Why do the McCanns care about us?

[hcc2007]

Here's something I don't quite get, and it's been puzzling me a lot.

Why, oh why, do the McCann's care so much what the public and all the small web-bloggers like us think?

I'd especially like to hear from the pro-McCann folks on this web forum. I have heard it said that it's because the McCann's are "narcissistic". OK, but that's just a label and I'd like to hear the positive side of it.

I believe that if MY child were missing, I'd be out looking for my child and hiring investigators and scouring every piece of information I could get my hands on. And aside from asking the public to help, I wouldn't give a fig about what scandal rags or internet bloggers & sleuths had to say.

They had four months to ask the public to help, and I should think the public did all it could during that time. There were numerous "sightings".

Do they think we'd all be looking for Madeleine now if we didn't spend so much time blogging? Heck, most of us would much rather be looking for Maddy, if we thought there was a ghost of a chance. I'm sure they could line up 1,000s of volunteers at the "Fund's" expense, to fly anywhere to look for her (Portugal, Spain, outer Mongolia) ... as one BRILLIANT poster recently suggested.

Or ... do they think the PJ are getting ideas from us? I'd be surprised if so, as the information flow seems to be in the other direction.

It was predictable that attention would turn to them eventually if Maddy were not found. And it's also predictable that the public will scrutinize and criticize everything you do, once you put your mug on their TV screens. If you feel sorry for the McCann's, just look at various entertainment and sports figures. They're carved, sliced, diced and served up daily by the media for public consumption. And they're not suspects in a crime.

Why would the McCanns have expected any different? And why do they care so much? I should think that, like the entertainment and sports figures, they just wouldn't read this stuff.

Caring so much about what is thought of them tends to reflect somewhat badly on them. As though "they doth protest too much."

Thanks for any thoughts. This case is really bugging me. :P

[STEADFAST]

I'm not sure the McCanns do care what an American crime forum thinks of them. I guess that they care what the British public think because it would be so very helpful to have lots of public backing if they get into any more serious legal troubles and to be able to live comfortably among their neighbors. Also, in general, I think they (at least Gerry) like to get attention and admiration. There could also be a money angle.

Are there any pro-McCann posters on here? I mean people who think the McCanns are good parents or think they couldn't possibly be guilty of hurting Madeleine or who enjoy reading Gerry's blog? I've missed those posts.

There are posters, myself included, who haven't made up their minds about whether the McCann's are guilty. Not the same as being pro-McCann.

[Dr. Creepin]

Hmmm... Maybe that's why the FIRST person Gerry called, allegedly, after a molester took his daughter, was Alistair Clarke, a specialist in media crisis management.

http://www.alistairclarke.co.uk/

[Pinkhammer]

We are the test jury. The defense has to put up "trial balloons", like DNA sweat from sandals, twins peeing in the boot, McC's hauling ther own garbage around town, to see how they go over. We are prototypical jury members...the ordinary folks who read about the case and analyze it.

It also helps in jury selection.

[Jayelles]

I'm not sure the McCanns do care what an American crime forum thinks of them. I guess that they care what the British public think because it would be so very helpful to have lots of public backing if they get into any more serious legal troubles and to be able to live comfortably among their neighbors. Also, in general, I think they (at least Gerry) like to get attention and admiration. There could also be a money angle.

Are there any pro-McCann posters on here? I mean people who think the McCanns are good parents or think they couldn't possibly be guilty of hurting Madeleine or who enjoy reading Gerry's blog? I've missed those posts.

There are posters, myself included, who haven't made up their minds about whether the McCann's are guilty. Not the same as being pro-McCann.

I am British and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are involved. I know some, possible many Brits do - I just haven't encountered any.

I have believed from the outset that she was abducted from her bed and I have not wavered from that opinion. None of the tabloid reported "evidence" made any sense and I wasn't surprised when it turned out to be false.

OTOH, opinions vary about them leaving the children. Like many other Brits, my husband and I have used a baby listening service on holiday. If you Google "baby listening", you'll get literally thousands of hits on European hotels. It's a fairly standard service.

I hope with all my heart that she is found alive.

[STEADFAST]

I am British and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are involved. I know some, possible many Brits do - I just haven't encountered any.

I have believed from the outset that she was abducted from her bed and I have not wavered from that opinion. None of the tabloid reported "evidence" made any sense and I wasn't surprised when it turned out to be false.

OTOH, opinions vary about them leaving the children. Like many other Brits, my husband and I have used a baby listening service on holiday. If you Google "baby listening", you'll get literally thousands of hits on European hotels. It's a fairly standard service.

I hope with all my heart that she is found alive.

I hope so, too. Here in the U.S., nobody would know what you were referring to if you offered a "baby listening service." And if I went to my neighbors and said, "I'm going across the street for dinner and drinks, but I'm leaving the toddler home asleep. Could you listen at the door every once in a while?" they'd call the police.

[shipmatekate]

I hope so, too. Here in the U.S., nobody would know what you were referring to if you offered a "baby listening service." And if I went to my neighbors and said, "I'm going across the street for dinner and drinks, but I'm leaving the toddler home asleep. Could you listen at the door every once in a while?" they'd call the police.

Yes we are all paranoid and jumpy here in the states.
The Brits take a much more practical approach than a lot of us yanks.
All this finger pointing and trying to find "an angle" is, IMHO, a sad statement on our mind set.

