrary to what the media would lead people to believe.  Reactions are utterly individual, and tend to be based on the experiences of the person expressing the behaviour, and what they believe is expected of them.  

Given she's a doctor, I *personally* would expect any reaction to be overlaid with a veneer of professional calm, as doctors have it inculcated into them that they shouldn't panic, though, rather than expecting her to go all "headless chicken".


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> that's another odd thing, it gets mentioned in those questions, after discovering the child was missing, kate then left the twins on their own while she went back to the restaurant and announced "we've let her down".
> even considering the state she must have been in, this is strange behaviour.



I can completely understand that. 

It's shocked behaviour.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Just checked your posting history and seen that you're a female.
> 
> Yes, I'm embarrassed.
> 
> Sorry.


----------



## rostabeef (Oct 18, 2013)

Cheesypoof said:


> Those moralising about the McCanns behaviour that night....really annoys me.



Hi everyone, to all those hissing at the McCan's guilt at leaving their children alone that fateful night, don't you think they mustn't have cried themselves to sleep with the guilt of what they did?  Doesn't anyone for one moment imagine they don't ever forget for one single moment  that what they stupidly thought was a safe environment in a holiday complex to leave three little ones alone and sleeping will forever be etched into their very souls. It could well have been THREE babies that went missing not just one.How anyone after six years can still be vilifying those two parents horrifies me.
I am old enough to remember Butlins and Pontins Holiday Camps where all the children and babies were left in the chalets with staff informed and walking around to listen for any of them crying and announcements then made to the parents over the tannoy system if a child was crying, the parents could be watching one of the shows or having a meal, so what difference was that to what the McCann's did? Both utterly wrong but a definite case of those who throw stones......
My own mum was the absolute extreme, there were my six brothers and me aged between 5 and 12 all at a catholic school and the Nun's used to take us for the annual once a year coach trip to Southport or Rhyl, and every year without fail there would be my mum, the only parent, waiting to board the coach with all the childen. The nun's would try to put her off by telling  her there was no need to worry as there were six nun's with the two coachloads of children but she was having none of it. She used to say there was no way her seven babies were being let loose in a strange town, beach and fairground without her. She would find a bench in the middle of the fairground and sit there for the whole day in case any of us got lost, we were to meet there every two hours on the dot and the older ones were to hold the little one's hands at all times and if they lost sight of them for any reason woe betide them. I know it was way over the top and the nun's must have had quite a chuckle at the end of the day at the idea of my dear old mum chaperoning us and sitting on a strange bench all day but that was the kind of woman she was. She would have killed for us. We are all different, but we all love our children, the McCann's are no different. they will have to live with the guilt for the remainder of their lives. That surely is punishment enough to go with the agony of losing a child to what they must assume is a paedophile. Try imagining for one moment how you would feel if you were in their shoes, imagine how it must have felt getting on that plane home having to leave your child in a strange country and not knowing where she is, what is happening or what has happened to her. My god, that must have been absolutele agony,


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

rostabeef said:


> Hi everyone, to all those hissing at the McCan's guilt at leaving their children alone that fateful night, don't you think they mustn't have cried themselves to sleep with the guilt of what they did?  Doesn't anyone for one moment imagine they don't ever forget for one single moment  that what they stupidly thought was a safe environment in a holiday complex to leave three little ones alone and sleeping will forever be etched into their very souls. It could well have been THREE babies that went missing not just one.How anyone after six years can still be vilifying those two parents horrifies me.


Really?

Because whilst I don't *think* that they were responsible for her death, I also don't know that they weren't.  There have been plenty of cases where parents etc have made a high-profile media plea for the return of their child, only to have been found to be guilty later on.  These things stick in people's minds, and they are understandably sceptical.  Personally I don't know either way, so whilst I'll not be accusing them of murder neither will I be stating their innocence.  We simply don't know.

As ever, there are people that will latch on to one extreme or the other.  But those that bemoan that anyone should cast any doubt upon the McCanns are really no different than those that weave conspiracies around them.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Because whilst I don't *think* that they were responsible for her death, I also don't know that they weren't.  There have been plenty of cases where parents etc have made a high-profile media plea for the return of their child, only to have been found to be guilty later on.  These things stick in people's minds, and they are understandably sceptical.  Personally I don't know either way, so whilst I'll not be accusing them of murder neither will I be stating their innocence.  We simply don't know.
> 
> As ever, there are people that will latch on to one extreme or the other.  But those that bemoan that anyone should cast any doubt upon the McCanns are really no different than those that weave conspiracies around them.



Quite possibly the worst post you've ever made. 

The last sentence is just mind-blowing.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 18, 2013)

rostabeef said:


> Hi everyone, to all those hissing at the McCan's guilt at leaving their children alone that fateful night, don't you think they mustn't have cried themselves to sleep with the guilt of what they did?  Doesn't anyone for one moment imagine they don't ever forget for one single moment  that what they stupidly thought was a safe environment in a holiday complex to leave three little ones alone and sleeping will forever be etched into their very souls. It could well have been THREE babies that went missing not just one.How anyone after six years can still be vilifying those two parents horrifies me.
> I am old enough to remember Butlins and Pontins Holiday Camps where all the children and babies were left in the chalets with staff informed and walking around to listen for any of them crying and announcements then made to the parents over the tannoy system if a child was crying, the parents could be watching one of the shows or having a meal, so what difference was that to what the McCann's did? Both utterly wrong but a definite case of those who throw stones......
> My own mum was the absolute extreme, there were my six brothers and me aged between 5 and 12 all at a catholic school and the Nun's used to take us for the annual once a year coach trip to Southport or Rhyl, and every year without fail there would be my mum, the only parent, waiting to board the coach with all the childen. The nun's would try to put her off by telling  her there was no need to worry as there were six nun's with the two coachloads of children but she was having none of it. She used to say there was no way her seven babies were being let loose in a strange town, beach and fairground without her. She would find a bench in the middle of the fairground and sit there for the whole day in case any of us got lost, we were to meet there every two hours on the dot and the older ones were to hold the little one's hands at all times and if they lost sight of them for any reason woe betide them. I know it was way over the top and the nun's must have had quite a chuckle at the end of the day at the idea of my dear old mum chaperoning us and sitting on a strange bench all day but that was the kind of woman she was. She would have killed for us. We are all different, but we all love our children, the McCann's are no different. they will have to live with the guilt for the remainder of their lives. That surely is punishment enough to go with the agony of losing a child to what they must assume is a paedophile. Try imagining for one moment how you would feel if you were in their shoes, imagine how it must have felt getting on that plane home having to leave your child in a strange country and not knowing where she is, what is happening or what has happened to her. My god, that must have been absolutele agony,



See, to me, this post reveals more about how clouded the "McCann defenders" (aka the "As a parent..." types) judgement is over their loss IMO.

I have no idea what happened - You can hypothesise for a long time and it's one of many extremist theories (for want of a better phrase) that suggests they had _something _to do with it, though the reality is that the 'riddle' is solved by another, yet similarly extremist/unlikely event. (Last time I looked random/planned snatches of little children was still pretty rare in Portugal).

What is pretty bonkers is the "_you moronicbitchfuckingcunt, NO WAY could they have had anything to do with it_" discussion that prevails though. Don't you think it gets a bit much if you're debating in those terms?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It seems to me that where the McCanns have "caught it" has it's basis in their class position, but in a way that isn't directly attributable to the McCanns themselves. Let me explain: It's been noted here, there and everywhere that the McCanns are, in their lifestyle, income etc, quintessentially middle class professionals.  *Because* of that identification, some people will have greater expectations of "appropriate behaviour" from the McCanns than they might from Joe and Josephine Prole.  We might think "wow, that's ridiculous!", but because we exist within a society where hierarchy is embedded, and where an expectation of "appropriate behaviour" according to one's place in the hierarchy is also embedded, then the McCanns may be said to have been victims of those expectations.
> 
> Me, I think they were unwise, even stupid, to leave a child unattended, but I don't believe they acted with malice or criminality aforethought, and I believe that people trying them in the court of public opinion are missing the point.



It's not just expectation though. Some people seem to feel that it's their duty to 'resist' or oppose them because of their inherent scepticism of 'middle class' people who can navigate the media. 

And there is a tonnage of mischief and misogyny thrown in for good measure. How dare Scouse talking Kate become a doctor and lord it up neglecting her babies? This board has taken an age to resist it.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> Quite possibly the worst post you've ever made.
> 
> The last sentence is just mind-blowing.


So no one should have any doubt about the McCann's role in her death?

You seem to be latching on to a certainty that simply isn't there.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> See, to me, this post reveals more about how clouded the "McCann defenders" (aka the "As a parent..." types) judgement is over their loss IMO.
> 
> I have no idea what happened - You can hypothesise for a long time and it's one of many extremist theories (for want of a better phrase) that suggests they had _something _to do with it, though the reality is that the 'riddle' is solved by another, yet similarly extremist/unlikely event. (Last time I looked random/planned snatches of little children was still pretty rare in Portugal).
> 
> What is pretty bonkers is the "_you moronicbitchfuckingcunt, NO WAY could they have had anything to do with it_" discussion that prevails though. Don't you think it gets a bit much if you're debating in those terms?



For me it's the presumption of innocence that is more important than their actual guilt or innocence. 

And if you look back through the thread the bile of the 'anti'-McCann's is quite astonishing. This one gets everyone heated which is why we come back to it.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> So no one should have any doubt about the McCann's role in her death?
> 
> You seem to be latching on to a certainty that simply isn't there.



What you effectively said in that last sentence was 'people who firmly believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty are no better than the conspiracy theorists'.

As far as the possibility of the McCann's having had a hand in her death, the evidence weighs quite emphatically in their favour.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> What you effectively said in that last sentence was 'people who firmly believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty are no better than conspiracy theorists'.


Not at all.  It's far more 'people that entirely rule out any possibility of their guilt are no better than conspiracy theorists'.  Neither extreme is valid or justifiable.


----------



## Greebo (Oct 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I remember it being pretty much standard practice at butlins and places for parents to leave the kids in the chalet of an evening and go to the bar.<snip>


Butlins (not sure if this held true for other similar holiday camps) had a free and automatic "baby/child listening" service, which operated via the intercoms in each chalet through the evening.  If any sounds of distress were picked up, the relevant chalet would be called or visited by one of the staff (with a key).


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Not at all.  It's far more 'people that entirely rule out any possibility of their guilt are no better than conspiracy theorists'.  Neither extreme is valid or justifiable.



Have you seen the evidence and watched the reconstructions and docs?

It's extremely difficult indeed to manufacture a scenario in which they did it without resorting to loony tunes.

Once again, _the available evidence points away from their involvement. _

_There is zero evidence that they were involved._

There's nothing extreme or conspiracy-like about that.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 18, 2013)

Greebo said:


> Butlins (not sure if this held true for other similar holiday camps) had a free and automatic "baby/child listening" service, which operated via the intercoms in each chalet through the evening.  If any sounds of distress were picked up, the relevant chalet would be called or visited by one of the staff (with a key).


Probably. Who knows how vigilant the Butlins staff really were? I had a babysitter who was watching TV and didn't notice my sister and me (we were 5 and 3 at the time) leave the house to explore the building site behind our building. There was another one who made us stay up late to watch horror films with her because she was too scared to watch them on her own. 

I know nowadays people are a bit more circumspect about the babysitters they choose but my parents really weren't and I don't think they were alone


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> There may have been, but perhaps one reason why we've not seen such comment is that Coral Jones very movingly talked about her 'life sentence' of agonising remorse she felt herself over that fateful decision. I'm sure that most parents empathised with that poor woman's agony.
> 
> Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.



Ah so it's back to castigating the McCanns for not behaving in a manner you feel befitting a family who've lost a child. Jesus.

If people feel the need to validate themselves by indulging in sanctimonious finger pointing and/or farcical speculation about what they think _might've_ happened based on nothing more than information gleaned from newspaper articles & internet bullshit then so be it I suppose. It reflects badly on you though.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 18, 2013)

Spymaster said:


> _There is zero evidence that they were involved._



As opposed to the reams of evidence of the other scenarios?

Which is why it's all speculation - and speculation of their potential involvement is valid - if IMO off the mark.

Are we allowed to clear the McCanns through lack of proof - if so why isn't Juan Doe given the same treatment? Or we just refuse to accept _any _theory?


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> As opposed to the reams of evidence of the other scenarios?
> 
> Which is why it's all speculation - and speculation of their potential involvement is valid - if IMO off the mark.
> 
> Are we allowed to clear the McCanns through lack of proof - if so why isn't Juan Doe given the same treatment? Or we just refuse to accept _any _theory?



When it becomes virtually impossible to construct a credible theory involving them, yet witnesses describe unidentified strangers carrying little girls around; various (possibly dodgy) reports of sightings of the child, timelines that make it virtually impossible for the McCann's to have disposed of the body, etc, a reasonable person would back away from the former.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> It's not just expectation though. Some people seem to feel that it's their duty to 'resist' or oppose them because of their inherent scepticism of 'middle class' people who can navigate the media.



That's an issue of social capital, and as such will indeed be *more likely* to have accrued to a member of the middle class.  Interrogating that usage of social capital isn't necessarily "opposition" or "resistance" to a narrative, and is usually an attempt to establish whether such usage has allowed a narrative that otherwise wouldn't "get past".



> And there is a tonnage of mischief and misogyny thrown in for good measure. How dare Scouse talking Kate become a doctor and lord it up neglecting her babies? This board has taken an age to resist it.



Interestingly, you don't note that the vilification of Kate McCann has been from both "above" and "below", but mostly from above, and from female journos and commentators as well as male.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

juice_terry said:


> Where did I allude that it needed to be specifically explained to me ? I am intrigued as to why she wouldn't answer the questions that were vital in the hunt for her missing daughter


Well, you are the one who seems to be banging the "she didn't answer the questions" drum the hardest here at the moment...

And you have already had several responses to your question, which you don't seem to have responded to or even acknowledged. One might almost think you were waiting for the answer you wanted to hear...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Not at all.  It's far more 'people that entirely rule out any possibility of their guilt are no better than conspiracy theorists'.  Neither extreme is valid or justifiable.


I think, to be fair, that it is hard, when you are debating with someone coming from the far extreme of the argument, _not_ to couch your own argument in terms which are perhaps towards the more extreme end of your position. I keep going back as I write a post and try to make sure I'm using words that are moderate enough to represent the moderateness of my own position (which is pretty much "they're innocent until proven guilty"), but it is very difficult, sometimes, not to be drawn into a polemical position when you're responding to some bit of lunacy, even more so when you're dashing off a post on a phone, or suchlike.

Most of the people arguing against the "it wuz them wot dunnit" tendency on here seem, to me, on fairly careful analysis, to be taking a moderate position overall. But it's bloody hard holding a "hang on, they're not on trial" line when you've got people behaving as if they are, and it is too tempting sometimes to want to balance that view with the countervailing one, even if that can end up making us look as if we're insisting that there is no possible way that anything can have been wrong.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> I think, to be fair, that it is hard, when you are debating with someone coming from the far extreme of the argument, _not_ to couch your own argument in terms which are perhaps towards the more extreme end of your position. I keep going back as I write a post and try to make sure I'm using words that are moderate enough to represent the moderateness of my own position (which is pretty much "they're innocent until proven guilty"), but it is very difficult, sometimes, not to be drawn into a polemical position when you're responding to some bit of lunacy, even more so when you're dashing off a post on a phone, or suchlike.
> 
> Most of the people arguing against the "it wuz them wot dunnit" tendency on here seem, to me, on fairly careful analysis, to be taking a moderate position overall. But it's bloody hard holding a "hang on, they're not on trial" line when you've got people behaving as if they are, and it is too tempting sometimes to want to balance that view with the countervailing one, even if that can end up making us look as if we're insisting that there is no possible way that anything can have been wrong.


Yeah, I can see that.  And that likely accounts for 90%.  But there's a minority that respond to anyone questioning whether the McCanns _*may*_ have had some culpability with "YOU EVIL BASTARD!!! THEY'VE LOST A CHILD!!! HOW DARE YOU DO ANYTHING BUT WEEP FOR THEIR LOSS!!!"

No one on here is quite that extreme tbf, but it's pretty commonplace elsewhere.


----------



## Smyz (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> There may have been, but perhaps one reason why we've not seen such comment is that Coral Jones very movingly talked about her 'life sentence' of agonising remorse she felt herself over that fateful decision. I'm sure that most parents empathised with that poor woman's agony.
> 
> Earlier in the thread I admitted that I've always been disconcerted by the media demeanour of the McCanns, and perhaps part of that feeling derives from their apparent inability to reflect upon their own decision.


You're wrong about this.

It is known that Madeleine complained about being left to cry the night before because Kate McCann's statement. They decided to check on the children more often rather than not go out at all the following night. She has spoken about the guilt they carry for that decision. Neither of them has ever claimed that it was acceptable.

The apartment was 50m away from the Tapas bar with the main entrance visible from the bar. It is easy to see how they might have felt it was acceptable, with three sets of parents going to and fro regularly. I'm not saying it was the right decision. Surely the whole point of renting an apartment for holiday is so that you can entertain yourselves at home when the kids have gone to bed. There was a night creche they could have forked out for.

But they have never denied responsibility for that terrible decision and they will have to live with it for the rest of their lives. Bashing them on the basis of some fantasy that they deny they made any mistake is really distasteful.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Yeah, I can see that.  And that likely accounts for 90%.  But there's a minority that respond to anyone questioning whether the McCanns _*may*_ have had some culpability with "YOU EVIL BASTARD!!! THEY'VE LOST A CHILD!!! HOW DARE YOU DO ANYTHING BUT WEEP FOR THEIR LOSS!!!"
> 
> No one on here is quite that extreme tbf, but it's pretty commonplace elsewhere.



I'm getting the impression that's what you are hearing maybe rather than seeing.

Evidence is all the better for a statement like that.

It would be gross to demand anyone weep for this issue above any other of the world's misery or tragedy. It just feels like 5 years of insinuation and abuse to the parents is more about people enjoying their opportunity to hate rather than the rational dressing up it gets.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

Smyz said:


> You're wrong about this.
> 
> 
> 
> But they have never denied responsibility for that terrible decision and they will have to live with it for the rest of their lives. Bashing them on the basis of some fantasy that they deny they made any mistake is really distasteful.



I think that's a fair comment, and I sense you are better informed than I am on this case.

I think I've muddied the waters by offering my own purely personal subjective perception of the McCanns as displayed in their media appearances, alongside an attempt to explain my own view about the objective fact of their decision to leave their infant children unattended. My fault, and I will strive to focus on the latter rather than the former.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> It just feels like 5 years of insinuation and abuse to the parents is more about people enjoying their opportunity to hate rather than the rational dressing up it gets.


When it comes to the lot that insist that the McCanns absolutely must have drugged and then disposed of their child, and probably cackled whilst doing so, I agree.  But a lot of the time anyone raising even an eyebrow at any element then gets bundled in with them by those on the 'other side'.  It goes the other way as well, when those objecting to the CTer approaches get accused of being biased because the McCanns are MC white professionals.

Essentially, and as existentialist alluded to, the whole thing has become increasingly polarised.  I suspect a lot of people are actually somewhere in the middle thinking "I dunno" - but the whole discourse has become Orwellian - in the sense of ‘he that is not with me is against me’


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> *I suspect a lot of people are actually somewhere in the middle thinking "I dunno"* - but the whole discourse has become Orwellian - in the sense of ‘he that is not with me is against me’


 
I agree with this. I've been following this thread a fair bit on and off but haven't been contributing. Mostly because of the polarisation (admitedly more generally on the new, rather than so much Urban specific). Corax has put his finger on this I reckon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Essentially, and as existentialist alluded to, the whole thing has become increasingly polarised.  I suspect a lot of people are actually somewhere in the middle thinking "I dunno" - but the whole discourse has become Orwellian - in the sense of ‘he that is not with me is against me’


i don't think orwell ever said that although george w. bush definitely did.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think orwell ever said that although george w. bush definitely did.


Maybe not.  I'm pretty sure he _wrote_ it though.  http://orwell.ru/library/articles/pacifism/english/e_patw


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Maybe not.  I'm pretty sure he _wrote_ it though.  http://orwell.ru/library/articles/pacifism/english/e_patw


oh dear oh dear

it's luke 11:23 all over again. unless you're suggesting that orwell was in this case original.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> oh dear oh dear
> 
> it's luke 11:23 all over again. unless you're suggesting that orwell was in this case original.





Pickman's model said:


> *i don't think orwell ever said that*


_*cough*_


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> _*cough*_


yeh and then you denied he'd said it and linked to where he'd _written _it


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and then you denied he'd said it and linked to where he'd _*written* _it


You're such an arse


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> You're such an arse


you're up your own arse


----------



## Part 2 (Oct 18, 2013)

Have they caught anyone yet?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Chip Barm said:


> Have they caught anyone yet?


oh come on. it's only been six years.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Yeah, I can see that.  And that likely accounts for 90%.  But there's a minority that respond to anyone questioning whether the McCanns _*may*_ have had some culpability with "YOU EVIL BASTARD!!! THEY'VE LOST A CHILD!!! HOW DARE YOU DO ANYTHING BUT WEEP FOR THEIR LOSS!!!"
> 
> No one on here is quite that extreme tbf, but it's pretty commonplace elsewhere.


Yes, that's definitely going on. Facebook has a lot to answer for: making me realise just how many COMPLETE FUCKING MORANS there are out there.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Yes, that's definitely going on. Facebook has a lot to answer for: making me realise just how many COMPLETE FUCKING MORANS there are out there.


----------



## clicker (Oct 18, 2013)

Sadly some children die in garden ponds, swimming pools, on roads, in car accidents, due to out of control dogs, by venetian blinds cords, choking on food etc etc etc....most of which could be prevented if their parent/carer was within arm's length. We've probably all made errors of judgement and had that heart in the mouth moment when we realise what 'could've happened', but luckily for the majority of us,  the worse case scenario didn't happen. Having experienced those heart in the mouth moments and the relief that follows, it's sad to see the parents who weren't as fortunate as us, being vilified for six long years. They don't come across to me as asking for sympathy or acceptance, but they'll keep above the parapet in the slim hope Maddie will be remembered and looked for and found. What else can they do?


----------



## coley (Oct 18, 2013)

clicker said:


> Sadly some children die in garden ponds, swimming pools, on roads, in car accidents, due to out of control dogs, by venetian blinds cords, choking on food etc etc etc....most of which could be prevented if their parent/carer was within arm's length. We've probably all made errors of judgement and had that heart in the mouth moment when we realise what 'could've happened', but luckily for the majority of us,  the worse case scenario didn't happen. Having experienced those heart in the mouth moments and the relief that follows, it's sad to see the parents who weren't as fortunate as us, being vilified for six long years. They don't come across to me as asking for sympathy or acceptance, but they'll keep above the parapet in the slim hope Maddie will be remembered and looked for and found. What else can they do?


Nicely put.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you're up your own arse


Trying to wriggle out of erroneously claiming "i don't think orwell ever said that" because he *wrote* it instead?  Really can't tell if you're serious... 

Meh _*shrugs* _


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


>


I love the pigeon-chested moranic stance he's got going on there!


----------



## 5t3IIa (Oct 18, 2013)

I think they did it because of science - statistically most murdered children die at the hands of a parent.


----------



## laptop (Oct 18, 2013)

Statistical determinism


----------



## weltweit (Oct 18, 2013)

clicker said:


> Sadly some children die in garden ponds, swimming pools, on roads, in car accidents, due to out of control dogs, by venetian blinds cords, choking on food etc etc etc....most of which could be prevented if their parent/carer was within arm's length. We've probably all made errors of judgement and had that heart in the mouth moment when we realise what 'could've happened', but luckily for the majority of us,  the worse case scenario didn't happen. Having experienced those heart in the mouth moments and the relief that follows, it's sad to see the parents who weren't as fortunate as us, being vilified for six long years. They don't come across to me as asking for sympathy or acceptance, but they'll keep above the parapet in the slim hope Maddie will be remembered and looked for and found. What else can they do?


 
Indeed, once my toddler tried to go down the stairs in front of me and fell head over heels down to the bottom. Could easily have broken his neck. The stair gate was open so we could both go downstairs, but I should have been in front.

Later he was in the shop across the road with his mum and decided to simply go home, so he walked out of the shop, she was paying and did not notice, across the normally busy road back to the house. He was perhaps 2 or 3 at the time. Amazing that there were no cars coming at that moment or it could have been curtains.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> And there is a tonnage of mischief and misogyny thrown in for good measure. How dare Scouse talking Kate become a doctor and lord it up neglecting her babies?



Yes. I haven't followed this thread (or even the story in the media) apart from the last few pages but that was my thought too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> How dare Scouse talking Kate become a doctor and lord it up neglecting her babies?


yes, you'd think a doctor of whatever ilk would know better than to neglect their children.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

Well, there's a bit of a theme of slagging off scouse women in the press. It was all the rage after Hillsborough.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> Well, there's a bit of a theme of slagging off scouse women in the press. It was all the rage after Hillsborough.


Really?  Too young to remember it directly, but I thought that was equally applied to _any_ scouse - men pissing on corpses, nicking wallets etc...  Was there a particular vilification of the women?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

laptop said:


> Statistical determinism


Accusative determinism.

(really hoping laptop gets that joke)


----------



## laptop (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Accusative determinism.
> 
> (really hoping laptop gets that joke)



My brain's a bit ablated at the moment and declined to remember... I had to look it up.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Has anyone else noticed the strange thing about these e-fits? They're being cited as based on the sighting by the Smith family from Ireland. But they were compiled five years ago by private detectives, presumably hired by the McCann family, not by the police. And the key witness, Martin Smith, later gave further statements to police that he was 60-80% certain that it was actually _Gerry McCann_ who he had seen carrying the child towards the beach, as described in his initial statement. His revised statement came after seeing Mr McCann's gait and stance while carrying his son in a similar manner on a BBC news report.

Is something missing here, or is this not the great breakthrough it is being dressed up as?


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 18, 2013)

Corax said:


> Really?  Too young to remember it directly, but I thought that was equally applied to _any_ scouse - men pissing on corpses, nicking wallets etc...  Was there a particular vilification of the women?



No, but that's what I remember. And of course it was before Hillsborough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Has anyone else noticed the strange thing about these e-fits? They're being cited as based on the sighting by the Smith family from Ireland. But they were compiled five years ago by private detectives, presumably hired by the McCann family, not by the police. And the key witness, Martin Smith, later gave further statements to police that he was 60-80% certain that it was actually _Gerry McCann_ who he had seen carrying the child towards the beach, as described in his initial statement. His revised statement came after seeing Mr McCann's gait and stance while carrying his son in a similar manner on a BBC news report.
> 
> Is something missing here, or is this not the great breakthrough it is being dressed up as?


yes


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

To which part?!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

yes to everything


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Has anyone else noticed the strange thing about these e-fits? They're being cited as based on the sighting by the Smith family from Ireland. But they were compiled five years ago by private detectives, presumably hired by the McCann family, not by the police. And the key witness, Martin Smith, later gave further statements to police that he was 60-80% certain that it was actually _Gerry McCann_ who he had seen carrying the child towards the beach, as described in his initial statement. His revised statement came after seeing Mr McCann's gait and stance while carrying his son in a similar manner on a BBC news report.
> 
> Is something missing here, or is this not the great breakthrough it is being dressed up as?


" Just watch the four hour YouTube video, sheeple  "


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> " Just watch the four hour YouTube video, sheeple  "



Too easy. What about the content of the post? Is it correct?


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Too easy. What about the content of the post? Is it correct?



This.

From what I can glean from the Portugese police files (cited) and current media reports this seems to be the case. Please correct if this is erroneous or misleading.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> This.
> 
> From what I an glean from the Portugese police files (cited) and current media reports this seems to be the case. Please correct if this is erroneous or misleading.


there should be a d before glean


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> there should be a d before glean


*you're


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> there should be a d before glean


what? a c after i.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> what? a c after i.


No, it's "i before c except after d"


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> what? a c after i.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> what? a c after i.


yeh my bad


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


>


And there was me thinking it was deliberate...


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


>


yessss! in your face!
that's for the 'poster's union' incident the other day.


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> " Just watch the four hour YouTube video, sheeple  "



Come on, you can't just pull this rationalier-than-thou, stfu you conspiraloon shit when merely presented with *actual evidential material*.

You're better than this, existentialist.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> yessss! in your face!
> that's for the 'poster's union' incident the other day.


i'm pleased to have made your day


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm pleased to have made your day


danke. liebling.


----------



## laptop (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> danke. liebling.



*L*iebling.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm pleased to have made your day


*they're


----------



## discokermit (Oct 18, 2013)

laptop said:


> *L*iebling.


i oppose the tyranny of capitalisation.


----------



## laptop (Oct 18, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i oppose the tyranny of capitalisation.



Your point is minuscule.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Too easy. What about the content of the post? Is it correct?


Frankly, I couldn't give a fuck. I am finding myself discounting certain posters as credible sources.

Fancy that, eh?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Come on, you can't just pull this rationalier-than-thou, stfu you conspiraloon shit when merely presented with *actual evidential material*.
> 
> You're better than this, existentialist.


You're right: I am.


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Frankly, I couldn't give a fuck. I am finding myself discounting certain posters as credible sources.
> 
> Fancy that, eh?


Four-hour YouTube CTer stuff, fair enough.  But what about sources like this then?


----------



## Corax (Oct 18, 2013)

DP


----------



## benedict (Oct 18, 2013)

Oh this takes the biscuit.

What have I done to raise your ire, existentialist? So I was defending shygirl's comments earlier in the thread. But in the context it seemed to me the collective flagellation was undeserved. You actually indicated this was the case by suggesting there was a broader context to her posting profile that informed your judgment. I can accept that but I don't know that broader context of her posting. If I did perhaps I would have agreed with you. But to just call me a conspiraloon and then say you're discounting me as a poster? Seriously, get to fuck. I don't think you'll find a single _incredible _claim in any of my posts and no conspiracy theory bull. It's a pathetic smear.

I really had a lot of time for you based on your posts on other threads. But you can't seem to engage in an reasonable discussion here. Why are you so tightly wedded to the idea of the McCanns' innocence that even the slightest hint of a possible suggestion of an inkling of a Portuguese police statement and a question must be met with such derision and scorn?

You are better than this, we both agree. So what gives?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

benedict said:


> Oh this takes the biscuit.
> 
> What have I done to raise your ire, existentialist? So I was defending shygirl's comments earlier in the thread. But in the context it seemed to me the collective flagellation was undeserved. You actually indicated this was the case by suggesting there was a broader context to her posting profile that informed your judgment. I can accept that but I don't know that broader context of her posting. If I did perhaps I would have agreed with you. But to just call me a conspiraloon and then say you're discounting me as a poster? Seriously, get to fuck. I don't think you'll find a single _incredible _claim in any of my posts and no conspiracy theory bull. It's a pathetic smear.
> 
> ...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 18, 2013)

brogdale said:


>


That's it. When you run out of argument, make it personal. Well, so long as it works for you...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2013)

existentialist said:


> That's it. When you run out of argument, make it personal. Well, so long as it works for you...



Oh dear...


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, you'd think a doctor of whatever ilk would know better than to neglect their children.



Pats Pickmans patronisingly on head. 

Ok dear.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i think maybe the reason people do that is because people breaking in somewhere and stealing a child is a pretty rare thing to happen. murder, rape, peadophilia etc, are all crimes where the victim is usually known by the offender.



Yup. It's not unreasonable to speculate that the parents has some knowledge of this. The now famous utterance of the mother saying 'They took her' in a tone that suggested she knew who they we're is telling...


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 19, 2013)

On Tuesday night I read the whole Maddie thread. It is more or less the same crap that we have had for the last few days, but it started soon after she disappeared so there was more 'how could they do that?'

Since it began a few people have been banned, and posters were more polite back then. Few people seemed to "like" threads; it felt like a ghost thread and I felt to be breaking unspoken rules when I "liked" something (jokes, mainly).

That apart, I feel it is time for us all to come clean, and ask:
*
Who Really Did It?*



The shortlist is as follows:

*"Dave": *whoever he is
*Evens favourite*

*"Random Paedophile"*:
Vigilant wannabe, on the lookout for unguarded kiddies. May have had insider knowledge of the questionable babysitting service at the holiday complex, may have sat at a table in the Tapas bar and overheard a slightly pissed person who had just returned from checking the kids telling the others who was asleep / crying /  had wet the bed etc, and may have followed said pissed persons back to to their apartments, and thereafter noticed who went where and when the apartments were unguarded.
*4:1*

*"Disco Kermit"*: Extreme interest in, and knowledge of, the case, mainly via Facebook, plus amateur interest in Cavadar dogs, training and usage of.
*5:1 Nobody's favourite, ever*

*"ShyGirl"*: Mumsnet regular, social worker and caring parent with gut feelings.
*50:1 *but who knows if it is all a great cover up? Introduced *"Dave" X ref, see above *to Urban75.

*"Stanley Edwards"*: Heavy drinker. Lives in Spain, which is closer to Portugal than the UK, therefore he is in a much better position to have done it.
*2000:1*

*"The McCanns"*: Parents. The mob's favourites for arrest but not really likely.
*10,0000:1*

*"Firky" *Easy scapegoat
*10:1*

I'd do a proper poll, but I don't know how.


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

UrbaneFox said:


> Few people seemed to "like" threads


It wasn't possible to - it was back on VB then, and 'likes' only came in with the switch to XF.

ETA: I've just got a sinking feeling that you knew that and it was a joke.


----------



## joustmaster (Oct 19, 2013)

is there any proof, other than a window that could have been opened maybe, that someone took her?
she could have just walked off and drowned or something.

anyway, i've just checked all my cupboards and she isn't there. i'll check the cellar in the morning


----------



## weltweit (Oct 19, 2013)

joustmaster said:


> anyway, i've just checked all my cupboards and she isn't there. i'll check the cellar in the morning


 
Years ago, when Osama Bin Laden was thought to be in hiding perhaps in Tora Bora caves, I saw a photograph of two London council workers opening up a big manhole cover and peering in, a third was exclaiming, "fuck me its Osama Bin Laden! Made me laugh a lot.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 19, 2013)

Corax said:


> It wasn't possible to - it was back on VB then, and 'likes' only came in with the switch to XF.
> 
> ETA: I've just got a sinking feeling that you knew that and it was a joke.


No, I didn't. I'm crap at technology and stuff. That's why I didn't do a proper poll. 

What is VB and XF? *


* Your answer may simply glide over the top of my head.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2013)

You could, in the most time wasting exercise in History, go back and 'like' them now.

A 'dislike' button would probably be more useful for those taken with any 'side' in the discussion.


----------



## Giles (Oct 19, 2013)

Is this some other parents "Maddie" - blonde girl found living in squalid gypsy camp in Greece!

http://news.sky.com/story/1156588/mystery-blonde-girl-greece-charity-in-appeal

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-blonde-girl-4-living-gypsy-camp-Greece.html

Perhaps Maddie was also taken like this kid surely was?

Giles


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 19, 2013)

UrbaneFox said:


> *Who Really Did It?*
> 
> *"Disco Kermit"*: Extreme interest in, and knowledge of, the case, mainly via Facebook, plus amateur interest in Cavadar dogs, training and usage of.
> *5:1 Nobody's favourite, ever*
> ...



Urban's very own Brady and Hindley?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

joustmaster said:


> is there any proof, other than a window that could have been opened maybe, that someone took her?
> she could have just walked off and drowned or something.
> 
> anyway, i've just checked all my cupboards and she isn't there. i'll check the cellar in the morning



If I had to choose I'd say the simplest answer would be she got out, wandered down the wrong road and ended at the beach....


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 19, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> If I had to choose I'd say the simplest answer would be she got out, wandered down the wrong road and ended at the beach....



and then what?


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 19, 2013)

Eaten by giant crab.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> Eaten by giant crab.



Nah, abducted by aliens is my bet.

Truth is, we don't know and I suspect we never will. Doesn't stop some from pouring endlessly over the minutea of what they're convinced happened.

For me, the biggest mystery is why the British police continue to spend any time whatsoever on this.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> For me, the biggest mystery is why the British police continue to spend any time whatsoever on this.



Political pressure, applied by politicians who understand what the public want. Unfortunately, public services will continue to do stupid things from time to time until we finally take this ghastly electorate into a cellar and shoot them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> and then what?


she failed her 100m


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> Political pressure. Unfortunately, public services will continue to do stupid things from time to time until we finally take this ghastly electorate into a cellar and shoot them.


fucking big cellar


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 19, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> fucking big cellar



The excavation of which would be full of Keynesian win.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> Political pressure, applied by politicians who understand what the public want. Unfortunately, public services will continue to do stupid things from time to time until we finally take this ghastly electorate into a cellar and shoot them.



Is there really anything to suggest political pressure (by which I assume you mean pressure from the govt rather than media hype) to either solve this case or else keep it at the front of our conciousness?

I can understand and even sympathise with the McCanns still wanting answers, but I'm genuinely puzzled as to why any of the rest of us should continue to give a fuck about this particular case.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> Is there really anything to suggest political pressure (by which I assume you mean pressure from the govt rather than media hype)..



The fact that the Met are wasting all this time and resource?


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> The fact that the Met are wasting all this time and resource?



Well yeah, but that just begs the question rather than actually answering it.

I was wondering about anything a bit more, you know, specific...


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> Well yeah, but that just begs the question rather than actually answering it.
> 
> I was wondering about anything a bit more, you know, specific...



Fair enough.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...iew-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

It was the Home Office that decide to review it and then, presumably, asked the Met to get involved. That increases the likelihood that political pressure was involved; anything that made Alan Johnson look humane and caring would have been politically helpful at the time, and axeing such an investigation would have been a poor move for his successor.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> Well yeah, but that just begs the question rather than actually answering it.
> 
> I was wondering about anything a bit more, you know, specific...



Remember this?



> Two peers who are members of police watchdogs warned that the independence of the Metropolitan police was under threat after the prime minister brought in Scotland Yard to review the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
> 
> Insiders at the Yard played down any suggestions that their role could quickly lead to any breakthrough in the case, saying that the review, which will cost millions of pounds, could take months or even years.
> 
> Labour's Lord Harris, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, accused David Cameron of bowing to Rupert Murdoch's empire, referring to Cameron's decision to call in Scotland Yard _*after Kate McCann wrote an open letter in the Sun*_ asking for his help.



Raisa chat?


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...iew-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html
> 
> It was the Home Office that decide to review it and then, presumably, asked the Met to get involved. That increases the likelihood that political pressure was involved; anything that made Alan Johnson look humane and caring would have been politically helpful at the time, and axeing such an investigation would have been a poor move for his successor.



That's the sort of thing I had in mind.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Remember this?



No, I must admit I don't.

This, to me, is far more interesting and worthy of discussion here, on a thread called "Madeleine McCann Madness" than most of the rest of what people are arguing about.

Is it really acceptable that the Prime Minister should instruct the Met to continue to pursue this case for which another country's police are actually responsible, costing millions of pounds and diverting who knows how many hours of resources, because one understandably grieving woman asks for it in an open letter published in the Sun?

Of course, it may be of more interest to many posters to continue a game of personal one-upmanship with this issue (I know more than you/I care more than you), but I think that's a little disappointing and I'd hope we could do better.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> and then what?



Walked near the shoreline and got dragged out to sea?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> No, I must admit I don't.
> 
> This, to me, is far more interesting and worthy of discussion here, on a thread called "Madeleine McCann Madness" than most of the rest of what people are arguing about.
> 
> ...



Yes.

Cameron's involvement pre-dates the full-blown NI scandal(s), and I sense that he may well have done this a personal favour for la Brooks. I think she'd have seen good sales to be had from supporting the McCanns, particularly as they had been in open warfare with 'Sun' rivals the 'express' and 'Star'.

"LOL"


----------



## youngian (Oct 19, 2013)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24589614


> * Greek police appeal over mystery blonde girl*
> Greek police are trying to discover the identity of a young blonde girl who was found living on a Roma settlement with a family she did not resemble.
> A spokesman for the British couple Kate and Gerry McCann, whose daughter Madeleine went missing in Portugal in 2007, said the case gave them "great hope" that she would one day be found alive.



Not a single statement from any professional law enforcer that there is any connection with these two events. When did the BBC become the Daily Express? (since last mondays Crimewatch some might argue).


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2013)

Exaro covered the exchanges between la Brooks & Robert Jay (Leveson) concerning this:-

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4728/rebekah-brooks-set-out-to-persuade-government-over-review


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Yes.
> 
> Cameron's involvement pre-dates the full-blown NI scandal(s), and I sense that he may well have done this a personal favour for la Brooks. I think she'd have seen good sales to be had from supporting the McCanns, particularly as they had been in open warfare with 'Sun' rivals the 'express' and 'Star'.
> 
> "LOL"



Yes what?

Yes, it's interesting and worthy of discussion, yes, it is acceptable that the Prime Minister should instruct the Met, or yes, it's of more interest to many posters to continue a game of personal one-upmanship with the issue?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 19, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Walked near the shoreline and got dragged out to sea?



And her body?


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Exaro covered the exchanges between la Brooks & Robert Jay (Leveson) concerning this:-
> 
> http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4728/rebekah-brooks-set-out-to-persuade-government-over-review



OK, I wasn't aware of that. Obviously not following these unfolding situations as closely as others, so apologies to you, Silas Loom and anyone else if this has all been covered elsewhere on Urban.

I still think the fact that this couple have managed to ensure an on-going multi-million pound campaign of publicity for this case in the British media and apparently influenced various arms of the government to be of greater significance than most of the other speculation we've seen on this thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> And her body?


smashed against the rocks and / or eaten by fishes and / or cannibals


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 19, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> smashed against the rocks and / or eaten by fishes and / or cannibals



Indeed. Only a complete cretin could believe such nonsense.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2013)

andysays said:


> OK, I wasn't aware of that. Obviously not following these unfolding situations as closely as others, so apologies to you, Silas Loom and anyone else if this has all been covered elsewhere on Urban.
> 
> I still think the fact that this couple have managed to ensure an on-going multi-million pound campaign of publicity for this case in the British media and apparently influenced various arms of the government to be of greater significance than most of the other speculation we've seen on this thread.


 ..and when pinned-down on this...Dave's memory let him down.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4729/david-cameron-could-not-recall-pressure-over-maddie-case
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4729/david-cameron-could-not-recall-pressure-over-maddie-case


----------



## 5t3IIa (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> And her body?



Currents. 

You arguing that it's not plausible?


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 19, 2013)

youngian said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24589614
> 
> 
> Not a single statement from any professional law enforcer that there is any connection with these two events. When did the BBC become the Daily Express? (since last mondays Crimewatch some might argue).



Perhaps the BBC assumed that most people can do basic maths, they did make it clear that this girl is only 4. 

I can see how this might give a glimmer of hope to people like the McCanns and the Needhams, but I don't like the assumption that because she was found with a Romany family, she was probably abducted. 

What worries me most about this story is that this child was taken away from what she would consider to be her own family in the middle of the night and from what I've read, hasn't been able to see them since. She'll be scarred for life by that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 19, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> Currents.
> 
> You arguing that it's not plausible?



It's more plausible *if* the tides were on the ebb when she went missing, especially if they'd turned soon before she putatively drowned (in which case there'd have been a long period of outward movement that could have drawn her body miles out.
Not particularly plausible if the tides were rising at the time, though.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> And her body?



You know the sea is a really big place right? A small wave and a stumble could easily pull her out and then she's basically gone.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> Currents.
> 
> You arguing that it's not plausible?



A few years back while on a family holiday my two year old niece stepped into the water, a very small wave came in (barely half a foot), knocked her off her feet, and pulled her under as it went back out. Within seconds she was 5 feet out and I and her father were grabbing her with water near our hips. It happened so fast and was so frightening I can't imagine how any child survives that without someone else around?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> You know the sea is a really big place right? A small wave and a stumble could easily pull her out and then she's basically gone.


http://www.praiadaluzuncovered.com/about-praia-da-luz/beaches.aspx it doesn't seem like there's any undertow or nasty currents or they wouldn't be so blase about the beach. although there's this story http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...their-death-off-the-algarve-coast-397711.html


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2013)

So a three year old girl managed to negotiate either the half a mile down a single roads to the beach or a maze of other roads to take the slightly shorter route, with no one noticing her - either on her little walk or when she gets onto the beach and wanders towards the sea on her own. God there's been some tripe on this thread but this stuff from kid eternity takes the biscuit.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 19, 2013)

Probably taken by an Orca; I saw how they can beach themselves to get at their prey on the telly recently and a three year old child is easily mistaken for a seal pup.


----------



## laptop (Oct 19, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> or they wouldn't be so blase about the beach



I refer the honourable gentleman to _Jaws _


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

laptop said:


> I refer the honourable gentleman to _Jaws _


http://www.algarveresident.com/38260-0/algarve/shark-reports-along-algarve-coast


----------



## discokermit (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Urban's very own Brady and Hindley?


you think this is funny? cunt.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 19, 2013)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Perhaps the BBC assumed that most people can do basic maths, they did make it clear that this girl is only 4.
> 
> I can see how this might give a glimmer of hope to people like the McCanns and the Needhams, but I don't like the assumption that because she was found with a Romany family, she was probably abducted.
> 
> What worries me most about this story is that this child was taken away from what she would consider to be her own family in the middle of the night and from what I've read, hasn't been able to see them since. She'll be scarred for life by that.


I think it's more that the DNA showed the girl was not related to either of her supposed parents, and when questioned the stories didn't add up (the woman claimed she'd had 6 children in 10 months at one point) - although I don't like the inference that Roma are all child-abductors/traffickers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Urban's very own Brady and Hindley?


in any case more interesting than the bland pap you so often serve up


----------



## revol68 (Oct 19, 2013)

discokermit said:


> you think this is funny? cunt.



i laughed.


----------



## laptop (Oct 19, 2013)

Tide table for Lagos, Portugal, 2007-05-03


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's more plausible *if* the tides were on the ebb when she went missing, especially if they'd turned soon before she putatively drowned (in which case there'd have been a long period of outward movement that could have drawn her body miles out.
> Not particularly plausible if the tides were rising at the time, though.


Except that sea otters are more likely to be around the shore during a rising tide.  So if her body was dragged out to deep waters by sea otters, that'd actually be_ *more*_ likely if the tides were rising at the time.


----------



## joustmaster (Oct 19, 2013)

I think the idea of a kid her age walking 500m down a straight road, with a view of the sea all the way down (a walk they probably had done several times a day) is fairly realistic.

Its a big angry sea of that corner of portugal. Nothing like the mediterranean at all


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2013)

joustmaster said:


> I think the idea of a kid her age walking 500m down a straight road, with a view of the sea all the way down (a walk they probably had done several times a day) is fairly realistic.
> 
> Its a big angry sea of that corner of portugal. Nothing like the mediterranean at all



A three year old girl, alone, at 10 o' clock at night (sunset 8-30), with no one noticing her? Either to ask her if she was ok or who remembered seeing her later? The point isn't about if she was capable of doing it, but if it was possible to do it with not a single person seeing her strolling down the main street on her own in those conditions, or navigate the more convoluted route without all the advantages that you mention above.


----------



## clicker (Oct 19, 2013)

500m is quite a long way in the dark for a 3 year old looking for your parents - I think most kids would be crying .


----------



## joustmaster (Oct 19, 2013)

clicker said:


> 500m is quite a long way in the dark for a 3 year old looking for your parents - I think most kids would be crying .


she was practically 4, right? a couple of days off it or something?
I remember my little brother escaping and wandering off when he was 4. he got further than 500m. He had walked down the road and in to the old folks bungalow place where my gran lived.
I can still remember my parents panic.


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 19, 2013)

I've seen this thread but it got too monstrous. Thought I'd see if I could start at the end and work back a bit.


_"Dragged out to deep water by sea otters."



_




*backs slowly away from thread*


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2013)

Sweet FA said:


> I've seen this thread but it got too monstrous. Thought I'd see if I could start at the end and work back a bit.
> 
> 
> _"Dragged out to deep water by sea otters."
> ...


you've not seen the size of some of those sea otters

to give you some perspective the fish is 18" long


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 19, 2013)

Had she got up and left the apartment on her own, I find it incredible that she wasn't noticed by a single person.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 19, 2013)

From here : http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html



> On Martin Brunt's documentary 'The Mystery of Madeleine McCann, aired on 24 December 2007, Prof David Barclay, one of Britain's top forensic consultants said: "I think it's impossible for somebody to get in and out, through that window without leaving a forensic trace. Apart from anything else, the window sills in that area are covered in green lichen. The minute you try and scrape over the window sills you would have left marks and we know that the scenes of crime lady, the next morning, was looking for exactly that."
> 
> Interestingly, Clarence Mitchell's statement about the McCanns reversal of their 'break in' story, came one week after Dispatches aired the documentary 'Searching For Madeleine' on 18 October 2007. In that documentary, it was effectively proved that there was no way anybody could break into the apartment and leave no forensic trace or damage to the lightweight aluminium shutters, which are covered with a fine coating of polyurethane paint which marks extremely easily.
> 
> ...


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

joustmaster said:


> I think the idea of a kid her age walking 500m down a straight road, with a view of the sea all the way down (a walk they probably had done several times a day) is fairly realistic.


I agree.  I know my nipper, if he'd been doing that same walk for several days during a holiday, would be entirely capable of repeating it alone at that age.

I think it's unlikely that anyone wouldn't notice him doing so though, in a tourist resort like that.  It's certainly something people would remember, even if they didn't intervene for whatever reason.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> From here : http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html


That appears to be an entirely unsourced note added to a report in an irish paper. Unless you know more?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Had she got up and left the apartment on her own, I find it incredible that she wasn't noticed by a single person.



Kate McCann was asked if it was possible she had wondered off and she said it was not. When it was put to her that she'd  said they had left the door unlocked (which they originally said they didn't do) so Madeleine could have opened it herself she replied she wasn't strong enough to open it. Which made their claim of leaving them open in case of fire all the stranger.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 19, 2013)

Corax said:


> I agree.  I know my nipper, if he'd been doing that same walk for several days during a holiday, would be entirely capable of repeating it alone at that age.



Very young children are very capable but it's not lack of cognitive and analytical ability that stops children going for a walk in the evening on their own in a place that isn't home.


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> Very young children are very capable but it's not lack of cognitive and analytical ability that stops children going for a walk in the evening on their own in a place that isn't home.


Yes.



I think I'm entirely missing your point somehow!


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 19, 2013)

Corax said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'm entirely missing your point somehow!



Only if you think I'm arguing with you.


----------



## clicker (Oct 19, 2013)

joustmaster said:


> she was practically 4, right? a couple of days off it or something?
> I remember my little brother escaping and wandering off when he was 4. he got further than 500m. He had walked down the road and in to the old folks bungalow place where my gran lived.
> I can still remember my parents panic.


yep not impossible...i got as far at that age in daylight but at night i can't believe she wouldnt have been seen in a busy resort,in nightclothes and at a time when a lot of adults / kids would have been going out to eat. I remember there being talk of a lot of dug up road around there for sewage pipes..that were then filled in before being searched...but no mention since so could be wrong.


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> Only if you think I'm arguing with you.


I wasn't thinking that - but by saying what _wasn't _a restraining factor it read (to me) as though you were implying that something else _was_ - and I couldn't figure that implication.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 19, 2013)

Corax said:


> I wasn't thinking that - but by saying what _wasn't _a restraining factor it read (to me) as though you were implying that something else _was_ - and I couldn't figure that implication.



Their emotional attachment to their parents, siblings, fear etc.

ETA:

Although perhaps a child's ability to navigate a route they know well in the day when safe with family would be somewhat diminished in the evening when alone in a state of anxiety or distress.


----------



## Corax (Oct 19, 2013)

Red Cat said:


> Their emotional attachment to their parents, siblings, fear etc.


Oh right, okay.  I think I get you.  Perils of text-based communication...


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 19, 2013)

Belushi said:


> Probably taken by an Orca; I saw how they can beach themselves to get at their prey on the telly recently and a three year old child is easily mistaken for a seal pup.



That's actually more believable than she was kidnapped from a locked hotel room and five years later not one person has been charged for that even with a global campaign behind it...


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 19, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> Kate McCann was asked if it was possible she had wondered off and she said it was not. When it was put to her that she'd  said they had left the door unlocked (which they originally said they didn't do) so Madeleine could have opened it herself she replied she wasn't strong enough to open it. Which made their claim of leaving them open in case of fire all the stranger.


That wasn't the point I was making. I made the point that I found it incredible that she wasn't noticed if she had left the apartment.


----------



## Looby (Oct 19, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> That's actually more believable than she was kidnapped from a locked hotel room and five years later not one person has been charged for that even with a global campaign behind it...



An unlocked hotel room. But yeah, it's very odd.

ETA-The no news thing, not the snatching by wildlife. ; )


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 19, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That appears to be an entirely unsourced note added to a report in an irish paper. Unless you know more?



The quote is apparently taken from Martin Brunt's Sky News piece shown on the 24th December 2007. Unfortunately i cant find a working link to the piece to watch it. So I did the next best thing and sent a polite email to Mr Barclay asking if it was an accurate representation of what he said. I'll let you know if i get a reply.

It is odd that it only seems to appear in 'certain blogs' though, you'd have thought a 'reputable paper' would have picked up on it.


----------



## stavros (Oct 19, 2013)

It's mainly been the Desmond papers that've run with this story for all eternity*, but it's noticeable that the Mirror's started doing it a lot. Other than rabid support for Labour, I can't remember it having "causes" and "campaigns".

*Maddie has been shifted off the Express front page today for vital news about Diana.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Oct 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> That wasn't the point I was making. I made the point that I found it incredible that she wasn't noticed if she had left the apartment.



I agree, its a holiday resort and didnt happen at a desperately late time of evening.. I was just making the point that Mrs McCann had said that her daughter couldn't open the doors and she was sure she hadn't 'wondered off', as slightly contradictory as that was - although its quite possible they were trying not to make themselves look bad parents by saying the apartment was locked up when in fact they'd left it open.

Looking at a map of where shed have had to walk to get to the beach, it's a pretty well populated area not a straight walk, a few curving roads and a main promenade before getting on to the beach itself.


----------



## deadringer (Oct 19, 2013)

Not, being a father (see what I did there ) would a child looking for his/her parents really be drawn down dark roads 500m to the beach, or would they go to the nearest hub of activity, people eating and drinking, being noisy close by? We are not talking about an inquisitive child going for a wander during the day from a position of safety, as children do, but one who possibly woke up, confused, wondering where her parents are and wanting to find them.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 19, 2013)

deadringer said:


> Not, being a father (see what I did there ) would a child looking for his/her parents really be drawn down dark roads 500m to the beach, or would they go to the nearest hub of activity, people eating and drinking, being noisy close by? We are not talking about an inquisitive child going for a wander during the day from a position of safety, as children do, but one who possibly woke up, confused, wondering where her parents are and wanting to find them.


I can only speak for my child but he'd go towards the people. If he were sleepwalking though, who knows? I've had some fucking weird conversations with him in the middle of the night when I've thought he was awake and then it's become clear he isn't


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 19, 2013)

discokermit said:


> you think this is funny?



Yes.


----------



## joustmaster (Oct 19, 2013)

Barking_Mad said:


> Looking at a map of where shed have had to walk to get to the beach, it's a pretty well populated area not a straight walk, a few curving roads and a main promenade before getting on to the beach itself.


Rua Primeiro de Maio is as straight as roads come.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 19, 2013)

speculation is rife !!


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 19, 2013)

Map, please.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 20, 2013)

UrbaneFox said:


> Map, please.


If you want maps and 3D renderings of the crime scene, go to websleuths.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 20, 2013)

trashpony said:


> I can only speak for my child but he'd go towards the people. If he were sleepwalking though, who knows? I've had some fucking weird conversations with him in the middle of the night when I've thought he was awake and then it's become clear he isn't



There's kids in my family that'd wander off given half the chance, my nephew is a right little sod for running off if he gets more than fifteen feet from you.>:/


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 20, 2013)

He def would not been seen on a busy street whilst he wonders around for an hour lost crying and shouting then.


----------



## Favelado (Oct 20, 2013)

stavros said:


> It's mainly been the Desmond papers that've run with this story for all eternity*, but it's noticeable that the Mirror's started doing it a lot. Other than rabid support for Labour, I can't remember it having "causes" and "campaigns".
> .



It's 'cos we're too young. Apparently The Mirror was great for campaigns in the '60s. I think it did good work in relation to homelessness and poverty. An older person will be able to fill us in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2013)

stavros said:


> It's mainly been the Desmond papers that've run with this story for all eternity*, but it's noticeable that the Mirror's started doing it a lot. Other than rabid support for Labour, I can't remember it having "causes" and "campaigns".
> 
> *Maddie has been shifted off the Express front page today for vital news about Diana.


you don't recall thr poll tax then


----------



## barney_pig (Oct 21, 2013)

Or the wrap around cover/ poster for the February 15 stop the war demos?


----------



## barney_pig (Oct 21, 2013)

Or even a couple of weeks back, every day during e Tory conference, front page stories and centre pages on victims of the Tory cuts.


----------



## stavros (Oct 21, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you don't recall thr poll tax then



No I don't. I was 7 at the time. The only political event I can remember from then or before was probably the Berlin Wall coming down.


----------



## Corax (Oct 21, 2013)

Oops. Wrong thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2013)

barney_pig said:


> Or even a couple of weeks back, every day during e Tory conference, front page stories and centre pages on victims of the Tory cuts.


so it's long been a campaigning paper then


----------



## bi0boy (Oct 21, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> so it's long been a campaigning paper then



Campaigning for a market niche versus the other tabloids, yes.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2013)

Daily Mail says..."Go and check if the local gypos have got any blond kids"...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2013)




----------



## laptop (Oct 23, 2013)

Headline seen on 'newspaper'


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2013)

barney_pig said:


> Or the wrap around cover/ poster for the February 15 stop the war demos?


 
still got that


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


>


 

I know its not really a newspaper, but its as if Levinson never happened, must be awful for the McCanns.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 23, 2013)

treelover said:


> I know its not really a newspaper, but its as if Levinson never happened, must be awful for the McCanns.


The Star (through Johnathon Corke) are the only paper still regularly following and reporting on the Hillsborough campaign(s) outside of the large media-friendly stories.


----------



## laptop (Oct 23, 2013)

OK. 

Perhaps, in the same way that codes of conduct specify that certain content must appear below a strap that says "advertising feature", in the tabs there should be straps saying "actual news"?


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr.Bishie said:


>


 
How the hell do they get away with this?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 23, 2013)

The re-kindled hatred of Roma does add some variety to things, especially as people feel they can't openly hate gays as much these days. That's thanks to the same sort of political correctness (which has actually GONE MAD) that means you can't even playfully grope a woman without some namby pamby saying you're "sexist".

Anyway, there's something just WRONG about a nice white kiddie living with dirty gyppos int there? But DON'T SAY THAT'S RACIST! it closes down debate! If it's not wearing a hood and burning a cross it can't be racist. Fact. Anyone who says different is branewashed by Cultural Marxism (tm)

And as some people think of ways round perceived problems caused by Roma folk, will they privately prefer to look beyond short-term remedies to a more final solution?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2013)

treelover said:


> I know its not really a newspaper, but its as if Levinson never happened, must be awful for the McCanns.


yeh worse than losing a child


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh worse than losing a child



Ah the McCann's. At last some people the left can poke with a stick and keep on poking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> Ah the McCann's. At last some people the left can poke with a stick and keep on poking.


no shortage i think you'll find


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2013)

The headlines are easy to explain though. Something for everyone in this  story. It never stops giving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> The headlines are easy to explain though. Something for everyone in this  story. It never stops giving.


i wouldn't know, i don't read the star


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2013)

The good news is the girl taken from the Roma family is their daughter.

What an absolute fucking outrage it is she was taken from them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2013)

Mr Moose said:


> The good news is the girl taken from the Roma family is their daughter.
> 
> What an absolute fucking outrage it is she was taken from them.


quite


----------



## LiamO (Oct 23, 2013)

ElizabethofYork said:


> How the hell do they get away with this?



especially when The Irish Daily Star had a front page that flatly contradicted the English one - and basically took the piss out of the Guards and Social workers for making an almighty cock-up of the proceedings - and ignoring all the evidence produced by the family that the child was indeed their daughter... and the family's intention to sue them


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 24, 2013)

LiamO said:


> especially when The Irish Daily Star had a front page that flatly contradicted the English one - and basically took the piss out of the Guards and Social workers for making an almighty cock-up of the proceedings - and ignoring all the evidence produced by the family that the child was indeed their daughter... and the family's intention to sue them



Sorry, who ignored the family's evidence - the Guards, or the Star? I know someone who was involved in anti-racism campaigns at home, and at that time (this would be about a decade ago) she generally found the Irish Star to be decent enough on those issues, by comparison with the rest of the Irish media.


----------



## LiamO (Oct 24, 2013)

The guards and the social workers


----------



## LiamO (Oct 24, 2013)

http://eveningharold.com/2013/10/23...t-family-on-parentage-of-confused-ginger-man/


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Exactly what I was asking about a few pages back is being reported on in today's papers after the Sunday Times report: the origin of the e-fits in a private investigation funded by the McCanns, the witness's testimony later identifying Gerry McCann, the "suppression" of the private investigators' report due to "criticism" of inconsistent evidence among the McCanns friends. Strange stuff.

So what were you saying, existentialist?


----------



## Smyz (Oct 28, 2013)

I can't access the Sunday Times report but this seems to have most of it 
http://www.anorak.co.uk/372377/made...nn-the-private-detectives-secret-e-fits.html/

benedict --Smith has withdrawn any allegation that the man he saw was Gerry McCann. I can't find anything that specifies that "inconsistent evidence among the McCanns friends" was the reason why the report was suppressed, where did you get that from?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

benedict said:


> Exactly what I was asking about a few pages back is being reported on in today's papers after the Sunday Times report: the origin of the e-fits in a private investigation funded by the McCanns, the witness's testimony later identifying Gerry McCann, the "suppression" of the private investigators' report due to "criticism" of inconsistent evidence among the McCanns friends. Strange stuff.
> 
> So what were you saying, existentialist?



Your speculation a few pages back was in poor taste and now your crowing about being "right" is in even poorer taste. You were and are an arsehole. Nothing's changed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Your speculation a few pages back was in poor taste and now your crowing about being "right" is in even poorer taste. You were and are an arsehole. Nothing's changed.


whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, you should be the last person to accuse people of poor taste. posters in glass houses should not throw stones.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

Lucky I live in a flat then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Lucky I live in a flat then.


on your own?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

No, I've got a three foot tall bust of Winston Churchill to keep me company.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No, I've got a three foot tall bust of Winston Churchill to keep me company.


Hole in the back of the head?


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Smyz said:


> I can't access the Sunday Times report but this seems to have most of it
> http://www.anorak.co.uk/372377/made...nn-the-private-detectives-secret-e-fits.html/
> 
> benedict --Smith has withdrawn any allegation that the man he saw was Gerry McCann. I can't find anything that specifies that "inconsistent evidence among the McCanns friends" was the reason why the report was suppressed, where did you get that from?



It's in the Sunday Times report. And reported elsewhere based on that. The thing about the report being "hypercritical" and the private detectives being threatened with legal action: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

Regarding the Smith allegation, that makes sense. (My previous post was based on a reading of the press reports at that point and I was asking due to this strange fact being mentioned in some places, not mentioned in others.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No, I've got a three foot tall bust of Winston Churchill to keep me company.


on your own then. no surprise.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> on your own then. no surprise.



What of it?

I'd have thought a man of your calibre would have far better put downs in his arsenal than "ha ha you sad twat, you live on your own". Me and about seven and a half million other people in the UK.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Your speculation a few pages back was in poor taste and now your crowing about being "right" is in even poorer taste. You were and are an arsehole. Nothing's changed.



This is weak. A few pages back I raised a number of _questions _about the e-fits that were being publicised. It contained no speculation. Existentialist accused me of being a conspiraloon, told me I was being discounted as a "credible source", then ignored my subsequent response.

Now, what I was asking about in the original post is confirmed in news reports. Since I was asking questions about the material there is no matter of being "right" (your word). But I do feel vindicated regarding existentialist's unfair characterization of myself. This is not crowing.

The fact your default setting is personal abuse tells us a lot about you, Frances.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Your speculation a few pages back was in poor taste



The irony being that while I was merely mentioning some facts about this evidence, most of the last three pages of the thread have been devoted to speculation about ways in which this disappearance could have taken place. Must try harder.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

benedict said:


> This is weak. A few pages back I raised a number of _questions _about the e-fits that were being publicised. It contained no speculation. Existentialist accused me of being a conspiraloon, told me I was being discounted as a "credible source", then ignored my subsequent response.
> 
> Now, what I was asking about in the original post is confirmed in news reports. Since I was asking questions about the material there is no matter of being "right" (your word). But I do feel vindicated regarding existentialist's unfair characterization of myself. This is not crowing.
> 
> *The fact your default setting is personal abuse tells us a lot about you, Frances.*



It doesn't, but the fact that you seem to think it does tells us you're a thick twat who thinks in cliches. And your mother was a rent boy. Probably.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It doesn't, but the fact that you seem to think it does tells us you're a thick twat who thinks in cliches. And your mother was a rent boy. Probably.



Okay, right. This makes sense in the context of your inability to utilize logic and the offence you take when posters deploy multisyllabic words.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

It's your own fault for saying "must try harder". Condescending piece of shit. Probably with a pocket full of werthers. And scampi fries. Dirty _bastard._


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

And again your inability to reply with anything substantive.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 28, 2013)

fuck off frances.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It's your own fault for saying "must try harder". Condescending piece of shit. Probably with a pocket full of werthers. And scampi fries. Dirty _bastard._



Yeah the condescension came after multiple volleys of obscene verbiage from your fine self.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

"Verbiage" - What a wanker.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> "Verbiage" - What a wanker.



Yep. Fucking _words_.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It's your own fault for saying "must try harder". Condescending piece of shit. Probably with a pocket full of werthers. And scampi fries. Dirty _bastard._



Are Werthers still the nonce's choice, then?
Always thought the adverts were a bit dodgy, frankly.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yep. Fucking _words_.



Give it a rest, you pair of wankers.  Get a room and fuck your antipathy out!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 28, 2013)

benedict said:


> Yeah the condescension came after multiple volleys of obscene verbiage from your fine self.



I've never quite understood people who get all mimsy about a few foul phrases.  Content and context are what matter.  If bad language is in context, then to object is at best prissy, at worst plain ridiculous.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 28, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Are Werthers still the nonce's choice, then?
> Always thought the adverts were a bit dodgy, frankly.



Lint encrusted & pocket(bollock) warmed.


----------



## benedict (Oct 28, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I've never quite understood people who get all mimsy about a few foul phrases.  Content and context are what matter.  If bad language is in context, then to object is at best prissy, at worst plain ridiculous.



Yes. And you'll find neither content or context from that cunt.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 8, 2013)

The Times and Telegraph articles are very interesting.  I really can't work out why the fund would have suppressed an e-fit of a possible suspect.  Very odd that.  

A social worker and a barrister both brought up the subject to me recently, in the context of comparing how a family we are working with has been treated following their child's death with how the McCanns were treated.  The legal bod went as far as to say that there is a fair amount of doubt on the official version of what happened that night in Praia de Luz.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 8, 2013)

shygirl said:


> A social worker and a barrister both brought up the subject to me recently, in the context of comparing how a family we are working with has been treated following their child's death with how the McCanns were treated.  The legal bod went as far as to say that there is a fair amount of doubt on the official version of what happened that night in Praia de Luz.



One important difference being that the child of the family you are working with died. Like your legal gossip, do you?


----------



## shygirl (Nov 8, 2013)

One conversation with one barrister about one subject does not constitute a liking of 'legal gossip', so fuck off.


----------



## laptop (Nov 8, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> One important difference being that the child of the family you are working with died



If you *know* this to be a difference, have you told the police how you know it?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> The Times and Telegraph articles are very interesting.  I really can't work out why the fund would have suppressed an e-fit of a possible suspect.  Very odd that.
> 
> A social worker and a barrister both brought up the subject to me recently, in the context of comparing how a family we are working with has been treated following their child's death with how the McCanns were treated.  The legal bod went as far as to say that there is a fair amount of doubt on the official version of what happened that night in Praia de Luz.


Oh come on ffs. What access to the files do you think the legal bod has just through being a legal bod. They went as far as to say nothing? Oh god. You make want to die you dinner party freaks. Why did you not ask her/him what they have done about it? Ask how you could bring their doubts to officials minds?


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh come on ffs. What access to the files do you think the legal bod has just through being a legal bod. They went as far as to say nothing? Oh god. You make want to die you dinner party freaks. Why did you not ask her/him what they have done about it? Ask how you could bring their doubts to officials minds?



Huh?  Dinner party freaks?!!  These conversations took place at work, I don't do dinner parties with barristers and their ilk, not posh enough for that.   Your questions are accusatory and attacking.  Are you actually capable of discussing things without getting personal?  Some of the posters on here make fucking huge assumptions about people.


----------



## Corax (Nov 9, 2013)

UrbaneFox said:


> No, I didn't. I'm crap at technology and stuff. That's why I didn't do a proper poll.
> 
> What is VB and XF? *
> 
> ...


VBulletin - the software the boards were using up until quite recently.
XenForo - what they're on now.

They looked different on VB, and some of the things you can do now weren't available - including 'likes'

Lots of other little differences.  For eg - "Conversations" were called "Private Messages" which is why most posters still refer to "PMs".


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh come on ffs. What access to the files do you think the legal bod has just through being a legal bod. They went as far as to say nothing? Oh god. You make want to die you dinner party freaks. Why did you not ask her/him what they have done about it? Ask how you could bring their doubts to officials minds?



Back to the issue being discussed, why do you think the fund suppressed a report compiled by former M15 agents, whom they hand-picked to investigate for them?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Huh?  Dinner party freaks?!!  These conversations took place at work, I don't do dinner parties with barristers and their ilk, not posh enough for that.   Your questions are accusatory and attacking.  Are you actually capable of discussing things without getting personal?  Some of the posters on here make fucking huge assumptions about people.


Your post - apart from being bullshit -  assumes some authority because they're involved in the law. No question of what access they have to any info. Just, if they are involved the law then  you better take them seriously. As our recent public examples of experience with the law shows. You met some people who think the whole thing is shit, and you sprinkled some they were legal people too - on top. Fuck off.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Back to the issue being discussed, why do you think the fund suppressed a report compiled by former M15 agents, whom they hand-picked to investigate for them?


Why do you?


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

I really hope that I am wrong to doubt the official version of events that night, but I can't bring myself to accept it when there are so many unanswered questions in my mind.   The suppression


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Why do you?



I asked first.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 9, 2013)

laptop said:


> If you *know* this to be a difference, have you told the police how you know it?



A missing child and a dead child. I think the police already know the difference. Surprised that you don't.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Huh?  Dinner party freaks?!!  These conversations took place at work, I don't do dinner parties with barristers and their ilk, *not posh enough for that.*   Your questions are accusatory and attacking.  Are you actually capable of discussing things without getting personal?  Some of the posters on here make fucking huge assumptions about people.



Why not start going on about your working class upbringing on a council estate in Cardiff in order to back up your claims of not being posh enough to break bread with barristers? 

Tell you what though, you can't help yourself you can't - Earlier on in the thread it was your job working with vulnerable children that gave you licence to speculate wildly and indulge your own prejudices WRT this case and now you tell us about a conversation you had about this case - A conversation that could've taken place between anyone, but because this conversation took place between you, a social worker and a barrister we're somehow supposed to what? Listen to the shit you're chatting as though it's anything more than speculative bullshit based on nothing?

I'll tell you something else as well - That young woman who you told us about in another thread, who was going to spend the last of her money on a takeaway pizza and leave herself and her child without electric. Well, assuming that story was even vaguely based on truth, she either had some money coming her way from a source that she wasn't comfortable telling you about (and who can blame her?) or she was going to put her electric on the wire. Til you went busybodying in there and stopped her from treating herself to a pizza anyway.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

You see the young woman I spoke about on that thread, well, she was my friend's daughter and she asked for help.  Regularly.  Sadly, because of her acohol dependency and all that that can bring with it, her child was removed from her care, at the behest of her family. Nowt to do with me.  She nearly died due to cirhossis of the liver, but is now, happily, off drink and sees her child regularly.  AND, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRAWL THROUGH MY POSTS, AT LEAST TRY TO GET THEM RIGHT - SHE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE PIZZA IN THE OVEN FOR THE CHILD BECAUSE SHE WANTED THE LECY FOR THE TV.  APOLOGY FOR YOUR MISTAKE OR TWISTING OF MY POST PLEASE.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Why not start going on about your working class upbringing on a council estate in Cardiff in order to back up your claims of not being posh enough to break bread with barristers?
> 
> Tell you what though, you can't help yourself you can't - Earlier on in the thread it was your job working with vulnerable children that gave you licence to speculate wildly and indulge your own prejudices WRT this case and now you tell us about a conversation you had about this case - A conversation that could've taken place between anyone, but because this conversation took place between you, a social worker and a barrister we're somehow supposed to what? Listen to the shit you're chatting as though it's anything more than speculative bullshit based on nothing?
> 
> I'll tell you something else as well - That young woman who you told us about in another thread, who was going to spend the last of her money on a takeaway pizza and leave herself and her child without electric. Well, assuming that story was even vaguely based on truth, she either had some money coming her way from a source that she wasn't comfortable telling you about (and who can blame her?) or she was going to put her electric on the wire. Til you went busybodying in there and stopped her from treating herself to a pizza anyway.



Now, Frances, I see you posting lots on this thread, quite viciously at times.  I don't believe I have speculated wildly, I have put forward views echoed by other posters but have been picked out for particularly nasty responses.  I don't believe I've used my work to justify any of my posts, I have referenced it, rather like other posters on here who work in caring/counselling sectors.  I believe the thing I said that drew the most ire was concerning the parents' decision to leave their children following their daughter's disappearance.  I accept this does come across as judgemental.  But the vitriol from you and a few others seems disproportionate to me.  

Oh, I've just seen your little bit about 'assuming that story was even vaguely based on truth' - what the fuck is wrong with you.  Why would I lie?  You really are a sad, angry little man, aren't you.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Back to the issue being discussed, why do you think the fund suppressed a report compiled by former M15 agents, whom they hand-picked to investigate for them?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> I really hope that I am wrong to doubt the official version of events that night, but I can't bring myself to accept it when there are so many unanswered questions in my mind.   The suppression


There isn't an "official version" of events. That's just a canard set up by conspiraloons and dinner-party sleuths so they can be all edgy and, y'know, "counterculture", like Columbo and that other geezer who was always building his house, Panettone, whatever, by arguing against it.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You see the young woman I spoke about on that thread, well, she was my friend's daughter and she asked for help.  Regularly.  Sadly, because of her acohol dependency and all that that can bring with it, her child was removed from her care, at the behest of her family. Nowt to do with me.  She nearly died due to cirhossis of the liver, but is now, happily, off drink and sees her child regularly.  AND, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRAWL THROUGH MY POSTS, AT LEAST TRY TO GET THEM RIGHT - SHE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE PIZZA IN THE OVEN FOR THE CHILD BECAUSE SHE WANTED THE LECY FOR THE TV.  APOLOGY FOR YOUR MISTAKE OR TWISTING OF MY POST PLEASE.


Still doesn't alter the fact - in fact it only emphasises it - that you're happy to chat shit about other people's lives in order to big yourself up or support your own debating position. And that's not on the basis of one or two isolated examples - Francis has pointed out two, and my recollection is that your posting style is very much about assuming positions of authority, often in an _incredibly_ judgemental way about the people you're self-declared-expert-in-charge-of. If you really are involved in child protection, or any of the multiplicity of professional roles you seem to claim, I feel sorry for those who come under your professional care. Not least because of the possibility of their cases being used as ammunition to make you look like the world-class expert on an internet forum site.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

existentialist said:


> Still doesn't alter the fact - in fact it only emphasises it - that you're happy to chat shit about other people's lives in order to big yourself up or support your own debating position. And that's not on the basis of one or two isolated examples - Francis has pointed out two, and my recollection is that your posting style is very much about assuming positions of authority, often in an _incredibly_ judgemental way about the people you're self-declared-expert-in-charge-of. If you really are involved in child protection, or any of the multiplicity of professional roles you seem to claim, I feel sorry for those who come under your professional care. Not least because of the possibility of their cases being used as ammunition to make you look like the world-class expert on an internet forum site.



Whoa, steady on there.  

With regards to the multiplicity of roles, my current post (which I've been doing since 2003) involves 'key work' support to yp with a wide range of needs, including housing, mental health, school exclusion, child protection, gang desistence work, drug and substance abuse, homelessness/housing, domestic violence, child to parent abuse, special educational needs, offending, help with finding courses/employment, benefits advice, and whatever else presents itself. Before that, I was an education welfare for 5 years. For the past 24 years, I have trained in all of the above, some extensively, including regular refresher courses.  If I've appeared on different threads asking for advice on different issues, it might have looked like I have many roles.  I have one, and that is to help yp and their families to deal with whatever difficulties are in the way of them moving forward.  Also, being active in my local community means that you can toss a few a few more things into the mix like stop & search, community safety issues, etc.  That's just what it is, that's what  I do.  If you say my posting style comes across as judgemental, claiming to be an expert, authority, etc. then maybe I need to check my writing style.  I'm happy to say I don't think this comes across in my work.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You see the young woman I spoke about on that thread, well, she was my friend's daughter and she asked for help.  Regularly.  Sadly, because of her acohol dependency and all that that can bring with it, her child was removed from her care, at the behest of her family. Nowt to do with me.  She nearly died due to cirhossis of the liver, but is now, happily, off drink and sees her child regularly.  AND, *IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRAWL THROUGH MY POSTS*, AT LEAST TRY TO GET THEM RIGHT - SHE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE PIZZA IN THE OVEN FOR THE CHILD BECAUSE SHE WANTED THE LECY FOR THE TV.  APOLOGY FOR YOUR MISTAKE OR TWISTING OF MY POST PLEASE.



If I'd have gone _trawling_ through your posts, I'd have got the details right - As it is, I just vaguely remembered it. Still though, I maintain she'd have probably put the electric on the wire though if you hadn't have been there waving your magic busybody spoilsport wand.

You've got nasty responses coz you're a nasty piece of work. If you'd have the decency (or even awareness) to acknowledge that your speculation on this case has no more credibility than the speculation of anyone else then, well, that might be a start. But no. Seriously just fuck off. Your sort can only do harm. I feel sorry for any parent of a child deemed "vulnerable" who has to engage with you. 



shygirl said:


> <snip> You really are a sad, angry little man, aren't you.



Less of the little, thank you very much.



existentialist said:


> There isn't an "official version" of events. That's just a canard set up by conspiraloons and dinner-party sleuths so they can be all edgy and, y'know, "counterculture", like Columbo and that other geezer who was always building his house, Panettone, whatever, by arguing against it.



Petrocelli. Mind you, he was a decent guy who defended wrongly accused people. See shygirl  - You do learn something when your mam foregoes cooking in favour of telly. The body, it may wither but the mind it does thrive.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

Existentialist, what you said about me 'chatting shit' about other peoples' lives has made me think that I need to hold back from doing that.  I have referenced things in the context of a thread discussion, but even so, perhaps its wrong of me.  Sometimes I ask for advice, like on housing or university applications, perhaps I should just keep it at that.  

Will you also be picking up others who reference details about some of their casework?


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> If I'd have gone _trawling_ through your posts, I'd have got the details right - As it is, I just vaguely remembered it. Still though, I maintain she'd have probably put the electric on the wire though if you hadn't have been there waving your magic busybody spoilsport wand.
> 
> You've got nasty responses coz you're a nasty piece of work. If you'd have the decency (or even awareness) to acknowledge that your speculation on this case has no more credibility than the speculation of anyone else then, well, that might be a start. But no. Seriously just fuck off. Your sort can only do harm. I feel sorry for any parent of a child deemed "vulnerable" who has to engage with you.
> 
> ...



She didn't have any fucking money, she was at a chaotic stage in her life.  That's why her family went to social services asking to look after the child.  All your attention is on the parent, and not the child who often went hungry.

Most of the youth I work with aren't sorry to have me around, so don't worry your little head about that.  Oh, no-one HAS to engage with me, I'm not in the statutory sector.  People choose to engage with me if it feels right for them.  For those who it doesn't, I help them or they find alternative help.  Simple.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> She didn't have any fucking money, she was at a chaotic stage in her life.  That's why her family went to social services asking to look after the child.  *All your attention is on the parent, and not the child who often went hungry.*
> 
> Most of the youth I work with aren't sorry to have me around, so don't worry your little head about that.  Oh, no-one HAS to engage with me, I'm not in the statutory sector.  People choose to engage with me if it feels right for them.  For those who it doesn't, I help them or they find alternative help.  Simple.



That's a side issue I only brought up to highlight your busybody oh-look-at-me-and-the-people-I-have-to-contend-with-ways. No wonder she took to the bottle if her mam made such poor life choices as to have you for a mate though - From that precedent christ knows what other errors of parental judgement could've (and probably did) occur. 

The main issue is your using first of all your job and then the people you hang around with (but never have round for dinner, being seen with a barrister would ruin your street cred) to lend credibility to your idle speculation on the McCann case. Now any one of us is prone to idle speculation - An issue is on the news, we'll all speculate on it. The difference is you'll, apparently without any awareness that it's in any way wrong, mention your job and the people you've been hob nobbing with in order to elevate your idle speculation into something more credible.


----------



## shygirl (Nov 9, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> That's a side issue I only brought up to highlight your busybody oh-look-at-me-and-the-people-I-have-to-contend-with-ways. No wonder she took to the bottle if her mam made such poor life choices as to have you for a mate though - From that precedent christ knows what other errors of parental judgement could've (and probably did) occur.
> 
> The main issue is your using first of all your job and then the people you hang around with (but never have round for dinner, being seen with a barrister would ruin your street cred) to lend credibility to your idle speculation on the McCann case. Now any one of us is prone to idle speculation - An issue is on the news, we'll all speculate on it. The difference is you'll, apparently without any awareness that it's in any way wrong, mention your job and the people you've been hob nobbing with in order to elevate your idle speculation into something more credible.



You're full of shit and I won't take the bait any longer.  Oh, I look forward to seeing you attack others for referencing their work, colleagues, clients, etc.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You're full of shit and I won't take the bait any longer. * Oh, I look forward to seeing you attack others for referencing their work, colleagues, clients, etc*.



What bait? I'm not dangling maggots for you. I'd be happy if you fucked off.

And I won't attack others for referencing anything to do with what they may do in a professional capacity. What I attacked _you_ for was using your job (oh, I work with vulnerable kids so I'm somehow more _attuned_ to this sort of thing) to give your red top fuelled speculation a veneer of credibility. As I've explained several times. You stupid, worthless piece of shit.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> Existentialist, what you said about me 'chatting shit' about other peoples' lives has made me think that I need to hold back from doing that.  I have referenced things in the context of a thread discussion, but even so, perhaps its wrong of me.  Sometimes I ask for advice, like on housing or university applications, perhaps I should just keep it at that.
> 
> Will you also be picking up others who reference details about some of their casework?


I think it's safe to say that if I see professionals lording it over their clients, I'm likely to pass comment, yes.

ETA: I have occasionally made reference to my casework. But what I wouldn't do is to reference details in any way that might have made a hypothetical Urbanite client think "hey, that's me he's talking about". Usually, if I cite my casework, I am careful to speak in broad generalities, and I think I am always very careful not to betray any kind of judgement on my clients in the course of doing so.

I may have been more sensitive than some might think is necessary to your comments about your clients, but that is probably because such comments would go against every professional instinct I have as far as such things go.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 9, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You're full of shit and I won't take the bait any longer.  Oh, I look forward to seeing you attack others for referencing their work, colleagues, clients, etc.



Not nice when people make unfounded speculations is it?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 10, 2013)

shygirl said:


> You see the young woman I spoke about on that thread, well, she was my friend's daughter and she asked for help.  Regularly.  Sadly, because of her acohol dependency and all that that can bring with it, her child was removed from her care, at the behest of her family. Nowt to do with me.  She nearly died due to cirhossis of the liver, but is now, happily, off drink and sees her child regularly.  AND, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRAWL THROUGH MY POSTS, AT LEAST TRY TO GET THEM RIGHT - SHE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE PIZZA IN THE OVEN FOR THE CHILD BECAUSE SHE WANTED THE LECY FOR THE TV.  APOLOGY FOR YOUR MISTAKE OR TWISTING OF MY POST PLEASE.



that post, right there, should be a sackable offence

you need to have a proper word with yourself, because you're no good


----------



## editor (Mar 19, 2014)

This looks to be a very interesting development: 


> UK police probing the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are seeking an intruder who sexually abused five girls in Portugal between 2004 and 2006.
> 
> Detectives say the attacks happened in holiday villas occupied by UK families in the Algarve.
> 
> ...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26646885


----------



## King Biscuit Time (Mar 19, 2014)

I'm no detective. But that seems like a quite a good lead to  be following up _seven years later. _What on Earth was on the to do list above it?


----------



## Part 2 (Mar 19, 2014)

Bound to be those rubbish Portueguese coppers not doing their jobs proper.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Intriguing quote from Andy Redwood here, seems to suggest the police may not be working from the hypothesis of abduction: "While I completely accept that there are differences (between the break-ins and the McCann case), there is no abduction that we can see, but the assumption from that is that Madeleine McCann has been abducted. That may not necessarily follow with all our thinking about what may have become of Madeleine McCann."

Seems like the Met are just going through each potential line of inquiry and eliminating what they can, like the appeal in the autumn.


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> I'm no detective. But that seems like a quite a good lead to  be following up _seven years later. _What on Earth was on the to do list above it?




Yep. You think it might have come up during initial investigations, someone might maybe p'raps have mentioned it. Just WTF.


----------



## editor (Mar 19, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> I'm no detective. But that seems like a quite a good lead to  be following up _seven years later. _What on Earth was on the to do list above it?


Apparently, people only came forward with their stories about this bloke after an appeal last Autumn.


----------



## trashpony (Mar 19, 2014)

editor said:


> Apparently, people only came forward with their stories about this bloke after an appeal last Autumn.


Surely they'd been reported to the police though


----------



## editor (Mar 19, 2014)

trashpony said:


> Surely they'd been reported to the police though


I've no idea, but I guess these kind of appeals must work sometimes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2014)

King Biscuit Time said:


> I'm no detective. But that seems like a quite a good lead to  be following up _seven years later. _What on Earth was on the to do list above it?


from a list found near praia da luz

make tea
make more tea
home time


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> Intriguing quote from Andy Redwood here, seems to suggest the police may not be working from the hypothesis of abduction: "While I completely accept that there are differences (between the break-ins and the McCann case), there is no abduction that we can see, but the assumption from that is that Madeleine McCann has been abducted. That may not necessarily follow with all our thinking about what may have become of Madeleine McCann."
> 
> Seems like the Met are just going through each potential line of inquiry and eliminating what they can, like the appeal in the autumn.



Abduction might have been an escalation behaviour if a molester was involved. It's certainly something that manifests in sexual crimes.


----------



## Piston (Mar 19, 2014)

It must be a hell of a burden on the McCann's to carry on with this charade all these years. The only 2 people who believe she's not dead are the ones who know more than they're letting on. Oh and their PR guy Clarence who is paid to believe anything they tell him or concoct together.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Abduction might have been an escalation behaviour if a molester was involved. It's certainly something that manifests in sexual crimes.



Yes, though I took the quote as implying that their thinking might be _contrary to _the assumption of abduction. Very unclear in any case.

ETA. Some reasonable speculation here.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Piston said:


> It must be a hell of a burden on the McCann's to carry on with this charade all these years. The only 2 people who believe she's not dead are the ones who know more than they're letting on. Oh and their PR guy Clarence who is paid to believe anything they tell him or concoct together.



Ignorant and spiteful post. You don't know anything that the trashy papers haven't fed you.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

shygirl said:


> The Times and Telegraph articles are very interesting.  I really can't work out why the fund would have suppressed an e-fit of a possible suspect.  Very odd that.
> 
> A social worker and a barrister both brought up the subject to me recently, in the context of comparing how a family we are working with has been treated following their child's death with how the McCanns were treated.  The legal bod went as far as to say that there is a fair amount of doubt on the official version of what happened that night in Praia de Luz.



Gossip. Don't kid yourself your friends are any more informed than anyone else on this issue.

It's true the McCanns have been treated 'differently'. In some ways favourably and in others not. But ultimately they should benefit from presumed innocence.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Gossip. Don't kid yourself your friends are any more informed than anyone else on this issue.



It's not gossip though, is it. It was an investigation published by The Sunday Times "Insight" team into the handling of those e-fits.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Chip Barm said:


> Bound to be those rubbish Portueguese coppers not doing their jobs proper.



Well...yes that's about the size of it. Never understood why criticising the Police was a touchy point for some on this forum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well...yes that's about the size of it. Never understood why criticising the Police was a touchy point for some on this forum.


name names


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> It's not gossip though, is it. It was an investigation published by The Sunday Times "Insight" team into the handling of those e-fits.



No I'm referring to her chatting to her pals and the inference their jobs meant they had something ITK to offer.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well...yes that's about the size of it. Never understood why criticising the Police was a touchy point for some on this forum.



Gossip. Don't kid yourself your friends are any more informed than anyone else on this issue.

You don't know anything that the trashy papers haven't fed you.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> No I'm referring to her chatting to her pals and the inference their jobs meant they had something ITK to offer.



Fair enough.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> name names



Who? Portuguese police or pro police urban posters?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Who? Portuguese police or pro police urban posters?


either suits me

start with the latter tho


----------



## Manter (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well...yes that's about the size of it. Never understood why criticising the Police was a touchy point for some on this forum.


I think it's a sensitivity over the perceived xenophobia of the Portuguese police being painted as lazy, disinterested, corrupt, tea drinking whatevers... While the met are the decent honest British coppers who'll sort it all out


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> either suits me
> 
> start with the latter tho



Are you trying to claim that no one on this thread has ever taken the line that criticism of the Portuguese police was unfair and some form of British snobbery, or assumed superiority?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Are you trying to claim that no one on this thread has ever taken the line that criticism of the Portuguese police was unfair and some form of British snobbery, or assumed superiority?


i'm asking you to name names.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Manter said:


> I think it's a sensitivity over the perceived xenophobia of the Portuguese police being painted as lazy, disinterested, corrupt, tea drinking whatevers... While the met are the decent honest British coppers who'll sort it all out



Well yeh, I get that. I don't get why people aren't a bit more neither Washington or Moscow about it.


----------



## Manter (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well yeh, I get that. I don't get why people aren't a bit more neither Washington or Moscow about it.


Fair enough


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm asking you to name names.



Well, I'm not going to. If you think I'm not right just say so. I always respect what you have to say.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well yeh, I get that. I don't get why people aren't a bit more neither Washington or Moscow about it.



What would that entail?


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> What would that entail?



Is it really that difficult? You don't have to choose one to support.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Who is supporting the Portugese police on principle here? Isn't saying 'no I don't think they fucked up massively on this case' just a matter of taking a position on this question, which has raised repeatedly in the British press. It's not a matter of "support".


----------



## thriller (Mar 19, 2014)

the Portuguese pholice are crap, though. lack skills and know-how. i remember they had to get brits to look at the room with specialist equipment or specially trained dogs or something a few years ago. idiots. incompetent baboons.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Not that unusual. The FBI is brought in on a lot of major crimes in other countries because of their expertise. In this case the highly-skilled cadaver and blood dogs you reference are not common.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> Who is supporting the Portugese police on principle here? Isn't saying 'no I don't think they fucked up massively on this case' just a matter of taking a position on this question, which has raised repeatedly in the British press. It's not a matter of "support".



That's a wholly different point so run along.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

No. Who is "supporting" the Portugese police? Your words.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> No. Who is "supporting" the Portugese police? Your words.



People who deflected criticism of them merely because they believe that it was inspired by a little England mentality. 

And don't ask 'who' like a sheep.


----------



## benedict (Mar 19, 2014)

Once more nothing to back up the claim. 

In any case much of the xenophobic bashing of the Portugese police in the press has been exactly that. And the SWP cliche just isn't working for you.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> Once more nothing to back up the claim.
> 
> In any case much of the xenophobic bashing of the Portugese police in the press has been exactly that. And the SWP cliche just isn't working for you.



I didn't say there hadn't been any Xenophobic bashing of the Police in the press. 

Arguing with you is like debating a particularly slow dog.


----------



## cesare (Mar 19, 2014)

Shouldn't that be owl, not sheep?


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2014)

benedict said:


> What would that entail?


They're all fucking useless?


----------



## Espresso (Mar 19, 2014)

That poor unfortunate child is as dead as a dodo. Or she's in Mr Portuguese Fritzl-alike's well hidden dungeon, with him carrying on as he's always done, arousing no attention or suspicion whatsoever.

In either case, it's been so long now that I daresay she's not turning up any time soon, alive or dead.


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2014)

I was struck by this bit at the bottom of the _Guardian_ report:




			
				Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood said:
			
		

> "If you have been a victim of a similar crime please come forward even if you reported the incident to police in Portugal, or anywhere else, please do not assume we have been made aware of it."



Translated from bureaucratese, that's practically a declaration of war on Portuguese police.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 20, 2014)

xenon said:
			
		

> Yep. You think it might have come up during initial investigations, someone might maybe p'raps have mentioned it. Just WTF.



Apparently they weren't linked as nobody was abducted.


----------



## benedict (Mar 20, 2014)

The profile of this case is really different from the pattern of those cases though, to be fair, especially the timing (2am-5am) vs. ~10pm and apparent behaviors. In any case there was no material evidence of abduction in the first instance (no forced entry, no fingerprints, nothing stolen etc), leaving a range of other possibilities for the police to have to explore.	

Also, bear in mind that this red-shirted individual is one of many they're looking into. According to the Guardian piece: "Scotland Yard also revealed it was looking at 38 "people of interest" in relation to her disappearance, having dismissed 22 others from that category. They were also trying to find out more about 530 known sex offenders – 59 regarded as of high interest – across Europe."

The immensity of the task in following up so many leads after all this time is unimaginable.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 20, 2014)

That may be so, but why hasn't this fellow had his collar felt for what he *has* done?


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 20, 2014)

laptop said:


> I was struck by this bit at the bottom of the _Guardian_ report:
> 
> 
> 
> Translated from bureaucratese, that's practically a declaration of war on Portuguese police.



More like a declaration of LOOK!!! FOR ONCE IT WASN'T US THAT FUCKED UP!!!!


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> That may be so, but why hasn't this fellow had his collar felt for what he *has* done?



Because only he knows who he is, or was?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 2, 2014)

Police have sealed off a large area of scrubland in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27659905


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Badgers said:


> Police have sealed off a large area of scrubland in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27659905


it's strange how the path in the middle of the scrubland looks like the bit in madeleine mccann's eye.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 2, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> it's strange how the path in the middle of the scrubland looks like the bit in madeleine mccann's eye.



That is some weirdness you are talking there Pickman's.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That is some weirdness you are talking there Pickman's.


no it isn't

have a look


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 2, 2014)

Well no it's weird because it's appearance cannot have anything to do with the case and your construction of the image is more revealing of your own thought processes. Not even mostly that you saw it, but that you wished to share it and thereby open yourself up for scrutiny.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Well no it's weird because it's appearance cannot have anything to do with the case and your construction of the image is more revealing of your own thought processes. Not even mostly that you saw it, but that you wished to share it and thereby open yourself up for scrutiny.


this is urban  we post up any auld shit


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 2, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this is urban  we post up any auld shit



I'm not telling you not to just commenting like.

But that's a bit rich considering you tend to jump with two feet on posts you don't agree with.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I'm not telling you not to just commenting like.
> 
> But that's a bit rich considering you tend to jump with two feet on posts you don't agree with.


you can too, if you like. no one's stopping you.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 2, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you can too, if you like. no one's stopping you.



Alright. I will.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Alright. I will.


i'm disappointed in you. it's a sorry state of affairs when you need someone else's approval to stomp on posts


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 2, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm disappointed in you. it's a sorry state of affairs when you need someone else's approval to stomp on posts



Like there isn't a mighty great herd mentality here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Like there isn't a mighty great herd mentality here.


can't you at least pretend to pretend


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 2, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> mighty great herd mentality



That's a bit rich coming from a woodland creature like yourself.

As for the thread topic, I'm going to stick my neck out and predict that no human remains will be found, and even if they are found they will leave us none the wiser as to what happened Maddeleine McCann.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 2, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> That's a bit rich coming from a woodland creature like yourself.
> 
> As for the thread topic, I'm going to stick my neck out and predict that no human remains will be found, and even if they are found they will leave us none the wiser as to what happened Maddeleine McCann.


she's the world hide and seek champion


----------



## TodayIsCaturday (Jun 2, 2014)

I bet she was on MH370


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 3, 2014)

You'd have to be pretty ballsy/stupid to abduct a child and then bury her less than a mile away from where you took her, on an open patch of scrubland, overlooked by houses and with a road running through and around it.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 3, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> You'd have to be pretty ballsy/stupid to abduct a child and then bury her less than a mile away from where you took her, on an open patch of scrubland, overlooked by houses and with a road running through and around it.


Those are my thoughts also but I suppose there is some intelligence, a lead or something behind this search?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 3, 2014)

news banging on about this and yet no mention of 800 child corpses stuffed in an irish septic tank


----------



## weltweit (Jun 3, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> news banging on about this and yet no mention of 800 child corpses stuffed in an irish septic tank


Someone could email uk news agencies about the Irish kids ..


----------



## quiquaquo (Jun 3, 2014)

weltweit said:


> Someone could email uk news agencies about the Irish kids ..



The church has put the frighteners on imho. Blackfriars Bridge probably reminds a few what can happen.


----------



## Tankus (Oct 5, 2014)

well ...a bit left of field 

Looked alarmed when the sky reporter told her that the police were now involved in sweepyfaces trolling ...

and now this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cCanns-dead-hotel-room-days-fleeing-home.html

I wonder how chuffed the sky reporter feels now


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 6, 2014)

> Burton Overy was mentioned in the Domesday Book



Thanks for that Mail reporter, vital local colour


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 6, 2014)

Tankus said:


> well ...a bit left of field
> 
> Looked alarmed when the sky reporter told her that the police were now involved in sweepyfaces trolling ...
> 
> ...



A BBC link for those with an aversion to the Mail.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-29501646

Poor woman.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

So she admitted to trolling the parents of a missing girl?

The involvement of those vultures at Sky doesn't make that less disgusting.


----------



## likesfish (Oct 6, 2014)

You may be entitled to troll someone but your Also  entitled to the consequences of your actions. not a lot of sympathy to be honest.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 6, 2014)

I find it difficult to blame Sky for this, will people on here take the blame if Laurie Penny tops herself and leaves a note blaming Urban and lazyhack ?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

Trolling troll trolled to death by trolling trolls.

No one wins. This is just how shitty society has become.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2014)

I haven't looked into it, but before you continue, can you provide some evidence for this 'trolling'?

Alternatively: http://spudgunsspoutings.blogspot.de/2014/10/rip-brenda-leyland-trolled-hounded-to.html?m=1



> Furthermore, given that the McCann's do not HAVE a Twitter presence, how can this lady possibly have trolled or abused them?
> 
> Amongst the WORST tweets I have seen was where she hoped the McCanns “suffered for the rest of their miserable lives”. It was a foolish, foolhardy and deeply insensitive tweet to make, even if she did genuinely mean it....BUT........



and




			
				Telegraph said:
			
		

> Mr McCann told _BBC Radio 4’s Today_ programme that, *while he had not seen the @sweepyface tweets*, online abuse had caused his family “severe distress”.


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

Dead witch. Ha hahahahaha.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> Dead witch. Ha hahahahaha.


You're a quite unpleasant person, really, aren't you?


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 6, 2014)

mauvais said:


> and
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's a lovely picture, isn't it - all those honourable, well-meaning journos scrabbling to be the first to find out poor Kate and Gerry's reaction to the distressing news that they're being abused in a medium they have, wisely, been avoiding. Ain't freedom of speech a glorious thing for all concerned in this case?

Like Awesome Wells and likesfish my first instinct is that Sky and the trolls are as bad as each other.  But on reflection I reckon trolling the parents of a dead child is most likely the act of someone who's thoughtless and a bit thick, and is somewhat less loathsome than the kind of person who, knowing those parents are trying to avoid such abuse, goes out of their way to ensure they can't, just to have an excuse to re-sensationalise an old story.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2014)

I think the linked blogger has a fairly strong agenda of their own, but the piece is worth a read. I wouldn't like to say what degree of culpability the media has in her death, but at very least it looks like another episode of short-sighted behaviour on their part.


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

mauvais said:


> You're a quite unpleasant person, really, aren't you?



No, I just think that this nasty spiteful woman deserves whatever happened to her. 

She had no involvement in the McCanns case at all, yet she chose to publish really nasty comments about them for a sustained period.

So, if eventually all that nastiness and hatred made her die, I am not going to be sad for her.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> She had no involvement in the McCanns case at all, yet she chose to publish really nasty comments about them for a sustained period.


Can you substantiate this?

Out of interest, what are we supposed to think about you, come your own passing?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

mauvais said:


> Can you substantiate this?
> 
> Out of interest, what are we supposed to think about you, come your own passing?


jelly and icecream when giles dies


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 6, 2014)

I reckon the mortuary assistants should hide the dead woman's body. See how her family like it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

her family really shouldn't have left her alone in that hotel room...


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> her family really shouldn't have left her alone in that hotel room...



Synchronicity at play here.


----------



## ChrisD (Oct 6, 2014)

not properly following all this... and refuse to open DailyFail link... but  how did Sky News (or other journalists) find the identity of the twitter account?


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2014)

Here are all the tweets, by the way, in a remarkably difficult to read fashion:

http://greptweet.com/u/sweepyface/sweepyface.txt

On a cursory look, it seems to be the equivalent of posting on a thread like this.


----------



## Betsy (Oct 6, 2014)

mauvais said:


> Here are all the tweets, *by the way, in a remarkably difficult to read fashion:*
> 
> http://greptweet.com/u/sweepyface/sweepyface.txt
> 
> On a cursory look, it seems to be the equivalent of posting on a thread like this.


You can say that again!


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> her family really shouldn't have left her alone in that hotel room...



Cheap shot.


----------



## Betsy (Oct 6, 2014)

There's a discussion about trolling (not this particular incident) on the radio just now and it has been said that trolling is the new poison pen letter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

Betsy said:


> There's a discussion about trolling (not this particular incident) on the radio just now and it has been said that trolling is the new poison pen letter.


on the other hand, you really are anonymous with the auld poison pen letter. however, it requires finding out the target's address, which is sadly not always easy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> I reckon the mortuary assistants should hide the dead woman's body. See how her family like it.


do you think mortuary assistants had anything to do with madeleine mccann's disappearance or death?


----------



## 2hats (Oct 6, 2014)

ChrisD said:


> but  how did Sky News (or other journalists) find the identity of the twitter account?



http://news.sky.com/story/1346687/gerry-mccann-says-make-example-of-web-trolls


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

Tankus said:


> well ...a bit left of field
> 
> Looked alarmed when the sky reporter told her that the police were now involved in sweepyfaces trolling ...
> 
> ...



I don't imagine he should feel bad. He was only doing his job. If she DID post this stuff online, why is it bad to ask her about it? That is the job of a reporter surely? 

If someoneposts nasty comments why not ask them about it? That's all he did. 

If she went off and topped herself because of this, that is due to her feeling ashamed of what she had done. 

Which is not the reporter's fault at all. If she was proud of what she had posted, she presumably wouldn't have done herself in.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 6, 2014)

Hard to see how she was directing comments 'at' the Mc Canns (as the BBC reports) when they aren't even on Twitter.


----------



## lizzieloo (Oct 6, 2014)

That Sky reporter could have chosen loads of folk on this thread to "out", she wasn't a troll, that reporter was over zealous at best.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 6, 2014)

Dogsauce said:


> Hard to see how she was directing comments 'at' the Mc Canns (as the BBC reports) when they aren't even on Twitter.



i disagree - the McCanns might not have read it, but lots of others will have done so, and the abuse might have contributed to a 'pool' of public and political indifference or even hostility to them and their situation (and perhaps more importantly, their daughters situation..) which then translates as a reduction in the UK police and diplomatic effort to bring about a resolution.

_that_ effects the McCanns - as does an atmosphere that this woman contributed to  - that its ok to say the most vile things about them in public, in this case that occured in a medium the McCanns aren't plugged into, but at some stage that atmosphere is going to mean some social inadequate is going to go up to them them and their kids in Sainsburys and either give them dogs abuse, or attack them physically.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

kebabking said:


> i disagree - the McCanns might not have read it, but lots of others will have done so, and the abuse might have contributed to a 'pool' of public and political indifference or even hostility to them and their situation (and perhaps more importantly, their daughters situation..) which then translates as a reduction in the UK police and diplomatic effort to bring about a resolution.
> 
> _that_ effects the McCanns - as does an atmosphere that this woman contributed to  - that its ok to say the most vile things about them in public, in this case that occured in a medium the McCanns aren't plugged into, but at some stage that atmosphere is going to mean some social inadequate is going to go up to them them and their kids in Sainsburys and either give them dogs abuse, or attack them physically.


your mights and mays become is going to mean despite your argument being built on sand.


----------



## T & P (Oct 6, 2014)

kebabking said:


> i disagree - the McCanns might not have read it, but lots of others will have done so, and the abuse might have contributed to a 'pool' of public and political indifference or even hostility to them and their situation (and perhaps more importantly, their daughters situation..)* which then translates as a reduction in the UK police and diplomatic effort to bring about a resolution.*


 There could be an argument that a reduction of the police efforts would be a good thing. Extraordinary amount of time and resources have been devoted to this case, which surely translates as those resources being missed elsewhere- likely on a number of cases that would have a much greater chance of being solved than this one. David Cameron's grand reopening of the police investigation had very little to do with new leads suggesting a resolution was tangible, and everything with political posturing and playing to the gallery.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 6, 2014)

T & P said:


> There could be an argument that a reduction of the police efforts would be a good thing. Extraordinary amount of time and resources have been devoted this case, which surely translates as those resources being missed elsewhere- likely on a number of cases that would have a much greater chance of being solved than this one....



i wouldn't disagree - in the wider scheme of things the focus on the McCanns is almost certainly damaging other investigations though a diversion of scarce resource, but for the McCanns themselves the concentration of resource on their case is a good thing, and that which dilutes it to other cases is a bad thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

kebabking said:


> i wouldn't disagree - in the wider scheme of things the focus on the McCanns is almost certainly damaging other investigations though a diversion of scarce resource, but for the McCanns themselves the concentration of resource on their case is a good thing, and that which dilutes it to other cases is a bad thing.


i don't think the mccanns live in london yet they're very happy to sponge of london council tax payers for the met police to run about looking for their lost and likely dead child.

http : //content. met. police. uk / Article/Operation-Grange/14000055 08791/35434


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

lizzieloo said:


> That Sky reporter could have chosen loads of folk on this thread to "out", she wasn't a troll, that reporter was over zealous at best.