[Rino]

I have believed from the outset that she was abducted from her bed and I have not wavered from that opinion. None of the tabloid reported "evidence" made any sense and I wasn't surprised when it turned out to be false.
.
But it is not tabloid traash that Gerry last week claimed he beleived they were being watched during their stay. But in the first televised interview, when asked just that, flatly denied any such "feelings".

It is not tabloid trash that they are now the only suspects in the case.

I agree completely with Pinkhammer, we are a test audiance and a sympathy ploy.

[narlacat]

Here's something I don't quite get, and it's been puzzling me a lot.

Why, oh why, do the McCann's care so much what the public and all the small web-bloggers like us think?

I'd especially like to hear from the pro-McCann folks on this web forum. I have heard it said that it's because the McCann's are "narcissistic". OK, but that's just a label and I'd like to hear the positive side of it.

I believe that if MY child were missing, I'd be out looking for my child and hiring investigators and scouring every piece of information I could get my hands on. And aside from asking the public to help, I wouldn't give a fig about what scandal rags or internet bloggers & sleuths had to say.

They had four months to ask the public to help, and I should think the public did all it could during that time. There were numerous "sightings".

Do they think we'd all be looking for Madeleine now if we didn't spend so much time blogging? Heck, most of us would much rather be looking for Maddy, if we thought there was a ghost of a chance. I'm sure they could line up 1,000s of volunteers at the "Fund's" expense, to fly anywhere to look for her (Portugal, Spain, outer Mongolia) ... as one BRILLIANT poster recently suggested.

Or ... do they think the PJ are getting ideas from us? I'd be surprised if so, as the information flow seems to be in the other direction.

It was predictable that attention would turn to them eventually if Maddy were not found. And it's also predictable that the public will scrutinize and criticize everything you do, once you put your mug on their TV screens. If you feel sorry for the McCann's, just look at various entertainment and sports figures. They're carved, sliced, diced and served up daily by the media for public consumption. And they're not suspects in a crime.

Why would the McCanns have expected any different? And why do they care so much? I should think that, like the entertainment and sports figures, they just wouldn't read this stuff.

Caring so much about what is thought of them tends to reflect somewhat badly on them. As though "they doth protest too much."

Thanks for any thoughts. This case is really bugging me. :P

They care how they come across in the media- and why wouldn't they in this day and age- they are enduring a witch hunt, very much like what Lindy Chamberlain endured- trial by media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_Chamberlain

[Brefie]

We are the test jury. The defense has to put up "trial balloons", like DNA sweat from sandals, twins peeing in the boot, McC's hauling ther own garbage around town, to see how they go over. We are prototypical jury members...the ordinary folks who read about the case and analyze it.

It also helps in jury selection.

If the defense are using us as a test jury, it must be in response to the PJ trying the same thing with 'leaks'. More often than not, the defense 'answers' to what the prosecution lays out.

I thought the 'boot' response was that there were soiled diapers in there, not that the twins peed in there.

[southcitymom]

I hope so, too. Here in the U.S., nobody would know what you were referring to if you offered a "baby listening service." And if I went to my neighbors and said, "I'm going across the street for dinner and drinks, but I'm leaving the toddler home asleep. Could you listen at the door every once in a while?" they'd call the police.


LOL - so true! I'm still not willing to make the leap from poor parenting decision to child murderer....there's just no real evidence now that I've sorted through all the bunk. I think she was abducted.

[philamena]

I am British and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are involved. I know some, possible many Brits do - I just haven't encountered any.

I have believed from the outset that she was abducted from her bed and I have not wavered from that opinion. None of the tabloid reported "evidence" made any sense and I wasn't surprised when it turned out to be false.

OTOH, opinions vary about them leaving the children. Like many other Brits, my husband and I have used a baby listening service on holiday. If you Google "baby listening", you'll get literally thousands of hits on European hotels. It's a fairly standard service.

I hope with all my heart that she is found alive.

:clap:

[philamena]

They care how they come across in the media- and why wouldn't they in this day and age- they are enduring a witch hunt, very much like what Lindy Chamberlain endured- trial by media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_Chamberlain

Good point naralcat. Excellent comparison. I believe AfterMidnight made the same comparison earlier today on another thread. Thanks so much for the link.

[colomom]

I hope so, too. Here in the U.S., nobody would know what you were referring to if you offered a "baby listening service." And if I went to my neighbors and said, "I'm going across the street for dinner and drinks, but I'm leaving the toddler home asleep. Could you listen at the door every once in a while?" they'd call the police.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Brefie]

I am British and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are involved. I know some, possible many Brits do - I just haven't encountered any.

I have believed from the outset that she was abducted from her bed and I have not wavered from that opinion. None of the tabloid reported "evidence" made any sense and I wasn't surprised when it turned out to be false.

OTOH, opinions vary about them leaving the children. Like many other Brits, my husband and I have used a baby listening service on holiday. If you Google "baby listening", you'll get literally thousands of hits on European hotels. It's a fairly standard service.

I hope with all my heart that she is found alive.

I think this just might be one of the 'cultural differences' that has been discussed so much. Thanks for the input Jayelles, I had a feeling this was more popular than folks let on.

[Texana]

I would dearly love to see Kate McCann advocating that this practice be stopped. If Maddie was abducted, then every other child left alone this way is at risk as well. How can we assume that it was just an isolated case for the McCanns? That seems irresponsible.

Even if this was common practice before, Kate should be saying that now it needs to stop.

On the Dr. Phil show today, a terribly distraught and grieving mother was telling about the accident that befell her son. She had heard noises in the middle of the night, her husband was not at home. She got their handgun out of its secure location and put it under her pillow. The next morning, her son found it and in front of her, shot himself accidentally. It was truly heartbreaking to watch her talk. Dr. Phil asked her what she would say to other parents, and she said immediately without hesitating, "Find another alternative besides having a handgun in the home to keep your family safe. I don't want one other family going through what we have gone through."

That is the thing I find odd, if we accept that the McCanns thought this was safe, (and as doctors, I think they would have understood it was not) then why aren't they campaigning to stop this practice now?

[blaize]

I would dearly love to see Kate McCann advocating that this practice be stopped. If Maddie was abducted, then every other child left alone this way is at risk as well. How can we assume that it was just an isolated case for the McCanns? That seems irresponsible.

Even if this was common practice before, Kate should be saying that now it needs to stop.

On the Dr. Phil show today, a terribly distraught and grieving mother was telling about the accident that befell her son. She had heard noises in the middle of the night, her husband was not at home. She got their handgun out of its secure location and put it under her pillow. The next morning, her son found it and in front of her, shot himself accidentally. It was truly heartbreaking to watch her talk. Dr. Phil asked her what she would say to other parents, and she said immediately without hesitating, "Find another alternative besides having a handgun in the home to keep your family safe. I don't want one other family going through what we have gone through."

That is the thing I find odd, if we accept that the McCanns thought this was safe, (and as doctors, I think they would have understood it was not) then why aren't they campaigning to stop this practice now?

Hello Texana,

It seems to me though that no matter what the McCann's say they get jumped on. If they hire PI's to search it's a publicity stunt, if they don't hire PI's they're not doing enough. I think the McCann's would be in the same quandary if they spoke out about the perceived rights & wrongs of the baby listening service.

[Salem]

I would dearly love to see Kate McCann advocating that this practice be stopped. If Maddie was abducted, then every other child left alone this way is at risk as well. How can we assume that it was just an isolated case for the McCanns? That seems irresponsible.

Even if this was common practice before, Kate should be saying that now it needs to stop.

On the Dr. Phil show today, a terribly distraught and grieving mother was telling about the accident that befell her son. She had heard noises in the middle of the night, her husband was not at home. She got their handgun out of its secure location and put it under her pillow. The next morning, her son found it and in front of her, shot himself accidentally. It was truly heartbreaking to watch her talk. Dr. Phil asked her what she would say to other parents, and she said immediately without hesitating, "Find another alternative besides having a handgun in the home to keep your family safe. I don't want one other family going through what we have gone through."

That is the thing I find odd, if we accept that the McCanns thought this was safe, (and as doctors, I think they would have understood it was not) then why aren't they campaigning to stop this practice now?

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Salem

[Texana]

Hello Texana,

It seems to me though that no matter what the McCann's say they get jumped on. If they hire PI's to search it's a publicity stunt, if they don't hire PI's they're not doing enough. I think the McCann's would be in the same quandary if they spoke out about the perceived rights & wrongs of the baby listening service.

No, I don't agree with you that no matter what they say they get jumped on. That seems to be just a response to any thing that the McCanns do that is regarded negatively or critically, "Damned if they do! Damned if they don't! Poor McCanns!"

They received massive outpourings of sympathy and donations from thousands of people. That's certainly not a "no matter what they do" response, that's a positive response no matter what they do.

I've certainly never commented on whether or not their hiring a PI is a publicity stunt. Frankly, if it were my child that truly was missing, I'd hire someone no matter what the country laws said. I can only hope that I'm as lucky as the McCanns in hiring a top firm as well.

So I'm not giving a pass to Kate on this one. Instead of responding as she did, that she feels supported that "hundreds" of mothers have written to tell her that they've done "exactly the same thing" she did, she needs to respond back, "And we all need to stop doing that. I didn't know better, but now I do. And we all need to stop this practice before another child is taken in the night."

To not say so seems to assume that somehow Madeleine's abductor is some kind of a one-in-billion bad luck scenario, that simply can't happen to another child ever.

Why not?

Why would anyone want to risk thinking that?

If Kate really wants to make a difference for all the other missing children--as she said more than once in her interviews--then she should at least say something about the baby listening idea as no longer being dafe.

She's the one who brings up "all the other children." If she is ready to talk about keeping them safe, then she needs to start talking about how the idea of just listening at intervals is not good enough.

[blaize]

No, I don't agree with you that no matter what they say they get jumped on. That seems to be just a response to any thing that the McCanns do that is regarded negatively or critically, "Damned if they do! Damned if they don't! Poor McCanns!"

They received massive outpourings of sympathy and donations from thousands of people. That's certainly not a "no matter what they do" response, that's a positive response no matter what they do.

I've certainly never commented on whether or not their hiring a PI is a publicity stunt. Frankly, if it were my child that truly was missing, I'd hire someone no matter what the country laws said. I can only hope that I'm as lucky as the McCanns in hiring a top firm as well.

So I'm not giving a pass to Kate on this one. Instead of responding as she did, that she feels supported that "hundreds" of mothers have written to tell her that they've done "exactly the same thing" she did, she needs to respond back, "And we all need to stop doing that. I didn't know better, but now I do. And we all need to stop this practice before another child is taken in the night."