All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?


----------



## gosub (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?


When did person has opinon on the internet become news?


----------



## likesfish (Oct 6, 2014)

As none of the people "who don't believe the mcanns story"  have any evidence whatsoever it's loonspudery.
Complaining she got unwanted publicity why put in on Twitter its a forum people have heard of. Unlike say urban


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?


jelly, icecream and cake when giles dies


----------



## sim667 (Oct 6, 2014)

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...nda-leyland-dead_n_5937900.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

I see the dried on ejaculate stain that is Katie Hopkins has insisted on having her say as per usual.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?



Yeah lizzieloo, stop picking on Sky.  They're the victim here.


----------



## The Octagon (Oct 6, 2014)

sim667 said:


> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...nda-leyland-dead_n_5937900.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
> 
> I see the dried on ejaculate stain that is Katie Hopkins has insisted on having her say as per usual.



I really wish people would stop giving her the oxygen of publicity.

Actually, in hindsight, the "of publicity" is redundant in the above sentence.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

sim667 said:


> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...nda-leyland-dead_n_5937900.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
> 
> I see the dried on ejaculate stain that is Katie Hopkins has insisted on having her say as per usual.


Urge to avoid...failing! Arg!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?


Who are Sky to decide what's in the public interest? I'm surprised they haven't hacked her phone.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

"Believe it - and get over yourself. Plenty think it. Imagine if I left my children alone and went out. Forgiveness? "

Is what the rancid bitch said (don't bother to inform me that i'm being sexist, i don't care, Hopkins is foul).

I'd like to think that if even she had left her children alone and, god forbid, something happened to them (other than having Satan for a mother), society would show some sympathy.

That's the problem with her. FFS the McCanns may be a pair of feckless tossers but they don't deserve having their child go missing!

She also said this : "The Peaches Effect. Someone from a council estate makes a mistake - vilified. White, middle class makes mistake - only sympathy on offer."

She's got her supporters as well because, as with Clarkson, it's all about someone who's 'brave' enough to reject the yoke of political correctness; "it's what people think".


----------



## lizzieloo (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> All he did was politely ask her about what she had posted. Why is this seen as wrong? Isn't it his job to do this?



Not at how he confronted her but at his pursuing her in the first place


----------



## Nylock (Oct 6, 2014)

The Octagon said:


> I really wish people would stop giving her the oxygen of publicity.


FTFY


----------



## The Octagon (Oct 6, 2014)

Nylock said:


> FTFY


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 6, 2014)

The Octagon said:


> I really wish people would stop giving her the oxygen of publicity.
> 
> Actually, in hindsight, the "of publicity" is redundant in the above sentence.



Give her all the oxygen she needs, then much much more.  Hyperoxia is a more unpleasant death than hypoxia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I find it difficult to blame Sky for this, will people on here take the blame if Laurie Penny tops herself and leaves a note blaming Urban and lazyhack ?


i'll take the biscuit, esp. if chocolate


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Who are Sky to decide what's in the public interest? I'm surprised they haven't hacked her phone.



But they didn't "hack her phone" did they? All he did was ask her a question, which, as a reporter, is pretty much his job. 

I cannot see how asking someone about something they posted on a public forum is in some way wrong. Let alone reason for the person questioned to do away with themselves.....


----------



## lizzieloo (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> But they didn't "hack her phone" did they? All he did was ask her a question, which, as a reporter, is pretty much his job.
> 
> I cannot see how asking someone about something they posted on a public forum is in some way wrong. Let alone reason for the person questioned to do away with themselves.....





lizzieloo said:


> Not at how he confronted her but at his pursuing her in the first place


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> But they didn't "hack her phone" did they? All he did was ask her a question, which, as a reporter, is pretty much his job.
> 
> I cannot see how asking someone about something they posted on a public forum is in some way wrong. Let alone reason for the person questioned to do away with themselves.....


ok, why do you post such guff?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> "Believe it - and get over yourself. Plenty think it. Imagine if I left my children alone and went out. Forgiveness? "
> 
> Is what the rancid bitch said (don't bother to inform me that i'm being sexist, i don't care, Hopkins is foul).
> 
> ...



Is it worth pointing out that the dominant media narrative in this has been very far from painting the McCanns as a pair of feckless tossers? Think more along the lines of a poor pair of grieving parents, contributing wonderfully to society, who have lost their daughter through absolutely no fault of their own and deserve not just our brief sympathy, but their continuous position in all our hearts and for the British police to continue to devote huge resources to this, long after there's any realistic chance of finding their daughter alive*.

General dismissal as a pair of feckless tossers is reserved for parents from another stratum of society altogether.

* of course, that doesn't mean they deserve to have their daughter go missing either, but it does throw up a contrast and an issue which we might like to consider.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> But they didn't "hack her phone" did they? All he did was ask her a question, which, as a reporter, is pretty much his job.
> 
> I cannot see how asking someone about something they posted on a public forum is in some way wrong. Let alone reason for the person questioned to do away with themselves.....


Because this isn't a public interest story and Sky aren't nice people.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

Person says bad thing on teh interwebs. Everyone notices and points. And hates. She wishes she hadn't. No wonder most of us use pseudonyms.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 6, 2014)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I find it difficult to blame Sky for this, will people on here take the blame if Laurie Penny tops herself and leaves a note blaming Urban and lazyhack ?



Great comparison.  No difference between Sky and Urban as far as I can tell.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 6, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Person says bad thing on teh interwebs. Everyone notices and points. And hates. She wishes she hadn't. No wonder most of us use pseudonyms.



Alright Rolf, the game's up.


----------



## Nylock (Oct 6, 2014)

The Octagon said:


>







...hard to resist though tbf....


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Because this isn't a public interest story and Sky aren't nice people.



He just walked up to her and politely asked her a few questions about what she'd written, she didn't really answer the questions, and then she drove off. He did not shout at her,nor was he rude.


----------



## lizzieloo (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> He just walked up to her and politely asked her a few questions about what she'd written, she didn't really answer the questions, and then she drove off. He did not shout at her,nor was he rude.



Pursuing her in the first place was the problem, might have pointed that out to you before


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> He just walked up to her and politely asked her a few questions about what she'd written, she didn't really answer the questions, and then she drove off. He did not shout at her,nor was he rude.


I'm sure he was; these people aren't stupid. They just aren't nice. If she has broken the law then get the law to deal with her. If she's just a nasty old troll, then have her banned from Twitter. 

Who are Sky to act as the moral arbiter? Who are these people to demand people, no matter how fragile, no matter their experiences or circumstances, explain themselves? Who are we to call these people to account?

I'm not defending her actions, but clearly she was fragile. I abhor the idea of trolling the victims of a missing child, but that doesn't justify being hounded by Sky, no matter how polite.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Giles said:


> He just walked up to her and politely asked her a few questions about what she'd written, she didn't really answer the questions, and then she drove off. He did not shout at her,nor was he rude.



I confess I haven't read the full details of this story, but presumably it didn't just stop when she drove off.

Presumably there was then the reporting of this "polite asking of questions" and all that had allegedly led up to it, in suitably monstering fashion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Who are Sky to act as the moral arbiter? Who are these people to demand people, no matter how fragile, no matter their experiences or circumstances, explain themselves? Who are we to call these people to account?


you're quite right. unless we have shares in sky, who are we to call them to a/c?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Cheap shot.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

Not sure I'm understanding this. She posts hostile stuff on Twitter, is confronted about it, and it's Sky's fault she has been driven into an intolerable situation? Not wanting to be heartless, but when you accuse someone of killing their child, do you expect everyone to listen patiently and reasonably? Should you be totally amazed if you are challenged?

[Edited to correct 'criticised' to 'challenged'.]


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Not sure I'm understanding this. She posts hostile stuff on Twitter, is confronted about it, and it's Sky's fault she has been driven into an intolerable situation? Not wanting to be heartless, but when you accuse someone of killing their child, do you expect everyone to listen patiently and reasonably? Should you be totally amazed if you are challenged?
> 
> [Edited to correct 'criticised' to 'challenged'.]


Interesting that it's all still up on the Sky site.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> Not sure I'm understanding this. She posts hostile stuff on Twitter, is confronted about it, and it's Sky's fault she has been driven into an intolerable situation? Not wanting to be heartless, but when you accuse someone of killing their child, do you expect everyone to listen patiently and reasonably? Should you be totally amazed if you are challenged?
> 
> [Edited to correct 'criticised' to 'challenged'.]



Where has she accused anyone of killing their child? Let's have a direct link please.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

i am disappointed not to have had a visit from martin brunt yet.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i am disappointed not to have had a visit from martin brunt yet.


try twerting "_trampled by horses_"...see if that does the trick?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> try twerting "_trampled by horses_"...see if that does the trick?


i've tried twerting it, i've tried twerking it - nothing seems to be happening.


----------



## friedaweed (Oct 6, 2014)

Has Frankie Boyle visited the story yet?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Where has she accused anyone of killing their child? Let's have a direct link please.


FFS. I take it all back. She merely criticised their choice of soft furnishings.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i've tried twerting it, i've tried twerking it - nothing seems to be happening.


you might get Kay?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> you might get Kay?


KB? not a whisper from her either


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you're quite right. unless we have shares in sky, who are we to call them to a/c?


LOL


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

anyway i wonder if there'll be birthday parties for mm on 12/5/15 to keep the flagging interest in the case alive.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Interestingly "Sky" appear to equate waterboarding with torture...hmmm


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

bluescreen said:


> FFS. I take it all back. She merely criticised their choice of soft furnishings.



The tweet quoted on the Sky site in brogdale's link reads



> How long must the McCanns suffer? For the rest of their miserables lives.



That's clearly more than a criticism of their soft furnishings, but it's nowhere near an accusation that they killed their child. So is there another quote you can link to, or are you just taking a leaf out of the "monster anyone who critcises the McCanns aka talking shit" book?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

Seriously, this is a sad story. Person convinced of her own truth (despite zero evidence) pursues it online big time, obtains large audience. Is challenged and shamed. Dies. Meanwhile, the tragedy around which she has constructed her version of "the truth" continues in its drab awful heartbreaking ordinariness, punctuated occasionally by offstage dramas. 

ETA: offstage dramas which are also tragic.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Where has she accused anyone of killing their child? Let's have a direct link please.


It's implicit. Unless she really did think they should be miserable for the rest of their lives (or words to that affect) because they were victims of a crime.

It suggests she finds them in some way culpable.


----------



## Giles (Oct 6, 2014)

She has a right to slate the McCanns, which she exercised.

Sky have a right to ask her about it. 

She has a right to go off and top herself.

So, no-one's rights appear to have been violated here.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> It's implicit. Unless she really did think they should be miserable for the rest of their lives (or words to that affect) because they were victims of a crime.
> 
> It suggests she finds them in some way culpable.



No, it doesn't. She doesn't say in that quote that she thinks they kiilled their child (again, if there is another tweet I haven't seen, then please produce it).

She could be saying they deserve to be miserable because they left their child alone, or because of the way they behaved after she went missing. Neither of those are very pleasant, and she certainly deserved some criticism for it, but not the total misrepresentation she's getting here.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 6, 2014)

Time for a bit of John Cooper Clarke

Read the paper - humdrum
Henley Regatta - page one
Eat die - ho hum
Page three - big bum
Giving a lunatic a loaded gun
He walks - others run
Thirty dead - no fun
Foreigners feature as figures of fun
Do something destructive chum
Sit right down - write a letter to the Sun
Say... "Bring back hangin' for everyone"
The took my advice - they brought it back
National costume was all-over-black
There were corpses in the avenues and cul-de-sacs
Piled up neatly in six-man stacks
Hanging from the traffic lights and specially made racks
They'd hang you for incontinence and fiddling your tax
Failure to hang yourself justified the axe
A deedely dee, a deedely dum
Looks like they brought back hangin' for everyone
The novelty's gone - it's hell
This place is a - death cell
The constant clang of the funeral bells
Those who aren't hanging are hanging someone else
The peoples pay - the paper sells
It's plug ugly - sub-animal yells
Death is unsightly - death smells
Swingin' Britain - don't put me on
They're gonna bring back the rope for everyone


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 6, 2014)

The account she used on Twitter has since been deleted but according to the BBC article:



> n a list of thousands of tweets, apparently sent by Mrs Leyland, none of the messages are directed personally at the McCanns, who have "no significant presence" on social media.
> However, many are labelled with the hashtag #mccanns which allows them to be easily found and criticised the couple following the disappearance of their daughter.
> 
> One read: "#mccann To Kate and Gerry, you will be hated by millions for the rest of your miserable, evil, conniving lives, have a nice day!"
> ...



Interestingly troll expert Mr Bishop was not used as the expert commenting in this article.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2014)

Always time for JCC


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> No, it doesn't. She doesn't say in that quote that she thinks they kiilled their child (again, if there is another tweet I haven't seen, then please produce it).
> 
> She could be saying they deserve to be miserable because they left their child alone, or because of the way they behaved after she went missing. Neither of those are very pleasant, and she certainly deserved some criticism for it, but not the total misrepresentation she's getting here.


Yes, I suppose it's entirely plausible that she thought they were 'evil' because of how they courted the media to help in the hunt for their daughter.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

Daily Mail said:
			
		

> The trollers wrongly believe the McCanns were involved in their daughter’s disappearance.



What do the DM know that no one else does?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> What do the DM know that no one else does?



Well, they know that the McCanns are nice well spoken, well connected people who would never have anything to do with anything nasty or unsavoury, so obviously they couldn't possibly be involved in any way shape or form in their daughter's disappearance.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Well, they know that the McCanns are nice well spoken, well connected people who would never have anything to do with anything nasty or unsavoury, so obviously they couldn't possibly be involved in any way shape or form in their daughter's disappearance.


Well what is indisputable is the fact that they were very much involved in her disappearance in so much as if they hadn't left her in a hotel room on her own, if in fact she wasn't already dead, then she would still be alive!


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> Well what is indisputable is the fact that they were very much involved in her disappearance in so much as if they hadn't left her in a hotel room on her own, if in fact she wasn't already dead, then she would still be alive!



Come on, that's equivalent to accusing them of murder!!!1!


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

In the 1970s, people left their children alone in their rooms in Butlins while they went to the bar. Redcoats would walk around the site and go and announce over the tannoy if a child was crying.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 6, 2014)

It's not really 'trolling' is it?  Usually trolling as I understand it tends to be adopting an extreme or confrontational position for kicks, just to wind people up or seek attention, which can be malevolent, but usually these aren't sincerely held views. 'pulling someone's chain' or 'pushing buttons' maybe.  I don't think from what I've read that this is the case here.  I think this person actually believed what they were spouting, mouthing off because they were angry about it.  I think 'trolling' has just become a media byword for any bad behaviour online.


----------



## ChrisD (Oct 6, 2014)

I'm still confused as to how media find out anonymous trolls identities?  I can understand how Police etc. can but what about the media?

Last week I got on the same train as that horrid woman K Hopkins.  We all know her id (and I know where she lives).  Fortunately she was in the first class carriage which is separated from the rest of us by the buffet car.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> In the 1970s, people left their children alone in their rooms in Butlins while they went to the bar. Redcoats would walk around the site and go and announce over the tannoy if a child was crying.


Shame the McCann's hadn't booked Butlins, then?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Come on, that's equivalent to accusing them of murder!!!1!


Well they are certainly guilty of child neglect, and any other parents would have been prosecuted.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> Well they are certainly guilty of child neglect, and any other parents would have been prosecuted.



Much though it's against my inclination to spring to the defence of the McCanns, are you really as familiar with the Child Neglect laws and prosecution policies of Portugal as this comment suggests?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Much though it's against my inclination to spring to the defence of the McCanns, are you really as familiar with the Child Neglect laws and prosecution policies of Portugal as this comment suggests?


Ok, I shall rephrase. They deserved to be prosecuted!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

do Butlins still offer that service?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Shame the McCann's hadn't booked Butlins, then?



As if the McCanns would ever be seen dead book a holiday at Butlins


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> As if the McCanns would ever be seen dead book a holiday at Butlins


Sounds like it might have been right up their street tbh...leave the kids at home to go out for a good time...


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Yes, I suppose it's entirely plausible that she thought they were 'evil' because of how they courted the media to help in the hunt for their daughter.



But you'd have to be an utter mentalist to believe that.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Sounds like it might have been right up their street tbh...leave the kids at home to go out for a good time...



But think of all the horrible working class people they'd have to mix with...

Anyway, I'd better leave this subject before I'm overcome by the temptation to make one of a number of sick jokes which occur to me.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Shame the McCann's hadn't booked Butlins, then?



How would they have booked in the 1970s? At least keep up when posting nasty.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> But think of all the horrible working class people they'd have to mix with...
> 
> Anyway, I'd better leave this subject before I'm overcome by the temptation to make one of a number of sick jokes which occur to me.


Well...I dunno about all that, but on checking my own Q...no Butlins do not offer that service any more. I wonder why? Seems like all those "horrible working class people" actually look after their kids and don't fuck off out to leave them to it.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> But think of all the horrible working class people they'd have to mix with...
> 
> Anyway, I'd better leave this subject before I'm overcome by the temptation to make one of a number of sick jokes which occur to me.



Funny this pernicious notion of the McCanns being elite (and therefore deserving of scepticism) what with Kate's Scouse accent and daughter's Everton shirt, a club so beloved of Britain's toffs.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> How would they have booked in the 1970s? At least keep up when posting nasty.


Jesus, Moose.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Well...I dunno about all that, but on checking my own Q...no Butlins do not offer that service any more. I wonder why? Seems like all those "horrible working class people" actually look after their kids and don't fuck off out to leave them to it.



Like April Jones? Out of Mum's sight? I don't think her mother did anything wrong. But I presume you do.

Or are you just establishing your WC credentials with all this crap?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Like April Jones? Out of Mum's sight? I don't think her mother did anything wrong. But I presume you do.
> 
> Or are you just establishing your WC credentials with all this crap?


wtf


----------



## ChrisD (Oct 6, 2014)

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ern-tale-of-internet-lawlessness-9778262.html

Grace Dent (who is supposed to be a twitter expert)
"Ms. Leyland, I cannot help but feel, is yet another victim of what I’ve termed “the internet wild west era” in which we’re living. The rules of civility are yet to be established. We’re naught but electronic guinea pigs. .."


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

It's interesting to compare this thread with the one about the Philpotts. There was an awful lot of sympathy for them as I recall


----------



## Coolfonz (Oct 6, 2014)

So a journalist can't ask someone who says something why they said it? Because they say it anonymously on the internet?

Seriously?

And working class people have an edge in holiday-time child care?

What a ridiculous thread!


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> It's interesting to compare this thread with the one about the Philpotts. There was an awful lot of sympathy for them as I recall



I don't remember there being any sympathy for them *at all*, or at least not for the father who killed them.

What I do remember is a lot of anger at the way their case was presented in much of the media, demonising them and all the rest of the "feckless, benefit claiming, council estate dwelling poor", in marked contrast to the way the case of the worthy, tragic, professional class McCanns had been and continues to be presented.

That may not be the McCanns' fault, of course, but it's undoubtedly the case.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

It was Shannon Matthews that was closer and more comparable. Her mam was at it like the Philpotts turned out to be.


----------



## dylanredefined (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> But think of all the horrible working class people they'd have to mix with...
> 
> Anyway, I'd better leave this subject before I'm overcome by the temptation to make one of a number of sick jokes which occur to me.









  wot like this one. That would be terrible.oops
http://


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

dylanredefined said:


> wot like this one. That would be terrible.oops



That wasn't quite what I had in mind, although funnily enough I've just made a Mr Men related joke on the
Letzgo hunting paedos thread. 

Only so many jokes to go round, I guess.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 6, 2014)

lucy meadows sad death got far less atention than this. Its not about a missing child or an angry tweeting wretch as much about the twisted values of Britains Biggest Bullies, the scum press.


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2014)

The trolling expert the BBC talked to in an article already quoted, decided to bring class into the trolling stuff too, as if class issues were not already prevalent enough when it comes to McCann matters.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-29501646



> Dr Arthur Cassidy, a psychologist who specialises in social media, said Mrs Leyland appeared to have a middle class upbringing which was unusual in trolling.
> 
> He said: "In this particular case, her whole repertoire of trolling is slightly different from those of well-seasoned trolls because of her uniqueness and the way she has done this.
> 
> ...



Christ on a stick.

To be honest, when it comes to class issues with the hatred against the McCanns, I'm not convinced its as big a part of the mix as u75 discussions might suggest. Its mostly a load of people who smelt a rat at the time, in part due to some specific press stories. And there were enough of them to sustain momentum and ensure this stuff lived on via the net, with continued opportunities for fresh people to read a load of dodgy stuff and find networks of people ready to express hate. Issues of class clearly affected aspects of the reality, the media treatment and the perceptions, but it really doesn't come up directly that often in the hate conversations.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> lucy meadows sad death got far less atention than this. Its not about a missing child or an angry tweeting wretch as much about the twisted values of Britains Biggest Bullies, the scum press.



That's a cop out or is at least as far as Dylan and pals above. They are not satirising the meeja - it's just an excuse for bullying and nastiness. Can't blame the press for everyone.


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2014)

ChrisD said:


> I'm still confused as to how media find out anonymous trolls identities?  I can understand how Police etc. can but what about the media?



Although certain dots could be helpfully joined using a journalists special contacts and methods, a lot of the time I'd expect the discovery of real identities on the net to involve users not anonymising themselves properly. And tip-offs from people who know them, don't like them, want to sell a story or cause trouble etc. I don't know what happened in this case, and it may be far harder for me to search the net for relevant historical info that might explain it, though I'll have a quick try.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That's a cop out or is at least as far as Dylan and pals above. They are not satirising the meeja - it's just an excuse for bullying and nastiness. Can't blame the press for everyone.


Im not trying to defend anyone here. Murdoch scum and the like are bigger bullies than any lone tweeting nut could hope to be. Its them who should be hounded.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Oct 6, 2014)

Its not to defend the behaviour of net trolls either. But populist MSM getting all preachy about them is sickening beyond belief. Their hate campaigns are far more calculated, coldly viscious and effective.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Its not to defend the behaviour of net trolls either. But populist MSM getting all preachy about them is sickening beyond belief. Their hate campaigns are far more calculated, coldly viscious and effective.



To be fair it's a good point and I don't disagree.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Like April Jones? Out of Mum's sight? I don't think her mother did anything wrong. But I presume you do.
> 
> Or are you just establishing your WC credentials with all this crap?


I really am at a loss to see why you'd make such an assumption. AFAICS the two cases are completely differnet, and it does no-one any favour to conflate the two. April's parents let their child play out, which undertaken responsibly is, (IMO), consistent with healthy parenting and something that I was happy to do with my own. Whereas Madeline's parents decided to leave her alone for the evening in a room far removed from her known surroundings; something I would not consider to be healthy parenting and I would not have done with my own.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Well, they know that the McCanns are nice well spoken, well connected people who would never have anything to do with anything nasty or unsavoury, so obviously they couldn't possibly be involved in any way shape or form in their daughter's disappearance.



Kate McCann has a working-class Liverpool accent.


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2014)

elbows said:


> Although certain dots could be helpfully joined using a journalists special contacts and methods, a lot of the time I'd expect the discovery of real identities on the net to involve users not anonymising themselves properly. And tip-offs from people who know them, don't like them, want to sell a story or cause trouble etc. I don't know what happened in this case, and it may be far harder for me to search the net for relevant historical info that might explain it, though I'll have a quick try.



Looks like the sky bloke started following her on twitter, and she noticed, so its quite possible they struck up a conversation which may have involved her identity or important identity clues being revealed.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> Kate McCann has a working-class Liverpool accent.



OK, would you prefer it if I replaced the phrase "well spoken" with "articulate sounding and professional appearing"?

Are you trying to deny my basic point that the media react differently to people in similar situations depending on how sympathetically they can be portrayed, and a large part of that is their class position and cultural capital? (those may not be the perfect ways of expressing my point either, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying)


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 6, 2014)

Pro-McCann and anti-McCann have been at it on twitter and elsewhere for years. (The anti's are currently dancing up and down at #mccann). Some pro-McCann types put together a (now deleted) site which listed abusive messages and the fruits of their research into the identities of the people posting them. This seems to have been the source of the information passed to the Police and followed up by journalists.

McCann internet 'troll-hunting' site deleted after death - C4 News

BBC reports this morning cited a neighbour who had seen her leaving after being photographed. If this was when finally she left her home then it was some days after she had been doorstepped by Sky. Maybe other journalists took up the story.


----------



## DemolitionRed (Oct 6, 2014)

I firmly believe we have to take responsibility for our own actions.

I’m not sure how I feel about Mrs Leyland taking her life. I think she took the sharp end for a bulk of people who were willing to unleash their dark side online. When her anonymous virtual world unfolded and she found herself without that cloak of protection, it was like someone held up a mirror to her and exposed her to all the pain, resentment and anger in reverse. What she was unable to live with was a taste of her own medicine.

When my sisters baby died from a cot death, she was subjected to cruel taunts and accusations on a social networking site she used to use. People were uninhibited in what they had to say because they had the safety of anonymity. Years later the words of those people still affect her. She still doesn’t trust people around her and finds herself looking suspiciously at friends or neighbours and thinking, “were you one of those vindictive trolls who pointed an accusing finger at me?.”

For her sake I wish the press had dragged those people out on the street and questioned their humanity. I wish they had been found, named and shamed.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 6, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> Kate McCann has a working-class Liverpool accent.



But it's a nice, well-spoken Scouse accent, like Gerry's nice, well-spoken Glaswegian accent. Well-spoken bastards that they obviously are.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> OK, would you prefer it if I replaced the phrase "well spoken" with "articulate sounding and professional appearing"?
> 
> Are you trying to deny my basic point that the media react differently to people in similar situations depending on how sympathetically they can be portrayed, and a large part of that is their class position and cultural capital? (those may not be the perfect ways of expressing my point either, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying)



I think the case of the McCanns is more complex than that. Is Kate McCann portrayed sympathetically? She seems to have been subject to a great deal of hatred right from the start from what I recall.


----------



## DemolitionRed (Oct 6, 2014)

According to one expert she was a conspiracy theorist. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/06/trolls_0_n_5938990.html


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> I think the case of the McCanns is more complex than that. Is Kate McCann portrayed sympathetically? She seems to have been subject to a great deal of hatred right from the start from what I recall.



Subject to hatred from whom, exactly?

The odd (in both senses of the word) trolling individual perhaps, but not the full force of the media as, for instance, the Phillpott family mentioned earlier did.

Overall, I think the balance of the coverage has been *overwhelmingly* positive and sympathetic.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

DemolitionRed said:


> According to one expert she was a conspiracy theorist. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/06/trolls_0_n_5938990.html



She's still getting monstered, even after she's dead


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Subject to hatred from whom, exactly?
> 
> The odd (in both senses of the word) trolling individual perhaps, but not the full force of the media as, for instance, the Phillpott family mentioned earlier did.
> 
> Overall, I think the balance of the coverage has been *overwhelmingly* positive and sympathetic.


Really, have you forgotten how she was portrayed as "too together" in the aftermath?. The tone has always been pretty negative.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Subject to hatred from whom, exactly?
> 
> The odd (in both senses of the word) trolling individual perhaps, but not the full force of the media as, for instance, the Phillpott family mentioned earlier did.
> 
> Overall, I think the balance of the coverage has been *overwhelmingly* positive and sympathetic.



Commentary on her looks, how she wore make up, was cold, didn't cry etc. That she didn't conform to the behaviour expected of a grieving mother. I thought this was fairly common but I don't have the evidence to hand to back that up.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> Really, have you forgotten how she was portrayed as "too together" in the aftermath?. The tone has always been pretty negative.





Red Cat said:


> Commentary on her looks, how she wore make up, was cold, didn't cry etc. That she didn't conform to the behaviour expected of a grieving mother. I thought this was fairly common but I don't have the evidence to hand to back that up.



Yeah, I remember that, vaguely.

TBH, I also thought that both of them behaved a little oddly in some way I can no longer remember the specifics of*, but that didn't translate to suspicions or anything approaching hatred, and I think to suggest there was anything approaching hatred in the general coverage is an exaggeration.

*one aspect of it is that they seemed to be quite calculated in the way they presented themselves, concerned about their media image, etc. That doesn't mean they're guilty of anything, but I and others I spoke to found it a bit odd.


----------



## elbows (Oct 6, 2014)

It wouldn't be that surprising if people had forgotten or did not know that, since the media for the most part changed its tune years ago and isn't about to remind us all that the very same media contributed heavily to the original atmosphere of suspicion that gave birth to the 'trolls'.

As for evidence, some papers getting their arses kicked in court is a good start, and that certainly happened.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yeah, I remember that, vaguely.
> 
> TBH, I also thought that both of them behaved a little oddly in some way I can no longer remember the specifics of*, but that didn't translate to suspicions or anything approaching hatred, and I think to suggest there was anything approaching hatred in the general coverage is an exaggeration.


But it wasn't *overwhelmingly* positive by any stretch of the imagination, and why should there have been hatred?.


andysays said:


> *one aspect of it is that they seemed to be quite calculated in the way they presented themselves, concerned about their media image, etc. That doesn't mean they're guilty of anything, but I and others I spoke to found it a bit odd.


They were trying to manage the media, don't think that's odd at all.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> But it wasn't *overwhelmingly* positive by any stretch of the imagination, and why should there have been hatred?.
> They were trying to manage the media, don't think that's odd at all.



OK, my memory is that it was generally (in terms of its breadth), rather than overwhelmingly (in terms of its depth or universality) positive. I'm changing the qualifier, and I accept that my memory may be faulty 7 years on.

There's no reason why there should have been hatred. I was disagreeing with Red Cat's suggestion that they had been subject to a great deal of hatred right from the start.

I think it's odd that in the immediate aftermath of their daughter going missing, they seemed so concerned with managing the media. I think that is both unusual/uncommon and different how I imagine I would behave if I were in a similar situation.

But obviously all those are my opinions, and others may quite reasonably have different recollections of how it happened and how it developed and different interpretations of why that was.


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yeah, I remember that, vaguely.
> 
> TBH, I also thought that both of them behaved a little oddly in some way I can no longer remember the specifics of*, but that didn't translate to suspicions or anything approaching hatred, and I think to suggest there was anything approaching hatred in the general coverage is an exaggeration.
> 
> *one aspect of it is that they seemed to be quite calculated in the way they presented themselves, concerned about their media image, etc. That doesn't mean they're guilty of anything, but I and others I spoke to found it a bit odd.



I didn't say anything about suspicions or guilt did I?

I was referring more to the kind of misogynistic attitudes towards mothers that are routinely expressed in the media. I remember that quite well. Although commenting on how a woman doesn't appear to be conforming to the behaviour expected of a grieving mother does invoke some suspicion doesn't it?


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> OK, my memory is that it was generally (in terms of its breadth), rather than overwhelmingly (in terms of its depth or universality) positive. I'm changing the qualifier, and I accept that my memory may be faulty 7 years on.
> 
> There's no reason why there should have been hatred. I was disagreeing with Red Cat's suggestion that they had been subject to a great deal of hatred right from the start.
> 
> ...



I didn't say they, I said she. I said _she_ had been subject to hatred from the start. How easy to miss the misogyny in the focus on how middle- class they are.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> I didn't say anything about suspicions or guilt did I?
> 
> I was referring more to the kind of misogynistic attitudes towards mothers that are routinely expressed in the media. I remember that quite well. Although commenting on how a woman doesn't appear to be conforming to the behaviour expected of a grieving mother does invoke some suspicion doesn't it?



My reference to suspicions or guilt was an attempt to explain what I felt about it - it was odd but it wasn't suspicious.

Again, I remember personally thinking that both of them, not just her, were behaving a bit odd. I also don't remember any particular focus from the media on her behaviour rather than his, but I'm happy to accept that there was that focus and my memory is at fault on this particular point.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

I really don't understand the McCann tinfoilhat stuff. They get criticised for getting the Met involved and spending £££ on the investigation and at the same time they were involved in her death. There's a bit of a disconnect there isn't there?

The fact that both these positions seem to hold equal weight demonstrates that they're hated whatever. Particularly by people whose children were sobbing in their Butlins chalets while they were ordering their 4th pint at the Butlins bar.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Red Cat said:


> I didn't say they, I said she. I said _she_ had been subject to hatred from the start. How easy to miss the misogyny in the focus on how middle- class they are.



OK, my mistake, you said she.

I still don't think she was subject to anything approaching what I would call hatred from anywhere from the start, and neither has she been overall subsequently*.

I would however call what the Phillpott family (and I'm talking about the whole family, pretty much indiscriminantly) were subjected to, from very early on, ie before the full truth came out, and from pretty much all sections of the media, hatred.

If you compare the media presentation of the two cases (and of course they're not equivalent, they are different cases in various ways), the differences in the levels of symapthy versus hatred is huge.

ETA* and I don't know how typical of the hate tweets the one from the now-dead tweeter quoted in the Sky story is, but that was having a go at both of them


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> I really don't understand the McCann tinfoilhat stuff. They get criticised for getting the Met involved and spending £££ on the investigation and at the same time they were involved in her death. There's a bit of a disconnect there isn't there?
> 
> The fact that both these positions seem to hold equal weight demonstrates that they're hated whatever. P*articularly by people whose children were sobbing in their Butlins chalets while they were ordering their 4th pint at the Butlins bar*.



WTF?????


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> WTF?????


Care to disprove that? My point is that Ms Leyland is of the generation that left her kids in her chalet and toddled off quite happily to drink 15 babychams. As were your parents (probably - I don't know how old you are). The McCanns didn't do anything that parents haven't done for generations. But that doesn't suit the narrative


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> Care to disprove that? My point is that Ms Leyland is of the generation that left her kids in her chalet and toddled off quite happily to drink 15 babychams. As were your parents (probably - I don't know how old you are). The McCanns didn't do anything that parents haven't done for generations. But that doesn't suit the narrative


Although I think you are wide of the Mark in making a sweeping generalisation about a whole generation of parents, there is one big point you have missed. If parents left their kids in the chalets at Butlins there was, as already pointed out, a patrol listening for children who had awoken, and there wax also a babysitting service. The McCanns had neither of these at their disposal and just went out on the lash leaving three kids alone in a hotel room! Get the fuckers in court for being irresponsible cunts!


----------



## editor (Oct 6, 2014)

Because no parent ever felt safe enough to leave their kids unattended for a short while. Not ever. No sir.


----------



## editor (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> Care to disprove that? My point is that Ms Leyland is of the generation that left her kids in her chalet and toddled off quite happily to drink 15 babychams. As were your parents (probably - I don't know how old you are). The McCanns didn't do anything that parents haven't done for generations. But that doesn't suit the narrative


Yep.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> Care to disprove that? My point is that Ms Leyland is of the generation that left her kids in her chalet and toddled off quite happily to drink 15 babychams. As were your parents (probably - I don't know how old you are). The McCanns didn't do anything that parents haven't done for generations. But that doesn't suit the narrative



So because she's of a particular generation, she must have done this particular thing? Your references to  15 Babychams and 4 pints in the Butlins bar are interesting. Do you think your class prejudice might be starting to show?

My parents probably are of a similar generation, but I can categorically state that when we went on holiday when I and my brothers were the age of the McCann children, they didn't leave us alone in either a hotel or a tent while they went out on the piss on either babycham, pints or _Vinho Verde._


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> So because she's of a particular generation, she must have done this particular thing? Your references to  15 Babychams and 4 pints in the Butlins bar are interesting. Do you think your class prejudice might be starting to show?
> 
> My parents probably are of a similar generation, but I can categorically state that when we went on holiday when I and my brothers were the age of the McCann children, they didn't leave us alone in either a hotel or a tent while they went out on the piss on either babycham, pints or _Vinho Verde._


they took you with them?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> they took you with them?



Either that or they brought the booze back with them and we all got pissed together, you cheeky cunt


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> I really don't understand the McCann tinfoilhat stuff. They get criticised for getting the Met involved and spending £££ on the investigation and at the same time they were involved in her death. There's a bit of a disconnect there isn't there?
> 
> The fact that both these positions seem to hold equal weight demonstrates that they're hated whatever. Particularly by people whose children were sobbing in their Butlins chalets while they were ordering their 4th pint at the Butlins bar.


it would be nice if you put some evidence in your posts for these (apparently fictional) counterpoints.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> it would be nice if you put some evidence in your posts for these (apparently fictional) counterpoints.



it would be nice, but I really don't think it's going to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> it would be nice, but I really don't think it's going to happen.


sadly agree with you


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> Although I think you are wide of the Mark in making a sweeping generalisation about a whole generation of parents, there is one big point you have missed. If parents left their kids in the chalets at Butlins there was, as already pointed out, a patrol listening for children who had awoken, and there wax also a babysitting service. The McCanns had neither of these at their disposal and just went out on the lash leaving three kids alone in a hotel room! Get the fuckers in court for being irresponsible cunts!


I'm not wide of the mark. It's what people did. 

But if you disagree with what the McCanns did, they've paid the ultimative price for being irresponsible. Much like Sara and Michael Payne for leaving their daughter walk home without them. And Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman's parents. Or Ben Needham's.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> I'm not wide of the mark. It's what people did.
> 
> But if you disagree with what the McCanns did, they've paid the ultimative price for being irresponsible. Much like Sara and Michael Payne for leaving their daughter walk home without them. And Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman's parents. Or Ben Needham's.


the ultimate price is where you get executed. so no, they haven't paid the ultimate price.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

What do you think happened then Pickman's model? If they killed her, why were they so keen to get the met involved? This is what I don't get about the raised eyebrow thing. 

And I was a kid left in the Butlins chalet in the 1970s andysays so fuck knows what point you're trying to make.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> I'm not wide of the mark. It's what people did.
> 
> But if you disagree with what the McCanns did, they've paid the ultimative price for being irresponsible. Much like Sara and Michael Payne for leaving their daughter walk home without them. And Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman's parents. Or Ben Needham's.



This is really silly, disingenuous stuff. It's what some people did, it's not what all people did.

And if you can't see at least some difference between leaving kids the age of the McCanns alone in a hotel room every night of your holiday, and letting kids the age of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman go out to play together without a parent, then I'm frankly glad you're not responsible for any child I care about.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> What do you think happened then Pickman's model? If they killed her, why were they so keen to get the met involved? This is what I don't get about the raised eyebrow thing.
> 
> And I was a kid left in the Butlins chalet in the 1970s andysays so fuck knows what point you're trying to make.



More nonsense.

Where has pickmans or anyone else said the McCanns killed her, or even that they are entirely responsible for whatever happened?

And if you're still upset at being left in the Butlins chalet back in the 70's, maybe you should take it up with your parents, don't drag me into, because my parents would never have done that when I was that age, and I would never do it to a child of mine.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> So because she's of a particular generation, she must have done this particular thing? Your references to  15 Babychams and 4 pints in the Butlins bar are interesting. Do you think your class prejudice might be starting to show?
> 
> My parents probably are of a similar generation, but I can categorically state that when we went on holiday when I and my brothers were the age of the McCann children, they didn't leave us alone in either a hotel or a tent while they went out on the piss on either babycham, pints or _Vinho Verde._



Well said. I take my lad to a quiet resort in Ibiza every year. There is a bar opposite the apartment we have, no more than 20 foot from front door. I still wouldn't think of going to bar and leaving him alone in bed.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> I'm not wide of the mark. It's what people did.
> 
> But if you disagree with what the McCanns did, they've paid the ultimative price for being irresponsible. Much like Sara and Michael Payne for leaving their daughter walk home without them. And Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman's parents. Or Ben Needham's.



It's what SOME people did, the irresponsible people. And they were cunts for doing it to!


----------



## trashpony (Oct 6, 2014)

OFGS - I wasn't saying that pickman's said that. I'm just tring to understand what the issue is. You seem to have an issue with comprehension. 

And I'm not angry with my parents for leaving me in the chalet because it's what people did at the time. It was considered totally acceptable to put crying babies in their prams and leave them at the end of the garden.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> Well said. I take my lad to a quiet resort in Ibiza every year. There is a bar opposite the apartment we have, no more than 20 foot from front door. I still wouldn't think of going to bar and leaving him alone in bed.



You really wouldn't go 20 feet?  Do you ever go out into your garden when the kids are in bed?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> You really wouldn't go 20 feet?  Do you ever go out into your garden when the kids are in bed?


There's a massive difference going into your own garden at home and going to a bar in a strange neighbourhood.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> OFGS - I wasn't saying that pickman's said that. I'm just tring to understand what the issue is. You seem to have an issue with comprehension.
> 
> And I'm not angry with my parents for leaving me in the chalet because it's what people did at the time. It was considered totally acceptable to put crying babies in their prams and leave them at the end of the garden.



More nonsense going on here.

I don't know how old you were when your parents did this thing, so I can't reach any judgement on if I think it was appropriate. Madeleine McCann was not yet 4 years old, and her sisters were even younger, when her parents left them alone in a hotel room. I think that was a totally wrong and irresponsible thing to do (not that that means for one moment they deserved what happened), and I would actually be surprised if it is as common as you are trying to suggest for parents of such young children to do it.

And it's totally different to leaving a crying baby in a pram at the end of the garden, unless by leaving them you mean going down to the pub for the evening,.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> There's a massive difference going into your own garden at home and going to a bar in a strange neighbourhood.



In terms of the risk of an intruder abducting your child, you mean?  How do you quantify it?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> In terms of the risk of an intruder abducting your child, you mean?  How do you quantify it?



You don't need to quantify it, you simply need to make a decision on if it's appropriate or not.

Going out into your own back garden, from which you could presumably hear a child if it woke up with not much more difficulty than if you were in the house, seems different to me to going to a bar, with the presumably different levels of noise etc, and in an unknown area, even if it's only 20 feet away. 

I would do the former with a young child, but would wait until the child was older before I considered doing the latter. Is that really so difficult to understand?


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> You don't need to quantify it, you simply need to make a decision on if it's appropriate or not.
> 
> Going out into your own back garden, from which you could presumably hear a child if it woke up with not much more difficulty than if you were in the house, seems different to me to going to a bar, with the presumably different levels of noise etc, and in an unknown area, even if it's only 20 feet away.
> 
> I would do the former with a young child, but would wait until the child was older before I considered doing the latter. Is that really so difficult to understand?



So, for you, the criteria is whether you can hear the kid.  So can you go as far as the range of a baby monitor?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> So, for you, the criteria is whether you can hear the kid.  So can you go as far as the range of a baby monitor?



No, that's one of the criteria. I'm sure there are others I could come up with if I really thought about it.

And it would obviously depend on the age of the child - there's a difference between leaving a two year old, a four year old, a fourteen year old.

But to bring it back to this particular case, my judgement would be that to leave three very young children alone in a hotel room as the McCanns did is not something I would do.


----------



## Looby (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> OFGS - I wasn't saying that pickman's said that. I'm just tring to understand what the issue is. You seem to have an issue with comprehension.
> 
> And I'm not angry with my parents for leaving me in the chalet because it's what people did at the time. It was considered totally acceptable to put crying babies in their prams and leave them at the end of the garden.



My mum used to put me in the back of the car in my carrycot but that wouldn't happen now. 

I'm not sure the references to what parents did 40 years ago is massively helpful.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> No, that's one of the criteria. I'm sure there are others I could come up with if I really thought about it.
> 
> And it would obviously depend on the age of the child - there's a difference between leaving a two year old, a four year old, a fourteen year old.
> 
> But to bring it back to this particular case, my judgement would be that to leave three very young children alone in a hotel room as the McCanns did is not something I would do.



So, it's a bit more nuanced than your posts may have initially implied; as you've acknowledged, there are lots of factors  - it's a judgment call.  And, since you were there not there to assess those risks (and are doing so now with the benefit of hindsight), you are less well placed to make that judgment call than the McCanns were.  So why presume to make pronouncements on their decisions?  Don't you think they've suffered enough, without the constant blame and criticism?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> So, it's a bit more nuanced than your posts may have initially implied; as you've acknowledged, there are lots of factors  - it's a judgment call.  And, since you were there not there to assess those risks (and are doing so now with the benefit of hindsight), you are less well placed to make that judgment call than the McCanns were.  So why presume to make pronouncements on their decisions?  Don't you think they've suffered enough, without the constant blame and criticism?


 I'm sure they suffer continually, but I believe the McCanns, in their own words, have accepted that their judgement was wrong and regrettable. In fact, Mrs McCann has actually said she is haunted by the fact that Maddie asked her why Mummy and Daddy hadn't come when she had cried for them on the night before her disappearance.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> ... the the McCanns, in their own words, have accepted that their judgement was wrong and regrettable.



Even less need for people to keep poking at them, then.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> There's a massive difference going into your own garden at home and going to a bar in a strange neighbourhood.



They were a very short distance away in a gated holiday park. It really wasn't very far at all. But even if it was the fact is the child was abducted. My sympathy doesn't end because they may have made a mistake. Why does yours again and again, year in year out?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> So, it's a bit more nuanced than your posts may have initially implied; as you've acknowledged, there are lots of factors  - it's a judgment call.  And, since you were there not there to assess those risks (and are doing so now with the benefit of hindsight), you are less well placed to make that judgment call than the McCanns were.  So why presume to make pronouncements on their decisions?  Don't you think they've suffered enough, without the constant blame and criticism?



I'm quite happy to make pronouncements, as you call them, here. I'm not inclined to take my pronouncements out to a wider audience, to push any sort of blame or criticism at the McCanns, and frankly it seems like a ridiculous position for you to take that I'm not allowed to voice an opinion on this in response to someone else's claims earlier in the thread that this is what parents generally do.

As far as this particular case goes, I would not leave three children of the age we're talking about alone in a hotel room while I went off as they did for an evening's drinking, with or without an attempt to assess or quantify the risks. Would you?

ETA: and no, I'm not doing anything with the benefit of hindsight. I wouldn't have left my daughter in that situation when she was that age, and that was some years before this case arose.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> Even less need for people to keep poking at them, then.


There's no need for that, at all. But neither is their any need to deny people the opportunity to express views on the wisdom of their decision making. Awareness of the risks associated with such parenting might conceivably prevent other such disappearances.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I'm sure they suffer continually, but I believe the McCanns, in their own words, have accepted that their judgement was wrong and regrettable. In fact, Mrs McCann has actually said she is haunted by the fact that Maddie asked her why Mummy and Daddy hadn't come when she had cried for them on the night before her disappearance.


So despite their child being upset that they had not been there the previous night when she cried, they still thought it acceptable to go on the piss again. I thought they were cunts now I know them to be complete and utter cunts!


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> There's no need for that, at all. But neither is their any need to deny people the opportunity to express views on the wisdom of their decision making. Awareness of the risks associated with such parenting might conceivably prevent other such disappearances.



I've not denied anyone anything.  I'm not sure I share your views about the prophylactic value of McCann-baiting, though.


----------



## Looby (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I'm sure they suffer continually, but I believe the McCanns, in their own words, have accepted that their judgement was wrong and regrettable. In fact, Mrs McCann has actually said she is haunted by the fact that Maddie asked her why Mummy and Daddy hadn't come when she had cried for them on the night before her disappearance.



Fuck, really? That just makes it more awful.

I dunno, I tend to keep off the subject because it causes bad feeling and yeah, they've suffered enough and don't really need my opinion. 

It does seem a bizarre thing to do though, I really don't get it. 
Babysitters/takeaway/take the kids/eat earlier. All sensible options.
It's not even the stranger danger that would worry me, it would be my kids waking up in a strange place and not being able to find me or them getting out of bed and hurting themselves or finding matches. 

Anyway, I'm probably going to return to keeping my mouth shut about it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> But you'd have to be an utter mentalist to believe that.


At least two people missed the sarcasm there.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2014)

trashpony said:


> OFGS - I wasn't saying that pickman's said that. I'm just tring to understand what the issue is. You seem to have an issue with comprehension.
> 
> And I'm not angry with my parents for leaving me in the chalet because it's what people did at the time. It was considered totally acceptable to put crying babies in their prams and leave them at the end of the garden.



You should know by now this lot will never let it go. You cannot reason with their love of sitting in judgement. Their need to take a queasy 'class based' stance. However they dress it up they have to feel that they are superior to tired old indulgences like innocence before proven guilt, or sympathy with human frailty.


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> I think that was a totally wrong and irresponsible thing to do


That's at the centre of it isn't it? You think that_ so_ much so that if anyone disagrees with your opinion, they're automatically a shit parent too


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> I've not denied anyone anything.  I'm not sure I share your views about the prophylactic value of McCann-baiting, though.



And if anyone was actually doing that here, you might have something approaching a point, but no one is, so this is bullshit.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> I'm quite happy to make pronouncements, as you call them, here. I'm not inclined to take my pronouncements out to a wider audience, to push any sort of blame or criticism at the McCanns, and frankly it seems like a ridiculous position for you to take that I'm not allowed to voice an opinion on this in response to someone else's claims earlier in the thread that this is what parents generally do.
> 
> As far as this particular case goes, I would not leave three children of the age we're talking about alone in a hotel room while I went off as they did for an evening's drinking, with or without an attempt to assess or quantify the risks. Would you?



I didn't say you're not allowed to do anything.  You're free to do what you like; just as I'm free to think that the years and years of sniping at grieving parents is a bit of a cunt's trick.

Also, they went to eat (rather than on a bender), and you have no idea what assessment they made of the risks.  But don't let the facts stop you putting more damning spin on things, and speculating wildly.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> I've not denied anyone anything.  I'm not sure I share your views about the prophylactic value of McCann-baiting, though.


Good, but I don't accept for one minute that discussion regarding the merits of the McCann's decision making on this thread amounts to "McCann-baiting".


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

sparklefish said:


> My mum used to put me in the back of the car in my carrycot but that wouldn't happen now.



Do they even make carrycots for adults?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> They were a very short distance away in a gated holiday park. It really wasn't very far at all. But even if it was the fact is the child was abducted. My sympathy doesn't end because they may have made a mistake. Why does yours again and again, year in year out?


I think you need to check the facts as the above is total bollocks,they were over 50 metres away and it was not a gated park. The apartment was accessible from the street, but don't let facts get in the way of your argument!


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> That's at the centre of it isn't it? You think that_ so_ much so that if anyone disagrees with your opinion, they're automatically a shit parent too



Do I? Where have I said that, or even suggested it?

This whole thing began because someone claimed that it was common for parents to leave children of this age alone while they went out on the piss.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

Quoting fuck-up.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> And if anyone was actually doing that here, you might have something approaching a point, but no one is, so this is bullshit.


But they are shit parents. If they weren't Maddie would still be alive!


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> And if anyone was actually doing that here, you might have something approaching a point, but no one is, so this is bullshit.





brogdale said:


> Good, but I don't accept for one minute that discussion regarding the merits of the McCann's decision making on this thread amounts to "McCann-baiting".



It's by no means as bad as a lot of what they endure, but it's somewhere on the continuum, and is typical the background noise that facilitates - by setting the tone - the more egregious instances.


----------



## Looby (Oct 6, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Do they even make carrycots for adults?



I did Google but it's too disturbing!


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> But they are shit parents. If they weren't Maddie would still be alive!



What do you get out saying something like that?  Does it make you feel better to say something hurtful about grieving parents?  Do you think they need to be punished some more?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> It's by no means as bad as a lot of what they endure, but it's somewhere on the continuum, and is typical the background noise that facilitates - by setting the tone - the more egregious instances.


No it doesn't; that bullshit.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> More nonsense.
> 
> Where has pickmans or anyone else said the McCanns killed her, or even that they are entirely responsible for whatever happened?
> 
> And if you're still upset at being left in the Butlins chalet back in the 70's, maybe you should take it up with your parents, don't drag me into, because my parents would never have done that when I was that age, and I would never do it to a child of mine.


A badly placed apostrophe though...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> What do you get out saying something like that?  Does it make you feel better to say something hurtful out grieving parents?  Do you think they need to be punished some more?


I've no wish to defend 1927 or speak for them, but what do you get out of saying things like they weren't on the piss? How do you know that? What motivates you to take that position?


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> No it doesn't; that bullshit.



Happy to agree to disagree.  Especially on a subject in respect of which so many otherwise sensible people seem to have strangely passionate and entrenched views.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> I didn't say you're not allowed to do anything.  You're free to do what you like; just as I'm free to think that the years and years of sniping at grieving parents is a bit of a cunt's trick.
> 
> Also, they went to eat (rather than on a bender), and you have no idea what assessment they made of the risks.  But don't let the facts stop you putting more damning spin on things, and speculating wildly.



But I haven't been endulging in years and years of sniping at anyone. I'm not sniping at anyone now, I'm challenging the idea that this is universal parental behaviour.

It makes no difference, to me, whether they went out for a game of tennis, a meal, a few glasses of wine, or a massive drink and drugs bender. Nor does it matter, to me, what sort of assessment they made before doing so (though I'll note in passing they don't appear to have attached much weight to the fact that their daughter asked why Mummy and Daddy hadn't come when she had cried for them on the night before her disappearance).