To not say so seems to assume that somehow Madeleine's abductor is some kind of a one-in-billion bad luck scenario, that simply can't happen to another child ever.

Why not?

Why would anyone want to risk thinking that?

If Kate really wants to make a difference for all the other missing children--as she said more than once in her interviews--then she should at least say something about the baby listening idea as no longer being dafe.

She's the one who brings up "all the other children." If she is ready to talk about keeping them safe, then she needs to start talking about how the idea of just listening at intervals is not good enough.

I understand your point Texana but to be honest I don't think the McCann's can or should be engaged in another campaign yet, that could involve them in more legal wrangling. Their focus should be on finding Madeleine.

By the way my comment about the PI's was not aimed at you or anybody else here either.

[Texana]

I understand your point Texana but to be honest I don't think the McCann's can or should be engaged in another campaign yet, that could involve them in more legal wrangling. Their focus should be on finding Madeleine.

By the way my comment about the PI's was not aimed at you or anybody else here either.

Blaize, I hear you. I don't think the McCanns should be taking on a global kind of campaign either, with Madeleine's fate still unknown. However, they did that themselves from the very beginning:

"Kate hints her future may lie in helping other families cope with abductions. "There are so many missing children out there, abducted children and sexually-exploited children," she said.

"Once you know all that you can't turn a blind eye to it. Madeleine is our priority but we have to help. We can't just ignore those other children.

"Whatever comes out of our experience, anything that can make the tiniest bit of difference to make the world safer place is going to be a good thing. I feel a moral obligation.

"Madeleine means so much to me, but you can't take it away from the bigger picture."

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1590&id=1223682007

If they are going to be talking about other children, then at the very least, they need to be saying that the whole "baby listening" idea is not safe. That would make the tiniest bit of difference, as Kate says, wouldn't it?

The whole "can't take it away from the bigger picture" emphasis is just so odd to me. I fully agree that everyone grieves uniquely. But to be talking so soon about "the bigger picture" is atypical in the extreme.

I have a good friend who lost a two year old suddenly to an undiagnosed medical condition twenty years ago. He was literally healthy one minute and then dropped into unconsciousness.

She spent four years in the Compassionate Friends support group (a national organization for parents who have lost their children) and only then did she spend another six years in the group helping others. (She says she felt she needed to help others as she was helped.)

The McCanns set themselves up early on as global activists for missing children, but they haven't really said the one thing that might stop other children from being abducted. Both things just don't make sense to me.

[txsvicki]

I'd think that if a couple had plenty of money and an abducted child, they would want to lay low and start hiring outside experts to infiltrate areas so that the girl could eventually be rescued or find someone who knows of the pedophile abduction rings. Getting a little girl back or finding her should be the one and only top priority or interest for a long time.

[SleuthMom]

I did not know the Mc Canns care about us. I personally think they care about themselves (who wouldn't in a situation like that?) IF they are guilty, then they need to keep pretending and clear up their names somehow because these people have careers, etc. IF they are innocent, heck...it is not a nice position to be AT ALL.

So I think is a natural thing to want to defend yourself IF you feel you are being wrongly accused.

Having said that, some of their statements (in my view) are idiotic as to defend the fact they left their tots alone. After the amount of criticism they got from around the world, you would at least think they would accept it was stupid.

So I really do not think they care about us at all but themselves.

[Texana]

I would have said that they care what people think, but Sleuthmom, thinking over what you said, I'm not so sure I wouldn't change my mind to agree with you...

[philamena]

I'd think that if a couple had plenty of money and an abducted child, they would want to lay low and start hiring outside experts to infiltrate areas so that the girl could eventually be rescued or find someone who knows of the pedophile abduction rings. Getting a little girl back or finding her should be the one and only top priority or interest for a long time.
Agree 100%.

[blaize]

Blaize, I hear you. I don't think the McCanns should be taking on a global kind of campaign either, with Madeleine's fate still unknown. However, they did that themselves from the very beginning:

"Kate hints her future may lie in helping other families cope with abductions. "There are so many missing children out there, abducted children and sexually-exploited children," she said.

"Once you know all that you can't turn a blind eye to it. Madeleine is our priority but we have to help. We can't just ignore those other children.

"Whatever comes out of our experience, anything that can make the tiniest bit of difference to make the world safer place is going to be a good thing. I feel a moral obligation.

"Madeleine means so much to me, but you can't take it away from the bigger picture."

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1590&id=1223682007

If they are going to be talking about other children, then at the very least, they need to be saying that the whole "baby listening" idea is not safe. That would make the tiniest bit of difference, as Kate says, wouldn't it?

The whole "can't take it away from the bigger picture" emphasis is just so odd to me. I fully agree that everyone grieves uniquely. But to be talking so soon about "the bigger picture" is atypical in the extreme.

I have a good friend who lost a two year old suddenly to an undiagnosed medical condition twenty years ago. He was literally healthy one minute and then dropped into unconsciousness.

She spent four years in the Compassionate Friends support group (a national organization for parents who have lost their children) and only then did she spend another six years in the group helping others. (She says she felt she needed to help others as she was helped.)

The McCanns set themselves up early on as global activists for missing children, but they haven't really said the one thing that might stop other children from being abducted. Both things just don't make sense to me.

Hello Texana,

I think when or if Madeleine is found then definitely Kate or Gerry or both should then speak out. But right now, no. On the one hand no one knows to a legal certainty where Madeleine is or what may have happened to her & as long as her parents are suspects in her disappearance it serves no positive purpose for them to speak out.

In fact playing devil's advocate here now, if they were guilty and spoke out about their own stupidity in leaving the children alone and how baby listening services could be dangerous etc, isn't it possible that they could garner a lot of distracting sympathy away from Madeleine's actual disappearance towards their own loss? Not only that but if they were found guilty wouldn't that totally detract from the any positive effect their speaking out might have had?

On the other hand if they're innocent and start a campaign against baby listening services right now or in the next few weeks isn't it likely that would take their focus & some resources away from finding Madeleine?

Personally I think one of the established internationally children's charities would be a better advocate for something like this anyway. Then when or if Madeleine is found or in the awful event she's not found & the McCann's are cleared of any involvement, there would be a neutral, unaffiliated body in charge of the campaign who can approach the McCann's as spokespeople or sponsors of the stop the baby listening service campaign.

Just my own opinion.

[Texana]

Blaize, it doesn't matter what you or I think the McCanns should have done in regards to setting themselves up as advocates for missing children worldwide, they've already done that. They did it from the very beginning. Maddie had been missing just a little over two months when Gerry McCann came to the United States, not as part of the search for Madeleine, but as a "fact finding" mission in preventing other child abductions.

"The father of missing Madeleine McCann will continue his visit to the United States today with a series of meetings with politicians.

Gerry McCann is in the US for a four-day fact-finding visit with the family’s campaigner Justine McGuinness.

He will meet a senior member of first lady Laura Bush’s staff as well as senators and congressmen in Washington DC.

Mr. McCann has already met US attorney general Alberto Gonzales to discuss efforts to tackle child abduction.

The meetings are part of a visit to the US to learn about the work of specialist agencies in preventing child trafficking and sexual abuse."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007340178,00.html

[BethyC]

I'm not sure the McCanns do care what an American crime forum thinks of them. I guess that they care what the British public think because it would be so very helpful to have lots of public backing if they get into any more serious legal troubles and to be able to live comfortably among their neighbors. Also, in general, I think they (at least Gerry) like to get attention and admiration. There could also be a money angle.

Are there any pro-McCann posters on here? I mean people who think the McCanns are good parents or think they couldn't possibly be guilty of hurting Madeleine or who enjoy reading Gerry's blog? I've missed those posts.

There are posters, myself included, who haven't made up their minds about whether the McCann's are guilty. Not the same as being pro-McCann.

Guess you haven't seen my posts then -- I am 'pro-McCann' and do not believe that they either murdered or accidentally killed Madeleine. There are quite a few of us actually on this board. I don't think anyone has parented mistake free. I don't think the McCann's are drunks or swingers or even bad parents. I can't join the rants of the majority on this board who have gone the path of wild speculation in this case.

[blaize]

Blaize, it doesn't matter what you or I think the McCanns should have done in regards to setting themselves up as advocates for missing children worldwide, they've already done that. They did it from the very beginning. Maddie had been missing just a little over two months when Gerry McCann came to the United States, not as part of the search for Madeleine, but as a "fact finding" mission in preventing other child abductions.
<Respectfully Snipped>


Hello Texana, sorry not to reply sooner.

The McCann's have spoken as advocates & I understand that you say that their doing that and not speaking out against the listening service seems odd to you but as I've said in a previous post there may be a legal reason they haven't spoken out. That's just my take on it anyway.

[hcc2007]

Guess you haven't seen my posts then -- I am 'pro-McCann' and do not believe that they either murdered or accidentally killed Madeleine. There are quite a few of us actually on this board. I don't think anyone has parented mistake free. I don't think the McCann's are drunks or swingers or even bad parents. I can't join the rants of the majority on this board who have gone the path of wild speculation in this case.

Hi BettyC,

Good to hear from you. So, now that you've posted, I wonder if you could share your take on why the McCanns seem to care so much about what is said in the media, while not always taking some very obvious actions toward finding their daughter? Here is one example:

Madeleine is likely to look different now, at almost 4.5 years, than she did in the most recent pictures taken of her. The McCanns could (and should) do something that is routinely done here in the U.S. (and which they must know about): That is, "virtual aging" of a picture.

We all feel sorry for the McCanns, especially over flurries of excitement (like the one this past week) when children who look like Maddy are spotted.

On the other hand, this would happen less if an ACCURATE picture of Maddy were to be released. The most recent picture of Madeleine that the McCanns have released (shown for much of the day on www.cnn.com), is really old -- probably taken when she was TWO as it is very baby-like.

If finding their daughter matters more to them than getting media/public sympathy, shouldn't they release an accurate picture of her? This is inexplicable to me.

Would love to hear YOUR take on some of these matters -- That is, the "generous" intepretation of some of their choices. Thanks for any positive light you can shed on them. I'm sure many of us here would rather they not be involved, it's just that so much of their behavior is inexplicable.

Thanks so much.

[SleuthMom]

I don't think anyone has parented mistake free.


True, but some are surely idiocy-free.

[teacherbees]

True, but some are surely idiocy-free.

Of course I made mistakes in my parenting...and will no doubt make a few more before I die. (Parenting never ends - even when the kids are grown!)