For children that old, I simply wouldn't leave them alone in a hotel room while I went off for the evening.

Once they were older, then I would consider it as a possibility and would attempt to make some sort of assessment as to how far, for how long etc.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I've no wish to defend 1927 or speak for them, but what do you get out of saying things like they weren't on the piss? How do you know that? What motivates you to take that position?



The evidence suggests they went out to eat rather than to drink.  The idea that they abandoned the kids in favour of a piss-up is a bit of spin that makes it easier to criticise them.

My motivation is that I don't like to see people who've suffered enough hurt by years of spiteful lies.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> The evidence suggests they went out to eat rather than to drink.  The idea that they abandoned the kids in favour of a piss-up is a bit of spin that makes it easier to criticise them.
> 
> My motivation is that I don't like to see people who've suffered enough hurt even further by years of spiteful lies.



They went out every night leaving kids hem alone, they put kids in kids club during day while they went out, makes you wonder why they bothered having kids at all.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> Although I think you are wide of the Mark in making a sweeping generalisation about a whole generation of parents, there is one big point you have missed. If parents left their kids in the chalets at Butlins there was, as already pointed out, a patrol listening for children who had awoken, and there wax also a babysitting service. The McCanns had neither of these at their disposal and just went out on the lash leaving three kids alone in a hotel room! Get the fuckers in court for being irresponsible cunts!


I think there was a babysitting service available, but the McCann's did not use it. Another reason why they were bashed.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> Happy to agree to disagree.  Especially on a subject in respect of which so many otherwise sensible people seem to have strangely passionate and entrenched views.


You're saying that being "senisble" and having "passionate" views about the disappearance of a small child are mutually exclusive?


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2014)

Athos said:


> It's by no means as bad as a lot of what they endure, but it's somewhere on the continuum, and is typical the background noise that facilitates - by setting the tone - the more egregious instances.



Sanctimonious twaddle


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 6, 2014)

I don't get leaving kids in on their own in order to fuck off out. 

I grew up with the whole leaving your front door unlocked etc in the 70s but you did that in your community, not on holiday amongst complete strangers. I'm surprised they never got pulled in for neglect. They certainly had a duty of care to ensure an adult was with their infants at all times.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> But I haven't been endulging in years and years of sniping at anyone. I'm not sniping at anyone now, I'm challenging the idea that this is universal parental behaviour.
> 
> It makes no difference, to me, whether they went out for a game of tennis, a meal, a few glasses of wine, or a massive drink and drugs bender. Nor does it matter, to me, what sort of assessment they made before doing so (though I'll note in passing they don't appear to have attached much weight to the fact that their daughter asked her why Mummy and Daddy hadn't come when she had cried for them on the night before her disappearance).
> 
> ...



Maybe not you solely, but as one of crowd; all part of the drip-drip-drip bullying of the McCanns.

You can try to suggest it was a dispassionate thing, and that you weren't passing judgment on them, and that the judgment wasn't influenced/justified by the oft-peddled slander that they were out on the piss, but your posts suggest otherwise.

I'm glad that your kids are well looked after.  As it happens, I suspect I would make a similar decision to you (though it's hard to know, without being party to all the circumstances).  But I don't feel any desire to criticise them for their decision; I just feel so desperately sorry for them.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

andysays said:


> Sanctimonious twaddle



Pot/kettle.  What could be more sanctimonious than people who make themselves feel superior by taking a swipe at grieving parents?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 6, 2014)

sparklefish said:


> Fuck, really? That just makes it more awful.
> 
> I dunno, I tend to keep off the subject because it causes bad feeling and yeah, they've suffered enough and don't really need my opinion.
> 
> ...


I wish I had done that. I feel like a McCann basher. I'm going to bed.


----------



## Athos (Oct 6, 2014)

brogdale said:


> You're saying that being "senisble" and having "passionate" views about the disappearance of a small child are mutually exclusive?



Not necessarily.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 6, 2014)

1927 said:


> It's what SOME people did, the irresponsible people. And they were cunts for doing it to!



I think it was more than "some" that would do that kinda thing in the 70's and it wasn't really considered that irresponsible then. 

My parents used to tip phenergan my throat (with all it's extra sleepy ingredients that are no longer in it) so they could get some peace of an evening when they had friends over. 
They are horrified that they did it now but stuff like that (and leaving kids alone or to go out alone) was just much more normal then.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Pot/kettle.  What could be more sanctimonious than people who make themselves feel superior by taking a swipe at grieving parents?



Have you actually read anything I've said? 

I'm not taking a swipe at grieving parents (because the McCanns aren't reading this, and however important we might think Urban is, they're never likely to be, nor is anyone ever likely to bring my comments to their attention).

And as I've said to you more times than I can now remember, this whole thing about what I would or would not do began as a response to someone who claimed that leaving children of this age alone in this way was a near universal thing. 

It wasn't in the 70's when her parents apparently did it to her, but mine didn't do it to me, and it isn't now, when the McCanns might have done it, but I haven't and wouldn't.

I actually don't need to argue with santimonious twats like you to make myself superior either, BTW.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 7, 2014)

sparklefish said:


> My mum used to put me in the back of the car in my carrycot but that wouldn't happen now.
> 
> I'm not sure the references to what parents did 40 years ago is massively helpful.



I think the relevance is that, even if it was wrong and irresponsible, that they are so demonised for something that was considered reasonably acceptable far less than 40 years ago.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I actually don't need to argue with santimonious twats like you to make myself superior either, BTW.



I'm sure you believe that.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I think it was more than "some" that would do that kinda thing in the 70's and it wasn't really considered that irresponsible then.
> 
> My parents used to tip phenergan my throat (with all it's extra sleepy ingredients that are no longer in it) so they could get some peace of an evening when they had friends over.
> They are horrified that they did it now but stuff like that (and leaving kids alone or to go out alone) was just much more normal then.


My mum used to give me a chip of the old mogadon, now and then, and was always offering me ProPlus in the mornings. She was a big fan of Judy Garland.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 7, 2014)

UrbaneFox said:


> My mum used to give me a chip of the old mogadon, now and then, and was always offering me ProPlus in the mornings. She was a big fan of Judy Garland.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I think it was more than "some" that would do that kinda thing in the 70's and it wasn't really considered that irresponsible then.
> 
> My parents used to tip phenergan my throat (with all it's extra sleepy ingredients that are no longer in it) so they could get some peace of an evening when they had friends over.
> They are horrified that they did it now but stuff like that (and leaving kids alone or to go out alone) was just much more normal then.


Anecdotally it appears that leaving kids alone did happen more frequently in past decades, but I've never really got what such observations add to the discussion of the McCanns decision making. 

It is not slanderous to report the facts of the case as told by Kate McCann in her own words from her book. Every night of their holiday they left their infant kids alone whilst they eat, drank and socialised with their friends. They did not consider using the in-house baby-sitting service and she later reflected that... 
'I could argue that leaving my children alone with someone neither we nor they knew would have been unwise, and it's certainly not something we'd do  at home, but we didn't even consider it.
'We felt so secure we simply didn't think it was necessary.' 

However British police later told the couple their holiday apartment, being a corner flat on the ground floor, next to two roads and with secluded entrances, made it a perfect target for criminals.

She also reflected that their decision to request the same table every night had resulted in a note to staff being publicly displayed at reception stating that.. the McCanns 

‘were leaving our young children alone ... and checking on them intermittently’.

Her book also confirmed that the penultimate evening of the holiday had ended abruptly at 11.50pm when Gerry had left the party claiming tiredness and went back alone. On finding him snoring Kate said she took herself off to the kids room spare bed and it was then that Maddie had asked her about the no-show the previous night when the kids had been crying out for their parents. She also revealed that the decision to ignore that plea from Maddie and go out again on the last night was made because they did not want to appear anti-social.

None of which strikes me as particularly good parenting, and certainly not a good model for others to adopt.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Why are people bringing up the 70s anyway? Rape in marriage was legal a few decades ago but I doubt many would argue that it should be ok because historically it was.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Why are people bringing up the 70s anyway? Rape in marriage was legal a few decades ago but I doubt many would argue that it should be ok because historically it was.



I just don't think rape and leaving your kids unattended are comparable.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Why are people bringing up the 70s anyway?...



Goodness only knows. 

Go back to where it was it as first brought up (top of page 93) and see if you can work it out. Better still ask the person who brought it up to explain what they were on about.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I just don't think rape and leaving your kids unattended are comparable.



Neither do I, but it's merely the latest in a series of ridiculous supposed equivalences this thread has thrown up


----------



## Weller (Oct 7, 2014)

Its interesting how some of the "facts" being quoted on this thread are not even in the released evidence or in the statements also released or even what the parents / friends have said themselves
Some of the stuff on the internet  is very far from the actual evidence but has become accepted maybe because the UK media do not print much of the police files that were released and instead  went crazy printing more and more bizarre stories probably sells more papers though 
Also some stuff that they do  do print is taken out of context or even total bollocks that then has over time become accepted as fact its created a lot of confusion about the case I think , I changed my opinion over the years and have an open mind about it now
Much of the distances , evidence found by the dogs , times , statement changes the 48 questions they put to the mother  who refused to answer them etc etc was released by the Portuguese police online too
Its worthwhile watching the Inspector of the original investigations documentary its why many of these so called "trolls" question the parents probably  , having watched it and read some  of the actual statements / evidence I can appreciate why so many do question the parents original timeline recollection of events etc
There is so much that our papers and news do not print  about the case but are well known in Portugal  , it certainly imo could not have happened quite the way they first said it did imo both press and parents/friends  and I wonder about why they did that , there have been many discrepancies/ changes  since not least in the mothers own book / their T.V appearances .

Worthwhile imo giving an hour to this inspectors release and his conclusion even though it is subtitled (its better quality elsewhere but its here on youtube ) it shows many things including the British dogs / handlers  findings on video , much of it I did not realize
The  inspector that released this and in the documentary is still awaiting the final libel case hearing due to happen in next few weeks in Portugal and much came out during that too regarding some of the U.K medias  "facts" some which even Scotland Yard have now officially publicly discounted and changed their  timeline (they did that publicly on crimewatch too) .
Much of the Portuguese police evidence IS online now released officially to the public and some of it is very different to what U.K press print hardly surprising then  imo  that some are asking questions and I am not sure that the media branding them all "trolls" is going to help matters really whatever happened to the girl


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I just don't think rape and leaving your kids unattended are comparable.


I wasn't making a comparison between rape and leaving children unattended. I was pointing out why it's daft to appeal to history as some kind of defence.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Weller said:


> Its interesting how some of the "facts" being quoted on this thread are not even in the released evidence or in the statements also released or even what the parents / friends have said themselves


Which "facts" are those?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> Why are people bringing up the 70s anyway? Rape in marriage was legal a few decades ago but I doubt many would argue that it should be ok because historically it was.


rape in marriage certainly legal to 1980s and (i forget) maybe to 1990s


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 7, 2014)

I wondered how long it would take. (@ the "facts")


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> I wasn't making a comparison between rape and leaving children unattended. I was pointing out why it's daft to appeal to history as some kind of defence.


"history will absolve me" - fidel castro


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

1927 said:


> I think you need to check the facts as the above is total bollocks,they were over 50 metres away and it was not a gated park. The apartment was accessible from the street, but don't let facts get in the way of your argument!



Hmm. I don't think 'over' 50 metres is a fact. I have always been surprised how much nearer the apartment appears in photos from the terrace, though clearly foreshortened. But it wasn't a good thing to do as the outcome indicates and that's never been my point.

What doesn't follow for me is the endless rehash of this 'evidence' in support of what? The right to condemn them for the child's abduction? The right to abuse them? The right to repeat sick jokes? The right to hold them in endless suspicion of murder? The right to condemn every activity of theirs to find out what happened to their child? 

What is the stance you feel the world should take on the McCanns? Mine is innocent until proven guilty. Brits who suffered abroad. What's yours?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

i think the response is at least partly due to the hysteria surrounding mm's disappearamce in 2007.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the response is at least partly due to the hysteria surrounding mm's disappearamce in 2007.



That's not the world's greatest crime for me.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Hmm. I don't think 'over' 50 metres is a fact. I have always been surprised how much nearer the apartment appears in photos from the terrace, though clearly foreshortened. But it wasn't a good thing to do as the outcome indicates and that's never been my point.
> 
> What doesn't follow for me is the endless rehash of this 'evidence' in support of what? The right to condemn them for the child's abduction? The right to abuse them? The right to repeat sick jokes? The right to hold them in endless suspicion of murder? The right to condemn every activity of theirs to find out what happened to their child?
> 
> What is the stance you feel the world should take on the McCanns? Mine is innocent until proven guilty. Brits who suffered abroad. What's yours?


Why do you bother to ask when you've already made up your own mind about what others think?



> *"You should know by now this lot will never let it go. You cannot reason with their love of sitting in judgement. Their need to take a queasy 'class based' stance. However they dress it up they have to feel that they are superior to tired old indulgences like innocence before proven guilt, or sympathy with human frailty."*


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That's not the world's greatest crime for me.


what is, for you, the world's greatest crime?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> what is, for you, the world's greatest crime?



I haven't ever worked a definitive list up, but if pushed I'd say bad rapping during and otherwise melodious song.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Why do you bother to ask when you've already made up your own mind about what others think?



Change my POV then. It happens.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Change my POV then. It happens.


about what?


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Anecdotally it appears that leaving kids alone did happen more frequently in past decades, but I've never really got what such observations add to the discussion of the McCanns decision making.
> 
> It is not slanderous to report the facts of the case as told by Kate McCann in her own words from her book. Every night of their holiday they left their infant kids alone whilst they eat, drank and socialised with their friends. They did not consider using the in-house baby-sitting service and she later reflected that...
> 'I could argue that leaving my children alone with someone neither we nor they knew would have been unwise, and it's certainly not something we'd do  at home, but we didn't even consider it.
> ...



But you know, parenting is a social activity, it's not something we're born knowing, it's influenced fundamentally to how we were parented ourselves, by our emotional resources, our social support, and ideas change about how to do it -  I don't do the same things as my neighbours, they don't do the same as me. And I think you underestimate the pressure that there is to not leave our kids, to leave our kids, what a bind mothers in particular can get into.

Where is the acknowledgement of complexity when it comes to us discussing the work of parenting?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> about what?



You say I've made my mind up about what others think. What do you think about the McCanns? Why do you need to endlessly prove the bad parenting, for example when they are in the news for being trolled?


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> That's at the centre of it isn't it? You think that_ so_ much so that if anyone disagrees with your opinion, they're automatically a shit parent too





andysays said:


> Do I? Where have I said that, or even suggested it?


:


andysays said:


> I'm frankly glad you're not responsible for any child I care about.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> then I'm frankly glad you're not responsible for any child I care about.


Which children don't you care about?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You say I've made my mind up about what others think. What do you think about the McCanns? Why do you need to endlessly prove the bad parenting, for example when they are in the news for being trolled?


I wouldn't presume to have any generalised personal opinion about the content of the their character, but on the specifics of their status, I would be happy to say that they are the victims of an alleged child abduction, and are obviously innocent (until proven guilty) of any crime.

Having views about the wisdom of their parenting, and its possible contribution to the alleged abduction, does not appear to be mutually exclusive to their status. As for the timing of my comments; they appeared in response to others wishing to defend their parenting decisions on the basis of past anecdotal material.
HTH


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I think it was more than "some" that would do that kinda thing in the 70's and it wasn't really considered that irresponsible then.
> 
> My parents used to tip phenergan my throat (with all it's extra sleepy ingredients that are no longer in it) so they could get some peace of an evening when they had friends over.
> They are horrified that they did it now but stuff like that (and leaving kids alone or to go out alone) was just much more normal then.



My mum used to give me Phenergan too, on the advice of the family GP.

Just a point of pedantry - its still got the same ingredients. Its just a brand name for the anti histamine promethazine.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I wouldn't presume to have any generalised personal opinion about the content of the their character, but on the specifics of their status, I would be happy to say that they are the victims of an alleged child abduction, and are obviously innocent (until proven guilty) of any crime.
> 
> Having views about the wisdom of their parenting, and its possible contribution to the alleged abduction, does not appear to be mutually exclusive to their status. As for the timing of my comments; they appeared in response to others wishing to defend their parenting decisions on the basis of past anecdotal material.
> HTH



That is very revealing because the first  reference to parenting in this recent little skirmish is your sick joke on page 90.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That is very revealing because the first  reference to parenting in this recent little skirmish is your sick joke on page 90.


joke?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Why do you bother to ask when you've already made up your own mind about what others think?





> _"You should know by now this lot will never let it go. You cannot reason with their love of sitting in judgement. Their need to take a queasy 'class based' stance. However they dress it up they have to feel that they are superior to tired old indulgences like innocence before proven guilt, or sympathy with human frailty."_



Yeah, it certainly does look as if Moose has made up their mind about those unnamed "they", all of whom are presumably guilty of all of the various charges listed. 

I'm guessing it means anyone who has done something they view as challenging the idea that the McCanns are saints is collectively guilty of all of the crimes that anyone who challenges that idea is guilty of, just like the poster above who argued vehemently that the tweeter who had wished misery on the McCanns had actually wished death on them, or the one last night who argued persitently argued that pointing out that not everyone would leave three very young children alone every evening in their hotel room while they went out to enjoy themselves with friends is guilty of bullying grieving parents "to make themselves feel superior".

It's funny the way this case affects the thought process of people who, one hopes, would otherwise be capable of rational judgement.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> :



That quote refers to one person, not a whole load of people, and explicitly refers to a reference they made to the child victims of various crimes and a suggestion that letting your older kids out to play is the same as leaving very young kids alone at night. 

I suggest you go back and read it properly.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

mauvais said:


> Which children don't you care about?



That was clumsily put - there are children I care most about (primarily my daughter), children I care alot about (those I know and those of people I know) and there are those I care less but still care about (the rest). Better?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yeah, it certainly does look as if Moose has made up their mind about those unnamed "they", all of whom are presumably guilty of all of the various charges listed.
> 
> I'm guessing it means anyone who has done something they view as challenging the idea that the McCanns are saints is collectively guilty of all of the crimes that anyone who challenges that idea is guilty of, just like the poster above who argued vehemently that the tweeter who had wished misery on the McCanns had actually wished death on them, or the one last night who argued persitently argued that pointing out that not everyone would leave three very young children alone every evening in their hotel room while they went out to enjoy themselves with friends is guilty of bullying grieving parents "to make themselves feel superior".
> 
> It's funny the way this case affects the thought process of people who, one hopes, would otherwise be capable of rational judgement.



You are rambling. I've never claimed the McCanns are 'saints'. I have no personal knowledge of them.

I wouldn't leave my very young children in the care of a holiday camp crèche, let alone dine away from them. 

But I don't believe this now has any bearing on the story 7 years on. You bring it up again and again to undermine and persecute.

It's simple for me. They suffered a terrible tragedy, are innocent until proven otherwise and suffer repeatedly through the abuse of others. Their story is easily ignorable if you wish, but you don't so you must get something out of this and if I was you I would scrutinise what that is.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> That quote refers to one person, not a whole load of people, and explicitly refers to a reference they made to the child victims of various crimes and a suggestion that letting your older kids out to play is the same as leaving very young kids alone at night.
> 
> I suggest you go back and read it properly.



ETA read the whole exchange, don't just pick one comment out of its original context


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I suggest you go back and read it properly.


I've read it. 

You said you hadn't suggested anyone was a shit parent. You did and there's a quote that shows you did.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You are rambling. I've never claimed the McCanns are 'saints'. I have no personal knowledge of them.
> 
> I wouldn't leave my very young children in the care of a holiday camp crèche, let alone dine away from them.
> 
> ...



No, as I've repeatedly said, I brought it up to counter the claim by a poster here that this is something all parents do.

And I choose not to ignore this story. I'm interested, if in nothing else, in the way reason apparently goes out the window for many when discussing it.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> I've read it.
> 
> You said you hadn't suggested anyone was a shit parent. You did and there's a quote that shows you did.



I said I hadn't suggested anyone was a shit parent for simply doing something different to what I would have done, which was what i thought you were accusing me of.

That's not what I was doing, and if you read the exchange properly, that should be fairly clear.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> No, as I've repeatedly said, I brought it up to counter the claim by a poster here that this is something all parents do.
> 
> And I choose not to ignore this story. I'm interested, if in nothing else, in the way reason apparently goes out the window for many when discussing it.



Where has reason gone out of the window? Other than when you make generalisations about other parents?


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I brought it up to counter the claim by a poster here that* this is something all parents do.*


Find that quote then. I think you've made that up.


eta OK sorry; it's because trashpony said "it's what people did" and you interpreted that as 'all people'. You then went on to suggest that if she actually believed what she said then she's a shit parent.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Oct 7, 2014)

Weller said:


> Its interesting how some of the "facts" being quoted on this thread are not even in the released evidence or in the statements also released or even what the parents / friends have said themselves
> Some of the stuff on the internet  is very far from the actual evidence but has become accepted maybe because the UK media do not print much of the police files that were released and instead  went crazy printing more and more bizarre stories probably sells more papers though
> Also some stuff that they do  do print is taken out of context or even total bollocks that then has over time become accepted as fact its created a lot of confusion about the case I think , I changed my opinion over the years and have an open mind about it now
> Much of the distances , evidence found by the dogs , times , statement changes the 48 questions they put to the mother  who refused to answer them etc etc was released by the Portuguese police online too
> ...





What the fuck is this? A 'banned' documentary? Is this some truther expose? Some brave anti-sheeples has exposed the lies and the conspriacy behind...a family having their kid deliberately disappear? What is this shit? Who spends their time thinking like that? I don't know what happened to that kid or why the mcCann's did what they did (or didn't), but ffs!


----------



## kittyP (Oct 7, 2014)

Blagsta said:


> My mum used to give me Phenergan too, on the advice of the family GP.
> 
> Just a point of pedantry - its still got the same ingredients. Its just a brand name for the anti histamine promethazine.



I thought they definitely took at least something out of the children's elixir version way back. 
Wasn't it banned for a while?
Or am I getting confused with something else?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> Find that quote then. I think you've made that up.
> 
> 
> eta OK sorry; it's because trashpony said "it's what people did" and you interpreted that as 'all people'. You then went on to suggest that if she actually believed what she said then she's a shit parent.



It's interesting that though you say you've found a post that demonstrates your claim, you don't actually use the quote function, you merely concoct a distorted version of what I actually said.  What I actually said was I was glad she wasn't responsible for any child I care about. 

Please provide me with a quote where I say the McCanns, or Trashpony, or anyone else is a shit parent. You can't because there isn't one.

Looks like we've got yet another case of "you read, but you do not comprehend" going on. This thread is absolutely full to bursting...


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> It's interesting that though you say you've found a post that demonstrates your claim, you don't actually use the quote function, you merely concoct a distorted version of what I actually said.  What I actually said was I was glad she wasn't responsible for any child I care about.
> 
> Please provide me with a quote where I say the McCanns, or Trashpony, or anyone else is a shit parent. You can't because there isn't one.
> 
> Looks like we've got yet another case of "you read, but you do not comprehend" going on. This thread is absolutely full to bursting...


Stop being a dick. All this patronising, self important "looks like we've got yet another case"  I'm picking you up on one point which for whatever reason you're pretending not to get. 

"What I actually said was I was glad she wasn't responsible for any child I care about" - why; because she's got amazing parenting skills that would put yours to shame? The implication is that she can't be trusted. 

(And piss off with your "concoct a distorted version". I quoted my original post and your reply. I then went back and found the original response, apologised for saying you'd made it up & suggested that you'd extrapolated from what she'd said). 

It's an aside really; I honestly don't get the vitriol aimed at the McCanns. Why are you and others _so_ judgemental? They fucked up royally for a wide variety of reasons and they've paid a terrible price.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I thought they definitely took at least something out of the children's elixir version way back.
> Wasn't it banned for a while?
> Or am I getting confused with something else?



I don't think so, but I could be wrong.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I thought they definitely took at least something out of the children's elixir version way back.
> Wasn't it banned for a while?
> Or am I getting confused with something else?



I think you may be thinking of Benylin (sp?) which used to have codeine in it as a cough suppressant back in the day, and occasionally got used as a "mother's little helper" to put baby to sleep.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 7, 2014)

kittyP said:


> I thought they definitely took at least something out of the children's elixir version way back.
> Wasn't it banned for a while?
> Or am I getting confused with something else?


It's been banned for under-2s iirc


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> I honestly don't get the vitriol aimed at the McCanns. Why are you and others _so_ judgemental? *They fucked up royally* for a wide variety of reasons and *they've paid a terrible price*.



tbh I think those sentiments cover virtually all of the posting in this thread.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> tbh I think those sentiments cover virtually all of the posting in this thread.



So any chance you'll leave it at that or do you feel it likely you will feel compelled to point the finger sometime in the future?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> Stop being a dick. All this patronising, self important "looks like we've got yet another case"  I'm picking you up on one point which for whatever reason you're pretending not to get.
> 
> "What I actually said was I was glad she wasn't responsible for any child I care about" - why; because she's got amazing parenting skills that would put yours to shame? The implication is that she can't be trusted.
> 
> ...



So you still aren't prepared to actually quote properly one post that you're objecting to, far less the sequence it was part of which formed the context.

I've had enough of being repeatedly misrepresented by you (and others - it's not just you) on this thread, and I no longer care if it's deliberate, or if you're just too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what I'm saying.

Fuck off back under your bridge and don't come out until you've learned to have a proper discussion without constantly distorting and misrepresenting what people are saying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> It's an aside really; I honestly don't get the vitriol aimed at the McCanns. Why are you and others _so_ judgemental? They fucked up royally for a wide variety of reasons and they've paid a terrible price.


this is urban, it's what we do.

these are the sorts of things that back in the 90s we'd just have chatted about to mates in the pub. or anyone who would listen to us in the pub. but now we're all aulder and wiser and so we natter about them on the internet while cracking open cans and bottles.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> So any chance you'll leave it at that or do you feel it likely you will feel compelled to point the finger sometime in the future?



Yes and yes*.

* Its highly probable that this thread will surface again with posters appearing to defend the McCann's ("royal") "fuck up" on the basis of comparison with anecdotal tales from the past behaviour; that might well prompt me to respond. Sorry and all that, but nice attempt at censorious Modding.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Yes and yes*.
> 
> * Its highly probable that this thread will surface again with posters appearing to defend the McCann's ("royal") "fuck up" on the basis of comparison with anecdotal tales from the past behaviour; that might well prompt me to respond. Sorry and all that, but nice attempt at censorious Modding.


i hope the mccanns now employ a babysitter when they leave their remaining children for an evening on the piss with their mates.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this is urban, it's what we do.
> 
> these are the sorts of things that back in the 90s we'd just have chatted about to mates in the pub. or anyone who would listen to us in the pub. but now we're all aulder and wiser and so we natter about them on the internet while cracking open cans and bottles.



Older maybe, but not necessarily wiser


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> i hope the mccanns now employ a babysitter when they leave their remaining children for an evening on the piss with their mates.


The middling classes don't go out on the piss...apparently. Do keep up; they go out for a "meal".


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> this is urban, it's what we do.
> 
> these are the sorts of things that back in the 90s we'd just have chatted about to mates in the pub. or anyone who would listen to us in the pub. but now we're all aulder and wiser and so we natter about them on the internet while cracking open cans and bottles.



Are you being serious?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Are you being serious?


about what?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> about what?



I wasn't sure if your post was a pastiche of the sort of excuses people make whilst being vile to each other on the internet. Cracking cans and bottles? Someone's child died, for fucks sake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

cynicaleconomy said:


> I wasn't sure if your post was a pastiche of the sort of excuses people make whilst being vile to each other on the internet. Cracking cans and bottles? Someone's child died, for fucks sake.


fyi: everyone's child dies. no one gets out of here alive.

e2a: if you have information that madeleine mccann is dead, you should pass it to the relevant authorities or post it up here.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> fyi: everyone's child dies. no one gets out of here alive.



I give up. What a shitty place the internet is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

cynicaleconomy said:


> I give up. What a shitty place the internet is.


don't worry, now you've given it up it will be a little better.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> fyi: everyone's child dies. no one gets out of here alive.
> 
> e2a: if you have information that madeleine mccann is dead, you should pass it to the relevant authorities or post it up here.



Disappeared/died; wished someone a miserable life/threatened to kill them; corrected someone's erroneous claim that everyone leaves three very young children alone in a hotel room every night of their holiday/pursues a vendetta of hate and bullying against two tragic victims over a period of years.

It's all the same, words are just arbitary signifiers with no absolute meaning and the fact that you think it matters just prooves that you're a nasty person who doesn't care one jot about dead/missing children.

I hate you


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Disappeared/died; wished someone a miserable life/threatened to kill them; corrected someone's erroneous claim that everyone leaves three very young children alone in a hotel room every night of their holiday/pursues a vendetta of hate and bullying against two tragic victims over a period of years.
> 
> It's all the same, words are just arbitary signifiers with no absolute meaning and the fact that you think it matters just prooves that you're a nasty person who doesn't care one jot about dead/missing children.
> 
> I hate you


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Nearly 100 pages. Anybody got anything special planned?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Disappeared/died; wished someone a miserable life/threatened to kill them; corrected someone's erroneous claim that everyone leaves three very young children alone in a hotel room every night of their holiday/pursues a vendetta of hate and bullying against two tragic victims over a period of years.
> 
> It's all the same, words are just arbitary signifiers with no absolute meaning and the fact that you think it matters just prooves that you're a nasty person who doesn't care one jot about dead/missing children.
> 
> I hate you


thank you for your feedback. it has been added to your file.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Nearly 100 pages. Anybody got anything special planned?


You're only egging Pickman's on to say something _*nasty *_like he's going out for a "meal".


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> Nearly 100 pages. Anybody got anything special planned?


i'm going to the opening of a challenging new art exhibition a week thursday.

e2a: brogdale i probably will be going out for a 'meal' that evening. i would ask you to join me but you're a notorious lightweight.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Mine's a pint of sombre reflection.


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> So you still aren't prepared to actually quote properly one post that you're objecting to, far less the sequence it was part of which formed the context.


Christ. No I'm obviously not going to quote a whole sequence of posts. I've quoted the relevant one, shown you where they are & I've told you how they could be interpreted.


andysays said:


> you're just too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what I'm saying.


Of course. I should have guessed that was the problem. I've quoted the part of the post I objected to & I've explained it to you twice. Didn't you understand or are you just too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what I'm saying?


andysays said:


> Fuck off back under your bridge and don't come out until you've learned to have a proper discussion without constantly distorting and misrepresenting what people are saying.


Well this has all been fun and edifying but you're not actually having a discussion. You're flailing about whining about misrepresentation and distortion. If you think you've been misquoted or misunderstood, maybe address the issue rather than calling people lazy and stupid?


My original point to you was made because I was surprised that you'd have a pop at trashpony (or anybody) on a very personal level, solely because she'd made a point on this thread that you didn't agree with. After you objected, I re-read the relevant quotes and realised that you'd qualified your dig at her (which I then apologised to you for). I still think it was a shitty and unnecessary thing to say no matter how much you qualify or obfuscate.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Sweet FA said:


> Christ. No I'm obviously not going to quote a whole sequence of posts. I've quoted the relevant one, shown you where they are & I've told you how they could be interpreted.
> 
> Of course. I should have guessed that was the problem. I've quoted the part of the post I objected to & I've explained it to you twice. Didn't you understand or are you just too lazy or too stupid to read and understand what I'm saying?
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


>


"Good morning!" said Bilbo, and he meant it. The sun was shining, and the grass was very green. But Gandalf looked at him from under long bushy eyebrows that stuck out farther than the brim of his shady hat.
"What do you mean?" he said. "Do you wish me a good morning, or mean that it is a good morning whether I want it or not; or that you feel good this morning; or that it is a morning to be good on?"
"All of them at once," said Bilbo.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Disappeared/died; wished someone a miserable life/threatened to kill them; corrected someone's erroneous claim that everyone leaves three very young children alone in a hotel room every night of their holiday/pursues a vendetta of hate and bullying against two tragic victims over a period of years.
> 
> It's all the same, words are just arbitary signifiers with no absolute meaning and the fact that you think it matters just prooves that you're a nasty person who doesn't care one jot about dead/missing children.
> 
> I hate you



It must be very comforting to live in your black/white, good/bad world.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 7, 2014)

Is this two flounces on one page?

And people say urban is in decline.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> It must be very comforting to live in your black/white, good/bad world.


altho andysays won't thank me for saying so, it's not very comforting for him because he lives in a house where there's a tree branch which whips his window when there's any wind and it stops him getting to sleep. plus he'd rather live in colour than monochrome.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> It must be very comforting to live in your black/white, good/bad world.



You can fuck off as well, you misrepresenting twat


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> altho andysays won't thank me for saying so, it's not very comforting for him because he lives in a house where there's a tree branch which whips his window when there's any wind and it stops him getting to sleep. plus he'd rather live in colour than monochrome.



With only his righteous indignation for comfort.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> You can fuck off as well, you misrepresenting twat



You silly cunt.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> altho andysays won't thank me for saying so, it's not very comforting for him because he lives in a house where there's a tree branch which whips his window when there's any wind and it stops him getting to sleep. plus he'd rather live in colour than monochrome.



I don't particular mind you saying that, but I really wish you'd get down off the branch and stop leering in through my bedroom window.

One day maybe I'll be able to afford a licence for a nice colour life like what Athos has, although it seems like he's not too good at distinguishing different hues himself, so it's clearly wasted on him.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> You silly cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I don't particular mind you saying that, but I really wish you'd get down off the branch and stop leering in through my bedroom window.
> 
> One day maybe I'll be able to afford a licence for a nice colour life like what Athos has, although it seems like he's not too good at distinguishing different hues himself, so it's clearly wasted on him.


i think you'll find that's dwyer peering through your bedroom window.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


>


so by 'good day' you mean 'fuck off'.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> The middling classes don't go out on the piss...apparently. Do keep up; they go out for a "meal".



Has anyone said that? Or even intimated it?  Or is simply that someone was picked up for repeating one of the McCann-baiters' favourite bits of spin - one  which make it easier for them to be vilified?  Is there any evidence that they were drinking heavily, or that any poor judgment was a result of them being drunk?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> so by 'good day' you mean 'fuck off'.



there you go being picky about the meaning of words again...


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Has anyone said that? Or even intimated it?  Or is simply that someone was picked up for repeating one of the McCann-baiters' favourite bits of spin - one  which make it easier for them to be vilified?  Is there any evidence that they were drinking heavily, or that any poor judgment was a result of them being drunk?



Yes, someone has said/intimated that, and yes there is some indication that at least one of then had been drinking heavily the night before their daughter went missing. If you want to know more, go back and read the thread properly. 

Not that anyone is actually making any sort of issue out of those things to have a go at the McCanns, what's going on here is that a number of people are pointing and laughing at those of you who are interpreting clarification of the nonsense arguments some are coming out with as attacking the McCanns.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Has anyone said that? Or even intimated it?  Or is simply that someone was picked up for repeating one of the McCann-baiters' favourite bits of spin - one  which make it easier for them to be vilified?  Is there any evidence that they were drinking heavily, or that any poor judgment was a result of them being drunk?


yeh cos they showed the poor judgment when they were sober


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh cos they showed the poor judgment when they were sober


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yes, someone has said/intimated that, and yes there is some indication that at least one of then had been drinking heavily the night before their daughter went missing. If you want to know more, go back and read the thread properly.
> 
> Not that anyone is actually making any sort of issue out of those things to have a go at the McCanns, what's going on here is that a number of people are pointing and laughing at those of you who are interpreting clarification of the nonsense arguments some are coming out with as attacking the McCanns.



Who said that?  Where?  Who intimated it?  Where?  What is the evidence for of this drinking?  Does it relate to the night of her disappearance, or the previous night? 

And, whether you like to admit it or not, casually repeating inaccurate, negative stories about the McCanns is part of the wider attacks on them.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh cos they showed the poor judgment when they were sober



Too easy.  That's why I specifically asked for evidence about their judgment being affected by booze, which is the subtext of the "they left their kids to go out on the piss" narrative.


----------



## Looby (Oct 7, 2014)

I have no fucking idea what is happening now. So I also don't know if I should be calling people cunts for being vile to trashy because I'm not sure if they've said what I think they have.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> You can fuck off as well, you misrepresenting twat





Athos said:


> You silly cunt.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

Jeff Robinson said:


>



Imagine Noel Coward and Oscar Wilde trying to win at internet.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> they left their kids to go out



All that matters really. 
Evidence? What is this, a court of law?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Who said that?  Where?  Who intimated it?  Where?  What is the evidence for of this drinking?  Does it relate to the night of her disappearance, or the previous night?
> 
> And, whether you like to admit it or not, casually repeating inaccurate, negative stories about the McCanns is part of the wider attacks on them.



Go back and read the fucking thread properly, and then you'll know not only what was said, but who said it. Only then will you know if anyone has been casually repeating inaccurate, negative stories about the McCanns, and if so who.

Until you've done that, maybe you should resist the temptation to make any more sweeping statements about anyone being part of any so-called wider attacks.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Go back and read the fucking thread properly, and then you'll know not only what was said, but who said it. Only then will you know if anyone has been casually repeating inaccurate, negative stories about the McCanns, and if so who.
> 
> Until you've done that, maybe you should resist the temptation to make any more sweeping statements about anyone being part of any so-called wider attacks.



I've read it, but I can't find the stuff you're referring to.  Can you point it out, please?


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> All that matters really.
> Evidence? What is this, a court of law?



No, the court of public opinion: at best, ill-informed; at worst, willfully dishonest.


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh cos they showed the poor judgment when they were sober



All parents have to make decisions about their children's safety and we don't know all the circumstances, but yes, it looks on the face of it like poor judgement. It was only a generation ago that it was taken for granted that you could leave your baby outside a shop in its pram and it was only one notorious case of child abduction (about 1970?) which put a stop to that forever. This case will have left a similar legacy in its wake.

It would be wrong to keep attacking the McCanns for making one mistake that had devastating consequences. Losing their child is already more punishment than anyone should ever have to suffer.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> I've read it, but I can't find the stuff you're referring to.  Can you point it out, please?



I've answered your question; I'm not going back to re-read the thread on your behalf. 

Use the search function or give up, but stop making sweeping accusations and insinuations based on your inability to follow the thread.


----------



## comrade spurski (Oct 7, 2014)

What they did in leaving their children alone was stupid...and not in hindsight
...leaving very young children to wake up with no adult in the house, in a strange place, which the children are unfamiliar with leaves them at risk of an accident and injury and a lot of distress.

Not using the in house baby sitting service because the adults used are unknown to them is equally stupid if you are insisting on going out without your children.

I do not understand why mainly the mother has been slaughtered for this decision in the press and on line (not here) as it was clearly a decision they both made.

I do not understand the anger towards them either...they are not the only parents to have made stupid decisions... most stupid decisions don't have these serious consequences.

Everyday I watch parents collect their children from school with a phone glued to their ear or talking to their mates. They barely acknowledge their child, pay next to no attention to them including when the child walks into the road without checking for traffic. This injures and kills many children each year as kids ain't taught how to cross the road properly.

On one level I feel sorry for them... the press, the police and many individuals think they killed their baby and they have been lied about in the press on numerous occasions.
The idea of innocent until proven guilty seems to have been replaced with no smoke without fire.

There seems to be a lot of cruel things written not only about them on the web but to them via social media (as highlighted with the case of the woman who seems to have committed suicide) by people who know no more about it than I do but because they have read it in the press or online believe they know best.

Finally, in my opinion they know they made stupid decisions and nothing will ever alleviate the guilt/responsibility they feel. 

Obviously (for those with very strong opinions) this is all person opinion and not factual but it is a little disturbing to read some of the posts on here that rely on information from the police (who have to protect themselves from serious misconduct allegations in this case), from the press (proven to have lied on several occasions) and websites (which have no more information than anyone else).


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> No, the court of public opinion: at best, ill-informed; at worst, willfully dishonest.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I've answered your question; I'm not going back to re-read the thread on your behalf.
> 
> Use the search function or give up, but stop making sweeping accusations and insinuations based on your inability to follow the thread.



I can't find it, because it's not there.  You made a claim, and, when challenged, can't back it up. You are a blowhard bullshitter.

I'm not making an insinuation,  I'm saying that you (and people like you) put a negative spin on accounts of the McCann's action (e.g. the idea that they left the kids to go on the piss), because it makes it easier to vilify them.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to vilify grieving parents, other than to assuage some deep-seated inadequacies by some claim to superior parenting skills.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

comrade spurski said:


> What they did in leaving their children alone was stupid...and not in hindsight
> ...leaving very young children to wake up with no adult in the house, in a strange place, which the children are unfamiliar with leaves them at risk of an accident and injury and a lot of distress.
> 
> Not using the in house baby sitting service because the adults used are unknown to them is equally stupid if you are insisting on going out without your children.
> ...



This is a very reasonable post and I agree with almost everything in it.

The only thing I'd say (and this reflects more on what has happened on this thread than on your post, TBH) is to stress that no-one on this thread has accused the McCanns of killing their baby, or even been hugely critical or hateful about them leaving their children alone.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> View attachment 62115



I think sticking to pretty pictures is your best bet, mate.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> No, the court of public opinion: at best, ill-informed; at worst, willfully dishonest.


Where does an unsubstantiated insistence that they were not drinking alcohol,(not matter how improbable that is), sit along that continuum?


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Where does an unsubstantiated insistence that they were not drinking alcohol,(not matter how improbable that is), sit along that continuum?



Are you suggesting that I have made such an insistence?  I haven't.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> I can't find it, because it's not there.  You made a claim, and, when challenged, can't back it up. You are a blowhard bullshitter.
> 
> I'm not making an insinuation,  I'm saying that you (and people like you) put a negative spin on accounts of the McCann's action (e.g. the idea that they left the kids to go on the piss), because it makes it easier to vilify them.  I'm not sure why anyone would want to vilify grieving parents, other than to assuage some deep-seated inadequacies by some claim to superior parenting skills.



You can't find it because you're not looking properly. 

Here's a clue: use the search function to look at trashpony's posts.

Then come back and apologise for all the various accusations you've levelled at me in this post and many others.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> You can't find it because you're not looking properly.
> 
> Here's a clue: use the search function to look at trashpony's posts.
> 
> Then come back and apologise for all the various accusations you've levelled at me in this post and many others.



Still can't find it.  If you can, just quote it.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Still can't find it.  If you can, just quote it.



Fuck off, you haven't even had time to look, you lying cunt.

I'm now putting you on ignore, because you're not just lazy or stupid, you are being deliberately dishonest, and throwing around accusations (to others as well as me) that are utterly groundless.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Fuck off, you haven't even had time to look, you lying cunt.
> 
> I'm now putting you on ignore, because you're not just lazy or stupid, you are being deliberately dishonest, and throwing around accusations (to others as well as me) that are utterly groundless.



I told you, I've read the whole thread (before your post).  It's not there, is it?

You've shown yourself to be a prick by bullshitting, and now can't back it up, so are trying to duck it by putting me on ignore.  We both know you'll read this though, and we both know you're a prick.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Are you suggesting that I have made such an insistence?  I haven't.


No. Good.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> No. Good.



Ok.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> I'm now putting you on ignore...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Ok.


 Not important, is it?


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Not important, is it?



I know that there's little point to all this bickering, that's for sure.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> The middling classes don't go out on the piss...apparently. Do keep up; they go out for a "meal".



You would know you wannabe.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You would know you wannabe.


You OK?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

For those who are genuinely interested in how the focus on drinking started, and the idea that all members of Ms Leyland and my parents' generation not only left their kids alone but went out to get pissed, these two posts may be informative



trashpony said:


> I really don't understand the McCann tinfoilhat stuff. They get criticised for getting the Met involved and spending £££ on the investigation and at the same time they were involved in her death. There's a bit of a disconnect there isn't there?
> 
> The fact that both these positions seem to hold equal weight demonstrates that they're hated whatever. Particularly by people whose children were sobbing in their Butlins chalets while they were ordering their 4th pint at the Butlins bar.





trashpony said:


> Care to disprove that? My point is that Ms Leyland is of the generation that left her kids in her chalet and toddled off quite happily to drink 15 babychams. As were your parents (probably - I don't know how old you are). The McCanns didn't do anything that parents haven't done for generations. But that doesn't suit the narrative



Go back and read the thread leading up to those posts and what other people said in response to get the full picture, obviously.

I'll also point out that the only related info we have about children crying while their parents were out drinking comes from something Kate McCann said. She made reference to the fact that the night before her daughter went missing, her husband got back slightly before her, but fell asleep on the bed without checking on the kids (which suggest to me that he at least might have been drinking, though there clearly could be another reason), leaving her to discover that Madeleine had been awake and crying. This has been referred to on the thread, and I'm sure anyone who is actually interested in finding rather than just throwing smears around can do so. I may have got some of the details of this slightly wrong, I'm doing this from memory.

And now that I've spoon fed those who are unable to find this stuff for themselves, I'm going to make my tea.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> You OK?



Yeah you? Hard day challenging middle class sanctimony on t'web? Poacher, gamekeeper and all that.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

Presumably after andysays has his tea he'll be back to repeat the same old once more for luck.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Yeah you? Hard day challenging middle class sanctimony on t'web? Poacher, gamekeeper and all that.


I'm very well, thank-you; charmed, I'm sure. Toodle pip old thing.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I'm very well, thank-you; charmed, I'm sure. Toodle pip old thing.



I presume all this MC affectation is irony given what well tuned attenae you possess when it comes to sussing out the middle classes and their mores.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> ...  I'll also point out that the only related info we have about children crying while their parents were out drinking comes from something Kate McCann said. She made reference to the fact that the night before her daughter went missing, her husband got back slightly before her, but fell asleep on the bed without checking on the kids (which suggest to me that he at least might have been drinking, though there clearly could be another reason), leaving her to discover that Madeleine had been awake and crying. This has been referred to on the thread, and I'm sure anyone who is actually interested in finding rather than just throwing smears around can do so. I may have got some of the details of this slightly wrong, I'm doing this from memory.
> 
> And now that I've spoon fed those who are unable to find this stuff for themselves, I'm going to make my tea.



I take it the reference to spoon-feeding is a follow-on from your suggestion that *I* should use the search function to find evidence to support *your* claims.  In any event, what you've just quoted is completely irrelevant to that discussion; I was taking issue with brogdale's suggestion that people here had said that 'the middling classes' don't go out on the piss.  You said that people had intimated that; I asked you where; you bullshitted and blustered for a bit, reaslised you couldn't back up what you'd said, then put me on ignore.  The extracts below are a reasonable precis.




brogdale said:


> The middling classes don't go out on the piss...apparently. Do keep up; they go out for a "meal".





Athos said:


> Has anyone said that? Or even intimated it?  ...





andysays said:


> Yes, someone has said/intimated that....





Athos said:


> Who said that?  Where?  Who intimated it?  Where?





andysays said:


> Go back and read the fucking thread properly, and then you'll know not only what was said, but who said it...





Athos said:


> I've read it, but I can't find the stuff you're referring to.  Can you point it out, please?





andysays said:


> I've answered your question; I'm not going back to re-read the thread on your behalf...





Athos said:


> I can't find it, because it's not there...





andysays said:


> You can't find it because you're not looking properly...





Athos said:


> Still can't find it.  If you can, just quote it.





andysays said:


> ... I'm now putting you on ignore...





Athos said:


> I told you, I've read the whole thread (before your post).  It's not there, is it?...



andysays: Silence.

You've made yourself look very silly.

But, of course, you won't read this becasue I'm on ignore.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> fyi: everyone's child dies. no one gets out of here alive.



Resorting to nihilism is probably down there with calling everyone a fascist when it comes to web cul-de-sacs.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> It would be wrong to keep attacking the McCanns for making one mistake that had devastating consequences.



I agree on not perpetually attacking them, but 'mistake'? Yes they drew the short straw and it's sad but leaving infants alone exposes them to risks with abduction being the worst of many possible scenarios. I know it's difficult to watch small children at all times but you try your best and making yourself (both of them!) unavailable is a recipe for disaster as was sadly the case.

And how do we know it was 'one' mistake? This might have been a regular set up, greatly increasing the risks. It wouldn't surprise me if the abductor/s had observed this arrangement and plotted the crime around it.


----------



## friedaweed (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Resorting to nihilism is probably down there with calling everyone a fascist when it comes to web cul-de-sacs.


Fascist


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Presumably after andysays has his tea he'll be back to repeat the same old once more for luck.



No, but I will say that pointing out that everyone eventually dies is not "resorting to nihilism", so by making this post



Mr Moose said:


> Resorting to nihilism is probably down there with calling everyone a fascist when it comes to web cul-de-sacs.



you just make yourself look even more of a twat. You really are struggling with the idea of words having fairly precise meanings, aren't you...


----------



## Coolfonz (Oct 7, 2014)

This thread is fucking nuts.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Coolfonz said:


> This thread is fucking nuts.



Madness, even


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Coolfonz said:


> This thread is fucking nuts.



101 pages and that's your summary?


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> I agree on not perpetually attacking them, but 'mistake'? Yes they drew the short straw and it's sad but leaving infants alone exposes them to risks with abduction being the worst of many possible scenarios. I know it's difficult to watch small children at all times but you try your best and making yourself (both of them!) unavailable is a recipe for disaster as was sadly the case.
> 
> And how do we know it was 'one' mistake? This might have been a regular set up, greatly increasing the risks. It wouldn't surprise me if the abductor/s had observed this arrangement and plotted the crime around it.



But you don't know whether this was 'a regular set up' or whether a potential abductor had been watching. That's just unhelpful speculation.

As I said, I don't think I would have left them alone even if it was in the same building, but I don't know all the circumstances and neither do you. Parents have to take risks with their children's safety all the time, whether it be letting them play on their own with their friends in the park or leaving them with a baby sitter they've only just met. You asses the risks at the time and it's speculation to assume the McCanns didn't do the same.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> But you don't know whether this was 'a regular set up' or whether a potential abductor had been watching. That's just unhelpful speculation.
> 
> As I said, I don't think I would have left them alone even if it was in the same building, but I don't know all the circumstances and neither do you. Parents have to take risks with their children's safety all the time, whether it be letting them play on their own with their friends in the park or leaving them with a baby sitter they've only just met. You asses the risks at the time and it's speculation to assume the McCanns didn't do the same.


No-one, but no-one is claiming that they didn't assess the risks; surely? The fuck-up arose from the risks that they took.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I presume all this MC affectation is irony given what well tuned attenae you possess when it comes to sussing out the middle classes and their mores.


We can all presume what we like here. I might presume that you think you're more working class than I am, but what would that achieve?


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 7, 2014)

Coolfonz said:


> This thread is fucking nuts.



You're welcome 

Ironically, when I started it, it was about the millionth MM thread and the whole focus of this, as opposed to all the other ones, was meant to be: 'isn't it about time everyone calmed the fuck down about this?'


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> As I said, I don't think I would have left them alone even if it was in the same building, but I don't know all the circumstances and neither do you. Parents have to take risks with their children's safety all the time, whether it be letting them play on their own with their friends in the park or leaving them with a baby sitter they've only just met. You asses the risks at the time and it's speculation to assume the McCanns didn't do the same.



I don't know anyone who would let children aged five and under play in the park on their own. Yes of course there's risk with leaving children with adults you don't know, there's risks with leaving them with adults you do know. I don't think it really ranks with leaving them without any or limited supervision though. They had options to get their child minded by someone employed by the complex. Not without risk but I'd be happy to be shown where this has led to abduction. One of them could have stayed in whilst the other went out. They both could have stayed in. They chose to go out and look in every twenty minutes or so. Aren't children so bloody inconvenient?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

I find it a bit revealing how some folk bang on about how it's the McCanns who have 'paid the price' for their mistake here, and no word on the actual victim. I'm sure it's a nightmare for them. But they weren't the ones kidnapped, presumably murdered. It's like you only become a person in your own right once you can be sympathised with.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> But you don't know whether this was 'a regular set up' or whether a potential abductor had been watching. That's just unhelpful speculation.



How is it unhelpful if it could help other families?

Awful luck to leave your kids on one sole occasion ever and for abductors to be in the very same area on the very same night and to target your chalet. What's the odds?


----------



## Weller (Oct 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> What the fuck is this? A 'banned' documentary? Is this some truther expose? Some brave anti-sheeples has exposed the lies and the conspiracy behind...a family having their kid deliberately disappear? What is this shit? Who spends their time thinking like that? I don't know what happened to that kid or why the mcCann's did what they did (or didn't), but ffs!



No if you took the time to see it you would see that it is the original inspectors television program released in Portugal containing the evidence that he and his investigation team gathered it was shown in Portugal and many other countries but is still subject to an ongoing and much delayed  libel case from the parents lawyers  in Portugal and for that reason I guess it has never been aired on UK TV it is no longer banned and maybe  never was it just says it was on that particular link (although the inspectors  book was banned until the supreme  court overturned that)  probably  just that the U.K media preferred  to ignore it those that did not got threatened with libel action some did get sued but   it does contain the actual statements details about the distances etc including the actual footage and documents from the Portuguese police as well as the UK dog handler and much more  .
Its interesting imo what the conclusion back then was from the original police team its certainly not a conspiracy loon video saying that they had "their Kid deliberately disappear" but as it is the *original inspector showing the details and evidence *it is why some of these "trolls" as the newspaper calls them ask questions after watching it and all I was saying that after watching that I can see why it often gets out of hand on twitter etc there are at least 48 questions not answered that could have been and maybe most parents would answer them if the police asked them and a quick search on the internet will show what those questions were as would actually seeing the insepctor speak on that video  - not on conspiracy loon sites even the parents do not deny the 48 police questions that the mother refused to answer  although their reasons for not answering them is a bit strange imo


I dont know what happened either but Portugal police saw it / see it different than gets printed here everything he says he shows the evidence on Portugals files  and their/his  conclusion and how/why  he/they came to that conclusion then  imo it is sadly a possibility as  it would be with any child left alone as is an abduction


----------



## laptop (Oct 7, 2014)

Somehow the _Private Eye_ column "from the boards" has leaked in here...


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't know anyone who would let children aged five and under play in the park on their own. Yes of course there's risk with leaving children with adults you don't know, there's risks with leaving them with adults you do know. I don't think it really ranks with leaving them without any or limited supervision though. They had options to get their child minded by someone employed by the complex. Not without risk but I'd be happy to be shown where this has led to abduction. One of them could have stayed in whilst the other went out. They both could have stayed in. They chose to go out and look in every twenty minutes or so. Aren't children so bloody inconvenient?



I don't disagree with any of what you say there, but all we're doing is speculating, we don't know if they were willfully negligent or whether they assessed the risks and rationally and were incredibly unlucky. (There's probably more chance of your child dying in a motor accident than there is it being abducted like that, but we still take that risk).

All I'm saying is that the McCanns have clearly suffered an unimaginable hell and they don't need to be reminded by others about their fateful decision. It's time people got off their backs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Resorting to nihilism is probably down there with calling everyone a fascist when it comes to web cul-de-sacs.


i'll let you know when i resort to nihilism


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> All parents have to make decisions about their children's safety and we don't know all the circumstances, but yes, it looks on the face of it like poor judgement. It was only a generation ago that it was taken for granted that you could leave your baby outside a shop in its pram and it was only one notorious case of child abduction (about 1970?) which put a stop to that forever. This case will have left a similar legacy in its wake.
> 
> It would be wrong to keep attacking the McCanns for making one mistake that had devastating consequences. Losing their child is already more punishment than anyone should ever have to suffer.


40+ yeats more than 1 generation


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> 40+ yeats more than 1 generation


That's just too many poets.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> I don't disagree with any of what you say there, but all we're doing is speculating, we don't know if they were willfully negligent or whether they assessed the risks and rationally and were incredibly unlucky. (There's probably more chance of your child dying in a motor accident than there is it being abducted like that, but we still take that risk).
> 
> All I'm saying is that the McCanns have clearly suffered an unimaginable hell and they don't need to be reminded by others about their fateful decision. It's time people got off their backs.


Actually yeah. They obviously didn't set out to get their child abducted. I feel a bit of a cunt now. I don't feel any better for pointing out the bleeding obvious. Gonna do some creative stuff instead.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> I don't disagree with any of what you say there, but all we're doing is speculating, we don't know if they were willfully negligent or whether they assessed the risks and rationally and were incredibly unlucky. (There's probably more chance of your child dying in a motor accident than there is it being abducted like that, but we still take that risk).



When we drive our children we obviously do take a risk, but most parents strive to mitigate that risk as far as possible. Unfortunately for their child, the McCanns did not seek to minimise risk of harm.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> 101 pages and that's your summary?


We had Proust on page 1 and Yeats on 101, what more d'ya want?  I'm predicting Pam Ayres for 1001.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> We had Proust on page 1 and Yeats on 101, what more d'ya want?  I'm predicting Pam Ayres for 1001.


"Oh I wish I'd looked after my..."


----------



## 1927 (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Too easy.  That's why I specifically asked for evidence about their judgment being affected by booze, which is the subtext of the "they left their kids to go out on the piss" narrative.


No one has intimated that their judgement was influenced by drink. The decision to leave kids in their own was made before the drinking commenced!


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> We had Proust on page 1 and Yeats on 101, what more d'ya want?  I'm predicting Pam Ayres for 1001.


----------



## Athos (Oct 7, 2014)

1927 said:


> No one has intimated that their judgement was influenced by drink. The decision to leave kids in their own was made before the drinking commenced!



Exactly, the issue of alcohol it's an irrelevance.  Except to the extent that the anti-McCann camp keep alluding to the fact that they 'left the kids to go on the piss', because it adds a little to their sense of moral superiority.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> We had Proust on page 1 and Yeats on 101, what more d'ya want?



And in between mostly a combination of the two. Prats.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

1927 said:


> No one has intimated that their judgement was influenced by drink. The decision to leave kids in their own was made before the drinking commenced!


My mum and dad used to leave me in the back of the car for hours in pub car parks. I was well acquainted with car parks all over Devon and Cornwall when I was a kid. That was my summer holiday. Hundreds of others like me too probably


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> And in between mostly a combination of the two. Prats.


I won't rise to that (yeast?).


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> I won't rise to that (yeast?).



You will be in my future Prayres.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> When we drive our children we obviously do take a risk, but most parents strive to mitigate that risk as far as possible. Unfortunately for their child, the McCanns did not seek to minimise risk of harm.


You don't know, nobody apart from the McCanns know how they felt about the risk. Maybe they thought there was no risk. They were wrong but they didn't know that. Or not. I'm not judging, I might have left my children if I thought they'd come to no harm.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> You will be in my future Prayres.


I'm all out of conjunctional puns. I should have included the poet Kimmie Kun rather than Pam Ayres, we'd have been in business all night.


----------



## tony heath (Oct 7, 2014)

Kidnapped by the Pam Ayres


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> My mum and dad used to leave me in the back of the car for hours in pub car parks. I was well acquainted with car parks all over Devon and Cornwall when I was a kid. That was my summer holiday. Hundreds of others like me too probably



We used to get whipped across the palm with a stick or belted repeatedly with a slipper on the arse for back chatting teachers. Wasn't it wonderful? Fuck knows why it's frowned upon nowadays.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> We used to get whipped across the palm with a stick or a slipper on the arse for back chatting teachers. Wasn't it wonderful? Fuck knows why it's frowned upon.


I'm not saying that it was ok to leave me in the back of a car. It wasn't. What I'm saying is that it was the norm and while I'm aware that I was at great risk, my mum and dad weren't. People don't always know what is risk and what isn't.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> You don't know, nobody apart from the McCanns know how they felt about the risk. Maybe they thought there was no risk. They were wrong but they didn't know that. Or not. I'm not judging, I might have left my children if I thought they'd come to no harm.


 Well, we do know...from the words of the McCanns themselves. They recognised that there were risks associated with leaving their infant children on their own whilst they socialised; they explicitly said that they were concerned about the risk of fire, and to that effect they decided to leave the door to the apartment open, and strive to check up on the kids every half an hour. They clearly did not think that no harm could come to their kids.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Well, we do know...from the words of the McCanns themselves. They recognised that there were risks associated with leaving their infant children on their own whilst they socialised; they explicitly said that they were concerned about the risk of fire, and to that effect they decided to leave the door to the apartment open, and strive to check up on the kids every half an hour. They clearly did not think that no harm could come to their kids.



Children could be abducted at almost any time. Should parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18?


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Well, we do know...from the words of the McCanns themselves. They recognised that there were risks associated with leaving their infant children on their own whilst they socialised; they explicitly said that they were concerned about the risk of fire, and to that effect they decided to leave the door to the apartment open, and strive to check up on the kids every half an hour. They clearly did not think that no harm could come to their kids.


But they possibly never considered abduction. They took precautions about what they did consider.


----------



## tony heath (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> But they possibly never considered abduction. They took precautions about what they did consider.


I remember being scared of kidnappers, possibly because of the Moors Murders and stories about child snatchers and wicked witches, dark magic, fairy tales etc


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

tony heath said:


> I remember being scared of kidnappers, possibly because of the Moors Murders and stories about child snatchers and wicked witches, dark magic, fairy tales etc



Boney'll get you.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> My mum and dad used to leave me in the back of the car for hours in pub car parks. I was well acquainted with car parks all over Devon and Cornwall when I was a kid. That was my summer holiday. Hundreds of others like me too probably



Out of interest, was this when you were not yet three and did you have two even younger siblings with you?


----------



## 1927 (Oct 7, 2014)

Athos said:


> Exactly, the issue of alcohol it's an irrelevance.  Except to the extent that the anti-McCann camp keep alluding to the fact that they 'left the kids to go on the piss', because it adds a little to their sense of moral superiority.


No! Alcohol, or the consumption of, is an issue. They made a decision, when sober, that a night drinking was more important than staying in with their kids!


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> But they possibly never considered abduction. They took precautions about what they did consider.



Yeah, I agree about that. They probably never considered abduction, and there's no real reason why they should have.

I wouldn't leave kids that young in those circs, but (still) not because I was worried about abduction


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

1927 said:


> No! Alcohol, or the consumption of, is an issue. They made a decision, when sober, that a night drinking was more important than staying in with their kids!



They were on holiday, you sanctimonious prick.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> They were on holiday, you sanctimonious prick.


They were on holiday with their kids!


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Out of interest, was this when you were not yet three and did you have two even younger siblings with you?


No I was probably about 6 and on my own.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> No I was probably about 6 and on my own.



OK, fair enough. 

That doesn't sound like it was much fun, but it also isn't really a directly comparable thing, in my opinion.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yeah, I agree about that. They probably never considered abduction, and there's no real reason why they should have.
> 
> I wouldn't leave kids that young in those circs, but (still) not because I was worried about abduction


I was a real worrier about my kids, I still am and the youngest is now 31.  I can't honestly say though that I wouldn't have left them if I'd felt there was no risk. My idea of no risk and someone elses idea of no risk may not have been the same.
Also, hindsight and all that


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Children could be abducted at almost any time. Should parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18?



This is a ridiculous comment. 

No one has suggested that parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18, and to even bring this up just adds to the hysterical nature of this thread, where any attempt to discuss the specifics of what did or didn't happen leads to people being accused of attacking the McCanns.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> OK, fair enough.
> 
> That doesn't sound like it was much fun, but it also isn't really a directly comparable thing, in my
> opinion.


Well to be honest I can't remember how I felt. I do know that I would have never done that with my children but my children were born 30 odd years later and maybe things felt safer back then, I don't know.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> I was a real worrier about my kids, I still am and the youngest is now 31.  I can't honestly say though that I wouldn't have left them if I'd felt there was no risk. My idea of no risk and someone elses idea of no risk may not have been the same.
> Also, hindsight and all that



Well, I applaude your honesty. 

I personally wouldn't have left my daughter at that age, and as she got older, when I judged it was potentially appropriate I made an assessment about what I considered an acceptable risk. That's what we all do, and I certainly wouldn't criticise you or anyone else for coming to a different conclusion than I would in the same circs.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> Well to be honest I can't remember how I felt. I do know that I would have never done that with my children but my children were born 30 odd years later and maybe things felt safer back then, I don't know.



It's not just a safety thing, it's also a fun thing.

I can remember times being left with my brothers when my parents were in the pub, but at least we had a bottle of coke and some crisps, and each other for company.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> This is a ridiculous comment.
> 
> No one has suggested that parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18, and to even bring this up just adds to the hysterical nature of this thread, where any attempt to discuss the specifics of what did or didn't happen leads to people being accused of attacking the McCanns.



The specifics of what didn't happen? Bit tricky, even for a non-hysterical, master debater like you, I'd have thought.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> It's not just a safety thing, it's also a fun thing.
> 
> I can remember times being left with my brothers when my parents were in the pub, but at least we had a bottle of coke and some crisps, and each other for company.



My mum and dad left me in the car with a bottle of pop, probably tizer or dandelion and burdock and a packet of crisps. Looking back, It was a dreadful thing to do but I know that a lot of other people did it too. It was the 1950's and the working classes were getting cars, they wanted to drive out to the countryside and enjoy the freedom. (((poor kids like me)))
I need to stop this now or I'll start on about how the rest of my childhood was so neglected


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> The specifics of what didn't happen? Bit tricky, even for a non-hysterical, master debater like you, I'd have thought.



No we can discuss the specifics of what didn't happen, where we have sufficient data.

In this case, for instance, we know that Madeleine wasn't washed out to sea by a great tidal wave, and then taken for a ride on the backs of dolphins to visit Neptune in his underwater city.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> My mum and dad left me in the car with a bottle of pop, probably tizer or dandelion and burdock and a packet of crisps. Looking back, It was a dreadful thing to do but I know that a lot of other people did it too. it was the 1950's and the working classes were getting cars, they wanted to drive out to the countryside and enjoy the freedom. (((poor kids like me)))
> I need to stop this now or I'll start on about how the rest of my childhood was so neglected



You seem to have survived relatively unscathed 

I remember spending significant time in pub gardens (rather than cars) when I was a kid. Do they not have them in your part of the country, or is the weather generally so bad that you're better off in the car?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Children could be abducted at almost any time. Should parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18?


I don't think that's correct. In reality, for most kids, there are probably very few moments in their childhood when they might be abducted by someone not known to them. Though, most parents would surely recognise that being left alone in a foreign hotel room might be one of those few moments.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> My mum and dad left me in the car with a bottle of pop, probably tizer or dandelion and burdock and a packet of crisps. Looking back, It was a dreadful thing to do but I know that a lot of other people did it too. It was the 1950's and the working classes were getting cars, they wanted to drive out to the countryside and enjoy the freedom. (((poor kids like me)))
> I need to stop this now or I'll start on about how the rest of my childhood was so neglected



We used to play night-time tick across the town when I was nine, ten. I was out until midnight and my single mother never had a clue where I was. This idea that parents could stop any random horror in the world is just absurd.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> We used to play night-time tick across the town when I was nine, ten. I was out until midnight and my single mother never had a clue where I was. This idea that parents could stop any random horror in the world is just absurd.



Again, who is putting forward the idea that parents could stop any random horror in the world?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I don't think that's correct. In reality, for most kids, there are probably very few moments in their childhood when they might be abducted by someone not known to them. Though, most parents would surely recognise that being left alone in a foreign hotel room might be one of those few moments.



You must be joking.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> You must be joking.


Not knowingly.


----------



## Shirl (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> You seem to have survived relatively unscathed
> 
> I remember spending significant time in pub gardens (rather than cars) when I was a kid. Do they not have them in your part of the country, or is the weather generally so bad that you're better off in the car?


I'm in Yorkshire and we have lovely summers (well this year anyway) in telling about my childhood, that was summer holidays in Devon and Cornwall.
My children grew up living on the edge of National Trust woodlands and we didn't need to visit the countryside, we were already there  No pub car parks for my boys


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Not knowingly.



Why are kids more likely to be abducted in foreign hotel rooms than their own homes?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

Shirl said:


> I'm in Yorkshire and we have lovely summers (well this year anyway) in telling about my childhood, that was summer holidays in Devon and Cornwall.
> My children grew up living on the edge of National Trust woodlands and we didn't need to visit the countryside, we were already there  No pub car parks for my boys



There is a time in a growing boy's life when pub car parks hold a great interest, but probably not at the age we've been talking about


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Why are kids more likely to be abducted in foreign hotel rooms than their own homes?



Yeah, I'd tend to agree with you on this, or at least to suggest that the chances of it happening in either location are so small as not to be something which would or should be at the forefront of any parent's mind.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Why are kids more likely to be abducted in foreign hotel rooms than their own homes?


 
"..._*being left alone..." *_did you see that bit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

Wilf said:


> We had Proust on page 1 and Yeats on 101, what more d'ya want?  I'm predicting Pam Ayres for 1001.


haven't you donne enough


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

andysays said:


> Yeah, I'd tend to agree with you on this, or at least to suggest that the chances of it happening in either location are so small as not to be something which would or should be at the forefront of any parent's mind.



What points are we disagreeing on then?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> haven't you donne enough



More Whit man!


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> What points are we disagreeing on then?



I'm not entirely sure -you tell me

I have already said (more than once) that I wouldn't leave kids of that young age in a hotel room on their own while I went out for the evening, but the reasons have nothing to do with a fear of them being abducted, even after the McCann case. I've never said they should have predicted the possibility of their daughter being abducted - it's a one in a million chance.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> More Whit man!


what are your words worth?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> haven't you donne enough


Not by a long(fellow) chalk. If you'd spender bit of time on it you'd see there's enough motion to keep it going all cecil day lewis.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> what are your words worth?



Stand in Au den!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> what are your words worth?


Sweet Macgona gall?


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Well, we do know...from the words of the McCanns themselves. They recognised that there were risks associated with leaving their infant children on their own whilst they socialised; they explicitly said that they were concerned about the risk of fire, and to that effect *they decided to leave the door to the apartment open*, and strive to check up on the kids every half an hour. They clearly did not think that no harm could come to their kids.



Christ - I've only just seen that detail, and have never been aware of it before.

They must be gutted having done that, and thinking that some intruder might have got in that way. As I've said already, the idea that their kids might be in danger from an intruder doesn't seem one that would or should have been at the front of their minds.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Stand in Au den!


lyly-livered scoundrel


----------



## Wilf (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> lyly-livered scoundrel


Marvel-ous (if a teeny-heaney bit contrived)!


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 7, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> lyly-livered scoundrel



Blow it out yer Sassoon!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 8, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Blow it out yer Sassoon!


I'll brooke no more of that sort of language - it's in your owen interest.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 8, 2014)

Shelley we're getting a bit off topic now.

(We are, and don't call me Shelley, etc.)


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

Shirl said:


> I'm not saying that it was ok to leave me in the back of a car. It wasn't. What I'm saying is that it was the norm and while I'm aware that I was at great risk, my mum and dad weren't. People don't always know what is risk and what isn't.


I'm quite astonished that doctors would be completely oblivious of the moral and legal implications surrounding child welfare.

They may have been lulled into a false sense of security but they would know more about child welfare than the average punter due to their occupation.


----------



## Athos (Oct 8, 2014)

1927 said:


> No! Alcohol, or the consumption of, is an issue. They made a decision, when sober, that a night drinking was more important than staying in with their kids!



Really?!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> Blow it out yer Sassoon!


 you can betjeman i won't take that sort of language from you


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you can betjeman i won't take that sort of language from you



I was only Larkin around.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Rimbaud with this now....


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> This is a ridiculous comment.
> 
> No one has suggested that parents literally never let their kids out of their sight until they are 18, and to even bring this up just adds to the hysterical nature of this thread, where any attempt to discuss the specifics of what did or didn't happen leads to people being accused of attacking the McCanns.



But your tone can hardly be described as friendly or even neutral to them.

Insinuation.



andysays said:


> Well, they know that the McCanns are nice well spoken, well connected people who would never have anything to do with anything nasty or unsavoury, so obviously they couldn't possibly be involved in any way shape or form in their daughter's disappearance.



Snobbery.



andysays said:


> But think of all the horrible working class people they'd have to mix with...
> 
> Anyway, I'd better leave this subject before I'm overcome by the temptation to make one of a number of sick jokes which occur to me.



You go further than 'discussing the case'. It's not possible to infer other than the repeated, seemingly endless condemnation, of their behaviour (so at odds with how most of us feel about other people who lost their children to  predators) means that your concern is primarily with ensuring they are considered culpable.


----------



## likesfish (Oct 8, 2014)

Ok they fucked  up people do bloody stupid stuff all the time.
 Doesn't mean there's some huge conspiracy to be unconverted by random peeps on the net by slagging them off.


----------



## 1927 (Oct 8, 2014)

Athos said:


> Really?!


Well the known facts support this!


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> But your tone can hardly be described as friendly or even neutral to them.
> 
> Insinuation.
> 
> ...



I've never claimed to be friendly or even neutral to them, have I?

I've quite clearly stated that from very early on I thought something about both their behaviours, particularly their immediate attempt to control/play the media, was a little odd. Clearly that doesn't make them guilty of anything, responsible for their daughter's disappearance, or any less deserving of sympathy than any other parents who have lost their child. But the point is, they haven't received the same level of sympathy as any other parents, they've received hugely more, and that disparity has created its own backlash (which is the fault of the media, primarily, not the McCanns).

So a few of my comments have been hostile to the McCanns, I agree, and possibly some of then have been in poor taste or whatever. I wouldn't dream of making those in a context where the McCanns themselves were likely to read them.

But I haven't been endlessly or even repeatedly condemning of the McCanns or their behaviour, the people I have been critical of are those who continually interpret any attempt to be clear about what did or didn't happen as criticism of the McCanns, or who use absolutely ridiculous and scurrilous distortions of what people are saying, or attempt to draw false equivalences which obscure rather than illuminate.

Let's be absolutely clear - the people I'm directing my criticism and sometimes my condemnation at are (some) people on this thread.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> I've never claimed to be friendly or even neutral to them, have I?
> 
> I've quite clearly stated that from very early on I thought something about both their behaviours, particularly their immediate attempt to control/play the media, was a little odd. Clearly that doesn't make them guilty of anything, responsible for their daughter's disappearance, or any less deserving of sympathy than any other parents who have lost their child. But the point is, they haven't received the same level of sympathy as any other parents, they've received hugely more, and that disparity has created its own backlash (which is the fault of the media, primarily, not the McCanns).
> 
> ...



That doesn't really explain why seven years on you still wish to prove their negligence, tell distasteful jokes and insinuate about their class.

The media stuff is just a fig leaf, always has been.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That doesn't really explain why seven years on you still wish to prove their negligence, tell distasteful jokes and insinuate about their class.
> 
> The media stuff is just a fig leaf, always has been.



I'm not seeking to prove their negligence, you idiot, and you need to explain what you mean by insinuate about their class. 

It's fairly clear that they are middle class, despite how some have tried to deny that. I'm not condemning them for that - my own upbringing was what some would describe as middle class - I'm saying their support in the media and elsewhere has been better with them being middle class than it would have been had they been working class


----------



## rasputin (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Where has she accused anyone of killing their child? Let's have a direct link please.



Coming to this late, so apologies if this has already been answered. Looking at Brenda Leyland's Twitter timeline, we find the following tweet dated 01 April 2014, timed at 19:15:39:

_IMO the fact that K and G killed Maddie is not in Q, the only Q is how, why and when_


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

rasputin said:


> Coming to this late, so apologies if this has already been answered. Looking at Brenda Leyland's Twitter timeline, we find the following tweet dated 01 April 2014, timed at 19:15:39:
> 
> _IMO the fact that K and G killed Maddie is not in Q, the only Q is how, why and when_



No, it hasn't already been answered, so thanks for doing so.

That's a horrible tweet, and deserves to be condemned. Now that I've seen it, I do condemn it.

That's not been generally available in the public domain, has it? Has it been quoted in the media anywhere before now?

My point is that people have been extrapolating from what they know Brenda Leyland has said, to what they think she might have said. The fact that evidence has subsequently turned up, if indeed that's how it has happened, wouldn't change the fact that that sort of extrapolation and distortion has been rife on this thread, and it's *that* that I've primarily been attempting to address.


----------



## rasputin (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> That's not been generally available in the public domain, has it? Has it been quoted in the media anywhere before now?



Haven't seen it quoted, no.  Though the link to the timeline has appeared here and there.  The problem is that there are thousands of tweets, nearly all about the McCanns ("obsessive" is putting it mildly) and I imagine people have just given up trying to read them all.  I copy pasted the lot into an excel table and searched for "killed" - which of course landed on this one.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

rasputin said:


> Haven't seen it quoted, no.  Though the link to the timeline has appeared here and there.  The problem is that there are thousands of tweets, nearly all about the McCanns ("obsessive" is putting it mildly) and I imagine people have just given up trying to read them all.  *I copy pasted the lot into an excel table and searched for "killed"* - which of course landed on this one.



there's dedication for you.

I'd still be interested in knowing if the poster who many that claim earlier in the thread had actually read it, or was just going on their own extrapolation or the general extrapolation seen in the media.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> I've quite clearly stated that from very early on I thought something about both their behaviours, particularly their immediate attempt to control/play the media, was a little odd.



Why do you think this was odd?

if my daughter was missing the only concern of mine would be to do everything possible to get her back. To that end when the press conference happened I would have notes prepared to ensure that everything I wanted/needed to say was said, and I would deliver my message in as clear as manner as possible. Wouldn't you?


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think this was odd?
> 
> if my daughter was missing the only concern of mine would be to do everything possible to get her back. To that end when the press conference happened I would have notes prepared to ensure that everything I wanted/needed to say was said, and I would deliver my message in as clear as manner as possible. Wouldn't you?



I think I've already addressed this upthread, but to briefly recap

I would certainly want to deliver my message as clearly as possible, but my (admittedly vague) recollection is that it went beyond that. And please note that I'm saying "odd" in the sense of unusual rather than "they were obviously wrong 'uns"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> I think I've already addressed this upthread, but to briefly recap
> 
> I would certainly want to deliver my message as clearly as possible, but my (admittedly vague) recollection is that it went beyond that. And please note that I'm saying "odd" in the sense of unusual rather than "they were obviously wrong 'uns"



It is unusual, as most people go to pieces and don't deliver the message that they want to deliver. I really do fail to comprehend why them doing the right thing by their child should still be commented on 7 years later though?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> No, it hasn't already been answered, so thanks for doing so.
> 
> That's a horrible tweet, and deserves to be condemned. Now that I've seen it, I do condemn it.
> 
> ...



Getting really pompous now.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think this was odd?
> 
> if my daughter was missing the only concern of mine would be to do everything possible to get her back. To that end when the press conference happened I would have notes prepared to ensure that everything I wanted/needed to say was said, and I would deliver my message in as clear as manner as possible. Wouldn't you?



I agree. I find it bizarre that so many people seem to 'know' what would be 'normal' behaviour when your child goes missing, or indeed when you end up as part of a big media story for the first time. The only sure thing would be your utter desperation to have the child returned.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is unusual, as most people go to pieces and don't deliver the message that they want to deliver. I really do fail to comprehend why them doing the right thing by their child should still be commented on 7 years later though?



I'm merely commenting on it to address something that someone else said upthread.

This is the problem with many conversations on Urban - people pick up on a particular post without considering the context in which it was made, just like someone else brought up the issue of drinking/being out on the piss, and I'm getting told I brought it up because I challenged what they were saying.

Sad but probably inevitable.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> No, it hasn't already been answered, so thanks for doing so.
> 
> That's a horrible tweet, and deserves to be condemned. Now that I've seen it, I do condemn it.
> 
> ...


But I was proven right, wasn't I?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> I'm merely commenting on it to address something that someone else said upthread.
> 
> This is the problem with many conversations on Urban - people pick up on a particular post without considering the context in which it was made, just like someone else brought up the issue of drinking/being out on the piss, and I'm getting told I brought it up because I challenged what they were saying.
> 
> Sad but probably inevitable.



We know what you and your fellow 'anarchists' (lol) think. Don't pretend you are being maligned.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> But I was proven right, wasn't I?



Was it you who said it? I think someone else said it first, so I don't know if you were repeating their assertion or making it up independently. Neither seems to me to be something to come back and bragg about.

Anyway, you were apparently right by fault - you made an assertion for which you had no evidence and luckily for you evidence later emerged.

A stopped clock is right twice a day, remember...


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Was it you who said it? I think someone else said it first, so I don't know if you were repeating their assertion or making it up independently. Neither seems to me to be something to come back and bragg about.
> 
> Anyway, you were apparently right by fault - you made an assertion for which you had no evidence and luckily for you evidence later emerged.
> 
> A stopped clock is right twice a day, remember...


Oh naff off. I surmised that the only logical reason why she dubbed them 'evil' was because she thought they were in some way culpable in Maddie's disappearance. I'm not surprised at all that evidence has now surfaced to support that.

Enjoy my victory dance.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> We know what you and your fellow 'anarchists' (lol) think. Don't pretend you are being maligned.



Ooh, look out "anarchists", Moose know what we think. Presumably that's why he feels he can respond to people's posts without have properly read or understood them.

The quality of discussion is particularly poor on this thread today.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

As has been just demonstrated, anarchists don't agree on things by virtue of being anarchists.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Ooh, look out "anarchists", Moose know what we think. Presumably that's why he feels he can respond to people's posts without have properly read or understood them.
> 
> The quality of discussion is particularly poor on this thread today.



I'm not talking to Anarchists. I'm talking to 'Anarchists'. Sort of Rik from the 'Young Ones' variety.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> As has been just demonstrated, anarchists don't agree on things by virtue of being anarchists.



Indeed, but in Moose's group think/collective guilt world they clearly do, and anyway he's talking about "anarchists". He clearly includes me in that heading, but maybe you've escaped.

And now you've outed yourself


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I'm not talking to Anarchists. I'm talking to 'Anarchists'...



I know that's what (you think) you're doing, that's why I included the quotes in my post, and why I referred to it in my post to C66.

You really are doing very badly this morning, even for you, so if you don't mind I'll focus on more productive discussion on other threads.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> I know that's what (you think) you're doing, that's why I included the quotes in my post, and why I referred to it in my post to C66.
> 
> You really are doing very badly this morning, even for you, so if you don't mind I'll focus on more productive discussion on other threads.



Surely if I was doing badly you'd stick around?


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> ...Enjoy my victory dance.








Knock yourself out.


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Shake it, baby!!!



Jesus Christ! Has there ever been anything more inappropriate given the subject!??


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> As has been just demonstrated, anarchists don't agree on things by virtue of being anarchists.



The reason I bring it up is that both Brogdale and andysays wear their anarchism boldly and yet pursue an agenda to discredit an ordinary couple (in extraordinary circumstances) set by the right wing press back in the first years of this case. 

The press has backed off since and turned sinners to saints. It was costing them money and hey they can spin any angle.

But it seems at odds to me for progressives to carry this on. The McCanns could well be guilty of murder for all I know, but I don't know it so I presume their innocence and see no justification to pursue them or tell nasty jokes.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Holy shit.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Jesus Christ! Has there ever been anything more inappropriate given the subject!??



I think there probably has, but in recognition of your feelings I've removed it. Pleae edit your post to do the same.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Indeed, but in Moose's group think/collective guilt world they clearly do, and anyway he's talking about "anarchists". He clearly includes me in that heading, but maybe you've escaped.
> 
> And now you've outed yourself


We're all anarchists here according to the press including hierarchical lick spittles like Moose.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Rimbaud with this now....


you're dowson our diversion


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> you're dowson our diversion


mere plathitudes


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> We know what you and your fellow 'anarchists' (lol) think. Don't pretend you are being maligned.


the auld 'guilt by association' ploy. pisspoor.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> the auld 'guilt by association' ploy. pisspoor.


t'was risable... lost the plot there


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> mere plathitudes


stop acting like an auld herbert


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Jesus Christ! Has there ever been anything more inappropriate given the subject!??


give me a couple of minutes and there will be


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Surely if I was doing badly you'd stick around?


only to laugh and poke fun


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> the auld 'guilt by association' ploy. pisspoor.



No it's not. I'm just saying it's at odds.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Pickman's model said:


> only to laugh and poke fun



And now you are associating. Stop acting like big bruv and let him fight his own battles.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Citizen66 said:


> We're all anarchists here according to the press including hierarchical lick spittles like Moose.



Hierarchical? How so? Studiously avoiding hierarchies of oppression or grief me.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 8, 2014)

Funnily enough in Prais da Luz at the moment ( it's very quaint but a bit like Surrey on algarve) and within an hour if arriving was approached  by two blokes with folders and ID badges with no photos around necks saying they were collecting for abused children. Would only accept cash though  explained to them that I had bankers orders in England for charities but they were quite insistent that as they were only in the area doing voluntary work for a few days that a cash donation was urgently required to feed the children .unfortunately they declined my offer to visit these hungry and abused children personally so we went our separate ways .

When I was walking about I saw a couple of stencilled signs saying 'McCann circus' . Couldn't find it though.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Jesus Christ! Has there ever been anything more inappropriate given the subject!??



Andrew Hertford 

In case you haven't seen my previous post, I'll repeat that I've removed what you've described as inappropriate and asked you to do the same.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Andrew Hertford
> 
> In case you haven't seen my previous post, I'll repeat that I've removed what you've described as inappropriate and asked you to do the same.



Yes. FFS Andrew Hertford can't you stop being offensive!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Andrew Hertford
> 
> In case you haven't seen my previous post, I'll repeat that I've removed what you've described as inappropriate and asked you to do the same.



Fucking anarchists, never do what they're asked.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fucking anarchists, never do what they're asked.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fucking anarchists, never do what they're asked.



Well, I have taken it down, even though I wasn't asked.

Up to him if he leaves his quote there obviously, I'm merely asking.

ETA and "anarchists" is the preferred usage on this thread, apparently


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Hierarchical? How so? Studiously avoiding hierarchies of oppression or grief me.


Stock response to the mocking of anarchists.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That doesn't really explain why seven years on you still wish to prove their negligence, tell distasteful jokes and insinuate about their class.



For the most part, and removing the part of the equation whereby the media sensationalised any and all developments, as well as promulgating many of the insinuations, people buy into narratives because it accords in some way with one of two things: 
1) their personal experience of that sort of thing, or
2) their preconceptions about how the world works.
The reality tends to be that when shit happens, there will always be people on both sides of the subsequent argument, and some of those people will buy into judgementalism, rather than compassion.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I agree. I find it bizarre that so many people seem to 'know' what would be 'normal' behaviour when your child goes missing, or indeed when you end up as part of a big media story for the first time. The only sure thing would be your utter desperation to have the child returned.



There is no single "normal" behaviour.  
We're unfortunately still at a stage in most of the world where we ascribe particular emotions to events, and if you don't happen to manifest those emotions, then people are far more likely to presume guilt on your part.
What doesn't get talked about is the fact that trauma can cause an entire range of reactions - everything from angry determination to weepy blubbering to grey-faced, shivering shock to blank-faced disassociation (psychologists have been researching this for at least 60 years).  Mrs McCann's reactions were entirely understandable, unless you buy into the ascription of emotions that I mentioned above.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> We know what you and your fellow 'anarchists' (lol) think. Don't pretend you are being maligned.



I'm an anarchist, and I doubt you know what I think. 
And "we", btw? Royal "we", or are you speaking for others without their permission?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fucking anarchists, never do what they're asked.



Wrong, we often do what we're *asked*, we just never do what we're *told*.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Wrong, we often do what we're *asked*, we just never do what we're *told*.



Fuck off.

If you'd be so kind, old boy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck off.
> 
> If you'd be so kind, old boy.



I said "often", not "all the time", cuntlugs!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I said "often", not "all the time"



Typical anarchist, sticking to the rules.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2014)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Typical anarchist, sticking to the rules.



Internally-agreed rules, not society's rules, maaan!!!


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm an anarchist, and I doubt you know what I think.
> And "we", btw? Royal "we", or are you speaking for others without their permission?



I was trying to say I didn't think the finger pointing of certain heavily badged Anarchists really fitted their alleged beliefs. But hey, I didn't make the point well enough and it's not helpful to generalise. So I apologise to the wider Anarchist community and withdraw the remarks.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> mere plathitudes



I'm Donne with this.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I was trying to say I didn't think the finger pointing of certain heavily badged Anarchists really fitted their alleged beliefs. But hey, I didn't make the point well enough and it's not helpful to generalise. So I apologise to the wider Anarchist community and withdraw the remarks.



as every old punk knows, it's shirt not a badge







we don't need no stinkin badges


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> as every old punk knows, it's shirt not a badge
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's just making ironing a right chore.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 8, 2014)

Idris2002 said:


> I'm Donne with this.



I knew this thread would Goethe hell in a handbasket.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> That's just making ironing a right chore.



Oh the ironing...


----------



## laptop (Oct 8, 2014)

goldenecitrone said:


> I knew this thread would Goethe hell in a handbasket.



Haven't we Sappho enough?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> I was trying to say I didn't think the finger pointing of certain heavily badged Anarchists really fitted their alleged beliefs. But hey, I didn't make the point well enough and it's not helpful to generalise. So I apologise to the wider Anarchist community and withdraw the remarks.



As (I think?) one of those you describe as a "heavily badged" Anarchist  I'm just a little intrigued by your position that espousing left-libertarian ideology somehow precludes any observation of poor parenting. Personally I'd say that expecting due care of the vulnerable and defenceless is entirely consistent with a "progressive" world-view FWIW.

Just my twopennyworth, but I really don't think you cover yourself in glory when you talk about other folks' "alleged beliefs".


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> As (I think?) one of those you describe as a "heavily badged" Anarchist  I'm just a little intrigued by your position that espousing left-libertarian ideology somehow precludes any observation of poor parenting. Personally I'd say that expecting due care of the vulnerable and defenceless is entirely consistent with a "progressive" world-view FWIW.
> 
> Just my twopennyworth, but I really don't think you cover yourself in glory when you talk about other folks' "alleged beliefs".


 
You are not merely observing poor parenting.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You are not merely observing poor parenting.


Go on then...if you have to...


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Go on then...if you have to...



You know that I am doing no such thing as saying left-libertarianism precludes observation of poor parenting. 

But fine feel free to 'observe' it in any case you wish. If you can put aside the nasty jokes and the class based insinuations I'll leave you to your seven year old obsession.

Can you? Can you say take the 'No More McCann Jokes' challenge?


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You know that I am doing no such thing as saying left-libertarianism precludes observation of poor parenting.
> 
> But fine feel free to 'observe' it in any case you wish. If you can put aside the nasty jokes and the class based insinuations I'll leave you to your seven year old obsession.
> 
> Can you? Can you say take the 'No More McCann Jokes' challenge?



Tell you what, I'll happily take the "No More McCann Jokes" challenge, and use my best efforts to persuade brogdale (and any others you care to mention) to take it too, if in exchange you (and others if possible) will take the "stop being a disengenuous cunt accusing people of doing ridiculous shit they haven't done just because they don't happen to agree 100% with you" challenge.

Deal?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Tell you what, I'll happily take the "No More McCann Jokes" challenge, and use my best efforts to persuade brogdale (and any others you care to mention) to take it too, if in exchange you (and others if possible) will take the "stop being a disengenuous cunt accusing people of doing ridiculous shit they haven't done just because they don't happen to agree 100% with you" challenge.
> 
> Deal?



Nice, but what on earth have I accused  either of you of that you haven't done?

Considering I've just been accused laughably of saying that progressives aren't/shouldn't be interested in poor parenting you can take the outrage and shove it somewhere cosy.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

And you have so far called me idiot, twat and cunt. Which is very hurtful.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Still looking?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> You know that I am doing no such thing as saying left-libertarianism precludes observation of poor parenting.
> 
> But fine feel free to 'observe' it in any case you wish. If you can put aside the nasty jokes and the class based insinuations I'll leave you to your seven year old obsession.
> 
> Can you? Can you say take the 'No More McCann Jokes' challenge?


You know what; I will feel free to make any observation I choose, thank-you very much...well...after all, I am a ("*heavily badged*") anarchist.

And, on the topic of challenges, how about you having a go at substantiating some of your claims, eh? Show me where I've made "nasty jokes" or "class-based insinuations" and we'll have a grown-up discussion. Otherwise...why not try spending a little time reading-up a little on the topic of anarchism; you seem a little confused about the ideology.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Nice, but what on earth have I accused  either of you of that you haven't done?
> 
> Considering I've just been accused laughably of saying that progressives aren't/shouldn't be interested in poor parenting you can take the outrage and shove it somewhere cosy.



What you've done, consistantly and repeatedly, is make snidey insinuations that a whole bunch of people, generally unnamed, have all done various horrible things, some of which one individual may have done, but usually, IMO, which absolutely nobody has done. You don't even have the courage or the integrity to name names and be explicit about your accusations.



Mr Moose said:


> And you have so far called me idiot, twat and cunt. Which is very hurtful.



And you have called me (and others, not explicitly named) certain heavily badged "Anarchists" and referred to me as "pompous".

I find both of those hurtful too 

ETA: insinuations, not innuendoes, though it wouldn't surprise me if you started making those next


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

But you is pompous.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> You know what; I will feel free to make any observation I choose, thank-you very much...well...after all, I am a ("*heavily badged*") anarchist.
> 
> And, on the topic of challenges, how about you having a go at substantiating some of your claims, eh? Show me where I've made "nasty jokes" or "class-based insinuations" and we'll have a grown-up discussion. Otherwise...why not try spending a little time reading-up a little on the topic of anarchism; you seem a little confused about the ideology.



Do you think this is the sort of badge he's talking about?



I don't have one of these, do you?


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> But you is pompous.



In your opinion (and that's fine; you're entitled to hold and express that opinion).

In my opinion, you're the various things I've referred to you as.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

Seriously, let's call it a score draw.  I'm sure I have explained my POV. Doesn't need repeating. 

We came into it again because this unhappy woman had sadly killed herself. A grim thing to consider. 

The case doesn't seem ready to fade away so I'm sure it'll be up for debate in the future when it's ripples next spread out.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Seriously, let's call it a score draw.  I'm sure I have explained my POV. Doesn't need repeating.
> 
> *We came into it again because this unhappy woman had sadly killed herself. A grim thing to consider.*
> 
> The case doesn't seem ready to fade away so I'm sure it'll be up for debate in the future when it's ripples next spread out.



Indeed. No doubt we'll have further opportunities to call each other names when this unfortunate case comes up again in the future.


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Oct 8, 2014)

andysays said:


> Andrew Hertford
> 
> In case you haven't seen my previous post, I'll repeat that I've removed what you've described as inappropriate and asked you to do the same.



I'm not going to remove it just because _I_ described it as inappropriate, but I'd be happy to do so if you agree that it was.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Seriously, let's call it a score draw.



 Classic cop-out. 
If you insist on such a reductive sporting analogy, you lost 3 - 0...and were lucky to get the 0!


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2014)

brogdale said:


> Classic cop-out.
> If you insist on such a reductive sporting analogy, you lost 3 - 0...and were lucky to get the 0!



Oh dear. How sad.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 9, 2014)

Mr Moose said:


> Oh dear. How sad.


I had an inkling that you wouldn't actually attempt to substantiate your claims of "nasty jokes" or "class-based insinuations".
So...how's the reading going?


----------



## andysays (Oct 9, 2014)

brogdale said:


> I had an inkling that you wouldn't actually attempt to substantiate your claims of "nasty jokes" or "class-based insinuations".
> So...how's the reading going?



Don't worry, as Moose says, there will be plenty of opportunities when the rematch comes around (and it will  )

And if it was a score draw this time, we have the away goals going into the home leg


----------



## 1927 (Oct 11, 2014)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-madeleine-mccann-prosecutor-vowed-4417866

New hope, or squeaky bum time?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 11, 2014)

1927 said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/new-madeleine-mccann-prosecutor-vowed-4417866
> 
> New hope, or squeaky bum time?



It doesn't seem especially fair for the three names to be in the public domain. Only one or none of them could have had anything to do with it, so at least two enduring (less so in the case of the dead fella) unwarranted speculation.


----------



## ShiningInLuz (Oct 14, 2014)

Does anyone know what became of the human blood found on a pavement/wall outside of Quinta Dos Figos, a site in Luz about 500m north of the McCann apartment, on 6th May 2007?

The story write up is at shininginluz.wordpress.com, but I'm really trying find out if anyone has an answer, as searching for "blood" and "Madeleine McCann" is pointless in this instance.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2014)

I imagine it got washed off after they'd taken a sample


----------



## ShiningInLuz (Oct 15, 2014)

OK, to clarify, the blood was proved to be human, on the scene  3 samples went into the police files, one swab from each of the 3 spots.  The trail of what happened to the samples is weird.  Gonçalo Amaral sent a fax, dated 26 Sep 2007 asking the Lisbon lab to hurry up with an analysis of the samples.   So human blood found near to the crime scene had (probably) not been analysed by that date.

The remains on the wall/pavement may have been removed by natural causes or by human intervention, but of that I have no interest.

I'm trying to find out that fate of the blood samples that went into the police evidence file.  Any takers?  Human blood, close to apartment 5A, picked up on 6th May.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 15, 2014)

andysays said:


> we don't need no stinkin badges



Punk can fuck off n'all.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 15, 2014)

Andrew Hertford said:


> I'm not going to remove it just because _I_ described it as inappropriate, but I'd be happy to do so if you agree that it was.


Now who's playing the anarchist?

In both senses.


----------



## ShiningInLuz (Nov 6, 2014)

Help me out here folks.

I am reading that up to 10 people may have been made arguidos and/or witnesses by SY.  These are, according to the reports, previously non-interviewed, or perhaps interviewed folks.  They include Ocean Club employees and residents of Luz alike, who appear to have committed the crime of being the wrong place (Luz) at the wrong time (when Madeleine disappeared).  Ouch.

Plus some of these people's phones were in Luz at the time.  (Yes, people in Luz had phones in 2007).  (By the way, they also had cars.  They did not need to walk through the centre of Luz with a dead or kidnapped child in their hands, they had cars).

So what is going on with the DNA and up to ten new people ensnared into this plot?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 21, 2017)

This is up on my feeds like a rash again this week.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This is up on my feeds like a rash again this week.


Ten years on the run


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Ten years on the run



I'm hoping this NASA announcement tomorrow will clear everything up for good.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This is up on my feeds like a rash again this week.



Yes, the armchair detectives are loving it.


----------



## 1927 (Feb 21, 2017)

Surely the issue this week is te fact that the McCann's are using the Maddie fund to finance their latest court battle, a use that I am sure most f not all of those who donated were not envisaging. Interestingly, the Maddie Fund is not a charity, but a non profit making limited company! although how no profit is defined when all revenues are donations would be interesting. Furthermore, the intended aims of the company are very broad and all monies could actually be used to pay for a lavish lifestyle for the McCann's, perish the thought!


----------



## belboid (Feb 21, 2017)

I doubt it could be a charity, it's aims won't be in the list of acceptable charitable activities.


----------



## T & P (Feb 21, 2017)

I want to buy that Portuguese detective's book now.


----------



## gosub (Feb 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Ten years on the run


Still behind Lucan in the hide and seek championship


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 21, 2017)

coincidentally, an ageing peter pan christian pop star and friend of Billy graham was on holiday just up the road at the same time. in his very private villa.


----------



## gosub (Feb 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> coincidentally, an ageing peter pan christian pop star and friend of Billy graham was on holiday just up the road at the same time. in his very private villa.


The personal commiserations from a holidaying Clement Freud were bad enough


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 21, 2017)

oh yes, him as well


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 21, 2017)

Sorry for the piss taking on a thread about the likely death of a child but this whole subject breached any good taste limits years ago


----------



## 1927 (Feb 21, 2017)

belboid said:


> I doubt it could be a charity, it's aims won't be in the list of acceptable charitable activities.


No it couldn't,  but that fact notwithstanding  think the use of the monies raised for supporting McCann's continual court battles is more than a bit off!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 21, 2017)

I have said it before, but it is worth repeating. If members of the great unwashed had buggered off to dinner, leaving their children on their own, social services would have been meeting them at the airport, to remove the other children.

The Portuguese police said recently that although there is not enough evidence, at present, to prosecute, the McCanns are still regarded as suspects.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 21, 2017)

gosub said:


> The personal commiserations from a holidaying Clement Freud were bad enough



Mrs Sas knew Clement Freud quite well. He lived on Islay at one point, and shopped in the shop where she worked. Her view was he was a gentleman, unfailingly courteous and pleasant.


----------



## wiskey (Feb 21, 2017)

1927 said:


> Surely the issue this week is te fact that the McCann's are using the Maddie fund to finance their latest court battle, a use that I am sure most f not all of those who donated were not envisaging. Interestingly, the Maddie Fund is not a charity, but a non profit making limited company! although how no profit is defined when all revenues are donations would be interesting. Furthermore, the intended aims of the company are very broad and all monies could actually be used to pay for a lavish lifestyle for the McCann's, perish the thought!



I find it hard to believe that anyone has donated to that for at least the last nine years!


----------



## 1927 (Feb 21, 2017)

wiskey said:


> I find it hard to believe that anyone has donated to that for at least the last nine years!


You'd be surprised.
and the company still has a surplus of circa £0.5M.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 21, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Mrs Sas knew Clement Freud quite well. He lived on Islay at one point, and shopped in the shop where she worked. Her view was he was a gentleman, unfailingly courteous and pleasant.



It's fortunate she didn't also consider him a rapist. Others did. Just goes to show how little appearances count. A bit like in this case.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 21, 2017)

I don't know why some of you are liking my post. I'm not for the unwillingness to preserve the assumption of innocence, the endless snidey jokes and the laughable 'class' analysis.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 22, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have said it before, but it is worth repeating. If members of the great unwashed had buggered off to dinner, leaving their children on their own, social services would have been meeting them at the airport, to remove the other children.



Like all the hundreds of thousands of working-class kids who used to be left sleeping in Chalets at Butlins/Pontins while the rest of the family were at the Bingo or the Disco hundreds of yards away? The ones alerted to their crying kids by the Chalet Patrol announcing 'There is a child crying in Chalet J73'? Or if the 'Turn' was performing  the chalet number would be placed on the crying child Board with the high-tech flashing lights? Those ones?

I remember all those early morning, Social Services raids like yesterday.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Like all the hundreds of thousands of working-class kids who used to be left sleeping in Chalets at Butlins/Pontins while the rest of the family were at the Bingo or the Disco hundreds of yards away? The ones alerted to their crying kids by the Chalet Patrol announcing 'There is a child crying in Chalet J73'? Or if the 'Turn' was performing  the chalet number would be placed on the crying child Board with the high-tech flashing lights? Those ones?
> 
> I remember all those early morning, Social Services raids like yesterday.


Were you in tears in j73?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> I don't know why some of you are liking my post. I'm not for the unwillingness to preserve the assumption of innocence, the endless snidey jokes and the laughable 'class' analysis.


Sympathy likes


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Sympathy likes



I know those. I've given you a few.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> I know those. I've given you a few.


You always were stingy


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Like all the hundreds of thousands of working-class kids who used to be left sleeping in Chalets at Butlins/Pontins while the rest of the family were at the Bingo or the Disco hundreds of yards away? The ones alerted to their crying kids by the Chalet Patrol announcing 'There is a child crying in Chalet J73'? Or if the 'Turn' was performing  the chalet number would be placed on the crying child Board with the high-tech flashing lights? Those ones?
> 
> I remember all those early morning, Social Services raids like yesterday.



Don't worry Liam, I doubt many of those concerned about 'class' in this issue will have ever experienced the debauched chaos of a holiday at Butlins.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Were you in tears in j73?



I was on the Chalet Patrol mate.

One lad. One lass (usually a Nursery nurse). One walkie-talkie.

You'd have a list with a) the chalets to listen at and b) which venue the parents were at. Basically you got paid overtime rates for walking laps of the camp, chatting and listening for crying kids. All par for the course back in the day.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> I was on the Chalet Patrol mate.
> 
> One lad. One lass (usually a Nursery nurse). One walkie-talkie.
> 
> You'd have a list with a) the chalets to listen at and b) which venue the parents were at. Basically you got paid overtime rates for walking laps of the camp, chatting and listening for crying kids. All par for the course back in the day.


They haven't offered any babysitting or childcare services at their resorts for years now.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 22, 2017)

brogdale said:


> They haven't offered any babysitting or childcare services at their resorts for years now.



yes.



LiamO said:


> All par for the course *back in the day.*


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> yes.


Yes, but 2007 "_back in the day_"?

Apples & oranges?


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 22, 2017)

was at the SWP do at skegness miners camp in 19xx which seemed very much like pontins/butlins. the veggie option for dinner was the same as everyone else, but no meat and a splot of mushy lentils.
i never followed the McCann thing, what is the general feeling among the populace? did the parents harm her? was she kidnapped etc?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Yes, but 2007 "_back in the day_"?
> 
> Apples & oranges?


Indeed. 'Back in the day' my parents left us in the car outside the pub with a packet of crisps and a bottle of irn bru. I'd never have dreamt of doing that with my kids. 

I think it's entirely plausible that Maddie wandered off looking for her parents, as the subject of the latest story proposes. I don't think it's something they should be rubbishing if they are at all interested in solving the case.


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 22, 2017)

KP crisps, ther brewery's pop in a bottle and a long wait outside.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2017)

It should also be noted, my Dad was having a few pints and intended to get back in the car and drive with his family, sans rear seatbelts, on winding  roads!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> KP crisps, ther brewery's pop in a bottle and a long wait outside.


Did your cheapskate folks not even put a pickled egg in the bag of _Golden Wonder _for yo_u?_


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> It should also be noted, my Dad was having a few pints and intended to get back in the car and drive with his family, sans rear seatbelts, on winding  roads!


Dad : "_I always drive better after a few..."_


----------



## badseed (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> KP crisps, ther brewery's pop in a bottle and a long wait outside.



"The barman said you can come in and have some crisps if you're quiet"


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 22, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Did your cheapskate folks not even put a pickled egg in the bag of _Golden Wonder _for yo_u?_



no, he was clueless about snacks and food in general (he was from kilmarnock!) he did give us cigs tho!


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> i never followed the McCann thing, what is the general feeling among the populace? did the parents harm her? was she kidnapped etc?



You will find this thread summarises this as effectively as anything else. Happy reading!


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 22, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> It should also be noted, my Dad was having a few pints and intended to get back in the car and drive with his family, sans rear seatbelts, on winding  roads!



Pah, mine let me sit on his lap and steer back down the country lanes from the old post pub..... from the age of about 6 or 7


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 22, 2017)

My dad used to leave me locked in the car while he went (sober) to meetings with community activists in areas that had recently experienced 'riots'. Fucking champagne socialist


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2017)

badseed said:


> "The barman said you can come in and have some crisps if you're quiet"


We had to sit quietly behind the meat raffle chest freezer.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> was at the SWP do at skegness miners camp in 19xx which seemed very much like pontins/butlins. the veggie option for dinner was the same as everyone else, but no meat and a splot of mushy lentils.
> i never followed the McCann thing, what is the general feeling among the populace? did the parents harm her? was she kidnapped etc?