But, here's one mistake I didn't and certainly would NOT have made. First off, I didn't leave my children alone at age three and under so I could go out and have a good time. Did I ever get tired of the responsibility of parenting and wish I could party hardy? Sure...but I took my duty as a mother seriously and knew that it would have been totally wrong to leave babies alone. The mere thought that one of them MIGHT have awakened and had the terrifying feeling of no mommy or daddy in the house would've stopped me cold.

But, you know what? I could probably forgive the McCanns if this had been the first time they ever tried that stunt. While I would've thought them rather stupid for setting up a scenario that invited trouble on so many levels, I still would've been devastated that someone chose that time to hurt/take their child and my heart would've gone out to the anyway.

What makes it very hard for me to go that full sympathy route is the knowlege that Maddie had cried for an extended period of time a few nights before. Criminy!! What kind of selfish parent could go off and leave their baby alone (away from the comfort of her own home..or country!), knowing full well she'd had to endure such agony just a few nights before???? In my book, that defines selfish and callous.

I do not rush to judgement on whether the McCanns are guilty of killing their daughter or not. When the Maddie picture came up yesterday morning, my heart soared. Even though I had doubts as to it really looking like Maddie, I prayed fervently it was her. And today, if more evidence came along that she was alive - I'd be the first to exult in that.

But, I'm not blind and dumb and I'm not a moron. PLE made Kate and Gerry arguidos. You don't make that kind of accusation on a whim. So, I have to factor that in. And while news on this case is confusing and contradictory, there are certain pieces of information and news that do stand out - most particularly the work of the cadaver dogs.

Added to that, the McCanns themselves keep changing their story. That's huge in my book. It is NOT a rush to judgement to evaluate their ever changing stories and wonder why they can't stick with one version of the important parts of the chronology of Maddies' disappearance.

I have the right, as a member of the human race, to not like certain things the McCanns do - selling Maddie items certainly ranks right up there as galling and sickening. Writing breezy blogs of their daily jogs and jaunts is a little weird. (I try to imagine me writing a blog after the death of my son...nope, can't picture that at all.) Washing Cuddle Cat - not something I've seen other grieving mothers do with precious belongings relating to their gone children...the list goes on.

But, in the end, I hold out hope that Maddie will be found alive and, if she is dead, I pray fervently that, whoever killed her will be found out and made to pay for their heinous deed.

[the original tez]

Excellent post teacherbees!

[Texana]

Agreed, teacherbees.

[Jayelles]

Of course I made mistakes in my parenting...and will no doubt make a few more before I die. (Parenting never ends - even when the kids are grown!)

But, here's one mistake I didn't and certainly would NOT have made. First off, I didn't leave my children alone at age three and under so I could go out and have a good time. Did I ever get tired of the responsibility of parenting and wish I could party hardy? Sure...but I took my duty as a mother seriously and knew that it would have been totally wrong to leave babies alone. The mere thought that one of them MIGHT have awakened and had the terrifying feeling of no mommy or daddy in the house would've stopped me cold.

But, you know what? I could probably forgive the McCanns if this had been the first time they ever tried that stunt. While I would've thought them rather stupid for setting up a scenario that invited trouble on so many levels, I still would've been devastated that someone chose that time to hurt/take their child and my heart would've gone out to the anyway.

What makes it very hard for me to go that full sympathy route is the knowlege that Maddie had cried for an extended period of time a few nights before. Criminy!! What kind of selfish parent could go off and leave their baby alone (away from the comfort of her own home..or country!), knowing full well she'd had to endure such agony just a few nights before???? In my book, that defines selfish and callous.

I do not rush to judgement on whether the McCanns are guilty of killing their daughter or not. When the Maddie picture came up yesterday morning, my heart soared. Even though I had doubts as to it really looking like Maddie, I prayed fervently it was her. And today, if more evidence came along that she was alive - I'd be the first to exult in that.

But, I'm not blind and dumb and I'm not a moron. PLE made Kate and Gerry arguidos. You don't make that kind of accusation on a whim. So, I have to factor that in. And while news on this case is confusing and contradictory, there are certain pieces of information and news that do stand out - most particularly the work of the cadaver dogs.

Added to that, the McCanns themselves keep changing their story. That's huge in my book. It is NOT a rush to judgement to evaluate their ever changing stories and wonder why they can't stick with one version of the important parts of the chronology of Maddies' disappearance.

I have the right, as a member of the human race, to not like certain things the McCanns do - selling Maddie items certainly ranks right up there as galling and sickening. Writing breezy blogs of their daily jogs and jaunts is a little weird. (I try to imagine me writing a blog after the death of my son...nope, can't picture that at all.) Washing Cuddle Cat - not something I've seen other grieving mothers do with precious belongings relating to their gone children...the list goes on.

But, in the end, I hold out hope that Maddie will be found alive and, if she is dead, I pray fervently that, whoever killed her will be found out and made to pay for their heinous deed.

Do you understand the concept of arguido? Do you know that some people actually ask to be made arguidos because it gives them more legal protection? It's not the same as a suspect in the US or UK. The McCanns had to be made arguidos so that the police could ask them certain questions. Kate was questioned for the first day as a witness and was asked no questions about Maddie's disappearance. Then she was made arguido for the second day of questioning so that they could ask her questions about Maddie's disappearance.

They aren't they only arguidos and more people may be made arguidos.