Two camps really,

They obv killed Maddy and are playing us for fools v presumption of innocence and they couldn't keep that up.

Middle class arrivistes using their social power to get spotlight others couldn't v woman with scouse accent who puts kids in Everton top is just fighting for her kids.

It's a giggle v it's nothing to laugh about.

Food at Butlins was, however good the craic, flipping awful.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 22, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Two camps really,
> 
> They obv killed Maddy and are playing us for fools v presumption of innocence and they couldn't keep that up.
> 
> ...


What's wrong with an Everton top?


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

dessiato said:


> What's wrong with an Everton top?



Nothing, nothing I give a toffee about, geddit? See what I've done there, oh forget it...


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 22, 2017)

The amount of hatred towards the McCanns on social media is pretty shocking.  Even after all these years.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> no, he was clueless about snacks and food in general (he was from kilmarnock!) he did give us cigs tho!



Lol.

I was at a funeral at the weekend down in Co. Kerry. My cousins were reminding me of the special treatment I got. Cos i'd had a bad chest as a young child, from about the age of 12 my Auntie Mollie used to hide a daily bottle of Guinness up the chimney in the bedroom for me to 'build myself up'. A bottle of guinness and some cigs for the asthmatic child!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Lol.
> 
> I was at a funeral at the weekend down in Co. Kerry. My cousins were reminding me of the special treatment I got. Cos i'd had a bad chest as a young child, from about the age of 12 my Auntie Mollie used to hide a daily bottle of Guinness up the chimney in the bedroom for me to 'build myself up'. A bottle of guinness and some cigs for the asthmatic child!


Did it work?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> The amount of hatred towards the McCanns on social media is pretty shocking.  Even after all these years.


I think, on the contrary, that this shows social media has not in fact eroded people's attention spans.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 22, 2017)

Well I smoked for 35 years and still like a bottle of Guinness.

Another cousin of mine was a very sickly child. So sick that his mother stated despairingly "Ach I don't know if you'll ever be able to smoke son",

She was dead two years later from lung cancer (he was 11 when she passed).

He never smoked though.


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 22, 2017)

It used to be SOP for nursing mums to be given a bottle of stout a day to build up their strength, post-giving birth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Well I smoked for 35 years and still like a bottle of Guinness.
> 
> Another cousin of mine was a very sickly child. So sick that his mother stated despairingly "Ach I don't know if you'll ever be able to smoke son",
> 
> ...


Pat, an auld Irishman I used to drink with, was told by the doctor he could only have one bottle of guinness a day and was downcast until I pointed out the medico hadn't specified the size.

RIP pat


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 22, 2017)

they'd still be using the 'guiness is good for you' slogan on their ads if the nazis of health hadn't been unleashed by blair


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Like all the hundreds of thousands of working-class kids who used to be left sleeping in Chalets at Butlins/Pontins while the rest of the family were at the Bingo or the Disco hundreds of yards away? The ones alerted to their crying kids by the Chalet Patrol announcing 'There is a child crying in Chalet J73'? Or if the 'Turn' was performing  the chalet number would be placed on the crying child Board with the high-tech flashing lights? Those ones?
> 
> I remember all those early morning, Social Services raids like yesterday.



Give us another war story.


----------



## petee (Feb 22, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> It used to be SOP for nursing mums to be given a bottle of stout a day to build up their strength, post-giving birth.


my mother, an OBGYN nurse, did that. she also administered heroin. i mean, in the right circumstances, not to nursing mothers. 
i teach kids now, ages 10-14, and regale them with the story of how she gave me hot toddies for a chest cold when i was their age and younger, the genuine article, whiskey and all.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 22, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Mrs Sas knew Clement Freud quite well. He lived on Islay at one point, and shopped in the shop where she worked. Her view was he was a gentleman, unfailingly courteous and pleasant.



People said the same of Eric Gill.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

Savile was a notoriously unpleasant weirdo who quite a few people reported to the Police and they still did nothing. So unsurprising that Freud might slip under the radar by just appearing polite.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I think, on the contrary, that this shows social media has not in fact eroded people's attention spans.



If not improved their reasoning.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 22, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Savile was a notoriously unpleasant weirdo who quite a few people reported to the Police and they still did nothing. So unsurprising that Freud might slip under the radar by just appearing polite.



Savile hid behind his connections and work for charitable causes.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 22, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Savile hid behind his connections and work for charitable causes.



Yes, we know. It was a comment on Freud or those commenting upon Freud's 'normality'.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Feb 22, 2017)

LiamO said:


> Lol.
> 
> I was at a funeral at the weekend down in Co. Kerry. My cousins were reminding me of the special treatment I got. Cos i'd had a bad chest as a young child, from about the age of 12 my Auntie Mollie used to hide a daily bottle of Guinness up the chimney in the bedroom for me to 'build myself up'. A bottle of guinness and some cigs for the asthmatic child!




I'm reliably informed by elderly relatives that Gunness was used in the TB sanitoriums to build patients up....in the 50s and 60s
It's good for you..


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 22, 2017)

Derail though it may be, all this nostalgia about being left in cars by parents in the pub rings a few 45 year old plus memory-bells


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Feb 22, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> I'm reliably informed by elderly relatives that Gunness was used in the TB sanitoriums to build patients up....in the 50s and 60s
> It's good for you..



1999.  In hospital having broken a lot of bones in a car crash, the nurses apologised that they could no longer provide Guinness, but they could clear some space in the ward's medical fridge should someone be good enough to bring some in.  Plenty of iron


----------



## catinthehat (Feb 22, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> was at the SWP do at skegness miners camp in 19xx which seemed very much like pontins/butlins. the veggie option for dinner was the same as everyone else, but no meat and a splot of mushy lentils.
> i never followed the McCann thing, what is the general feeling among the populace? did the parents harm her? was she kidnapped etc?


I also experienced a few of those.  Veggie breakfast - remove value spam from watery tinned tomato by hand and shout 'anyone want this vegi persons spam'.  Interactive Oktober made up for the catering though.


----------



## Sue (Feb 22, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> I'm reliably informed by elderly relatives that Gunness was used in the TB sanitoriums to build patients up....in the 50s and 60s
> It's good for you..


My Dad nearly died of pneumonia when he was two and his mother was told by the doctor/hospital to give him Guinness to build him up.

There used to be some weird licensing thing in Scotland (was a long time ago I worked in a pub so can't quite recall the details) where it was legal to sell stout to parents for consumption by under fives on the premises.


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 23, 2017)

petee said:


> my mother, an OBGYN nurse, did that. she also administered heroin. i mean, in the right circumstances, not to nursing mothers



distributing the tin foil and lighters to post-partum mothers may not be so bad, pre-stitching! 
nurse: 'congrats, its triplets! now, put this rolled fiver in your gob and breathe deeply!'


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 23, 2017)

on a boozy nostalgia do, my mam told me she got guinness when i was born and she claims the reason i like it was cos i had got it via her milk! (didnt have the heart to remind her i was brought up on formula!).


----------



## Shirl (Feb 23, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Derail though it may be, all this nostalgia about being left in cars by parents in the pub rings a few 45 year old plus memory-bells


I was another one left in the pub car park, back in the 1950's. There weren't as many cars on the road then and I remember there not being many other cars around when I was sat in the back with my crips and pop. It happened mostly when we went on holiday to Devon and they would explore the pubs in the evening.


----------



## trashpony (Feb 23, 2017)

Shirl said:


> I was another one left in the pub car park, back in the 1950's. There weren't as many cars on the road then and I remember there not being many other cars around when I was sat in the back with my crips and pop. It happened mostly when we went on holiday to Devon and they would explore the pubs in the evening.


My mum and dad used to leave me and my sisters in the car when they went to the pub in the 1970s.


----------



## Shirl (Feb 23, 2017)

trashpony said:


> My mum and dad used to leave me and my sisters in the car when they went to the pub in the 1970s.


I was thinking that was quite recent but then realised it's 2017 so not that recent  It's still surprising though, I wonder if it still happens.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 23, 2017)

My mother used to leave me and my brother in the pram with the dog tied to the pram outside shops .


----------



## trashpony (Feb 23, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> My mother used to leave me and my brother in the pram with the dog tied to the pram outside shops .


My gran forgot about me outside Tesco once and went home on the bus  


Shirl said:


> I was thinking that was quite recent but then realised it's 2017 so not that recent  It's still surprising though, I wonder if it still happens.



I don't think so - there was a dad who was prosecuted for leaving his kid in the car when he went into the chemist last year. I know people who won't even pay for petrol without taking their kids into the petrol station with them


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 23, 2017)

.


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 23, 2017)

apologies for totally diverting this serious thread about a missing child into pub car park nostalgia!


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 23, 2017)

trashpony said:


> I know people who won't even pay for petrol without taking their kids into the petrol station with them



I once did that (left the bairn aged about 3 while I went in and paid for petrol) and came out to some busybody tutting and fussing about him. I can't have been gone more than two minutes, I was within sight of the car throughout, and he didn't have access to the car keys, a Staffie, any radioactive material, etc.

He's 8 now and I wouldn't dream of subjecting myself to the whiny tantrum I'd get if I made him get out of his seat and come and stand next to me while I queued up to pay.


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 23, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> apologies for totally diverting this serious thread about a missing child into pub car park nostalgia!



I think the case is so far from being relevant at this point that the concept of 'diverting' the discussion is fairly meaningless.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 23, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> I'm reliably informed by elderly relatives that Gunness was used in the TB sanitoriums to build patients up....in the 50s and 60s
> It's good for you..



My mum was prescribed a bottle of Guinness a day after having me, for anaemia.
I think that's where I got the taste from!
Cue this be the verse!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 23, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> My mum was prescribed a bottle of Guinness a day after having me, for anaemia.
> I think that's where I got the taste from!
> Cue this be the verse!


As long as we don't have to put up with someone posting that awful droning drivel 'they tuck you up, your mum and dad' in pitiful response


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 23, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> As long as we don't have to put up with someone posting that awful droning drivel 'they tuck you up, your mum and dad' in pitiful response



I see you still have a cake there. Did you enjoy eating it?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 23, 2017)

She was a lovely mother.
When I became a rebellious teenager she used to laughingly point a carving knife towards me and say, 'Do us all a favour and run onto this!'
I hope she was joking?


----------



## wiskey (Feb 23, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> My mother used to leave me and my brother in the pram with the dog tied to the pram outside shops .



I do this, I also wantonly abandon my children more than 2" from me in department stores ... nobody has stolen any of them yet!


----------



## wiskey (Feb 23, 2017)

trashpony said:


> My gran forgot about me outside Tesco once and went home on the bus



My mum forgot me outside the postoffice in my pram (1980), got home and only realised when she thought 'it was very easy walking up the hill then'


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 23, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> I see you still have a cake there. Did you enjoy eating it?


If it's still there it's being saved for later


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 23, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> It's fortunate she didn't also consider him a rapist. Others did. Just goes to show how little appearances count. A bit like in this case.



Indeed. One one must speak as one finds though.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 23, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Indeed. One one must speak as one finds though.



Really? I find it's better to think it through first. You might think you 'find' the McCanns guilty as hell and of course they might be, but innocent til proven guilty is the cornerstone of law.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 23, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Really? I find it's better to think it through first. You might think you 'find' the McCanns guilty as hell and of course they might be, but innocent til proven guilty is the cornerstone of law.


No it isn't, it's that laws are made by the monarch in parliament


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 23, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Really? I find it's better to think it through first. You might think you 'find' the McCanns guilty as hell and of course they might be, but innocent til proven guilty is the cornerstone of law.



My comment was re Mrs Sas and Clement Freud.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 23, 2017)

trashpony said:


> I don't think so - there was a dad who was prosecuted for leaving his kid in the car when he went into the chemist last year. *I know people who won't even pay for petrol without taking their kids into the petrol station with them*



There's always the 'drive-off' option  

Surely it's better to be caught up with for stealing fuel  (as you inevitably will be .... eventually  ) then to be tabloid-monstored for abandoning your kids for 6 minutes!!!


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 23, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> No it isn't, it's that laws are made by the monarch in parliament



There is a thing that is 'the law' that can be spoken of whoever grants it. Not sure what your point is.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 23, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> My comment was re Mrs Sas and Clement Freud.



Ok, sorry, I thought there was a point to your Freud anecdote in the context of the thread.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 23, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Ok, sorry, I thought there was a point to your Freud anecdote in the context of the thread.



Nope, just a comment was all.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 24, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> apologies for totally diverting this serious thread about a missing child into pub car park nostalgia!



At least it seems to have prevcented another round of spleen renting and bile retching about these misfortunate parents.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> There is a thing that is 'the law' that can be spoken of whoever grants it. Not sure what your point is.


The point is how that law is made.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The point is how that law is made.



Even your facepalm is whiney. Your point isn't interesting or on the point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Even your facepalm is whiney. Your point isn't interesting or on the point.


I have a point. You have ad hominems.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I have a point. You have ad hominems.



This is no time to bring my ancestors into it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> There is a thing that is 'the law' that can be spoken of whoever grants it. Not sure what your point is.


You like your "the law" now but you weren't so keen on it earlier.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You like your "the law" now but you weren't so keen on it earlier.



Executive or judiciary? Not really sure what you are on about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Executive or judiciary? Not really sure what you are on about.


No, you never are

Even terms you introduce to the thread baffle you


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 24, 2017)

Pickman's I know you love this dreary year in year out zero sum game of oneupmanship/pedantry and pack hunting, but it's just frittering away your precious minutes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Pickman's I know you love this dreary year in year out zero sum game of oneupmanship/pedantry and pack hunting, but it's just frittering away your precious minutes.


Yeh? I'm on the bus going to work. My precious minutes today will be frittered away doing fuck all whatever I do. But please, do go back to where you say 'innocent till proven guilty is the cornerstone of law' and reread from there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

i didn't think it would take you this long, Mr Moose


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 24, 2017)

I think you are assuming cornerstone has to refer to creation rather than practice. But as you well know I was referring to its importance as a principle.

Never fails to amaze how many arse licking likers you get.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> I think you are assuming cornerstone has to refer to creation rather than practice. But as you well know I was referring to its importance as a principle.
> 
> Never fails to amaze how many arse licking likers you get.


i think that the principle of innocent till proven guilty can be seen as a cornerstone of - in your own phrase 'the law': but innocent till proven guilty the cornerstone _of law_? no.

if no one likes you don't blame me: or them.


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 24, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> She was a lovely mother. When I became a rebellious teenager she used to laughingly point a carving knife towards me and say, 'Do us all a favour and run onto this!' I hope she was joking?



this has to be the new diversion away from the other diversion? mine chased our kid out of the house with a kids cricket bat, he ran out the front, up the side alley and in through the backdoor which he locked. needless to say, mumsy smashed the window with the bat to unlock it (and cut herself in the process) whilst he cowered behind a locked toilet door till she calmed down (which usually took an estimated 3 or 4 days). it must have been all that Guinness!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 24, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> this has to be the new diversion away from the other diversion? mine chased our kid out of the house with a kids cricket bat, he ran out the front, up the side alley and in through the backdoor which he locked. needless to say, mumsy smashed the window with the bat to unlock it (and cut herself in the process) whilst he cowered behind a locked toilet door till she calmed down (which usually took an estimated 3 or 4 days). it must have been all that Guinness!



Ah... nostalgia, you don't get mothers like that nowadays.

Mine belted me black and blue with a hairbrush for nicking her fags.

Have any of you had that moment when the physical dominance of the father is suddenly overcome by the increasing physicality of the son? The point where the father abandons corporal punishment, because he fells it may lead to a fight that he would lose?


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 24, 2017)

fraid the daddy didnae stick around for very long but i doubt many men would have stood up to her! imagine something like Biff McBacon but really hard!
edit: favoured weapon?


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 24, 2017)

well, me mam knackered this thread much like she did our kid!


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 24, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ah... nostalgia, you don't get mothers like that nowadays.
> 
> Mine belted me black and blue with a hairbrush for nicking her fags.
> 
> Have any of you had that moment when the physical dominance of the father is suddenly overcome by the increasing physicality of the son? The point where the father abandons corporal punishment, because he fells it may lead to a fight that he would lose?


Yup but to be fair my father rarely hit me but I do remember when about 14/15 and big for my age that I had done something which caused him to intervene physically and there was this stalemate of pushing and shoving. I could see in his eyes that he knew he couldn't win , at least within the margins of pushing and shoving, but equally I knew that it was not necessary for me to win .


----------



## malatesta32 (Feb 24, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Have any of you had that moment when the physical dominance of the father is suddenly overcome by the increasing physicality of the son? The point where the father abandons corporal punishment, because he fells it may lead to a fight that he would lose?



charles bukowski talks about the horrible abuse he suffered at his fathers hands - who was clearly a psycho - and the moment he popped his pop one in Ham On Rye (and other places - he recycled a lot) which was clearly a liberating moment. didnae experience it meself.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 25, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Mine belted me black and blue with a hairbrush for* nicking her fags*.



I, for one, admire her self-control... whilst also regretting her lack of social responsibility. She had a perfect opportunity to rid the world of one more Tory... and bottled it.


----------



## LiamO (Feb 25, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> Yup but to be fair my father rarely hit me but I do remember when about 14/15 and big for my age that I had done something which caused him to intervene physically and there was this stalemate of pushing and shoving. I could see in his eyes that he knew he couldn't win , at least within the margins of pushing and shoving, *but equally I knew that it was not necessary for me to win *.



That is as admirable a statement as I have ever read on here.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Feb 25, 2017)

LiamO said:


> I, for one, admire her self-control... whilst also regretting her lack of social responsibility. She had a perfect opportunity to rid the world of one more Tory... and bottled it.


My late mother was a Conservative party member all of her life. I, on the other hand am not.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Mar 13, 2017)

Another £85K of madness for the UK police no less.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 13, 2017)

We send the EU 350m a week! Lets use that to find Maddie instead.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 13, 2017)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Another £85K of madness for the UK police no less.


 
And just in time for the plod summer holiday season.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 13, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ah... nostalgia, you don't get mothers like that nowadays.
> 
> Mine belted me black and blue with a hairbrush for nicking her fags.
> 
> Have any of you had that moment when the physical dominance of the father is suddenly overcome by the increasing physicality of the son? The point where the father abandons corporal punishment, because he fells it may lead to a fight that he would lose?


Happened with my mum aged 12.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 14, 2017)

My mum's partner would sometimes lose his temper with me and my sister and hit us. Such behaviour never induced me to respect him, or even fear him really. I did however come to despise him at the time. These days I just wonder how a man with such a short fuse ever really enjoyed anything in life. Hitting kids is the mark of a clueless idiot who treats children like objects or animals rather than people. If striking other adults is no way to gain their respect, then why should that change when children are the targets of such abuse?

And it *is* abuse. If I ever have children, I like to think that I would never hit them. I have a three year old nephew, and the thought of me hitting him feels all wrong.

My mother on the other hand was perfectly able to effectively convey to me her displeasure whenever I seriously fucked up, without having to lay a finger on me. Effective enough that on at least one occasion she had to tell me to stop backing away from her.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 24, 2017)

but also today in the mail...


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 24, 2017)

NoXion said:


> If striking other adults is no way to gain their respect, then why should that change when children are the targets of such abuse?
> 
> And it *is* abuse.



Sadly, Children's Services disagree. As long as the abuse is 'reasonable chastisement' and leaves no marks, they're fine with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 24, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ah... nostalgia, you don't get mothers like that nowadays.
> 
> Mine belted me black and blue with a hairbrush for nicking her fags.
> 
> Have any of you had that moment when the physical dominance of the father is suddenly overcome by the increasing physicality of the son? The point where the father abandons corporal punishment, because he fells it may lead to a fight that he would lose?


i've noticed you've not tried to whack me since you adopted me.


----------



## pengaleng (Apr 24, 2017)

oh god is she missing STILL???? 

i dont watch news


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 24, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> oh god is she missing STILL????
> 
> i dont watch news


nor does she


----------



## 1927 (Apr 24, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> oh god is she missing STILL????
> 
> i dont watch news


Not missing as such, it's just no one knows where she's buried!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 24, 2017)

1927 said:


> Not missing as such, it's just no one knows where she's buried!


----------



## 1927 (Apr 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


>


Thats that sorted then!


----------



## Manter (Apr 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 105129
> 
> but also today in the mail...
> 
> View attachment 105130


The idea that a rich Arab family so want a little blonde baby that they have snatch squads operating in holiday resorts is both laughable and laughably racist.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 24, 2017)

I think we can also laugh PC Plod's ramblings out of court.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> nor does she



It's bizarre you are still getting lols out of this. It makes no difference to anything as so few people ever see it, but it is weird. What drives you on Pickman's?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 27, 2017)

police believe madeleine mccann might have a spiderweb facial tattoo and released this artist's impression


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 27, 2017)

Hilarious!


----------



## Sparkle Motion (Apr 27, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> oh god is she missing STILL????
> 
> i dont watch news


She's still selling newspapers. I have yet to see a Maddie thread on the Internet that ends well, or adds anything to understanding.


----------



## bluescreen (Apr 27, 2017)

Sparkle Motion said:


> She's still selling newspapers.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (May 25, 2017)

Amused by this 2nd hand book sticker


----------



## Ranbay (May 25, 2017)

What will you discover 


yes I saw the top bit also.


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 25, 2017)

Fucking hell - where is that from ?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 25, 2017)

The Works. its usually full of complete shite but its good for stationary and I'm told the kids books are decent value for money.


----------



## Corax (Jul 27, 2017)

*British boy not missing in same resort where Madeleine McCann vanished*

No other details known at this time

Madeleine McCann police squad called to Praia de Luz after Brit boy goes missing


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 27, 2017)

Corax said:


> *British boy not missing in same resort where Madeleine McCann vanished*
> 
> No other details known at this time
> 
> Madeleine McCann police squad called to Praia de Luz after Brit boy goes missing



Love the snazzy green shell suit. Perhaps they are coming back into fashion.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jul 27, 2017)

Clickbait. I'm furious. 

Don't look, everyone, it's just money in the Mirror's coffers.


----------



## donkyboy (Jul 27, 2017)

I got click baiteded


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2017)

Has anyone ever considered the possibility that nobody took the kid and she simply absconded on her own initiative to get away from her manifestly unfit parents?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 28, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Has anyone ever considered the possibility that nobody took the kid and she simply absconded on her own initiative to get away from her manifestly unfit parents?



And, is currently happily holidaying with a guy called Stanley?


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, is currently happily holidaying with a guy called Stanley?






ohhhhh my days i almost got tears over that one


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 28, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, is currently happily holidaying with a guy called Stanley?


Not sure about the happily


----------



## petee (Jul 28, 2017)

Corax said:


> *British boy not missing in same resort where Madeleine McCann vanished*
> 
> No other details known at this time
> 
> Madeleine McCann police squad called to Praia de Luz after Brit boy goes missing



for a sec thought it was an Onion headline


----------



## T & P (Aug 21, 2017)

Top of the UK section of Sky News Website tonight 

Hunt for Madeleine McCann needs more cash

Should we do a whip-round?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2017)

T & P said:


> Top of the UK section of Sky News Website tonight
> 
> Hunt for Madeleine McCann needs more cash
> 
> Should we do a whip-round?


Maybe a levy on all tapas bar orders?


----------



## T & P (Aug 22, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Maybe a levy on all tapas bar orders?


Extra 5p on the cover price of The Sun, Mail and Express.


----------



## Corax (Aug 22, 2017)

If they really want to find her, they should have some sort of publicity campaign so that people know she's gone missing.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 22, 2017)

T & P said:


> Extra 5p on the cover price of The Sun, Mail and Express.



Or just get a psychic to ask Diana.


----------



## davesgcr (Aug 22, 2017)

According to the Daily Fail - the £11m fund is exhausted , please for more dosh for one "last" research effort.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 22, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, is currently happily holidaying with a guy called Stanley?



The police are asking for extra funding, and Stanley has gone AWOL.

Coincidence?


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 24, 2017)

davesgcr said:


> According to the Daily Fail - *the £11m fund is exhausted *, please for more dosh for one "last" research effort.



What on?  

Lawyers and that? 

</back-from-pub drunk checked  before posting the above  >


----------



## Ted Striker (Aug 24, 2017)

Corax said:


> If they really want to find her, they should have some sort of publicity campaign so that people know she's gone missing.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 24, 2017)

I know some who knows someone who knows someone involved with this. The coppery have already long since made up their minds on this case and are taking it personally. I am sure you can work out what the filth think on this matter.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 24, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I know some who knows someone who knows someone involved with this. The coppery have already long since made up their minds on this case and are taking it personally. I am sure you can work out what the filth think on this matter.


I knew it, it was the one-armed man


----------



## malatesta32 (Aug 24, 2017)

the 1 armed man whose typos befoul #3336 you mean?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2017)

Given £11M has been spent so far I guess another £150K won't harm.

More money for Madeleine McCann search


----------



## Silas Loom (Sep 28, 2017)

Magic Maddy tree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Given £11M has been spent so far I goes another £150K won't harm.
> 
> More money for Madeleine McCann search


£11m which could've been spent on investigating crimes with perhaps less photogenic victims in this country, assaults on the elderly, burglaries, muggings etc. But no, eleven million pounds of taxpayers' money pissed away on jollies to portugal with fuck all to show for it.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 28, 2017)

Other less fortunate parents might get done for neglect.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Other less fortunate parents might get done for neglect.


Yeh they'd have been hauled up before the court of publick opinion and damned


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2017)

If they'd spent £1.1m on catching the cat-killer they'd have the fucker by now


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2017)

If they'd spent twenty quid on a baby sitter it would have been the biggest bargain in the history of finance.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2017)

as i said, The cops are not letting this go. Probabaly doesnt help that the scab on this case is constantly being picked off by the press ( some of them anyway)- it does raise questions of proportionality and the drivers of the case. tragic.


----------



## Weller (Sep 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If they'd spent twenty quid on a baby sitter it would have been the biggest bargain in the history of finance.


As it happens the baby sitting service was free at the Mark Werner apts as it usually is if eating on the complex but instead they left the children alone everynight and didnt want the service maybe because you have to get back at 11pm my eyes  were opened a bit when I eventually got around to reading thier released statements etc something just isnt right in thier  timeline  imo all very sad but I think that 11 milion has been wasted


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 28, 2017)

Weller said:


> As it happens the baby sitting service was free at the Mark Werner apts as it usually is if eating on the complex but instead they left the children alone everynight and didnt want the service maybe because you have to get back at 11pm



IIRC it was because they 'didn't trust leaving the children with a stranger'. 
Well that worked out for the best then.


----------



## Weller (Sep 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> IIRC it was because they 'didn't trust leaving the children with a stranger'.
> Well that worked out for the best then.


Well they have said and changed a lot of things in thier multiple statements and since but they trusted the same sitters  at the playgroup in the day  no problem whilst they went playing tennis or running or sunbathing or doing other adult holiday things with the other doctors
Its a very strange case and we didnt and  havent got to see or hear much of the statements on our media although Portugal has especially the Gaspar statement thier previous holiday friends  but it was released too its googleable
No more public money should be spent imho there is enough in thier own public donated funds anyway which as it happens is not a  registered  charity and hasnt given anything to other missing children cases much of it has been spent on thier own defence and litigation


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 29, 2017)

I don't want to do the holier than thou thing as they clearly made a huge mistake that cost them dearly but I wouldn't dream of leaving my (just turned) four year old son in an apartment on his own whilst I fucked off out for dinner. He'd either be with me or I'd have drinks on the balcony if he was in bed. 
Aren't kids a massive inconvenience?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 29, 2017)

I suspect more than anything else it is the media dragging this story on and on.

No matter what the circumstances were, they lost their child in a way that left them without any closure. It is incredibly tragic. Enough to screw anyone's mind and heart.

All the what if's being spouted about here are just that. They tried to do all they could, probably in the guilt ridden knowledge (unjustified guilt) to find their child/an answer/justice - who knows?

They needed money to fund the search for a body/an answer.

Anyone who can claim to legitimately deny them their quest for a resolution is an heartless fucktard.

Urban75 just keeps getting more and more tabloid pathetic. What would you do in their situation?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I don't want to do the holier than thou thing as they clearly made a huge mistake that cost them dearly but I wouldn't dream of leaving my (just turned) four year old son in an apartment on his own whilst I fucked off out for dinner. He'd either be with me or I'd have drinks on the balcony if he was in bed.
> Aren't kids a massive inconvenience?



And, you have never left your son alone for 30 minutes, or so?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Sep 29, 2017)

Stanley Edwards said:


> And, you have never left your son alone for 30 minutes, or so?



Well yes in the same house but that's not the same as fucking off and leaving him in his own, is it?
And given you can barely look after yourself I don't really need child rearing advice from you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 29, 2017)

Stanley Edwards said:


> I suspect more than anything else it is the media dragging this story on and on.
> 
> No matter what the circumstances were, they lost their child in a way that left them without any closure. It is incredibly tragic. Enough to screw anyone's mind and heart.
> 
> ...


I'd get an itinerant artist to post up a heartfelt defence of me on a london-based bulletin board


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> But no, eleven million pounds of taxpayers' money pissed away on jollies to portugal with fuck all to show for it.



Not so, some lovely tans on show down the Yard.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 29, 2017)

working on their golf handicap. I am sure If this had happened in Chechnya, there would not be as many coppers winging it out to make sure justice is done


----------



## Silas Loom (Sep 29, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> working on their golf handicap. I am sure If this had happened in Chechnya, there would not be as many coppers winging it out to make sure justice is done



Genuinely doubt that anyone in the Met is happy to be spending time on this, and it's quite clear that at a chief officer level they down tools unless the Home Office hands over hypothecated cash from a big bag marked "for the appeasement of Daily Express readers".


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 29, 2017)

Totes.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I'd get an itinerant artist to post up a heartfelt defence of me on a london-based bulletin board



As much as you know only those wanting to argue read posts by itinerant artists...

This story sells papers. If revenue from the publicity is funding an investigation, where is the problem?

And, it isn't just about a single case. Anything revealed about a single crime could help to solve many other crimes. Anything that could possibly prove to protect the most innocent and vulnerable in the future is worth every penny as far as I am concerned.

I can't find anything online ATM, but I remember reading Two reports in the British ex-pat press in Southern Spain which were very compelling in an unexpectedly rational way. One was by a private investigator who concluded that Maddie had been stolen and passed into 'trade' in Mauritania via Morocco. Many children/babies went missing from Spanish hospitals as recently as the 80's. It is a huge, ugly, lucrative business. One of the ugliest realities of the World we all live in - any chance of eliminating this ugliness can only be a good thing.

The second story should be online somewhere. It was by a journalist working on the story for The Olive Press in Spain, and UK papers. In a very balanced way he described how he was 100% convinced that the McCann's were innocent (in so much as they were victims of their own neglect). I will Google when I have more time.

My own short experience of Portugal is one of exceptional trust and safety. It isn't as though you feel lulled into a false sense of security. It is just a very safe place. I can fully understand why people would not give a second thought about leaving children unattended within a holiday complex home here.

This story will never die. It sells papers. Hopefully, it will eventually expose the cunts behind child trafficking in a way like media exposure finally exposed paedophile rings in positions of power. It is a start at least.


--/e2a...

A paedophile took Madeleine McCann, not her parents | Olive Press News Spain


----------



## nuffsaid (Sep 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> If they'd spent £1.1m on catching the cat-killer they'd have the fucker by now



Doesn't anyone think of the birds.....the poor little birds.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 29, 2017)

Maybe the cat killer has an ornithological bent.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 29, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Maybe the cat killer has an ornithological bent.


has anyone seen where bill oddie was at the times of the killings?


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

Has anyone applied a class-based analysis to the disappearance yet? I'm pretty sure there'll be no finding her unless this is tackled from a Marxist perspective.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 29, 2017)

If Maddie had disappeared from a high-rise estate and her parents had been unemployed rather than doctors, I don't think we'd have seen the same media response. Like, at all.

ETA, hypothetically, obvs


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 29, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> Has anyone applied a class-based analysis to the disappearance yet? I'm pretty sure there'll be no finding her unless this is tackled from a Marxist perspective.



Well they've tried everything else to find her. Maybe its time they tried full blown communism?


----------



## sealion (Sep 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> If Maddie had disappeared from a high-rise estate and her parents had been unemployed rather than doctors, I don't think we'd have seen the same media response. Like, at all.
> 
> ETA, hypothetically, obvs


The tabloids would have had a field day demonising the parents.


----------



## Siouxsie (Sep 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> If Maddie had disappeared from a high-rise estate and her parents had been unemployed rather than doctors, I don't think we'd have seen the same media response. Like, at all.
> 
> ETA, hypothetically, obvs


No, but we'd have had to sit through a 4 part drama with Sheridan Smith starring.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> If Maddie had disappeared from a high-rise estate and her parents had been unemployed rather than doctors, I don't think we'd have seen the same media response. Like, at all.
> 
> ETA, hypothetically, obvs


----------



## UrbaneFox (Sep 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well they've tried everything else to find her. Maybe its time they tried full blown communism?


If only Doris Stokes was still alive.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 30, 2017)

The last person I heard holding forth at length about the McCanns kept talking about how negligent they were. And about how he was convinced that they were involved in their daughter's disappearance. 

I thought about pointing out that it couldn't exactly be both things at the same time, but decided to just talk to somebody else instead.


----------



## IC3D (Sep 30, 2017)

They could have been negligent and hidden the body.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 30, 2017)

If they _did_ hide the body, it seems they weren't negligent in one respect at least.


----------



## malatesta32 (Sep 30, 2017)

Stanley Edwards said:


> And, you have never left your son alone for 30 minutes, or so?



absolutely not. even if you're just going out to get the paper or something. take em with. 
holiday dinners are hardly going to be short and sober. cant kids be at the table as well? like millions of families in spain?


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 30, 2017)

I don't think you are allowed to leave a child under 12 alone unsupervised. Cant be bothered to google.

Loosing a child to kidnappers would sure spur a parent on in their attempt to ease the guilt.


----------



## phillm (Sep 30, 2017)

It's the one 'mystery' where I tend to side with the 'loons'. Just this one mind.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 2, 2017)

They were negligent. They left the child unattended, out of their line of sight. Not that being in their line of sight would necessarily have made a difference, as any parent knows, at that age they move like lightning.

No matter how much the McCanns posture about their innocence, they know in their hearts that they are not. They left their child unattended, and the child was abducted.

Any normal person would be dreadfully ashamed of their behaviour, but I cannot recall this pair ever saying that they were sorry for what they have done. They are too busy hitting out at anyone and everyone, and taking legal action against those who they see as damaging their reputation.
It is my view that their reputation is such, that it is impossible to traduce it.


----------



## marshall (Oct 2, 2017)

Leaving their children alone on the night, and indeed other nights on the same holiday, beggars belief. But there's no way they could hide a body from local police/searchers in a town/area they barely knew.


----------



## cybershot (Mar 27, 2018)

More funds granted. 

Police granted Madeleine inquiry funds


----------



## T & P (Mar 27, 2018)

FFS...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Should keep the Daily Express happy.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 27, 2018)

Hmmm


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 27, 2018)

deffo find her now with these extra p's


----------



## patman post (Mar 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> The tabloids would have had a field day demonising the parents.


As it is, the demonising has mostly been left to social media conspiracy theorists...


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> deffo find her now with these extra p's


the real maddy was the friends we made along the way


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

cybershot said:


> More funds granted.
> 
> Police granted Madeleine inquiry funds


when a crime occurs, investigators look for who benefits. and the people who have benefited the most over the years from mm's disappearance have been the british police team working on this, who've had trips to portugal and all over and a great ton of overtime. i wonder if anyone's pursued that little thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> If they _did_ hide the body, it seems they weren't negligent in one respect at least.


i wonder what they'd find under the mccanns' patio.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Should keep the Daily Express happy.



Under new management.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 27, 2018)

but specificaly the same editorial


----------



## blossie33 (Mar 27, 2018)

I've just been looking at the click bait on Yahoo about this - couldn't resist  needless to say what the tone of comments was.

Seriously though, I really can't believe so much money has been spent on the case - not that a person's life isn't worth more than money but honestly, what about all the other missing persons/children - why are they such a priority?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> when a crime occurs, investigators look for who benefits. and the people who have benefited the most over the years from mm's disappearance have been the british police team working on this, who've had trips to portugal and all over and a great ton of overtime. i wonder if anyone's pursued that little thread.


 Cui bono indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

blossie33 said:


> I've just been looking at the click bait on Yahoo about this - couldn't resist  needless to say what the tone of comments was.
> 
> Seriously though, I really can't believe so much money has been spent on the case - not that a person's life isn't worth more than money but honestly, what about all the other missing persons/children - why are they such a priority?


4% of cuts since 2007 have been directly due to the government diverting funding to the fruitless search for madeleine mccann.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 27, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Under new management.



Yep moved from the pornographer to the phone hackers.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 27, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> If Maddie had disappeared from a high-rise estate and her parents had been unemployed rather than doctors, I don't think we'd have seen the same media response. Like, at all.
> 
> ETA, hypothetically, obvs



Had that been the scenario, social services would have been meeting the homeward flight.

Because the parents whose negligence was complicit in the abduction of their child were doctors, a different outcome.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Under new management.



Still subject to the OK from the Competition and Marketing Authority who have placed a “hold separate” order on Trinity Mirror, pending an investigation into the media plurality implications, but as DC posted - editorially the Express will remain totally separate from the Mirror anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Still subject to the OK from the Competition and Marketing Authority who have placed a “hold separate” order on Trinity Mirror, pending an investigation into the media plurality implications, but as DC posted - editorially the Express will remain totally separate from the Mirror anyway.


yeh but the orders will come down from superior authority


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but the orders will come down from superior authority



Putin?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Putin?


possibly


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Being serious, I am not sure Trinity Mirror (or 'Reach' as they have renamed themselves ) are likely to interfere editorially, being a company focused on returning 'value' to their shareholders, rather than being an individual 'press baron' with their own agenda.

There's plenty of criticism about how they operate with their take-overs of various regional dailies & local weekly rags, and the savage cutbacks, but I've not seen anything on the main industry website indicating any interference in editorial policy across their stable of titles.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> when a crime occurs, investigators look for who benefits. and the people who have benefited the most over the years from mm's disappearance have been the british police team working on this, who've had trips to portugal and all over and a great ton of overtime. i wonder if anyone's pursued that little thread.



Mr and Mrs McCann must hold the world record for biggest payday resulting from an act of willful neglect.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Mr and Mrs McCann must hold the world record for biggest payday resulting from an act of willful neglect.


dr and dr, sf, dr and dr


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> dr and dr, sf, dr and dr



Oh yeah of course. That's how come it was OK for them to definitely not drug their kids so they could eat their fucking tapas in peace.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh yeah of course. That's how come it was OK for them to drug their kids so they could eat their fucking tapas in peace.


i believe the phrase they prefer is mildly sedate


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh yeah of course. That's how come it was OK for them to drug their kids so they could eat their fucking tapas in peace.



Really?

I thought that was just a rumour on some of those nasty slagging-off-the-McCanns sites.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 27, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Really?
> 
> I thought that was just a rumour on some of those nasty slagging-off-the-McCann's sites.


No evidence of it whatsoever. But you can always rely on Wanky Franky to perpetuate hateful shit like that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Really?
> 
> I thought that was just a rumour on some of those nasty slagging-off-the-McCann's sites.


which brings to mind siouxsie's prescient 'arabian knights', where she sings 'i heard a rumour - what have you done to her'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> No evidence of it whatsoever. But you can always rely on Wanky Franky to perpetuate hateful shit like that.



Wanky Franky.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Wanky Franky.


spymaster
swears faster

wanky franky
is very lanky


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

Earlier post edited. Genuine error on my part.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 27, 2018)

Twat


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## dessiato (Mar 27, 2018)

cybershot said:


> More funds granted.
> 
> Police granted Madeleine inquiry funds


And how more for all the other children who've disappeared since then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

dessiato said:


> And how more for all the other children who've disappeared since then?


You know that's not how it works


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 27, 2018)

What's the grand total spent on the McCann investigation(s) so far?

And what's the usual expenditure on similar investigations of this sort? Anyone know?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

twentythreedom said:


> What's the grand total spent on the McCann investigation(s) so far?
> 
> And what's the usual expenditure on similar investigations of this sort? Anyone know?


Think of a very big lottery win, triple it and add editor's age x 100,000. Perhaps even Sasaferrato's


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Think of a very big lottery win, triple it and add editor's age x 100,000. *Perhaps even Sasaferrato's*



I think you're pushing it with the BIB, thb.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you're pushing it with the BIB, thb.


Sasaferrato needs a bib, it's his second childhood


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Twat



Whereas I quite endorse your sentiment, an apology was given. We have all made genuine errors.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Sasaferrato needs a bib, it's his second childhood



No, you pair of cunts, I am not.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 27, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Whereas I quite endorse your sentiment, an apology was given. We have all made genuine errors.


 Look at the original post quoted by Liz and the twat's edit. Typical Wanky Franky. Thinks he's clever but he's a fuckwit.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 27, 2018)

I wouldn't be surprised if they drugged the kids tbh

Killing one of them and magicking the body away but then getting endless funding to investigate anyway, I'm less sure about


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

twentythreedom said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they drugged the kids tbh
> 
> Killing one of them and magicking the body away but then getting endless funding to investigate anyway, I'm less sure about


Sure doctors know a thing or two about chopping up a body


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Sure doctors know a thing or two about chopping up a body


115 pages say you're on the money


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 28, 2018)

As has been already said, the money and attention give to this case as compared to 1,000s of other missing children is gross. I have no idea what happened, MM's disappearance is certainly tragic but the disproportionate fetishisation and hysteria around the case are tawdry, weird and disgusting.


----------



## RainbowTown (Mar 28, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> As has been already said, the money and attention give to this case as compared to 1,000s of other missing children is gross. I have no idea what happened, MM's disappearance is certainly tragic but the disproportionate fetishisation and hysteria around the case are tawdry, weird and disgusting.



Totally concur. There is something quite unhealthy about this particular story being dragged up every 18 months or so, and the obsession with it in some quarters of the media. Even more distasteful is that more money is indeed being allocated to it, 11 YEARS after the event. What a great PR machine the McCann's must have behind them. Very professional indeed. Just a pity the same time and resources weren't given to the Hillsborough 96 in their fight for justice, or indeed the ongoing battle for by the families of the Birmingham pub bombings who only yesterday, in their fight for justice, had their plea for funding a vital court case ignored by the Government (ie legal aid). 

Still, at least the detectives in McCann case can once again enjoy yet another nice sun tan as they carry out yet another investigation by delving deeper into those never-ending 'critical leads' that seem to miraculously crop up time and again...............


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 28, 2018)

RainbowTown said:


> Totally concur. There is something quite unhealthy about this particular story being dragged up every 18 months or so, and the obsession with it in some quarters of the media. Even more distasteful is that more money is indeed being allocated to it, 11 YEARS after the event. What a great PR machine the McCann's must have behind them. Very professional indeed. Just a pity the same time and resources weren't given to the Hillsborough 96 in their fight for justice, or indeed the ongoing battle for by the families of the Birmingham pub bombings who only yesterday, in their fight for justice, had their plea for funding a vital court case ignored by the Government (ie legal aid).
> 
> Still, at least the detectives in McCann case can once again enjoy yet another nice sun tan as they carry out yet another investigation by delving deeper into those never-ending 'critical leads' that seem to miraculously crop up time and again...............



Am I being cynical in thinking, that this seems to kick off each year just as the good weather arrives?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

RainbowTown said:


> Totally concur. There is something quite unhealthy about this particular story being dragged up every 18 months or so, and the obsession with it in some quarters of the media. Even more distasteful is that more money is indeed being allocated to it, 11 YEARS after the event. What a great PR machine the McCann's must have behind them. Very professional indeed. Just a pity the same time and resources weren't given to the Hillsborough 96 in their fight for justice, or indeed the ongoing battle for by the families of the Birmingham pub bombings who only yesterday, in their fight for justice, had their plea for funding a vital court case ignored by the Government (ie legal aid).
> 
> Still, at least the detectives in McCann case can once again enjoy yet another nice sun tan as they carry out yet another investigation by delving deeper into those never-ending 'critical leads' that seem to miraculously crop up time and again...............


not to mention the orgreave miners or the women with whom the spy cops had relationships... there's a long list of wholly domestic issues which could have done wonders with but a fraction of the millions squandered on the mccanns.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Am I being cynical in thinking, that this seems to kick off each year just as the good weather arrives?


it is a hardy perennial

but where is the good weather?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it is a hardy perennial
> 
> but where is the good weather?



Portugal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Portugal.


stan and maddie sitting on a beach k-i-s-s-i-n-g


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 28, 2018)

Honestly, I'm _this _close to wondering whether it was such a good idea to start this thread


----------



## sim667 (Mar 29, 2018)

It pisses me off that the woman who's child was left into a car and then accidentally rolled into a river is being charged with negligence, where as the Mccann's were clearly negligent in leaving their kids alone whilst they went off to get pissed are having millions thrown at them years later.

Total bullshit.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 29, 2018)

sim667 said:


> It pisses me off that the woman who's child was left into a car and then accidentally rolled into a river is being charged with negligence



Is she?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

But working class parents do, or did that in butlins all the time, which had a service where the staff on the resort would look in every 15 minutes. Where the Mccanns stayed also had that service, but they didn’t use it as they checked themselves, and could see the room from where they were sat. Now either my mum and gran and half the parents I knew in the 80’s were manifestly unfit ... or you lot are off your nut comparing it to leaving kids in a flat and going to the pub


----------



## sim667 (Mar 29, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Is she?



I read about it the other day, can't find the article now.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 29, 2018)

sim667 said:


> I read about it the other day, can't find the article now.



I saw an article which said there is a possibility she *may* be done for neglect.  That's all.  Typical tabloid shite.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> But working class parents do, or did that in butlins all the time, which had a service where the staff on the resort would look in every 15 minutes. Where the Mccanns stayed also had that service, but they didn’t use it as they checked themselves, and could see the room from where they were sat. Now either my mum and gran and half the parents I knew in the 80’s were manifestly unfit ... or you lot are off your nut comparing it to leaving kids in a flat and going to the pub


Totally. I've been aware of loads of parents leaving their kids in rooms whilst they've had a drink around the pool or a nearby meal in the hotel. Someone checks on them every now and then and it's never been a problem or even raised eyebrows.  There's a lot of bollocks being spouted about this on here.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 29, 2018)

sim667 said:


> It pisses me off that the woman who's child was left into a car and then accidentally rolled into a river is being charged with negligence ...


That sounds like bollocks. I wouldn't have thought the investigation has even been concluded yet.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 29, 2018)

I remember, the one time we went abroad when I was little, staying in a small hotel in France where there were no locks on the doors. Me and my brother were left upstairs to go to bed while my parents went down to eat and have a few glasses in the evening. Little_bro_bob started complaining about something, so I (aged about 6) had to go wander around til I found my way down to the restaurant and get a parent. Things were theoretically much more dangerous in those days, no CCTV, no mobiles, etc., but if my parents did it - they were generally very responsible people - I'm sure it was utterly commonplace.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> I remember, the one time we went abroad when I was little, staying in a small hotel in France where there were no locks on the doors. Me and my brother were left upstairs to go to bed while my parents went down to eat and have a few glasses in the evening. Little_bro_bob started complaining about something, so I (aged about 6) had to go wander around til I found my way down to the restaurant and get a parent. Things were theoretically much more dangerous in those days, no CCTV, no mobiles, etc., but if my parents did it - they were generally very responsible people - I'm sure it was utterly commonplace.


question: were your parents doctors?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Totally. I've been aware of loads of parents leaving their kids in rooms whilst they've had a drink around the pool or a nearby meal in the hotel. Someone checks on them every now and then and it's never been a problem or even raised eyebrows.  There's a lot of bollocks being spouted about this on here.


yeh. but when it goes wrong it goes very wrong and no stone should be left unturned.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> question: were your parents doctors?



One of them was a social worker


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> One of them was a social worker


you had a narrow escape in that case


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you had a narrow escape in that case



social workers ... 1980s ... shouting distance of Middlesbrough ... dangerous territory


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> But working class parents do, or did that in butlins all the time, which had a service where the staff on the resort would look in every 15 minutes. Where the Mccanns stayed also had that service, but they didn’t use it as they checked themselves, and could see the room from where they were sat. Now either my mum and gran and half the parents I knew in the 80’s were manifestly unfit ... or you lot are off your nut comparing it to leaving kids in a flat and going to the pub



I appreciate the inflammatory intent of your post.

Couple of points, firstly, the room was not in line of sight from the restaurant, secondly, it is a bit different to leaving children under staff supervision, within an enclosed site.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 29, 2018)

So the police, press and parents are cunts then?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. but when it goes wrong it goes very wrong and no stone should be left unturned.


Nah. When it goes wrong you get back to the room to find the little darlings have redecorated it with nail varnish or the big one's given the littlun a hair cut. What almost never happens is that your kid gets abducted. I actually can't recall it ever happening before although I'm sure it has. The chances must be millions to one against, and doubtless parents routinely take other greater risks with their kid's safety with no harm coming to them whatsoever.


----------



## Farmer Giles (Mar 31, 2018)

Me and m brother were regularly left on our own on a Friday/Saturday night when we he was 10 and me 8, while my folks pissed it up in the Horse and Groom or Jacks or the Littlehouse or elsewhere in Tooting in the 70/80s and the neighbour was supposed to pop in to check up on us, which they sometime did. Neglected?


----------



## Beats & Pieces (Mar 31, 2018)

Badgers said:


> So the police, press and parents are cunts then?



In most instances - yes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 31, 2018)

Beats & Pieces said:


> In most instances - yes.


Yeh, "they fuck you up, your mum and dad"


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 31, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> I remember, the one time we went abroad when I was little, staying in a small hotel in France where there were no locks on the doors. Me and my brother were left upstairs to go to bed while my parents went down to eat and have a few glasses in the evening. Little_bro_bob started complaining about something, so I (aged about 6) had to go wander around til I found my way down to the restaurant and get a parent. Things were theoretically much more dangerous in those days, no CCTV, no mobiles, etc., but if my parents did it - they were generally very responsible people - I'm sure it was utterly commonplace.



I remember escaping from the house when I was very young (probably around 6 years old or so), as I think I'd been left in as my mam and sister went to the shops.  I got to the bottom of our street where it joined the main road and a copper stopped to see what was up.  He gave me a lemon sherbert from the bag of sweets he had, and took me back to the house.  Nothing was said about it as it probably wasn't unusual back in the 70s.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2018)

and the madeleine mccann money tree keeps paying out



there are cops whose entire mortgages have been paid by the taxpayers' largesse on this one case.


----------



## dessiato (May 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and the madeleine mccann money tree keeps paying out
> 
> View attachment 134301
> 
> there are cops whose entire mortgages have been paid by the taxpayers' largesse on this one case.


And, again, where's the money for all the other kids who've gone missing in the last 11 years?


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 3, 2018)

Nice bit of golf down there at this time of year as well.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 3, 2018)

Police raise fresh hope along with new appeal for cash 

Detective who worked on Madeleine McCann case believes she could be alive | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 3, 2018)

Detective in ‘wanting to spend more time on the Algarve and not in stabby London’ shocker.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 3, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Police raise fresh hope along with new appeal for cash
> 
> Detective who worked on Madeleine McCann case believes she could be alive | Daily Mail Online



I believe I can fly.

I believe in angels.

I believe in a hill called Mount Calvary.

I believe that the children are our future.

Where's my posting in the sun?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 3, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> Detective in ‘wanting to spend more time on the Algarve and not in stabby London’ shocker.


FFS


----------



## phillm (Oct 3, 2018)

As Sherlock once said :

"You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head. "How often have I said to you that

when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?

We know that he did not come through the door, the window, or the chimney. We also know that he could not have been concealed in the room, as there is no concealment possible.

When, then, did he come?"

Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four (Doubleday p. 111)


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 3, 2018)

The revolting McCanns have never once expressed their guilt at leaving their children unattended, and out of line of sight.

Had they been ordinary punters, rather than doctors, Social Services would have been meeting the plane to remove their other children.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2018)

phillm said:


> As Sherlock once said :
> 
> "You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head. "How often have I said to you that
> 
> ...


See also Edgar Allen Poe's 'purloined letter'


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 3, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The revolting McCanns have never once expressed their guilt at leaving their children unattended, and out of line of sight.
> 
> Had they been ordinary punters, rather than doctors, Social Services would have been meeting the plane to remove their other children.



Lovely as it is you and others have an issue to spaff off a bit of bile now and then, do you think that being out of sight is enough to condemn all parents who tragically lose small children? Because there are quite a few.

What harm have their other children come to? What makes you think your reading of trashy papers sets your judgement above Leics Social Services?

The reverse is true. Your inverse snobbery is at work here. You wouldn’t say such things about other parents were they not doctors.


----------



## JHE (Oct 3, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The revolting McCanns have never once expressed their guilt at leaving their children unattended, and out of line of sight...



How do you know?

I bet they regret leaving their children while they went out for supper, regret it more deeply than we can imagine, that the knowledge that they left their kids torments them day and night (and fuels their almost mad insistence that the girl can be found alive).


----------



## Red Cat (Oct 3, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The revolting McCanns have never once expressed their guilt at leaving their children unattended, and out of line of sight.
> 
> Had they been ordinary punters, rather than doctors, Social Services would have been meeting the plane to remove their other children.