ETa:- But you're right of course, the Portuguese police didn't make them arguidos on a whim. They made them arguidos based on their theory that the McCanns injected their daughter with a massive dose of sleeping tablets then kept her body for 25 days before disposing of it under the full glare of the world's media.
There is no doubt in my mind that they will be cleared of this. I haven't felt so sure of anything since the Danielle van dam case.

[SleuthMom]

Do you know that some people actually ask to be made arguidos because it gives them more legal protection?

That's correct although ...are you suggesting this is the case with the Mc Canns? Based on a little piece I read today from the latest of their blog, I do not have that impression AT ALL. Same, as just judging how worried sick Gerry Mc Cann looked after the last police interview when he was made an arguido.

[mjak]

I cringe when I read comments here where people define themselves as pro Mccaans or con Mccaans. I believe we should be neither of these and what we shold be is pro Maddie. This means finding Maddie should be they only thing we are "pro" about. In order to do this we must consider all evidence, all possibiities and all outcomes. This means that if we declare ourselves pro or con the mcCaans then we are distoring our reasoning which is a definite detriment to the ultimate goal of finding Maddie.

mjak

[Jayelles]

That's correct although ...are you suggesting this is the case with the Mc Canns? Based on a little piece I read today from the latest of their blog, I do not have that impression AT ALL. Same, as just judging how worried sick Gerry Mc Cann looked after the last police interview when he was made an arguido.

No I'm pretty certain they didn't ask to be made arguidos but the fact that many people do highlights the difference between a Portuguese arguido/a and a British/American suspect. You don't ever hear of anyone in the UK or US asking to be made a suspect!

It's a status which carries added legal protection. I understand that they are not allowed to ask questions pertaining to potential involvement without the interviewee having arguido/a status.

I'm sure I'd look worried sick if my child had been abducted and instead of looking for her, the police made their mind up that I'd killed her and someone disposed of her body under the full glare of the world's media.

I'm not even sure how the McCanns were supposed to have disposed of her body. I don't normally pack a shovel when I go on vacation and I don't know anyone who does. Nor have I ever stayed in a holiday apartment which had a shovel as part of it's inventory. Do the police suppose they used spoons to dig a grave?

Regarding the theory about them somehow persuading a British sailor to dispose of her body at sea.... The nearest marina is about 4 miles away from their resort (along a main road) and they didn't have access to a hired car at that time. You can check this easily on Google Earth.

There is not one shred of evidence which supports a parents did it theory. They didn't have the means, motive or opportunity IMO.

[SleuthMom]

I'm sure I'd look worried sick if my child had been abducted and instead of looking for her, the police made their mind up that I'd killed her and someone disposed of her body under the full glare of the world's media.

You mean if you was innocent. So far, the Mc Canns's names have not been cleared up by the police...which means they could or they could not have been involved.

I'm not even sure how the McCanns were supposed to have disposed of her body. I don't normally pack a shovel when I go on vacation and I don't know anyone who does. Nor have I ever stayed in a holiday apartment which had a shovel as part of it's inventory. Do the police suppose they used spoons to dig a grave?

Not sure but is certain that those cadaver dogs did smell something.


There is not one shred of evidence which supports a parents did it theory. They didn't have the means, motive or opportunity IMO.

Motive, perhaps...if it was an accident they do not need one. Means and opportunity? Heck, yes. No need to bury her, throw her in the ocean and job done.

[Texana]

They most certainly had the same opportunity to dispose of her that an abductor had to take her.

They would not need motive, as Sleuthmom said, for an accidental death.

And you don't really need a shovel if excavations are already taking place.

The cadaver dogs alerted to the scent of decomposition in the Renault Scenic. A DNA sample was recovered from the car.

That is evidence, which may or may not be connected to other evidence that ultimately convicts the McCanns, but it is evidence.

[JMCDAD]

I was so stunned when I first heard that they left the kids alone that I honestly thought that I must have heard the ages wrong.
I assumed she had an older sister or something.
That is how incredulous it was to me to do something like that, especially when you factor in that these are 2 professional people, doctors no less.

Some things are just common sense, Its like taking them to the beach and leaving them there, and then being surpirsed if something happend to them !!

[mjak]

I was so stunned when I first heard that they left the kids alone that I honestly thought that I must have heard the ages wrong.
I assumed she had an older sister or something.
That is how incredulous it was to me to do something like that, especially when you factor in that these are 2 professional people, doctors no less.

Some things are just common sense, Its like taking them to the beach and leaving them there, and then being surpirsed if something happend to them !!

I too thought heard the ages wrong and went online to check what I though I had misheard on the news. I was shocked to find out I had heard correctly. Then I was also shocked to hear the parents had not been taken into custody for leaving them alone.

mjak

[CaliKid]

Everyone keeps saying it's "impossible" for the McCanns to have disposed of Madeleine's body because of the media presence.

Did the newspapers follow the McCanns everywhere all summer? On each of Gerry's trips back and forth to the airport to pick up and drop off relatives? Every time they went to church? To the homes of people in PDL where their children swam?

I think that after the initial swarm went away, there were opportunities for the McCanns to do whatever they needed to in complete privacy.

[Texana]

Everyone keeps saying it's "impossible" for the McCanns to have disposed of Madeleine's body because of the media presence.

Did the newspapers follow the McCanns everywhere all summer? On each of Gerry's trips back and forth to the airport to pick up and drop off relatives? Every time they went to church? To the homes of people in PDL where their children swam?

I think that after the initial swarm went away, there were opportunities for the McCanns to do whatever they needed to in complete privacy.