Don't you get bored of saying the same thing?


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Oct 3, 2018)

JHE said:


> How do you know?



Show us an interview where they accept they were at fault.  Even if someone hadn't abducted their child, there could easily have been a fire or an accident, with no-one there to help.  The best thing they could do is admit they were wrong - if only as a warning to other parents.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2018)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Show us an interview where they accept they were at fault.  Even if someone hadn't abducted their child, there could easily have been a fire or an accident, with no-one there to help.  The best thing they could do is admit they were wrong - if only as a warning to other parents.


A cautionary tale


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Sasaferrato needs a bib, it's his second childhood


Or is it third...


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 3, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The revolting McCanns have never once expressed their guilt at leaving their children unattended, and out of line of sight.
> .



Gerry McCann: 'Our terrible regret at leaving Madeleine alone' | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Oct 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> A cautionary tale



Quite.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Gerry McCann: 'Our terrible regret at leaving Madeleine alone' | Daily Mail Online


I see it took only a year


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Oct 3, 2018)

"We made a mistake, BUT, we are paying for it." Says Gerry.

Always the victim our Gerry.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I see it took only a year



Which is probably why I missed it. My bad.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or is it third...



Any more of your lip, and you won't be getting out of your first.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 3, 2018)

JHE said:


> How do you know?
> 
> I bet they regret leaving their children while they went out for supper, regret it more deeply than we can imagine, that the knowledge that they left their kids torments them day and night (and fuels their almost mad insistence that the girl can be found alive).



Why then did they do it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2018)

Rosemary Jest said:


> "We made a mistake, BUT, we are paying for it." Says Gerry.
> 
> Always the victim our Gerry.


They're paying for it.

Not as much as young madeleine of course.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 3, 2018)

Are we really going back over this now?

I didn't find the McCanns any easier to warm to than anyone else, but anyone who doesn't know them personally who claims to 'know' that they don't feel the appropriate amount of guilt or haven't suffered over this as much as any other parent would is talking out their arse.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 3, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Are we really going back over this now?
> 
> I didn't find the McCanns any easier to warm to than anyone else, but anyone who doesn't know them personally who claims to 'know' that they don't feel the appropriate amount of guilt or haven't suffered over this as much as any other parent would is talking out their arse.


Tend to agree with this sentiment, but OTOH I don't think we can blame folk for responding to the couple's professionally funded and organised media profile.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Tend to agree with this sentiment, but OTOH I don't think we can blame folk for responding to the couple's professionally funded and organised media profile.



No, we really can. They are hardly the first distraught parents to make it to the front page. People could ignore but some need their hatred to get by.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> No, we really can. They are hardly the first distraught parents to make it to the front page. People could ignore but some need their hatred to get by.


Yeh people could ignore except when this bollix is shoved in your face, like the lunacy in 2007 when have you seen madeleine fliers were all over the place. There was one in the staffroom at work, and I know for a fact not one of my colleagues had been in Portugal that year. All the shit in the newspapers for years. Yeh I suppose you could ignore it, if you deafened and blinded yourself.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> No, we really can. They are hardly the first distraught parents to make it to the front page. People could ignore but some need their hatred to get by.


Indeed, sadly there have been and will be other parents similarly propelled into the media focus. But there can be few other examples of such a sustained, professionally funded and directed media programme designed specifically to keep the parents in the news agenda. Reacting negatively to this exceptional exposure does not necessarily reflect on any 'hatred'.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh people could ignore except when this bollix is shoved in your face, like the lunacy in 2007 when have you seen madeleine fliers were all over the place. There was one in the staffroom at work, and I know for a fact not one of my colleagues had been in Portugal that year. All the shit in the newspapers for years. Yeh I suppose you could ignore it, if you deafened and blinded yourself.



You don’t not ignore it, you immerse yourself in the pleasure of hating them. A tabloid mindset.

You, I believe, have criticised harshening of laws around terror or data, because these things may affect, not just perps, but everyone. I’m not sure why you do not feel the same way about the presumption of innocence.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Indeed, sadly there have been and will be other parents similarly propelled into the media focus. But there can be few other examples of such a sustained, professionally funded and directed media programme designed specifically to keep the parents in the news agenda. Reacting negatively to this exceptional exposure does not necessarily reflect on any 'hatred'.



True, but the comments are harsher than just a criticism of media priorities.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but the comments are harsher than just a criticism of media priorities.


Yes, some other comments relate to the established 'facts' of the case. Are you suggesting that folk should not be able to express views about the wisdom of leaving infants unattended?


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 4, 2018)

Feel of course for any parent that loses a child and the McCann's are no different in that. 

However, the disproportionate media coverage they receive and are happy to have baffles me. What makes their child any more special and deserving of coverage than any other?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> You don’t not ignore it, you immerse yourself in the pleasure of hating them. A tabloid mindset.
> 
> You, I believe, have criticised harshening of laws around terror or data, because these things may affect, not just perps, but everyone. I’m not sure why you do not feel the same way about the presumption of innocence.


that's rather a large strawman you're flaunting in the last sentence

i don't hate the mccanns, i simply despise them.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 4, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> Feel of course for any parent that loses a child and the McCann's are no different in that.
> 
> However, the disproportionate media coverage they receive and are happy to have baffles me. What makes their child any more special and deserving of coverage than any other?



I would suspect that a large part of the media coverage they continue to receive is based on the fact that the editors of that media know that a large proportion of their viewers/readers believe that the McCann's are as guilty as sin...

If the McCann's are in the front page, the online comments section will be seething - and the advertiser's and traffic counters happy.

I don't think anyone believes that MM is anymore important that any other missing child, but her disappearance is more _interesting _because of the circumstances of how it occurred.

I should add that even though I believe they were, at the very least, negligent, I feel enormously sorry for them - a woman once attempted to abduct my eldest Daughter, who was 3 at the time, while we were in a very crowded Hillhead underground station in Glasgow. The woman put her hand out, my daughter took it and let go of mine - they didn't get more than 3 metres away, but the blind, uncontrollable panic and total emptiness I felt as a watched the woman walk away with my daughter is something I relive every day. 

Even if the McCann's _caused _their daughters death I don't doubt that they feel a grief and recrimination that very few of us will ever know - and yes, I'd feel intensely sorry for them even as I threw them down a hole so deep they'd starve to death before they hit the bottom...


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 4, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> Feel of course for any parent that loses a child and the McCann's are no different in that.
> 
> However, the disproportionate media coverage they receive and are happy to have baffles me. What makes their child any more special and deserving of coverage than any other?



Just guessing that all parents rightly think their child is special and deserving. Especially after they've disappeared.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2018)

kebabking said:


> If the McCann's are in the front page, the online comments section will be seething - and the advertiser's and traffic counters happy.


there are armies of loons out there posting in the comments section of all sorts of articles. don't think there's anything special about the seething in comments about mm.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 4, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> Feel of course for any parent that loses a child and the McCann's are no different in that.
> 
> However, the disproportionate media coverage they receive and are happy to have baffles me. What makes their child any more special and deserving of coverage than any other?


I suspect they're more than willing to put up with the media coverage because they cling to the understandable if irrational belief they're going to get her back alive, which  makes me think (other than a moment of carelessness) they played no part in their daughter's disappearance. Without the publicity this would have long since been filed away as a cold case.
The press no doubt have their own not very noble motives for keeping this case in the public eye.
As for the money still being spent on an investigation well the kidnapping and possible murder of a toddler is a serious crime and you can't put a budget on solving it. I would expect that somewhere in Scotland Yard some senior officer is looking at the facts and asking questions like "Are there any real leads to investigate?", "is there an actual possibility of an arrest?". If the answer to these questions is yes then they should keep investigating, If no and this is just to keep the press off the Home Secretary's back then it should stop.
Personally I think this case will (if ever) only get solved when someone accidentally finds a body in some unmarked grave.
Their child isn't any more or any less deserving of coverage than any other missing child but I have seen no evidence that the police treat any case of this nature has anything other than extremely serious.


----------



## newbie (Oct 4, 2018)

kebabking said:


> a woman once attempted to abduct my eldest Daughter, who was 3 at the time, while we were in a very crowded Hillhead underground station in Glasgow. The woman put her hand out, my daughter took it and let go of mine - they didn't get more than 3 metres away, but the blind, uncontrollable panic and total emptiness I felt as a watched the woman walk away with my daughter is something I relive every day.


wow! what happened next?


----------



## kebabking (Oct 4, 2018)

newbie said:


> wow! what happened next?



i grabbed the sprog and we barged our way out of the station - reported it to the station staff who called the PoPo, unfortunately she'd got on a train and got off at the next station. i was able to identify her (or more correctly, her coat and hat..) on CCTV, but the pictures weren't good and she disappeared after leaving Kelvinbridge station.

i did a walk-around with a DC the following weekend, and other the weekend after to see if i saw her, but the well was empty.

it does worry me that she's out there, and i got the impression from the Police that we weren't the first people to encounter her.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 4, 2018)

Uuuh why the fuck would anyone do that? Especially in such a blatant fashion. Boggles the mind.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Uuuh why the fuck would anyone do that? Especially in such a blatant fashion. Boggles the mind.



One of the DI's said it could be anything - every permutation from the very worst you could imagine to a mind driven beyond reason by loneliness or grief.

The woman who tried it knew what she doing - crowded place, lots of surging bodies, noise, and then when it went wrong she just went into escape mode, no hanging around, just jumped on the train, and then got off at the next stop. Her counter-surveillance drills were excellent - she never looked up the whole time from when she walked into Hillhead station to walking out of Kelvinbridge station, so CCTV never saw her face. She went straight into a residential area and just disappeared of the face of the earth - she probably ditched the hat and coat when she turned the first corner, and that's it, the identity that tried to take a little girl just ceased to exist.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Yes, some other comments relate to the established 'facts' of the case. Are you suggesting that folk should not be able to express views about the wisdom of leaving infants unattended?



Almost all child abductions require the child to be unattended or the parent distracted. If not then they would not have succeeded. 

The normal response is to blame the perpetrator and sympathise with the victims. 

In this case the idea that they were having a grown up meal appears to scandalise. I bet in barbecue season plenty of babies are left to sleep indoors alone while every adult is in the garden in various states of inebriation.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Almost all child abductions require the child to be unattended or the parent distracted. If not then they would not have succeeded.
> 
> The normal response is to blame the perpetrator and sympathise with the victims.
> 
> In this case the idea that they were having a grown up meal appears to scandalise. I bet in barbecue season plenty of babies are left to sleep indoors alone while every adult is in the garden in various states of inebriation.



I think one of the the things that isn't widely understood is that the McCann's were having dinner about 60 yards from where their children were sleeping - I've done that a dozen times this summer, and while I'd like to think that the front door to the house had been locked, I wouldn't bet my life on it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Almost all child abductions require the child to be unattended or the parent distracted. If not then they would not have succeeded.
> 
> The normal response is to blame the perpetrator and sympathise with the victims.
> 
> In this case the idea that they were having a grown up meal appears to scandalise. I bet in barbecue season plenty of babies are left to sleep indoors alone while every adult is in the garden in various states of inebriation.



Are unattended babies regularly snatched from houses whilst a barbecue is taking place in the garden? I can’t think of any instances of it happening. Certainly way down on the risk scale from leaving infants unattended in a holiday rental, in a foreign country, whilst you fuck off for dinner.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 4, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> in a foreign country.



I was pretty much with you up to that bit.

What does a foreign country have to do with it? Is there some added danger from the child not speaking Portuguese? Is abduction more likely in Portugal than here?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> I was pretty much with you up to that bit.
> 
> What does a foreign country have to do with it? Is there some added danger from the child not speaking Portuguese? Is abduction more likely in Portugal than here?



Do I detect wacism?! 

Perhaps people are less familiar with their surroundings at somewhere they’ve perhaps never been compared with eating in their own back garden?


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 4, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Do I detect wacism?!
> 
> Perhaps people are less familiar with their surroundings at somewhere they’ve perhaps never been compared with eating in their own back garden?



Tell me what familiarity with your surroundings has to do with eg rape or domestic violence statistics.

Just because you try and belittle racism by spelling it with a W doesn’t make you exempt from falling into it, unconscious or not.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Tell me what familiarity with your surroundings has to do with eg rape or domestic violence statistics.
> 
> Just because you try and belittle racism by spelling it with a W doesn’t make you exempt from falling into it, unconscious or not.



We aren’t talking about rape or domestic violence statistics are we? 

It had quite a lot to do with the abduction of Maddie given the McCann’s ‘felt’what they were doing was safe. The abductor will have known those surroundings better as they carried out the crime successfully and got away undetected (and have got away with it).
No mention of race. So, an apology. When you’re ready.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 4, 2018)

Haha get fucked Magnus. An apology for what? The McCanns feeling they were safe has nothing to do with it being in a foreign country. You don’t know who the abductor was, so have no idea of the context as to how and why it was carried out successfully. You mentioned race first, not me. I asked what being in a foreign country had to do with it. Do abductions not happen in the U.K. then?

The whole abduction has nothing to do with “being familiar with their surroundings”. Crime can happen anywhere, which is why I mentioned the stats I did. You implying that the risk scale is heightened by being in a foreign country is a dodgy statement you are now trying to cover by suggesting you were only talking of “familiarity of surroundings” being some panacea for crime.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Haha get fucked Magnus. An apology for what? The McCanns feeling they were safe has nothing to do with it being in a foreign country. You don’t know who the abductor was, so have no idea of the context as to how and why it was carried out successfully. You mentioned race first, not me. I asked what being in a foreign country had to do with it. Do abductions not happen in the U.K. then?
> 
> The whole abduction has nothing to do with “being familiar with their surroundings”. Crime can happen anywhere, which is why I mentioned the stats I did. You implying that the risk scale is heightened by being in a foreign country is a dodgy statement you are now trying to cover by suggesting you were only talking of “familiarity of surroundings” being some panacea for crime.



You accused me of racism yet I never mentioned race. And given we don’t even know the nationality of the abductor is quite a bizarre accusation to level at me. 
They were in a foreign country (I haven’t made that up) and I was juxtaposing that against the bizarre suggestion that it was similar to being in your own back garden.

Accusing someone of racism who is involved in anti-racist politics needs a bit more than what you’re cobbling together here. 

So either apologise or piss off ya massive wet napkin.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 4, 2018)

You brought up “wacism” yer pillock. I merely asked what a foreign country had to do with it. Child abduction is more often than not going to happen in familiar surroundings, nothing to do with “foreign”.

As a parent I have to be vigilant with my child whether I’m in my high street or on holiday abroad.

You give every impression of not being a parent, nor ever having been further than the end of your street.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> You brought up “wacism” yer pillock. I merely asked what a foreign country had to do with it. Child abduction is more often than not going to happen in familiar surroundings, nothing to do with “foreign”.
> 
> As a parent I have to be vigilant with my child whether I’m in my high street or on holiday abroad.
> 
> You give every impression of not being a parent, nor ever having been further than the end of your street.



I knew what you were aiming at. Me mentioning they were in a foreign country isn’t some xenophobic angle I was taking ya berk. 

(I’m a parent too btw so let’s not do that one).


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Almost all child abductions require the child to be unattended or the parent distracted. If not then they would not have succeeded.
> 
> The normal response is to blame the perpetrator and sympathise with the victims.
> 
> In this case the idea that they were having a grown up meal appears to scandalise. I bet in barbecue season plenty of babies are left to sleep indoors alone while every adult is in the garden in various states of inebriation.


Given that, it doesn't seem unreasonable to question the wisdom of leaving infants unattended in unfamiliar surroundings? And doing so does not mutually exclude the capacity for sympathy, does it?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 4, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Tell me what familiarity with your surroundings has to do with eg rape or domestic violence statistics.
> 
> Just because you try and belittle racism by spelling it with a W doesn’t make you exempt from falling into it, unconscious or not.



 WTF are you doing, apart from making an arse of yourself?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

Apparently I ought to have excluded this major feature of the story as it’s irrelevant.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Oct 4, 2018)

Reminds me of a thread circa 2002 where someone lost their phone in a Chinese restaurant, a huge row broke out about the relevance of mentioning the restaurant was Chinese (because wacism, obvs) and twenty pages later the op returned to say they’d found the phone.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Given that, it doesn't seem unreasonable to question the wisdom of leaving infants unattended in unfamiliar surroundings? And doing so does not mutually exclude the capacity for sympathy, does it?



I’m not sure you get what I’m saying. Sure, it’s not wise in hindsight, but it wasn’t in the other circumstances either. Whatever the fault, it’s maybe not worth a decade of self-righteous vilification that some indulge in, with all its queasy assumptions about class and psychology.

To the McCanns and the others they dined with, the distance from table to door, in a holiday park with restricted access seemed safe. No one dining with them apparently suggested ‘WTF are you doing’? Maybe you would have, maybe I would have, but I doubt the coverage gives us a sense of the moment.


----------



## kenny g (Oct 5, 2018)

I don't believe the parents account and therefore have little sympathy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> To the McCanns and the others they dined with, the distance from table to door, in a holiday park with restricted access seemed safe. No one dining with them apparently suggested ‘WTF are you doing’? Maybe you would have, maybe I would have, but I doubt the coverage gives us a sense of the moment.


the sense of the moment is that there was a risk but they considered it inconsequential


----------



## brogdale (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m not sure you get what I’m saying. Sure, it’s not wise in hindsight, but it wasn’t in the other circumstances either. Whatever the fault, it’s maybe not worth a decade of self-righteous vilification that some indulge in, with all its queasy assumptions about class and psychology.
> 
> To the McCanns and the others they dined with, the distance from table to door, in a holiday park with restricted access seemed safe. No one dining with them apparently suggested ‘WTF are you doing’? Maybe you would have, maybe I would have, but I doubt the coverage gives us a sense of the moment.





Pickman's model said:


> the sense of the moment is that there was a risk but they considered it inconsequential


Not quite that simple; they claim that they returned to their room to check on their children every half hour during the evening. They obviously recognised and foresaw the risks attendant upon leaving infants unsupervised in unfamiliar surroundings but decided to take the risk for the half hours when dining with their friends.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 5, 2018)

They were around a 300ft walk from the apartment, from the restaurant they couldn't even see the doors of the apartment, which they had left unlocked anyway. 

Hardly on a par with leaving your kids in the house whilst having a BBQ in your own garden.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the sense of the moment is that there was a risk but they considered it inconsequential



As did the others they dined with and as have other unfortunate parents assessing or not noticing other risks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> As did the others they dined with and as have other unfortunate parents assessing or not noticing other risks.


do you have any other statements of the blindingly obvious to make?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> To the McCanns and the others they dined with, the distance from table to door, in a holiday park with restricted access seemed safe.



What restricted access?



The walk between the apartment & restaurant included using a public street.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the sense of the moment is that there was a risk but they considered it inconsequential



Such is human folly.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> What restricted access?
> 
> View attachment 148869
> 
> The walk between the apartment & restaurant included using a public street.



Fucking hell, full Inspector Morse now. I understood that the type of resort had restricted access, but I stand corrected by your forensic analysis by tabloid.

Btw, as you can see the LoS over the swimming pool is nothing like 300ft.

Would I have done it? No, but I’m apparently obsessively cautious. I used to wonder about friends who would tell us they would leave the babies asleep in a hotel room, while they drank 6 or 7 floors down. It’s a curious thing that people who love their children also treat sometimes treat them with a lack of caution. I don’t despise them for it.


----------



## keybored (Oct 5, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Reminds me of a thread circa 2002 where someone lost their phone in a Chinese restaurant, a huge row broke out about the relevance of mentioning the restaurant was Chinese (because wacism, obvs) and twenty pages later the op returned to say they’d found the phone.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Fucking hell, full Inspector Morse now. I understood that the type of resort had restricted access, but I stand corrected by your forensic analysis by tabloid.



I just happened to remember it being widely reported at the time, that the walk between the two locations was via a public street, and that they had left the doors to their ground floor apartment unlocked, despite not having a view of the doors, and thinking that was a very odd thing to do.

Sorry if you missed out on these important points, and just made-up stuff up in your own head. 



> Btw, as you can see the LoS over the swimming pool is nothing like 300ft.



There was no 'Line of Sight' from the restaurant to the apartment's unlocked patio doors, due to trees/hedges, again widely reported at the time.



> Would I have done it? No, but I’m apparently obsessively cautious. *I used to wonder about friends who would tell us they would leave the babies asleep in a hotel room, while they drank 6 or 7 floors down.* It’s a curious thing that people who love their children also treat sometimes treat them with a lack of caution. I don’t despise them for it.



But, I assume, in those cases (a) there was restricted access, and (b) they locked the bloody doors!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 5, 2018)

Oh, here's the apartment...

 

...whilst the parents were about a 300 foot walk from their kids, the kids were just 30 feet from any random passer-by.


----------



## Weller (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> No one dining with them apparently suggested ‘WTF are you doing’? .


But that was because all the doctors on holiday with them were also leaving thier children alone not just that night but every night of the holiday refusing room watch or baby sitting because they would have had to have been back before 11pm
If you read the released statements by the PJ as they always do in Portugal law you will see that quite a few people did say WTF they some rang the reception and complained about the child crying for over an hour including the night before and including the woman in the apartment above Mrs Fenn and her Neice in official statement heard crying for 75 minutes
Even  thier own child asked them why they didnt come according to the parents statement yet still the next night when she went missing or whatever happened they still went out and refused a baby sitter etc that night the children none of them cried that nioght but the other 2 children didnt wake up and could not be roused when the PJ arrived
it just ALL seems so fishy to me and they did not always dine and drink in the tapas bar on site either

maybe we will never know the true story but the original timeline does not fit the evidence even our own police investigation came to that conclusion so changed it on crimewatch and removed one of the doctors stories or evidence suspect etc  about seeing the abductor because it could not possibly have happened that way or details seen at at that time without the McCanns or others seeing him too and if they lied why and how big is the lie imho that alone would have meant a proper full investigation had they not been doctors but came from a council estate its that that has always annoyed me why they are being ignored as possible suspects and nothing bad from evidence etc   can be published about the case in UK without them being threatened by expensive lawyers paid out of a fund set up to search for missing chld but only one mind no other missing children hence why the fund is not a registered charity that annoys me 
Something is not right but its a crazy  case where even the first call they made to Sky TV can now be seen as false the shutters were not jemied open indeed the only finger prints on the shutter were the mothers
so many things do not fit too many excuses and statements , changed or added stories in interviews or the mothers own book have changed to try to explain things the police released including ignoring thier childs worries about why they did not come when they were crying and I expect that too only came out later because a witness came forward from upstairs who heard the children crying the night before and the police eventually released that statement ...
I think some people are oblivious due to our media about the real evidence that was gathered and released by Portugal and Liverpool police much of it well known in Portugal including some strange evidence from thier own doctor friends from a previous holiday perhaps google gasper statement too many bizzare statements imho for thier not to have been a proper investigation of the parents as arguidos forcing them to return to Portugal for a reenactment etc for the police which they always refused to do



> Madeleine McCann complained to her mother after she was left crying and alone on the night before she disappeared, leaked police documents have disclosed.
> The little girl, then aged three, spoke to Kate McCann at breakfast the following morning and said: "Mummy, why didn’t you come when we were crying last night?"
> The question prompted Mrs McCann and her husband Gerry to discuss keeping a closer on eye on their children. However, just a few hours after that conversation, Madeleine vanished from their holiday apartment in the Algarve.



Madeleine McCann complained to mother Kate about being left crying alone


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Weller said:


> But that was because all the doctors on holiday with them were also leaving thier children alone not just that night but every night of the holiday refusing room watch or baby sitting because they would have had to have been back before 11pm
> If you read the released statements by the PJ as they always do in Portugal law you will see that quite a few people did say WTF they some rang the reception and complained about the child crying for over an hour including the night before and including the woman in the apartment above Mrs Fenn and her Neice in official statement heard crying for 75 minutes
> Even  thier own child asked them why they didnt come according to the parents statement yet still the next night when she went missing or whatever happened they still went out and refused a baby sitter etc that night the children none of them cried that nioght but the other 2 children didnt wake up and could not be roused when the PJ arrived
> it just ALL seems so fishy to me and they did not always dine and drink in the tapas bar on site either
> ...



I don’t see how they have been ignored as suspects. They were official suspects.

I do not have a clue as to whether they are guilty of anything or not and I’m very sceptical of what we ‘know’ about it all and drawing too many conclusions. 

Rather than universally indulged they appear to be the parents that it has been ok for the country to vent upon in a situation that normally draws sympathy. I reject the justifications for that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I don’t see how they have been ignored as suspects. They were official suspects.
> 
> I do not have a clue as to whether they are guilty of anything or not and I’m very sceptical of what we ‘know’ about it all and drawing too many conclusions.
> 
> Rather than universally indulged they appear to be the parents that it has been ok for the country to vent upon in a situation that normally draws sympathy. I reject the justifications for that.


If such a predicament normally wins sympathy and such has been denied in this case then perhaps you should consider why, why after the effusive outpouring of madeleine madness the parents have attracted less sympathy than would generally be the case


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If such a predicament normally wins sympathy and such has been denied in this case then perhaps you should consider why, why after the effusive outpouring of madeleine madness the parents have attracted less sympathy than would generally be the case



I expect because many people enjoy being harsh when granted the licence. 

It doesn’t follow for me that I would despise just because they take up a lot of column inches or police resources. 

Taking the harshest view (other than murder) that they seriously neglected their child simply for some adult company and a bit of tapas, are we not done with that yet? Isn’t losing a child through your own negligence to dwell in hell? And does doing that mean the best response is to call it a day after a few weeks or clutch onto any lifeline going?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I expect because many people enjoy being harsh when granted the licence.


This doesn't sit well with you're 'this sort of thing normally attracts public sympathy', I don't think you know what you're about. Again.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> This doesn't sit well with you're 'this sort of thing normally attracts public sympathy', I don't think you know what you're about. Again.



In a population of 65m you can’t have two lots of ‘many’?

To be frank though your criticism doesn’t make sense, because I wrote sympathy was usual, not mandatory..


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> In a population of 65m you can’t have two lots of ‘many’?


That's the best you can do? Two lots? 

There's generally at least three views in the country on any question.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> That's the best you can do? Two lots?
> 
> There's generally at least three views in the country on any question.



Have the courtesy to deal with the susbstance of a reply rather than take it up pedant creek without a paddle.

Why aren’t you done it with it and why isn’t their private hell isn’t enough?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Have the courtesy to deal with the susbstance of a reply rather than take it up pedant creek without a paddle.
> 
> Why aren’t you done it with it and why isn’t their private hell isn’t enough?


When you post something with substance i'll be pleased to engage with it. As it is all you're saying is it's nasty. Why aren't I done with it? Why should I be? It's not like km or gm are, and while this thread continues I'll be pleased to post on it. Their private hell may suffice but it's inaccessible to people here. We have to make do with this thread. Why don't you take your sanctimonious priggery elsewhere?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> When you post something with substance i'll be pleased to engage with it. As it is all you're saying is it's nasty. Why aren't I done with it? Why should I be? It's not like km or gm are, and while this thread continues I'll be pleased to post on it. Their private hell may suffice but it's inaccessible to people here. We have to make do with this thread. Why don't you take your sanctimonious priggery elsewhere?



Why do you need accessibility to their private hell you weirdo?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Why do you need accessibility to their private hell you weirdo?


Oh look it's you with your strawman™


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Oct 6, 2018)

I've read reports about a film being made called the 'Tapas Seven.'

Gerard Butler is in line to play Gerry with Lena Headey as Kate, due out next year apparently.


----------



## Weller (Oct 6, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I don’t see how they have been ignored as suspects. They were official suspects.



They have not been suspects in the Scotland Yard   Operation Grange investigation they were suspects or arguidos in the Portugal investigation which was shelved due to lack of evidence the parents refusing to answer many questions or return for a reenactment 
They have since lost their 8 year battle funded by public donations to the search fund against the Portuguese inspector who came to the conclusion that the girl died in the apartment in the  supreme court 

I just do not think we have had what would be the usual investigation that includes parents because of their powerful lawyers they have never been suspects here 
Its always bothered me that they  left the country after saying they would never leave until she was found and then refusing to answer questions as suspects in Portugal they then employed the most expensive lawyers to defend themselves and sue any newspaper that spoke badly about them then refused to participate in the investigations reenactment of their own timeline in Portugal which Id expect any parent would usually want to help an investigation into their missing child 




> In February’s ruling the judges also declared the lifting of Kate and Gerry’s ‘arguidos’ status (a kind of formal suspect), and the 2008 archiving of the criminal investigation into Maddie’s disappearance, did not mean they were innocent.



McCanns fail to stop ‘not innocent’ ruling in Maddie’s disappearance – The Cadaver Dog Network





> *7 SEPTEMBER QUESTIONS KATE McCANN REFUSED TO ANSWER*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



BBC NEWS | UK | The questions put to Kate McCann


----------



## friendofdorothy (Oct 6, 2018)

I know I'm new to this thread, but I feel compelled to say a few things:

In Britain people are presumed not guilty until proved otherwise.
It is a right to remain silent. 

People should not be tried by newspapers.
Weller you are quoting the fucking Daily mail.


----------



## Weller (Oct 6, 2018)

friendofdorothy said:


> I know I'm new to this thread, but I feel compelled to say a few things:
> 
> In Britain people are presumed not guilty until proved otherwise.
> It is a right to remain silent.
> ...


whoops my bad changed to BBC link above but have this one then too all the same questions though from the official released Portugal investigations but thats thousands of pages in pdf form including thier conclusion when it was shelved and all statements photos etc some of it quite bizzare

I found it pretty disturbing now especially as we as a family donated to the fund several times in first year I for the sake of me cannot imagine any parents ripping the cover off thier missing daughters painting book to write down a timeline for the police thinking the child  would be returning and leaving  the twins alone even after one had gone missing to raise the alarm 
I know I would have stayed with the other children and  shouted or phoned for help , joined the other holiday makers in searching which they did not do and then  answered anything the police asked to help find my kid
but much more just does not make sense to me personally over the years evidence and from the parents on tv interviews too

The 48 police questions Madeleine McCann's mother refused to answer


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 6, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> I was pretty much with you up to that bit.
> 
> What does a foreign country have to do with it? Is there some added danger from the child not speaking Portuguese? Is abduction more likely in Portugal than here?



An abduction is more likely when a child is unattended, out of line of sight, and being looked in on 'every twenty minutes or so'.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 6, 2018)

One of those colouring in books? Oh yeah I could totally imagine doing that. Or anything that came to hand. We are drowning in shite like that these days, one, two, many painting books. 
So what are you suggesting might have happened Weller?


----------



## Weller (Oct 6, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> They were around a 300ft walk from the apartment, from the restaurant they couldn't even see the doors of the apartment, which they had left unlocked anyway.
> 
> Hardly on a par with leaving your kids in the house whilst having a BBQ in your own garden.



not forgetting that the first call was to Sky news and they said as did members of thier family that were interviewed here originally that the window shutter had been forced open they then changed that to the patio door had been left unlocked as it was virtually impossible according to the investigation for an abductor to have got through the window over a bed then back out carrying a child in the few minutes that their timeline left without an abductor  being seen or caught according to the investigation 

I would just like to know why they were so certain straight away she had not walked out or was not hiding but was abducted then added and  changed so many other  details over the years too its strange behavior


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 6, 2018)

Weller said:


> whoops my bad changed to BBC link above but have this one then too all the same questions though from the official released Portugal investigations but thats thousands of pages in pdf form including thier conclusion when it was shelved and all statements photos etc some of it quite bizzare
> 
> I found it pretty disturbing now especially as we as a family donated to the fund several times in first year I for the sake of me cannot imagine any parents ripping the cover off thier missing daughters painting book to write down a timeline for the police thinking the child  would be returning and leaving  the twins alone even after one had gone missing to raise the alarm
> I know I would have stayed with the other children and  shouted or phoned for help , joined the other holiday makers in searching which they did not do and then  answered anything the police asked to help find my kid
> ...


To save space “McCanns remained silent during interview” might have been quicker.


----------



## Weller (Oct 6, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> One of those colouring in books? Oh yeah I could totally imagine doing that. Or anything that came to hand. We are drowning in shite like that these days, one, two, many painting books.
> So what are you suggesting might have happened Weller?


I am not sure but I would want to keep my missing childs paintings and drawing book as  it was and just remembered the timeline 
I certainly would not have washed their favorite toy either they were not drowning in favourite toys and books these were a few special items took on holiday
Its just odd but perhaps a proper investigation would have sorted  out if the cadaver scent from the dogs etc is correct or not its just all so bizzare but there could have been an accident child falling drowsy etc then panic  like the Portuguese inspector concluded its entirely possible too surely


----------



## Weller (Oct 6, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> To save space “McCanns remained silent during interview” might have been quicker.


Yes but they have not answered most those questions in the years  since thier child went missing  either neither have the others that were with them and their lawyers make sure that they do not have to


----------



## campanula (Oct 6, 2018)

I don't know what to believe regarding who abducted the child...but I lost a 13 year old sister in a fire, also left alone. 13...not under 3 years old...and 2 who were even younger.

For that alone, the McCann's have been damned in my mind, as selfish, negligent, entitled aresholes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2018)

campanula said:


> I don't know what to believe regarding who abducted the child...but I lost a 13 year old sister in a fire, also left alone. 13...not under 3 years old...and 2 who were even younger.
> 
> For that alone, the McCann's have been damned in my mind, as selfish, negligent, entitled aresholes.


((((campanula))))


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> ((((campanula))))


Yep.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> To save space “McCanns remained silent during interview” might have been quicker.


To save money they left their children without adult supervision


----------



## IC3D (Oct 6, 2018)

They should have gone for ketamine


----------



## kebabking (Oct 6, 2018)

IC3D said:


> They should have gone for ketamine



Isn't that one of the suggestions - that the kids who had spent the last few nights crying while their parents went out were, err... s_trangely silent, _and that this new and innovative form of child care had gone somewhat wrong?

Dunno if I believe it, I doubt I'd fall over if eventually comes out that that's what happened, but at the very least they were appallingly negligent...


----------



## kenny g (Oct 7, 2018)

Re-watching some of the press conferences and interviews with the couple they make "Alexander Petrov" and "Ruslan Boshirov" look like paragons  of innocence. It may just be a case of unfortunate body language but they have the mannerisms of a defendant you most definitely would avoid putting in the witness box.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 7, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I would suspect that a large part of the media coverage they continue to receive is based on the fact that the editors of that media know that a large proportion of their viewers/readers believe that the McCann's are as guilty as sin...
> 
> If the McCann's are in the front page, the online comments section will be seething - and the advertiser's and traffic counters happy.
> 
> ...



Sorry to hear about your daughter.

You're right, the media know the McCann's story will sell newspapers and attract hits to their online websites, so I can understand from their perspective why they cover it so prominently.

I too feel massively sorry for the parents and they'll no doubt feel worse as like you say, they will blame their own negligence in leaving Madeline unattended.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 7, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I suspect they're more than willing to put up with the media coverage because they cling to the understandable if irrational belief they're going to get her back alive, which  makes me think (other than a moment of carelessness) they played no part in their daughter's disappearance. Without the publicity this would have long since been filed away as a cold case.
> The press no doubt have their own not very noble motives for keeping this case in the public eye.
> As for the money still being spent on an investigation well the kidnapping and possible murder of a toddler is a serious crime and you can't put a budget on solving it. I would expect that somewhere in Scotland Yard some senior officer is looking at the facts and asking questions like "Are there any real leads to investigate?", "is there an actual possibility of an arrest?". If the answer to these questions is yes then they should keep investigating, If no and this is just to keep the press off the Home Secretary's back then it should stop.
> Personally I think this case will (if ever) only get solved when someone accidentally finds a body in some unmarked grave.
> Their child isn't any more or any less deserving of coverage than any other missing child but I have seen no evidence that the police treat any case of this nature has anything other than extremely serious.



Don't get me wrong, I don't think for one minute that they had anything to do with their daughter's disappearance. On their part, it was nothing more than irresponsibility.

I do take your point re: the media coverage. I suppose any desperate parent whose child is missing would do the same, whether their hope of finding them is irrational or not. Guess I'm just fascinated to know what attracts the media to give more prominence to a certain missing person case.

As for the police, I don't think they've necessarily taken Madeline's case any more serious than they would others, but I do think there has been a huge element of political and media influence in keeping the case open. Is it really justifiable to spend such a large amount of money on this case in comparison to others? The police haven't covered themselves in glory in all this either, just look at the different conclusions reached by the Portuguese and UK police as to what actually happened.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 7, 2018)

Weller said:


> Yes but they have not answered most those questions in the years  since thier child went missing  either neither have the others that were with them and their lawyers make sure that they do not have to


How do you know this? You don’t have access to the statements they and the others gave to the police and they are not allowed to talk about them, though now it’s been ten years you’ll find the answers to your 48 questions in the numerous quotes and timelines online. This 48 questions carry on probably relates to one interview where they remained silent. I gather by the information available to us now it wasn’t the only one they attended. 
I don’t want to write an essay on the subject but much of what you say hasn’t been investigated or looked at actually has by both the British and the Portuguese and whilst various theories may have popped up in 2008 it doesn’t appear that both police forces are vastly at odds now, the arguido status was lifted some time ago. it’s just the evidence they had  isn’t as conclusive as some seem to think. Google it, well google it more.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 7, 2018)

And as for this “all mothers would do this” shite it’s sexist nonsense, we don’t all behave the same or place the same value on the same things. A washed toy ffs.


----------



## Weller (Oct 8, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> How do you know this? You don’t have access to the statements they and the others gave to the police and they are not allowed to talk about them,
> .



Yes we do all have the right to access the  statements Portuguese law allows the release of the statements when a case is shelved it relates to the 48 questions asked when they were taken in for questioning at the police station as suspects
They were released including the refusal to answer the questions again at the regoratory interviews carried out by the Liecester police at the request of the  Policia Judiciária after they returned here after being made suspects due to the British cadaver and blood dog evidence
Tthe only people not able to speak about this openly are the media  here in the U.K much of the evidence as well as the Inspectors conclusion including his win in the supreme court 2 years ago are all publicised all around the world all of it gathered up until the case was shelved until further evidence£ in Portugal
All was was released appart from a few documents that they probably wish to keep , it  included all the British police dog handler evidence and all the statements , photos , documents on DVD in PDF format by the Policia Judiciária Its always been freely available  much like much of our own freedom of information about crimes etc here and imho is much better than relying on google searches or careful newspaper headlines so they dont get sued made up to sell newspapers

Besides all that it has been discussed over the years in depth elsewhere than this thread , the parents themselves have said that they and the Tapas 7 will not answer those questions or return for a reenactment and thier lawyers make sure that they do not have to it is one of the reasons it could not be concluded in Portugal



HoratioCuthbert said:


> whilst various theories may have popped up in 2008 it doesn’t appear that both police forces are vastly at odds now.



Some  British Police and the PJ are still vastly at odds the main original investigator concluding that the girl sadly died in the apartment after an accident and some British police support them in that  this has been well publicised elsewhere in the world the parents have now lost to that original  Portuguese detective inspector in charge of the case  the Supreme court after 8 years to try to silence him things may change but they are now waiting for yet another appeal decision in Europe about human rights set up by thier lawyers

They remain straight forward questions imho and many more since that any parent would want to answer to try and help the search especially back then at an early  time in the search most are  about evidence collected by both Portugal investigators and including conclusions also from the UK dog handlers and police forensic investigators brought in to  to try and avoid difficulties between 2 countries differing laws




HoratioCuthbert said:


> A washed toy ffs.



It was the toy that she carried around with her always , the mother , every interview  the missing childs cuddle toy that was also just one of the places that the British forensic  dogs found cadaver or blood , the other places included ,  the wardrobe , behind the sofa , on the window ledge , in the flower border , the boot of the parents hire car , the mothers trousers and a few other places but only in that apartment although the dogs were taken to other apartments and other vehicles
Confirmed by different flown over specialist British forensic dogs that was the reason I expect they drew up that list of 48 questions , I think that they are and were important questions that required all the suspects to stay in the country to help with

Yes none of us know what happened but this has been very far from the usual investigation into a missing child imo and that is because they employed one of the most expensive lawyer companies in the world paid out of a search funds donations  that doesnt even search for the 1 missing child it was set up for never mind any others

Probably enough now anyway but I have followed this case for personal reasons too over the years and its been like no other before as said previously we as a family donated to the search fund originally several times


----------



## Crystal Phallus (Oct 8, 2018)

i tHINK sHE WAS aBDUCTED bY aLIENS


----------



## Poi E (Oct 8, 2018)

Clearly a cock.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 8, 2018)

Crystal Phallus said:


> i tHINK sHE WAS aBDUCTED bY aLIENS



Emergency alias. Goodbye.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2018)

This thread reminds me of those 'the desert blooms after it rains' World About Us docs.
Every so often it bursts into flower, and then....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

the search for madeleine mccann has cost the uk taxpayer a whopping £11,750,000

Madeleine McCann's parents get £100k boost in book sales | Daily Mail Online


----------



## dessiato (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the search for madeleine mccann has cost the uk taxpayer a whopping £11,750,000
> 
> Madeleine McCann's parents get £100k boost in book sales | Daily Mail Online


I'll ask again, how much has been spent on finding all the other missing kids since Maddy disappeared?

I don't begrudge them searching for their child, but continue to be saddened by the apparent lack of help and publicity being given to all the others.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I'll ask again, how much has been spent on finding all the other missing kids since Maddy disappeared?
> 
> I don't begrudge them searching for their child, but continue to be saddened by the apparent lack of help and publicity being given to all the others.


i don't know how much has been spent on looking for all the other missing children since 3 may 2007, but i wouldn't be surprised if it was rather less than £11.75m


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 11, 2019)

This would have been consigned to the archives years ago if it wasn’t for the gutter press agitating with dog whistle tactics.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

Everytime this thread is bumped I think they have finally charged the parents found her


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 11, 2019)

Meanwhile, on the other side, someone else has confessed to murdering Jonbenet Ramsey. 

It's high time we had some hoaxers on the Madeleine McCann case.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 11, 2019)

Some times this place gets a bad rep, but...119 pages. Let's not forget we've done our bit too urbs

Keeping her memory alive, in preparation for her inevitable return. Trebles all round.


----------



## cyril_smear (Jan 11, 2019)

what happens if she is founds?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Jan 11, 2019)

Deej92 said:


> ...Guess I'm just fascinated to know what attracts the media to give more prominence to a certain missing person case.
> 
> As for the police, I don't think they've necessarily taken Madeline's case any more serious than they would others, but I do think there has been a huge element of political and media influence in keeping the case open. Is it really justifiable to spend such a large amount of money on this case in comparison to others?


It's a well-known phenomenon:

Missing white woman syndrome. Applies to girls as well.

Missing white woman syndrome - Wikipedia


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 12, 2019)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> It's a well-known phenomenon:
> 
> Missing white woman syndrome. Applies to girls as well.
> 
> Missing white woman syndrome - Wikipedia


Really? I genuinely can’t think of any other missing white children’s names off the top of my head. I’m sure they’ll come to me.


----------



## dessiato (Jan 12, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Really? I genuinely can’t think of any other missing white children’s names off the top of my head. I’m sure they’ll come to me.


Ben Needham. Not a girl or woman, obviously, but a missing white child. 

Re my earlier posts, how much time, money, and effort has been put into finding him by comparison, I wonder.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 12, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> what happens if she is founds?



Huge funeral, I suppose.


----------



## Part 2 (Jan 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Huge funeral, I suppose.



Day off work though.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 12, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> what happens if she is founds?



She can only be a massive disappointment to the entire nation, and then what? Books will have to be written.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 12, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> what happens if she is founds?



The Express will have to find a new subject for the front page of approximately 25% of its editions.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jan 12, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Ben Needham. Not a girl or woman, obviously, but a missing white child.
> 
> Re my earlier posts, how much time, money, and effort has been put into finding him by comparison, I wonder.


Why has no-one recorded a song in the hope of finding Madeleine? It makes my blood boil. Popular singers? PAH


----------



## stavros (Jan 12, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> The Express will have to find a new subject for the front page of approximately 25% of its editions.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 12, 2019)

So, do we think she was abducted, or did the parents do it?


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 12, 2019)

Abducted.


----------



## cyril_smear (Jan 12, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> So, do we think she was abducted, or did the parents do it?



abducted by parents


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 12, 2019)

Parents drugged her to keep her quiet but she OD'd, stopped breathing or choked on vomit or whatever. Obvious really


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 16, 2019)

Just a heads up, there's a new 8 part documentary on Netflix for those who may be interested, just watching the 1st one now.

Not sure how it's going to go, but decent so far.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Just a heads up, there's a new 8 part documentary on Netflix


It came up in our “who is watching” section. It said “who is watching Maddie McCann?”

Well, not Gerry and Kate, that’s the point.


----------



## marshall (Mar 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Just a heads up, there's a new 8 part documentary on Netflix for those who may be interested, just watching the 1st one now.
> 
> Not sure how it's going to go, but decent so far.



It's going to go nowhere, complete waste of your time. There's lots of worthwhile, worth a watch 'real life' crime stuff on Netflix, this isn't one of them.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 16, 2019)

Yep, that's one to make sure I don't watch.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 16, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> abducted by parents


i like the way you cut through the binary bollocks


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 16, 2019)

marshall said:


> It's going to go nowhere, complete waste of your time. There's lots of worthwhile, worth a watch 'real life' crime stuff on Netflix, this isn't one of them.



How so? Does it make the parents out to be innocent?  I don't expect any revelations but it seems decently made and researched at least.


----------



## maomao (Mar 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Just a heads up, there's a new 8 part documentary on Netflix for those who may be interested, just watching the 1st one now.
> 
> Not sure how it's going to go, but decent so far.


8 fucking parts? Ted Bundy killed 20-30 women and he got a four parter.


----------



## andysays (Mar 16, 2019)

maomao said:


> 8 fucking parts? Ted Bundy killed 20-30 women and he got a four parter.


But did he get an audience with the Pope?


----------



## marshall (Mar 16, 2019)

maomao said:


> 8 fucking parts? Ted Bundy killed 20-30 women and he got a four parter.



 Quite, not sure how they're going to spin it out when there's nothing new to talk about, it's just...pointless.


----------



## cyril_smear (Mar 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i like the way you cut through the binary bollocks



Just the man on the street telling it how it is!


----------



## MrCurry (Mar 17, 2019)

How many African kids could have been prevented from dying with the money spent on / donated to the Maddie McCann search?  But of course the African kids aren’t cute and blond, are they?


----------



## Badgers (Mar 17, 2019)

Have the murderers parents endorsed the Netflix show?


----------



## dessiato (Mar 17, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> How many African kids could have been prevented from dying with the money spent on / donated to the Maddie McCann search?  But of course the African kids aren’t cute and blond, are they?


And how many missing kids in the UK could have had some of this money helping, saving, finding them?


----------



## Badgers (Mar 17, 2019)

dessiato said:


> And how many missing kids in the UK could have had some of this money helping, saving, finding them?


And how many more police swanning around in a Portugal holiday resort would it pay for?


----------



## dessiato (Mar 17, 2019)

I know it's a tragedy, I really understand that, I also understand why they'd want so much doing to find her. But she isn't the only one, she wasn't the first nor the last.

Why does she merit all this extra effort? After all, if the parents had looked after her properly in the first place they wouldn't be in this situation.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 17, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Just a heads up, there's a new 8 part documentary on Netflix for those who may be interested, just watching the 1st one now.
> 
> Not sure how it's going to go, but decent so far.



No spoilers, please


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 17, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I know it's a tragedy, I really understand that, I also understand why they'd want so much doing to find her. But she isn't the only one, she wasn't the first nor the last.
> 
> Why does she merit all this extra effort? After all, if the parents had looked after her properly in the first place they wouldn't be in this situation.


What a refreshing opinion to hear on this 12 year old thread.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 17, 2019)

marshall said:


> It's going to go nowhere, complete waste of your time. There's lots of worthwhile, worth a watch 'real life' crime stuff on Netflix, this isn't one of them.



Making a Murderer Season 3: The McCanns


----------



## dessiato (Mar 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What a refreshing opinion to hear on this 12 year old thread.


I've said it from the beginning. I lived in Portugal at the time and it was one of the big discussion topics there, and especially the apparent negligence of the parents.


----------



## belboid (Mar 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Have the murderers parents endorsed the Netflix show?


lol, have they fuck. 

No one has, apart from the producers, and they don’t seem that keen either.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 17, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> No spoilers, please



On episode 4, they still haven't found her... Yet.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 17, 2019)

Who have they got to play Clement Freud?


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 17, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> On episode 4, they still haven't found her... Yet.



It's like the new _Lost_. They'll wring at least four series out of it, but suspending disbelief will become increasingly difficult and unrewarding.


----------



## UnicornElf (Mar 18, 2019)

It took very long time to eliminate parents as suspects in JonBenét Ramsey case. I wonder whether McCann's will ever be eliminated as suspects.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## Nylock (Mar 19, 2019)

stavros said:


>


That's another 50% and fulminating about brexit is the remaining 25%....


----------



## Dom Traynor (Mar 19, 2019)

billy_bob said:


> It's like the new _Lost_. They'll wring at least four series out of it, but suspending disbelief will become increasingly difficult and unrewarding.



Let’s hope they don’t discover an Irish guy in a cave with a bicycle


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 19, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> Let’s hope they don’t discover an Irish guy in a cave with a bicycle



Pretty sure it was a Scottish guy in a bunker.


----------



## MrCurry (Mar 27, 2019)

Having watched the Netflix series right through, I’ve come to the conclusion that it probably wasn’t the parents wot dunnit, but boy, aren’t they odd?  I’m not just talking about directly after the disappearance, when they could be forgiven for being in shock, but at every appearance in front of the camera their manner just seems strange. 

Being asked, for example, “did you ever give your children drugs to help them sleep” wouldn’t normally be met with the dismissive response “well we’re not going to talk about that”...!  

I don’t doubt they were unfairly put through the ringer by the Portuguese police and tabloid media, but my god they didn’t help themselves much.

Anyhow, having watched the whole series, that was pretty much the only surprise to me. My view remains that it’s a sickening waste of money (both public and private) to spend so much looking for one girl, when thousands of kids avoidably die each day for lack of basic sanitation and cheap medicines.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 27, 2019)

Does the programme analyse the fetishisation of the case by British media? Concurrent with all manner of revelations about child abuse in Britain. Just sayin'.


----------



## MrCurry (Mar 28, 2019)

Well they talked in general terms about how remarkable the level of press attention was, but without coming out and condemning it as downright sick.


----------



## T & P (Mar 28, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Does the programme analyse the fetishisation of the case by British media? Concurrent with all manner of revelations about child abuse in Britain. Just sayin'.


And expanding on that theme, does it explore in an impartial and fair way the claims and beliefs put forward by the Portuguese investigators who thought the parents might have been involved in the disappearance?

The way it was instantly dismissed by the British media was little short of disgraceful. I remember the press mocking the Portuguese police dog trained to smell blood and the scent of dead bodies when it strongly reacted while sniffing around the McCanns' rental car. Police dogs in the UK are clever, invaluable resources available to investigators, but Johnny Foreigner clearly cannot be trusted to train and use dogs for police work...


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 29, 2019)

T & P said:


> I remember the press mocking the Portuguese police dog trained to smell blood and the scent of dead bodies when it strongly reacted while sniffing around the McCanns' rental car. Police dogs in the UK are clever, invaluable resources available to investigators, but Johnny Foreigner clearly cannot be trusted to train and use dogs for police work...



Actually, the two dogs that were used in this case were British police dogs, brought in at the request of the McCanns.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 29, 2019)

Yeah, the documentary implied that trained sniffer dogs were unreliable, but never really gave a reason as to why. 

But apparently saying you had no involvement in the disposal of your daughter's body is to be trusted 100%.

I thought the documentary was ok, at least it got the views of those close to the action, as it were. The snakey PR people are my 'favourites'.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Mar 29, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> The snakey PR people are my 'favourites'.



Thanks. I might watch it after all.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Mar 29, 2019)

How long did it take?


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 29, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> Thanks. I might watch it after all.



I also found it useful as a reminder of everything that has gone on, it's easy to forget it happened 12 odd years ago...


----------



## UrbaneFox (Mar 29, 2019)

I have to decide whether watching it is worth spending 30 minutes, 2 hours, or more, of my life.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 29, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> I have to decide whether watching it is worth spending 30 minutes, 2 hours, or more, of my life.



It's 8 hour long episodes, so take a sick day off work and get watching.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> It's 8 hour long episodes, so take a sick day off work and get watching.


Or just read the thread


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2019)

UrbaneFox said:


> I have to decide whether watching it is worth spending 30 minutes, 2 hours, or more, of my life.


Yes, yes it is


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2019)

If you get past the first few episodes it explains pretty well how THE PARENTS DID IT theories are bullshit, gives a decent insight into how the media develop and maintain  their cunt practices, you’ll see all the folks that were actually involved in the investigation and even tabloid style reporting saying they thought the parents were guilty in the initial episodes and then   explaining their u turn in later episodes. Given a 12 year thread on urban is still banging on about the fucking 49 “unanswered” questions, it’s a good idea that those still  getting riled on this thread about unsubstantiated bullshit watch the whole thing just to recap on the evidence gathered over the last decade, with a view to ceasing posting speculation that’s about 10 years behind the fucking times for fuck sake. 

Cheers, I rate the series 6/10.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 29, 2019)

Gerry McCann is creepy though.

Plus, what about the sniffer dogs?


----------



## Sodapop (Mar 29, 2019)

I tried to watch this but only have a streaming box which told me there were no sources. I would like to watch and see for myself


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 30, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Gerry McCann is creepy though.
> 
> Plus, what about the sniffer dogs?


They reacted to something.  But there was no dna-able material in either location.  It’s the only evidence.  

For me, I don’t have a problem believing parents may have accidentally killed their kid and attempted to conceal it, but for there to be absolutely no evidence seems unlikely, given the few minutes they’d have had to clean up.  Indeed, for the dog’s finding in the car they’d also have had to hide the body for almost three weeks in the middle of a huge hunt for the child, and then disposed of the body entirely without trace and cleaned the car if all dna, while under huge press and police scrutiny.  

Occam’s Razor here points to Madeline being taken.  Which doesn’t let the parents off the hook for leaving the kids, but is much more plausible.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Mar 30, 2019)

spanglechick said:


> They reacted to something.  But there was no dna-able material in either location.  It’s the only evidence.
> 
> For me, I don’t have a problem believing parents may have accidentally killed their kid and attempted to conceal it, but for there to be absolutely no evidence seems unlikely, given the few minutes they’d have had to clean up.  Indeed, for the dog’s finding in the car they’d also have had to hide the body for almost three weeks in the middle of a huge hunt for the child, and then disposed of the body entirely without trace and cleaned the car if all dna, while under huge press and police scrutiny.
> 
> Occam’s Razor here points to Madeline being taken.  Which doesn’t let the parents off the hook for leaving the kids, but is much more plausible.



That makes sense, thanks. 

Interestingly, the documentary gives little mention about their negligence regarding leaving babies unattended, bar a brief mention that it's ok to do so by one of the journalists, as he's done it before.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 12, 2019)

Watched it to the end now and have come to the following conclusions :-
The Portuguese Plod are almost comically incompetent, the case they tried to build against the McCann's, Robert Murat and the Russian guy seemed to be based on personal dislike, wild guesses and a desperate desire to pin it on someone who was  not Portuguese as soon as possible and sod actually solving the case.
The press both British and Portuguese are an unredeemable bunch of vile scumbags and the blonde Portuguese woman Sandra who tried to sell herself as a real life Lois Lane was one of the worst.
The McCanns are not a very like-able couple especially the father and were criminally negligent in leaving 3 small children alone in an unlocked apartment. but I have no doubt that they are actually innocent in the disappearance of their daughter. The case that Gonzalo Amaral tried to present against them was farcical to say the least.
Some people came out of it in a positive light, the Spanish detective who failed to find her but helped catch a dozen pedo's whilst he was looking, the MccCann's Portuguese lawyer, the UK cop running the Scotland Yard Child Unit and the guy willing to step up and fund the search out of his own pocket but most of the people involved didn't look too good at the end.
As for Operation Grange, the UK plod rapidly proved themselves in a different league to the Portuguese ones but they came to the case years too late after all the evidence had been trampled on by buffoons and self-promoting fools.
It's been 12 years now and whilst you can't put a price on a child's life or catching a child killer (more likely) there doesn't seem to be much point in going on with this if it isn't throwing up any real leads and there doesn't seem to be any progress on that.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 13, 2019)

There's a documentary being broadcast later this week. It's "interesting" even here in Spain.


----------



## Indeliblelink (May 5, 2019)

Article saying the German serial child killer Martin Ney is a suspect. Seems his other victims were boys though.
Madeleine McCann investigators probe convicted child killer from Germany


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 5, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


>


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

from the star


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 5, 2019)

FFS, what a waste of fucking money.


----------



## BryanLuc (Jun 5, 2019)

I have never understood how the McCanns keep this investigation going when other cases seem to slip by the wayside. Not only do Scotland Yard keep finding funds but they seem able to employ an official PR man. Where does al the money come from
I know that he is a surgeon and she is a doctor so they must have a good income but even so


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jun 5, 2019)

BryanLuc said:


> I have never understood how the McCanns keep this investigation going when other cases seem to slip by the wayside. Not only do Scotland Yard keep finding funds but they seem able to employ an official PR man. Where does al the money come from
> I know that he is a surgeon and she is a doctor so they must have a good income but even so



That weird creep business owner from Scotland who owned Stockport County briefly payrolled them around 10 years ago. I suspect there are other strange folk with money to burn doing similar.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 5, 2019)

Plod fancies another few holidays in Portugal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Plod fancies another few holidays in Portugal.


it's no coincidence operation grange is named for a country house with farm buildings attached as many of the cops 'working' on the investigation will have bought just such a property on the taxpayers' dime


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jul 17, 2019)

Don't forget the Maddie posters when packing for your holidays guys.

British tourists urged to take posters of missing Madeleine McCann on holiday


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 17, 2019)

skyscraper101 said:


> Don't forget the Maddie posters when packing for your holidays guys.
> 
> British tourists urged to take posters of missing Madeleine McCann on holiday


the poster's a bit shit

not least because mm would be 15 now, not 9


----------



## Gaia (Jul 17, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> That weird creep business owner from Scotland who owned Stockport County briefly payrolled them around 10 years ago. I suspect there are other strange folk with money to burn doing similar.



Most of it comes from the government. If you pay taxes, YOU'RE paying for it. From the Beeb (05/06/2019): More funds pledged for Madeleine McCann search. Home Office has granted the Met yet another 6 months funding. Why are they still concentrating on Portugal…? It's part of Schengen, so whoever abducted her could have taken her across the border very easily. 

This is fucking ridiculous, why the fuck is this investigation so special…? Go to the Missing People website and there are kids who've been missing for the same length of time (girl from Irvine, Ayrshire who's been missing since 2009 (when she was 2) don't see her family demanding millions from the taxpayer. Or Sandy Davison (also from Irvine) who's been missing since 1976 (aged 3)).


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the poster's a bit shit
> View attachment 177653
> not least because mm would be 15 now, not 9


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 3, 2020)

Seems some German fella is in the frame for her disappearance now...


----------



## blossie33 (Jun 3, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems some German fella is in the frame for her disappearance now...



Yes, I just read that - guessed someone here would post   

Well....we shall see


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 3, 2020)

I'm thinking of opening an investigation into whether I can pay to have someone kidnap and murder this fucking thread.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 3, 2020)

Should fill the front pages


----------



## cracklivesmata (Jun 3, 2020)

Wurst than Hitler.


----------



## stavros (Jun 3, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems some German fella is in the frame for her disappearance now...



This is why we voted to leave!


----------



## brogdale (Jun 3, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Should fill the front pages


In the absence of any Royal birth/death/marriage or an 'Arctic blast' how else could they get their own incompetence off the front pages?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 3, 2020)

suppose this gets sir cliff off the hook then


----------



## two sheds (Jun 3, 2020)

What mainly confused me when it all happened was the 'Missing' posters with photograph in Redruth train station. She's going to turn up in Redruth?  The only people who go to redruth are mining or steam engine enthusiasts.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> What mainly confused me when it all happened was the 'Missing' posters with photograph in Redruth train station. She's going to turn up in Redruth?  The only people who go to redruth are mining or steam engine enthusiasts.


They could have other hobbies though


----------



## MrSki (Jun 4, 2020)

Hope it puts an end to it all. Can't see how the Met have justified all the money on this one case.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 4, 2020)

A glance at the Telegraph website tells me that this sudden and unexpected discovery by the Met is in no way a manufactured distraction from anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> What mainly confused me when it all happened was the 'Missing' posters with photograph in Redruth train station. She's going to turn up in Redruth?  The only people who go to redruth are mining or steam engine enthusiasts.


if she'd wandered out of Praia da luz and taken a right and third left she'd have ended up there


----------



## MrCurry (Jun 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> What mainly confused me when it all happened was the 'Missing' posters with photograph in Redruth train station.



What mainly confused me when it all happened was the monumental disparity in compassion which led to so many £millions being raised for the hunt to find her, together with thousands of hours of TV airtime, when just a small fraction of that could‘ve saved the lives of hundreds of poor babies in Africa.  But they’re black, and she was cute and blonde, so it figures!


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 4, 2020)

Apparently the front page on all the papers except the Metro which has 50,000 deaths in UK as headline.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 4, 2020)

Raheem said:


> A glance at the Telegraph website tells me that this sudden and unexpected discovery by the Met is in no way a manufactured distraction from anything.


With the Germans and Portuguese in on it I suppose? 

This place gets more like Infowars every day.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 4, 2020)

Would be cheaper to just arrest the parents


----------



## dessiato (Jun 4, 2020)

Years ago I knew a forensic scientist who worked for the Home Office. He said that if the public knew how often kids disappear or are seriously hurt they’d be shocked. In his opinion, as tragic as the McCann case undoubtedly is, it was hard to justify the vast amount spent on searching for her, and little or nothing being spent on the others.

I have said it many times, what about all these other missing kids? Who’s spending vast amounts looking for them?


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 4, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> suppose this gets sir cliff off the hook then



Don't be silly - he would have people to do the actual abducting for him. If he were an abductor of children, that is


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 4, 2020)

The Brit filth have combined golf and investigation jaunts for what seems like an eternity. Their boner for the parents has kept this going.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 4, 2020)

Time to add another 10 pages by saying this should be a reminder to parents, no matter how posh, not to leave infants and toddlers unattended in unfamiliar environments to go on the piss.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 4, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> What mainly confused me when it all happened was the monumental disparity in compassion which led to so many £millions being raised for the hunt to find her, together with thousands of hours of TV airtime, when just a small fraction of that could‘ve saved the lives of hundreds of poor babies in Africa.  But they’re black, and she was cute and blonde, so it figures!



Yes indeed that's what mainly confused me, too. The Redruth posters were just an instance of the overall disparity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Yes indeed that's what mainly confused me, too. The Redruth posters were just an instance of the overall disparity.


Yeh there were posters up where I worked. A library in London. From where no one had gone to Portugal.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 4, 2020)

Why don’t the cops just call the number last dialled on the phone and see who picks up ?


----------



## High Voltage (Jun 4, 2020)

Be a bloody good time for the poor little sod to turn up mind, what with CV19, social distancing, quarantining and what not


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 4, 2020)

They put a poster up in our works canteen, sadly there wasn’t a poster up for the Serbian mass murderer that was working there.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

If it was my child, I'd still be looking.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 4, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> If it was my child, I'd still be looking.


But would you have the Met Police still looking for you?


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

dessiato said:


> if the public knew how often kids disappear or are seriously hurt they’d be shocked.


The figures aren't hidden. 

'The public' know about it. Like 'the public' know how many women are killed each week. It's not a secret.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

Badgers said:


> But would you have the Met Police still looking for you?


If I could yes, I'd have everybody looking. It's my child.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 4, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> If I could yes, I'd have everybody looking. It's my child.


I am sure all parents would if they could. 
Fact is they don't, literally none of them apart from the negligent McCanns


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> If I could yes, I'd have everybody looking. It's my child.


By now mm's parents can't have many places left to look


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I am sure all parents would if they could.
> Fact is they don't, literally none of them apart from the negligent McCanns


I've just read back and found when I last posted on this thread   


Sweet FA in 2014 said:


> I honestly don't get the vitriol aimed at the McCanns. Why are you and others _so_ judgemental? They fucked up royally for a wide variety of reasons and they've paid a terrible price.


Obviously I do get the vitriol - class & privilege coupled with the fact that everyone thinks they dunnit.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 4, 2020)

this is going to get the internet ms marples going innit. they have already come to the verdict that the parents are to blame. Im sure they will find a way to work around this development and bring up some convoluted justification that the mcanns are still behind it.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 4, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> this is going to get the internet ms marples going innit. they have already come to the verdict that the parents are to blame. Im sure they will find a way to work around this development and bring up some convoluted justification that the mcanns are still behind it.


I think it's long been well established that, by their own admission, they are.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 4, 2020)

dessiato said:


> Years ago I knew a forensic scientist who worked for the Home Office. He said that if the public knew how often kids disappear or are seriously hurt they’d be shocked. In his opinion, as tragic as the McCann case undoubtedly is, it was hard to justify the vast amount spent on searching for her, and little or nothing being spent on the others.
> 
> I have said it many times, what about all these other missing kids? Who’s spending vast amounts looking for them?


I went to a missing persons conference about a decade or more ago as I was doing a presentation about Police, Council and the private sectors response to kids missing from children's homes . It was a fascinating couple of days with some high profile speakers including the McCanns. However the most interesting and staggering thing I learnt was that the vast majority of kids missing have been 'abducted ' by a parent or family member, normally in a dispute about custody.Some of these involve the child being taken abroad. 
Some coverage here about MM btw but mainly using the UK press reports.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 4, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> With the Germans and Portuguese in on it I suppose?
> 
> This place gets more like Infowars every day.


I'm a bit stuck, though, because if I actually looked into the details of the story that would make it like the Daily Star.


----------



## steveo87 (Jun 4, 2020)

Sprocket. said:


> Serbian mass murderer that was working there.



This needs a thread all of its own!


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 4, 2020)

steveo87 said:


> This needs a thread all of its own!


All I can say is, he was working here on an Albanian passport, he was arrested at work by immigration officials and the police.
We were told he was at Srebenica.
He just blended in and we were all shocked.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> With the Germans and Portuguese in on it I suppose?


surprised the german police in on the investigation as i thought the met would want the sunloungers all to themselves


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 4, 2020)

Badgers said:


> But would you have the Met Police still looking for you?



Depends if you live in a pleasant Portuguese town that they could get themselves seconded to for a decade or so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

Badgers said:


> But would you have the Met Police still looking for you?


after searching all the bars, beaches and pools, the police would have searched the restaurants and desultorily enquired among the denizens of the town's demi-monde. then the next day they'd have flown home well pleased with themselves, their luggage bulging with cheap tobacco and booze


----------



## andysays (Jun 4, 2020)

So is there any coherent explanation of why this new suspect has apparently only come to light now?


----------



## blossie33 (Jun 4, 2020)

This just from BBC










						Madeleine McCann 'assumed dead' by German prosecutors
					

A German man, 43, is being investigated on suspicion of murder over the British girl’s disappearance.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 4, 2020)

Reckon it could be a confession or someone grassing on them, often how stuff like this comes to light.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 4, 2020)

has anyone, even diana, had this much coverage in the media in the last 25 years?


----------



## bimble (Jun 4, 2020)

Flavour said:


> has anyone, even diana, had this much coverage in the media in the last 25 years?


Diana wasn’t quite as blonde.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

I've read it again and I'm being dense...I don't quite get your post...



Badgers said:


> I am sure all parents would if they could.


And? The McCanns could so they did. 


Badgers said:


> Fact is they don't, literally none of them apart from the negligent McCanns


What are you deducing from that?  If you carry on looking, you definitely dunnit? They protesteth too much?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

There's a Netflix documentary series on this case which is well worth a watch.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 4, 2020)

Sweet FA said:


> I've read it again and I'm being dense...I don't quite get your post...
> 
> 
> And? The McCanns could so they did.
> ...


I never said they did it. Just that they were negligent in their care and they have had a disproportionate amount of money and time spent on their search.


----------



## treelover (Jun 4, 2020)

Might be worth changing the thread title, if she is dead it is a bit unpleasant, although it is referring to the media, etc.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

You know, I thought they were negligent at the time. But the documentary changed my mind on that. Yes they left their kids alone, but where they went for a meal was across from the apartment and they were checking on the kids frequently throughout the meal. The restaurant was part of the same holiday complex as the apartment block they were in.

They were also not told that there had been a spate of assaults on children at the holiday complex, which may have been connected to burglaries, I can't remember.


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 4, 2020)

treelover said:


> Might be worth changing the thread title, if she is dead it is a bit unpleasant, although it is referring to the media, etc.



I don't think the title is a problem.* Anyone who isn't just deliberately looking for a reason to be outraged can easily discover that it isn't intended as some kind of nastiness against any individual(s). I might support a change to 'Madeleine McCann - sanity at last' if the majority felt it was appropriate.

*IIRC it was originally 'Maddy madness' but was changed presumably because at one point there was a big wave of objection to the way a million busybodies had taken it on themselves to cutify the child's name, even though her family had apparently never called her by the diminutive. I thought it had been obvious that I wasn't doing that myself when I named the thread - in fact my view was the original name was _less _potentially unpleasant, in that it more clearly referred to the hysterical aspects of the public and media response to the case rather than appearing to dismiss or sneer about the case as a whole.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

treelover said:


> Might be worth changing the thread title, if she is dead it is a bit unpleasant, although it is referring to the media, etc.


that's a late example of the sort of thing the madness bit's about

A bit unpleasant? Surely you've known in your heart for years that she's dead, didn't the dogs finding the smell of death in her parents' car suggest all might not be well with her?


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> You know, I thought they were negligent at the time. But the documentary changed my mind on that. Yes they left their kids alone, but where they went for a meal was across from the apartment and they were checking on the kids frequently throughout the meal. The restaurant was part of the same holiday complex as the apartment block they were in.
> 
> They were also not told that there had been a spate of assaults on children at the holiday complex, which may have been connected to burglaries, I can't remember.




I agree really and I think you'd be more relaxed in a holiday complex environment.

This though  =>  


> An appeal for information was made for anyone who recognised the numbers, the camper van or a Jaguar car linked to the man.


who'd ever remember anything clearly from 2007 and be able to testify in court?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I agree really and I think you'd be more relaxed in a holiday complex environment.
> 
> This though  =>  who'd ever to remember anything clearly from 2007?


I can clearly remember my surprise and disgust at the hysteria surrounding this case as tho it was but an hour past


----------



## bimble (Jun 4, 2020)

How come it took so long if he was known to be there at time burgalring hotels and has been a convicted paedophile for a while. Seems a bit rubbish.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I agree really and I think you'd be more relaxed in a holiday complex environment.
> 
> This though  =>
> 
> who'd ever remember anything clearly from 2007 and be able to testify in court?


I think even the McCanns said the holiday complex did give them a false sense of security because it was so family friendly and I think they had been before, iirc.

They also said if they'd known about the assaults they would never have gone.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 4, 2020)

I mean how did they miss the house breaking paedo?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

bimble said:


> How come it took so long if he was known to be there at time burgalring hotels and has been a convicted paedophile for a while. Seems a bit rubbish.


I think the initial investigation by the local Spanish police was not carried out properly. The Netflix documentary showed a lot of hole, mistakes and omissions.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> You know, I thought they were negligent at the time. But the documentary changed my mind on that. Yes they left their kids alone, but where they went for a meal was across from the apartment and they were checking on the kids frequently throughout the meal. The restaurant was part of the same holiday complex as the apartment block they were in.
> 
> They were also not told that there had been a spate of assaults on children at the holiday complex, which may have been connected to burglaries, I can't remember.



But, they couldn't see the apartment from the restaurant, and they had to use a public road to get between the two, this wasn't some sort of secured holiday complex.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> I think the initial investigation by the local Spanish police was not carried out properly. The Netflix documentary showed a lot of hole, mistakes and omissions.


Iirc didn't one of the local police write a book accusing the McCanns


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

IC3D said:


> Iirc didn't one of the local police write a book accusing the McCanns


I think so. I think they sued him but could be wrong on that.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, they couldn't see the apartment from the restaurant, and they had to use a public road to get between the two, this wasn't some sort of secured holiday complex.
> 
> View attachment 216053View attachment 216054


They could see it although not if anyone was entering or leaving by the side window which showed signs of tampering, that's why they chose the restaurant. And yes, it wasn't a secured site but very much portrayed to them as a holiday complex for families. Not a massive one but still a complex.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> I think the initial investigation by the local Spanish police was not carried out properly. The Netflix documentary showed a lot of hole, mistakes and omissions.



I imagine it was Portuguese plod who were inept in this instance.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 4, 2020)

it's immaterial to anyone but them whether or not they were negligent or not. They lost a daughter. Best to reserve one's judgment.


----------



## andysays (Jun 4, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> it's immaterial to anyone but them whether or not they were negligent or not. They lost a daughter. Best to reserve one's judgment.


Given the amount of media coverage of the case, and the amount of money and time spent on the investigation, I think the idea that anyone should reserve their judgement on all of this, including but not limited to the question of whether the McCanns were negligent, is frankly ridiculous.


----------



## phillm (Jun 4, 2020)

Can't be bothered !


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> They could see it although not if anyone was entering or leaving by the side window which showed signs of tampering, that's why they chose the restaurant. And yes, it wasn't a secured site but very much portrayed to them as a holiday complex for families. Not a massive one but still a complex.



They could only see the top of the apartment, but not the patio doors. The patio doors could only be locked from the inside, so the they left them closed but unlocked, with the curtains drawn, so they could let themselves in that way when checking on the children.  

They left the kids in an unlocked apartment, next to a public road, that was basically out of their view, only checking on them every half an hour or so, they were negligent.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 4, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I imagine it was Portuguese plod who were inept in this instance.


Having watched the Netflix documentary, Keystone Kop level of incompetence not to mention being uninterested in doing much beside safeguarding the local tourist industry and failing abjectly at that. The UK Plod were infinitely more capable but by the time they were involved, the local plod had utterly trashed every possible lead.
Unless this German dude is prepared to make a confession (which I suspect is highly unlikely) then this announcement isn't going to change much that I can see.


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

Badgers said:


> I never said they did it. Just that they were negligent in their care and they have had a disproportionate amount of money and time spent on their search.


Can't argue with that. 


I get why you might do all you can though, obsessively, using everything you have - money & privilege in this case - without caring what it looks like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> it's immaterial to anyone but them whether or not they were negligent or not. They lost a daughter. Best to reserve one's judgment.


That's not a very urban attitude, esp so long after the disappearance


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 4, 2020)

This other thread shows the urban reactions at the time: https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-little-girl-missing-in-portugal.134383/


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 4, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I imagine it was Portuguese plod who were inept in this instance.



Partly because they didn't let the Spanish police have a crack at it, though, to be fair...


----------



## 1927 (Jun 4, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Hope it puts an end to it all. Can't see how the Met have justified all the money on this one case.


On the contrary, this will be used as justification by The Met for more funding to keep it going1


----------



## 1927 (Jun 4, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> this is going to get the internet ms marples going innit. they have already come to the verdict that the parents are to blame. Im sure they will find a way to work around this development and bring up some convoluted justification that the mcanns are still behind it.


Its hardly a development! a German paedophilic was on holiday in the same country as MM at the time of her disappearance. No evidence that he has anything to do with it, no sightings of him in the resort at same time as disappearance.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 4, 2020)

andysays said:


> So is there any coherent explanation of why this new suspect has apparently only come to light now?


Maybe its that time of year when the Met have to apply for more funding!


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 4, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I imagine it was Portuguese plod who were inept in this instance.


You're right, it's my appalling geography at fault here.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 4, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> I think so. I think they sued him but could be wrong on that.


They did, they won as well as did the 2 local guys (including a Brit) that the locat plod tried to fit up for it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 4, 2020)

German prosecutors have gone to the trouble of announcing that they think she is dead. No shit Sherlocks


----------



## 1927 (Jun 4, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> They did, they won as well as did the 2 local guys (including a Brit) that the locat plod tried to fit up for it.


No they didnt, it was thrown out by Portugeuese courts!


----------



## teqniq (Jun 4, 2020)

May well have been said already but this is classicc 'oooo look over there' shit from a completely shambolic and corruption-ridden government.

Somewhat akin to this epic direness:


/derail

* unsubscribes *


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 4, 2020)

IC3D said:


> Iirc didn't one of the local police write a book accusing the McCanns





equationgirl said:


> I think so. I think they sued him but could be wrong on that.





MickiQ said:


> They did, they won as well as did the 2 local guys (including a Brit) that the locat plod tried to fit up for it.



No, the Portuguese copper won on appeal and the McCann's final appeal lost in 2017.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 4, 2020)

planetgeli said:


> No, the Portuguese copper won on appeal and the McCann's final appeal lost in 2017.


No doubt he'll apologise now.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 4, 2020)

1927 said:


> No they didnt, it was thrown out by Portugeuese courts!


I stand corrected, they won at first but lost on appeal, Murat won his case but it was against the British press not Portuguese Plod


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 4, 2020)

teqniq said:


> May well have been said already but this is classicc 'oooo look over there' shit from a completely shambolic and corruption-ridden government.
> 
> Somewhat akin to this epic direness:
> 
> ...


We visited the old one when we visited Edinburgh well worth a look to see how the other half live. Likely to get the average Urb in a seething rage though.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 4, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Time to add another 10 pages by saying this should be a reminder to parents, no matter how posh, not to leave infants and toddlers unattended in unfamiliar environments to go on the piss.


If the MM case has taught us anything, it's precisely that.
So some good HAS come out of this case.


----------



## Weller (Jun 4, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> They did, they won as well as did the 2 local guys (including a Brit) that the locat plod tried to fit up for it.



Actually they lost on appeal and are still awaiting for another appeal at the European court of justice so have not paid costs or his award etc not judging them but I dont know I once read a lot of the statements and evidence on this case a lot that was never printed here after The Daily Express got sued since then there has been an awful lot of misinformation that as well as the McCanns not using the fund for other missing children bothers me still
Im sitting on the fence now and changed my views a long time ago , we as a family donated to thier fund a few times which is why I still show an interest but something does always happen around this time every year there have been many suspects and none yet have come to anything , indeed even this suspect was spoken about a long time ago by the Portuguese inspector leading the case who they sued his documentary is banned in this country as are his books still until after the appeal
Many others involved in the original investigation supported him in the appeal too



> * Madeleine McCann's parents lose libel case appeal in Portugal *
> 
> Portugal’s supreme court throws out libel case against an ex-detective who implicated couple in their daughter’s disappearance


Madeleine McCann's parents lose libel case appeal in Portugal


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 4, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> If the MM case has taught us anything, it's precisely that.
> So some good HAS come out of this case.


I agree with this, look at the ludicrous situation with Beckenham swimming lake where a child nearly died because the parents weren't looking out for them when it opened. There was a life guard obviously there.

The downside is the whole media strategy that the McCann's have pursued that has diverted police funds away from more solvable cases. It implies that only by heightened media can you get any justice.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> The downside is the whole media strategy that the McCann's have pursued that has diverted police funds away from more solvable cases. It implies that only by heightened media can you get any justice.


I don’t think they should be criticised for that though. What parents wouldn’t have done the same in those circumstances?


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I don’t think they should be criticised for that though. What parents wouldn’t have done the same in those circumstances?


But when the only evidence that exists points at their guilt it is rather puzzling, no?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> But when the only evidence that exists points at their guilt it is rather puzzling, no?


No, not if they knew they were innocent (beyond the initial negligence) which now looks to be the case.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> No, not if they knew they were innocent (beyond the initial negligence) which now looks to be the case.


Why does it now look like they are innocent? what has changed?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> Why does it now look like they are innocent? what has changed?


This German business. If it’s as important as seems to be the case at the moment, at face value it looks to exonerate the McCanns, no? I never bought that they killed her anyway.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> This German business. If it’s as important as seems to be the case at the moment, at face value it looks to exonerate the McCanns, no?


From what Ive read there is no evidence against him, unlike the McCann's. He is a German paedophile who was in the Algarve at the time of disappearance. Its a huge jump to believe that that exonerates the parents.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> From what Ive read there is no evidence against him, unlike the McCann's. He is a German paedophile who was in the Algarve at the time of disappearance. Its a huge jump to believe that that exonerates the parents.


Well we’ll see. There wasn’t any real evidence against the McCanns as I recall. Just a load of speculation and conspiracy stuff. The massive hole in that boat was “what did they do with the body?”


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Well we’ll see. There was any real evidence against the McCanns as I recall. Just a load of speculation. The massive hole in that boat was “what did they do with the body?”


I don't think thats a hole, a body can be disposed of anywhere. But without going over old ground, the dna  in the boot of  car that they hadn't even hired before the disappearance is pretty damning dont ya think. And the 48 questions she refused to answer!!!


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> I don't think thats a hole, a body can be disposed of anywhere. But without going over old ground, the dna  in the boot of  car that they hadn't even hired before the disappearance is pretty damning dont ya think. And the 48 questions she refused to answer!!!


The dna stuff was debunked as it could have come from anything that she had been in contact with. Refusing to answer questions doesn’t infer guilt in any sensible system. For me, the disposal of the body within an hour, whilst they’re presumably in shock at having just killed their kid, to a standard that has withstood years of forensic micro-searches, blows that apart.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 5, 2020)

She was advised by her lawyer not to answer the questions.  

There's never been a speck of evidence against the parents, it's all been rumours, speculation and downright spite.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

ElizabethofYork said:


> She was advised by her lawyer not to answer the questions.
> 
> There's never been a speck of evidence against the parents, it's all been rumours, speculation and downright spite.


Indeed. Nonsense from conspiraloons and people who dislike the McCanns because they're doctors.

I also think the German authorities have a bit more on this bloke than 'he's just a paedo who happened to be in the Algarve' 1927. As someone said above, it's far more likely that he's confessed or been grassed


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 5, 2020)

Most of the papers have named the accused and have a photo of him on their front pages.

They blanked out the front pages on the Sky Press Review show, and the BBC has done the same on their 'today's front pages' website page.









						The Papers | BBC News
					

A detailed round-up of the main stories covered in the UK’s national newspapers – including a look at the front pages and expert reviews on the BBC News Channel.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 5, 2020)

IC3D said:


> Iirc didn't one of the local police write a book accusing the McCanns


If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Indeed. Nonsense from conspiraloons and people who dislike the McCanns because they're doctors.



I meet people who dislike doctors to the point of making false accusations against them everyday!  

Why do those who disagree with the official line have to be labelled as conspiraloons? Just because they have a different opinion.


----------



## spanglechick (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> Why does it now look like they are innocent? what has changed?


I do recommend the Netflix documentary.  It’s over-long, but puts every scrap of evidence and every beat of the various investigations out there.  I always thought they’d accidentally over-medicated her and covered it up.  I no longer think that.  

For me, the crux is that they had no time to hide the body completely before a totally thorough search of the apt and area.  Even pre-meditated Murder and a plan (and ive seen little suspicion of that) would’ve made that difficult given that the friends and hotel staff were all over them and the apt straight away.  

But ok.  Imagine they did find a place to hide her.  They then had to move the body (presumably weeks later after they hired the car - so she’d been in a freezer somewhere?) - but now as well as searchers and investigators you have international media following their every move.  

There comes a point where you have to realise you’re thinking zebras not horses.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.


Thank you Inspector Clouseau.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.


I think profiling has a place in forensic detection but normally its based on some form of research and evidence  rather than just a gut instinct.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.


And there you have it.

It's simply a class war thing for a lot of people.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

spanglechick said:


> For me, the crux is that they had no time to hide the body completely before a totally thorough search of the apt and area.  Even pre-meditated Murder and a plan (and ive seen little suspicion of that) would’ve made that difficult given that the friends and hotel staff were all over them and the apt straight away.
> 
> But ok.  Imagine they did find a place to hide her.  They then had to move the body (presumably weeks later after they hired the car - so she’d been in a freezer somewhere?) - but now as well as searchers and investigators you have international media following their every move.


This is insurmountable for the consiracy mob. To hide/dispose of a body to the degree that no trace of it can be found in years of searching is really very difficult indeed. Especially when you're being watched.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> And there you have it.
> 
> It's simply a class war thing for a lot of people.


That only works if opinion of the case was split down class lines, but its not!


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> And the 48 questions she refused to answer!!!



If you get jury service, do us a favour and turn it down.

Refusing to answer leading questions is no proof of crime.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> And there you have it.
> 
> It's simply a class war thing for a lot of people.


Abandoning yer kids is wrong whatever class you are; but it has to be said that privileged, wealthy parents usually have few fewer pressures that might lead to such neglect of the kids needs.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> That only works if opinion of the case was split down class lines, but its not!


No, but it’s a good indicator of some folk on here. Have you seen the Netflix doc?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Abandoning yer kids is wrong whatever class you are; but it has to be said that privileged, wealthy parents usually have few fewer pressures that might lead to such neglect of the kids needs.


So, nothing to do with their involvement in her murder and disappearance then. Fair enough.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> So, nothing to do with their involvement in her murder and disappearance then. Fair enough.


Like all of us here, I've not got the evidence either way to say whether or not they 'abducted' or murdered their own daughter, but what we do know (from their own testimony) is that they facilitated the crime through their neglect.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Like all of us here, I've not got the evidence either way to say whether or not they 'abducted' or murdered their own daughter, but what we do know (from their own testimony) is that they facilitated the crime through their neglect.


That’s undeniable and something they’ll have with them for them forever.

It’s fucking light-years from them murdering her though. If that’s the aspect of this you prefer to concentrate on, fine.


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.



I assume this is intended satire. I mean, collectively this forum could probably come up with a longer list of reasons to condemn the middle classes than could Karl Marx and Mark E. Smith combined, but even then I'm not sure 'they're so prim and proper that they keep murdering their kids' would be on it.

(e2a: your last sentence is spot on - but unfortunately that weakens the suggestion that your ludicrous second sentence isn't meant in earnest...)


----------



## brogdale (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> That’s undeniable and something they’ll have with them for them forever.
> 
> It’s fucking light-years from them murdering her though. If that’s the aspect of this you prefer to concentrate on, fine.


Although I do contribute to this thread, it's not something that particularly exercises me tbh.
Though it is undeniable that, had the McCanns presented as the media stereotype of a working class family, they would have been vilified and demonised by the press and consequently far less chance of on-going support from the authorities.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Although I do contribute to this thread, it's not something that particularly exercises me tbh.
> Though it is undeniable that, had the McCanns presented as the media stereotype of a working class family, they would have been vilified and demonised by the press and consequently far less chance of on-going support from the authorities.


Yeah yeah, keep banging that class drum mate. By the way, just in case you missed it, a little girl got abducted and probably murdered.


----------



## xenon (Jun 5, 2020)

1927 said:


> From what Ive read there is no evidence against him, unlike the McCann's. He is a German paedophile who was in the Algarve at the time of disappearance. Its a huge jump to believe that that exonerates the parents.



German pedo in the area at the time, history of house breaking.

Cased closed IMO. Grease the gallows.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah yeah, keep banging that class drum mate. By the way, just in case you missed it, a little girl got abducted and probably murdered.


That's an odd reply.
I really don't see that proposing how class may well have impacted the reporting or investigation of this case can credibly be cast as 'banging a drum'. As for the second sentence, I really don't think my posting in this thread could justify suggesting that I had missed the murder.


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 5, 2020)

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but as someone speculated earlier, the German fella apparently made a confession to a friend on the anniversary of the disappearance while they were drinking together. Thats what the Manchester Evening News is reporting anyway. Aside from the circumstantial evidence things look pretty damning. Clearly the Germans think he's the man.

I've not watched any documentaries or read much about the case over the years although remember people at work speculating about the parents involvement. It might be time to give that a rest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2020)

Part 2 said:


> Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but as someone speculated earlier, the German fella apparently made a confession to a friend on the anniversary of the disappearance while they were drinking together. Thats what the Manchester Evening News is reporting anyway. Aside from the circumstantial evidence things look pretty damning. Clearly the Germans think he's the man.
> 
> I've not watched any documentaries or read much about the case over the years although remember people at work speculating about the parents involvement. It might be time to give that a rest.


----------



## Part 2 (Jun 5, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 216179



Very odd...it was there as I was typing. Has it been reported anywhere else?....maybe someone got a bit giddy.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 5, 2020)

planetgeli said:


> If you get jury service, do us a favour and turn it down.
> 
> Refusing to answer leading questions is no proof of crime.


If I was ever arrested for a serious crime I hadn't done, no way am I answering questions without a lawyer. No chance. And that's the advice I've seen people give on urban too.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 5, 2020)

Part 2 said:


> Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but as someone speculated earlier, the German fella apparently made a confession to a friend on the anniversary of the disappearance while they were drinking together. Thats what the Manchester Evening News is reporting anyway. Aside from the circumstantial evidence things look pretty damning. Clearly the Germans think he's the man.
> 
> I've not watched any documentaries or read much about the case over the years although remember people at work speculating about the parents involvement. It might be time to give that a rest.


I think it’s fair to say that they are investigating an allegation that the bloke admitted or claimed that he kidnapped her , which they are duty bound to do and have appealed for further information. Whether or not they think he’s the man is a different matter .


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 5, 2020)

billy_bob said:


> I assume this is intended satire./QUOTE]
> Nope, I'm serious.  I bring up the prim and proper middle class thing because I believe they had a prejudice against their own daughter's health condition  (and it is relevent to how they were treated by the press). It is also my understanding that they also heavily drugged her on the night in question, which could have caused serious problems such as breathing problems.
> 
> I also find Kate McCann's behaviour around the time of the disappearance very strange- constantly appearing on TV clutching a teddy. Any mother in that situation would want to be just left alone.
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Nope, I'm serious.  I bring up the prim and proper middle class thing because I believe they had a prejudice against their own daughter's health condition  (and it is relevent to how they were treated by the press). They also heavily drugged her on the night in question, which could have caused serious problems such as breathing problems.
> 
> I also find Kate McCann's behaviour around the time of the disappearance very strange- constantly appearing on TV clutching a teddy. Any mother in that situation would want to be just left alone.
> 
> But as I said before, if they were working class they would have been in serious shit. The media did them a huge favour, because they were the 'right kind' of parents- even though that was clearly not the case.


if you had a media adviser, they might suggest you go on telly clutching a children's toy. as you say, it's not the sort of thing most people would do off their own bats


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I also find Kate McCann's behaviour around the time of the disappearance very strange


No shit.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 5, 2020)

I despise you armchair detectives


----------



## Sweet FA (Jun 5, 2020)




----------



## Jay Park (Jun 5, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> surprised the german police in on the investigation as i thought the met would want the sunloungers all to themselves



He’s been on one the last couple of days hasn’t he. What a snidey little joke this is to go along with many unsavoury comments on this thread.

did badgers like this?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 5, 2020)

This has never been a GOOD OR NICE thread. I hate everyone with more than 5 posts on it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 5, 2020)

Sorry 115


----------



## Jay Park (Jun 5, 2020)

What’s your cryptic code for ‘cavalry’ ?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 5, 2020)

butchersapron said:


> This has never been a GOOD OR NICE thread. I hate everyone with more than 5 posts on it.



Ah fuck.  I've made 6 posts (now 7).  So close.  I'll just have to content myself with being hated for all the other reasons...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s been on one the last couple of days hasn’t he. What a snidey little joke this is to go along with many unsavoury comments on this thread.
> 
> did badgers like this?


what a tawdry post this is ^

not only did badgers like it but so too did six other people.

do you have any thoughts to share on madeleine mccann?


----------



## Jay Park (Jun 5, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> not only badgers but six other people.



quality though, not quantity right


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> quality though, not quantity right


that's three posts on this thread and you've not yet managed to mention madeleine mccann. you don't give a shit about her or what happened to her.  you're only here for the 'banter' i see.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said
"I believe they had a prejudice against their own daughter's health condition (and it is relevent to how they were treated by the press). It is also my understanding that they also heavily drugged her on the night in question, which could have caused serious problems such as breathing problems."

Where are you getting your "information" from?  What health condition,  and why do you believe the child was drugged by her parents?  This is just spiteful gossip with absolutely no proof.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 5, 2020)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Where are you getting your "information" from?



His rectum


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 5, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> His rectum



Harsh but fair.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 5, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> I think it’s fair to say that they are investigating an allegation that the bloke admitted or claimed that he kidnapped her , which they are duty bound to do and have appealed for further information. Whether or not they think he’s the man is a different matter .



something like this. There’s no logical reason why German police would be investigating the case otherwise, it’s come to them, they weren’t looking.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 5, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I also find Kate McCann's behaviour around the time of the disappearance very strange- constantly appearing on TV clutching a teddy. Any mother in that situation would want to be just left alone.



Grieving mothers never hang onto toys that their lost child once played with. It's completely inconceivable that anyone in such a state would do such a thing.

You're disgusting.


----------



## andysays (Jun 5, 2020)

Info here about how the new suspect emerged

Madeleine McCann: New suspect also investigated over missing German girl - reports


> A senior judicial source in Portugal has told the BBC the joint investigation into the new suspect began after a tip-off in Germany in 2017.





> The source said German investigators informed their Portuguese counterparts and British officials three years ago that they received a tip-off from a friend of Christian B, after the suspect had made a "disturbing comment" in a bar in Germany, as they were watching TV news coverage of the 10th anniversary of Madeleine going missing.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 5, 2020)

This thread will never die.


----------



## T & P (Jun 5, 2020)

butchersapron said:


> This has never been a GOOD OR NICE thread. I hate everyone with more than 5 posts on it.


TBF the spirit of the thread as it was conceived and created was to mock and despair at the public’s ludicrously OTT reaction to her disappearance.

Nothing wrong with ridiculing that anymore than the Brass Eye paedo special episode was wrong for ridiculing the paedoparanoia that runs rampant among the tabloid press, or laughing and rolling eyes at the indescribable mass-grieving shitshow that engulfed the country when Diana died.

Ridiculing such examples of human stupidity does not mean one thinks paedophilia itself or the untimely death of a 30-y.o. woman are funny or to be rejoicing about. And there was/ is an even more valid point in this case, as aside from the usual OTT popular reaction there is the issue of far too much money and resources being devoted to one case at the detriment of many other similar cases that aren’t nearly as media friendly.


----------



## billy_bob (Jun 5, 2020)

Yep, that about covers it T & P, although I suspect butchersapron knows that ...


----------



## Duncan2 (Jun 6, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> You know, I thought they were negligent at the time. But the documentary changed my mind on that. Yes they left their kids alone, but where they went for a meal was across from the apartment and they were checking on the kids frequently throughout the meal. The restaurant was part of the same holiday complex as the apartment block they were in.
> 
> They were also not told that there had been a spate of assaults on children at the holiday complex, which may have been connected to burglaries, I can't remember.
> [/QUOTE
> Just watched the Netflix documentary and was quite astonished at the shysters that were entrusted with the investigation of the case.Scotland Yard brought in it seems as a last resort.Like EQ I thought that the McCanns otherwise came out of it fairly well.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 7, 2020)

Duncan2 yes, the documentary lays everything out very clearly, I really recommend it. I find Netflix has a lot of very well done documentary programming.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 7, 2020)

T & P said:


> TBF the spirit of the thread as it was conceived and created was to mock and despair at the public’s ludicrously OTT reaction to her disappearance.
> 
> Nothing wrong with ridiculing that anymore than the Brass Eye paedo special episode was wrong for ridiculing the paedoparanoia that runs rampant among the tabloid press, or laughing and rolling eyes at the indescribable mass-grieving shitshow that engulfed the country when Diana died.
> 
> Ridiculing such examples of human stupidity does not mean one thinks paedophilia itself or the untimely death of a 30-y.o. woman are funny or to be rejoicing about. And there was/ is an even more valid point in this case, as aside from the usual OTT popular reaction there is the issue of far too much money and resources being devoted to one case at the detriment of many other similar cases that aren’t nearly as media friendly.


I'm not persuaded you've seen butchers has 47 posts on the thread and that you've read his post quite as he intended


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 7, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not persuaded you've seen butchers has 47 posts on the thread and that you've read his post quite as he intended


How do you think I feel? 3727 was quoted completely out of context.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> If you ask me they are the most likely suspects. Just the type of 'prim and proper' and 'perfect' middle class parents to do such a thing. Certainly if they were working class they would have atleast been in the shit for neglect from the off.



I completely agree with your sentiment regarding the status of the parents.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> If I was ever arrested for a serious crime I hadn't done, no way am I answering questions without a lawyer. No chance. And that's the advice I've seen people give on urban too.



You are absolutely right there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> If I was ever arrested for a serious crime I hadn't done, no way am I answering questions without a lawyer. No chance. And that's the advice I've seen people give on urban too.


Tbh even if I had committed a serious crime I wouldn't answer questions without a lawyer


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 8, 2020)

Sasaferrato said:


> I completely agree with your sentiment regarding the status of the parents.


Why? 

It's bollocks.


----------



## Kasper Jonran (Jun 8, 2020)

I suspect now that the German may well have done it. If he did at least the family might get some closure now. It must be terrible to lose a child.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 8, 2020)

How do you know ffs


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 8, 2020)

Kasper Jonran said:


> I suspect now that the German may well have done it. If he did at least the family might get some closure now. It must be terrible to lose a child.


Unless he confesses I doubt we'll ever know. There's no body and it was 13yrs ago , hard to prove in court.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 8, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Unless he confesses I doubt we'll ever know. There's no body and it was 13yrs ago , hard to prove in court.


There could be DNA. From the flat or whatever.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Why?
> 
> It's bollocks.


I've said before, had the parents been from council estate, social services would have removed the other children.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 8, 2020)

Sasaferrato said:


> I've said before, had the parents been from council estate, social services would have removed the other children.


I think that's balderdash. They may have got a different ride from the press but this notion that social services would have charged round and ripped their other kids away without a by-your-leave is ridiculous. You've been reading too much class warrior shit from dickheads on here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I think that's balderdash. They may have got a different ride from the press but this notion that social services would have charged round and ripped their other kids away without a by-your-leave is ridiculous. You've been reading too much class warrior shit from dickheads on here.


You're right, they wouldn't have charged round, they'd have made an appointment and explored options before removing the other children


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I think that's balderdash. They may have got a different ride from the press but this notion that social services would have charged round and ripped their other kids away without a by-your-leave is ridiculous. You've been reading too much class warrior shit from dickheads on here.



Have you been drinking again?


----------



## Kasper Jonran (Jun 8, 2020)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Unless he confesses I doubt we'll ever know. There's no body and it was 13yrs ago , hard to prove in court.


Yes I doubt he'll confess, you never know though he may court the infamy however, there may be more scientific evidence that emerges that nails him nos as has been suggested by others.

You are probably correct though. More chance of Prince Andrew admitting he was a nonce than a full confession from the currently accused.


----------



## Kasper Jonran (Jun 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I think that's balderdash. They may have got a different ride from the press but this notion that social services would have charged round and ripped their other kids away without a by-your-leave is ridiculous. You've been reading too much class warrior shit from dickheads on here.


Correct.. From my experience of the care system in the UK that would never have happened. Even if the McCann's had got caught up in an all nighter with some good powder and some group sex and snook back in at 8 am the following morning to discover the cherub had gone social services would have still have thought it best to leave the other kids with the family unit. It makes you wonder what sort of life those kids have had though since they made that error of judgement


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 8, 2020)

Sasaferrato said:


> Have you been drinking again?


Have you stopped thinking again?


----------



## Duncan2 (Jun 8, 2020)

To me it was only ever the claimed presence of forensic evidence that gave legs to the idea that the McCanns might have had some part in the disappearance of their own daughter.The scientists seem to have concluded that there was no such evidence.The idea that the McCanns on holiday in a foreign land with a dozen or so close friends could have disposed of a body whilst also at the centre of a media storm is so far out there that even Jazz would not entertain it.I should know btw because I watched the Netflix thing in its entirety


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 9, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> I should know btw because I watched the Netflix thing in its entirety


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2020)

Duncan2 said:


> To me it was only ever the claimed presence of forensic evidence that gave legs to the idea that the McCanns might have had some part in the disappearance of their own daughter.The scientists seem to have concluded that there was no such evidence.The idea that the McCanns on holiday in a foreign land with a dozen or so close friends could have disposed of a body whilst also at the centre of a media storm is so far out there that even Jazz would not entertain it.I should know btw because I watched the Netflix thing in its entirety


There would be no better time to dispose of a body than when you have the keen attention of the world's press, any stage magician or illusionist can tell you of the power of misdirection


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 28, 2020)

I was going to post that all had gone oddly quiet on the Madeleine front. But there's been a new development, it appears.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 29, 2020)

Madeleine McCann police in Germany 'find cellar' during allotment search
					

Cellar reportedly found on plot used by suspect in disappearance of British girl from Portuguese hotel in 2007




					www.theguardian.com
				




a cellar apparently. lets hope there is an end in sight in the awful story


----------



## 1927 (Jul 30, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> I was going to post that all had gone oddly quiet on the Madeleine front. But there's been a new development, it appears.



Who knew Kate had an allotment!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 30, 2020)

1927 said:


> Who knew Kate had an allotment!


what a horrible thing to say


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> Madeleine McCann police in Germany 'find cellar' during allotment search
> 
> 
> Cellar reportedly found on plot used by suspect in disappearance of British girl from Portuguese hotel in 2007
> ...


It was reported that there was a cellar before they found it, though. But, yes, let's hope.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2020)

1927 said:


> Who knew Kate had an allotment!


Where you can find cellary


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2020)

Raheem said:


> It was reported that there was a cellar before they found it, though. But, yes, let's hope.


This is getting a bit Schrödinger for my liking 

Is the cellar always there or only there when you look for it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2020)

not-bono-ever said:


> Madeleine McCann police in Germany 'find cellar' during allotment search
> 
> 
> Cellar reportedly found on plot used by suspect in disappearance of British girl from Portuguese hotel in 2007
> ...


I don't suppose it will ever end


----------



## tim (Jul 30, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't suppose it will ever end


It will if Diana puts her foot down!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2020)

tim said:


> It will if Diana puts her foot down!


Yeh last time she put her foot down it ended so well


----------



## tim (Jul 30, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh last time she put her foot down it ended so well


Extremely well for the Daily Express.


----------



## Badgers (Jul 25, 2021)

Madeleine McCann police given £350,000 extra public cash to investigate suspect
					

The Met Police's request for extra funding in the Madeleine McCann case has been approved as the British force works alongside German police to build a case against convicted paedophile and rapist Christian Brueckner



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Badgers (Jul 25, 2021)

I am sure this £350k is going to find her or her body. The poor police slumming it in the  tourist part's of Portugal must be so sick of this


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2021)

Badgers said:


> I am sure this £350k is going to find her or her body. The poor police slumming it in the  tourist part's of Portugal must be so sick of this


Surely it should go to the NHS


----------



## brogdale (Jul 25, 2021)

Badgers said:


> I am sure this £350k is going to find her or her body. The poor police slumming it in the  tourist part's of Portugal must be so sick of this


Institutionally corrupt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2021)

Badgers said:


> I am sure this £350k is going to find her or her body. The poor police slumming it in the  tourist part's of Portugal must be so sick of this


Perhaps they know exactly where it is but have held off for so long so they can enjoy the fine wines and lovely cuisine of Portugal. But having spent almost half their careers around praia da luz many of the team have finally finished paying for their flats in the sun so after one final beano they'll recover mm from her shallow grave and take her in hand luggage back to Britain.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps they know exactly where it is but have held off for so long so they can enjoy the fine wines and lovely cuisine of Portugal. But having spent almost half their careers around praia da luz many of the team have finally finished paying for their flats in the sun so after one final beano they'll recover mm from her shallow grave and take her in hand luggage back to Britain.


Of course they know; likely one of their own did it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Of course they know; likely one of their own did it.


I wouldn't be surprised if a cd of nsy can provide that name


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 25, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely it should go to the NHS


350m, not 350k.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> 350m, not 350k.


I think you'll find the met are getting £350k. Which may be a fraction of what the NHS were promised but shouldn't be begrudged them.


----------



## blossie33 (Nov 28, 2021)

I've just been reading this sad case of a missing girl from 1981    the father is now 72. It's obvious from his comments near the end of the article who he's referring to ...








						Katrice Lee: Family still longing for answers 40 years on
					

Forty years after Katrice Lee vanished without a trace, her family remain desperate for answers.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Doctor Carrot (May 15, 2022)

It's amazing how much this case is still in our national psyche. This is the front page of the Bristol Post for the weekend edition. A fair amount of people have come into where I work saying it's Madeline McCann and how great it is she's been found when in fact it's a completely unrelated and much more recent case. 

And then there's the front cover of you know what today. It's been what? 15 years? Madness indeed.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (May 15, 2022)

Doctor Carrot said:


> It's amazing how much this case is still in our national psyche. This is the front page of the Bristol Post for the weekend edition. A fair amount of people have come into where I work saying it's Madeline McCann and how great it is she's been found when in fact it's a completely unrelated and much more recent case.
> 
> And then there's the front cover of you know what today. It's been what? 15 years? Madness indeed.



It was a sad case, but there's probably a big crossover between people who are still interested in this and people who are still interested in Diana.  I actually think most people think she's long gone and it's time to get over it.


----------



## billy_bob (May 15, 2022)

Doctor Carrot said:


> It's amazing how much this case is still in our national psyche. This is the front page of the Bristol Post for the weekend edition. A fair amount of people have come into where I work saying it's Madeline McCann and how great it is she's been found when in fact it's a completely unrelated and much more recent case.
> 
> And then there's the front cover of you know what today. It's been what? 15 years? Madness indeed.



The whole point of starting the thread was to say 'this is getting ridiculous now, can everyone just sit the fuck down and face reality'. And that was in May 2007.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (May 15, 2022)

billy_bob said:


> The whole point of starting the thread was to say 'this is getting ridiculous now, can everyone just sit the fuck down and face reality'. And that was in May 2007.


Crikey, even Dubversion was still posting then!


----------



## two sheds (May 15, 2022)

you think he was involved?


----------



## billy_bob (May 15, 2022)

two sheds said:


> you think he was involved?



I think you're on to something - it wasn't long after that he stopped posting, was it?


----------



## stavros (May 15, 2022)

Johnny Vodka said:


> there's probably a big crossover between people who are still interested in this and people who are still interested in Diana.


If only there was a term for such people, like "Daily Express readers".


----------



## Dom Traynor (May 15, 2022)

two sheds said:


> you think he was involved?


He was DJing in the bar


----------