Agreed, Calikid, the McCanns stayed up very late each night as well--they said once they went to bed at 10:30 because they were so tired, and that was very early for them.

They had media presence during "working hours" but other than that, they only had media presence when they alerted them or wanted it.

[Brefie]

There is NO WAY the McCann's were able to keep, then transport and bury Madeleine McCann after they raised the alarm. The only thing that could convince me otherwise would be a confession from their own mouths or actual footage.

To say they only had media presence during working hours or when they wanted it would require someone to have followed the media the whole time. You don't think there was ONE SINGLE photog ALWAYS at the ready for a quick burial a la McCann? Imagine the bonus that would come with that photo! If the initial swarm went away (I think this unlikely) then that's when the PJ took over.

Respect it all, folks, but this one is WAY too out there for me.

[Texana]

There is NO WAY the McCann's were able to keep, then transport and bury Madeleine McCann after they raised the alarm. The only thing that could convince me otherwise would be a confession from their own mouths or actual footage.

To say they only had media presence during working hours or when they wanted it would require someone to have followed the media the whole time. You don't think there was ONE SINGLE photog ALWAYS at the ready for a quick burial a la McCann? Imagine the bonus that would come with that photo! If the initial swarm went away (I think this unlikely) then that's when the PJ took over.

Respect it all, folks, but this one is WAY too out there for me.

Did the press follow them to Fatima each time?

[hcc2007]

Hi everyone,

I came back today to read this thread that I started, because I hoped to find that someone had written in response to my original question ... why would innocent parents be so interested in public opinion and seemingly not so interested in finding their daughter?

Instead I am reading a rehash of really old stuff. They left the kids alone, they are arguidos, they could have moved the body.

If you really want to rehash these topics that's ok of course! But it would be helpful, given how MANY postings there are, if discussions followed the thread they are in. That way, folks with not enough time to read ALL the threads -- like me -- could choose a thread and find the stuff in there that fits with it.

Hope that makes sense to all.

Thanks!

[philamena]

....
There is no doubt in my mind that they will be cleared of this. I haven't felt so sure of anything since the Danielle van dam case.

Hope this is how it turns out Jayelles. FWIW, I haven't viewed the McCann's as murderers either.

[philamena]

Hi everyone,

I came back today to read this thread that I started, because I hoped to find that someone had written in response to my original question ... why would innocent parents be so interested in public opinion and seemingly not so interested in finding their daughter?

Instead I am reading a rehash of really old stuff. They left the kids alone, .....

Thanks!

hcc2007,
lol , So you came back to see if anyone wants to argue their point?:crazy: just kidding
I can't speak for anyone else but I can tell you that after personally following these kinds of cases for over 20 years, there is no guidebook explaining how to act, talk, what news media to talk to, when to lawyer up, when not to lawyer up, etc. There simply isn't a right or wrong way.

If the McCann's stayed inside and kept silent, people would have said they were hiding something. They can't win.

[Brefie]

Did the press follow them to Fatima each time?

No idea. Noone does, which is kind of my point. But I am willing to bet SOMEONE did.

[Brefie]

hcc2007,
lol , So you came back to see if anyone wants to argue their point?:crazy: just kidding
I can't speak for anyone else but I can tell you that after personally following these kinds of cases for over 20 years, there is no guidebook explaining how to act, talk, what news media to talk to, when to lawyer up, when not to lawyer up, etc. There simply isn't a right or wrong way.

If the McCann's stayed inside and kept been silent, people would have said they were hiding something. They can't win.

Totally agree.

[colomom]

Do you understand the concept of arguido? Do you know that some people actually ask to be made arguidos because it gives them more legal protection? It's not the same as a suspect in the US or UK. The McCanns had to be made arguidos so that the police could ask them certain questions. Kate was questioned for the first day as a witness and was asked no questions about Maddie's disappearance. Then she was made arguido for the second day of questioning so that they could ask her questions about Maddie's disappearance.

They aren't they only arguidos and more people may be made arguidos.

ETa:- But you're right of course, the Portuguese police didn't make them arguidos on a whim. They made them arguidos based on their theory that the McCanns injected their daughter with a massive dose of sleeping tablets then kept her body for 25 days before disposing of it under the full glare of the world's media.
There is no doubt in my mind that they will be cleared of this. I haven't felt so sure of anything since the Danielle van dam case.

As I understand it, as a "witness" they would not be allowed to refuse to answer questions. It is only after being made arguido(a)s that they would then be allowed to state "no comment" or refuse to answer.

The PJ were forced to make them arguidos because they refused to answer the questions and (I think) the PJ was preparing for the possibility of arrest.

It is very likely that the McCanns requested this arguido status themselves.

Who requested it is not exactly clear.

Links:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2164464,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2407089.ece

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/law_order/what+is+an+arguido/775257

[CaliKid]

Hi everyone,

I came back today to read this thread that I started, because I hoped to find that someone had written in response to my original question ... why would innocent parents be so interested in public opinion and seemingly not so interested in finding their daughter?

Instead I am reading a rehash of really old stuff. They left the kids alone, they are arguidos, they could have moved the body.

If you really want to rehash these topics that's ok of course! But it would be helpful, given how MANY postings there are, if discussions followed the thread they are in. That way, folks with not enough time to read ALL the threads -- like me -- could choose a thread and find the stuff in there that fits with it.

Hope that makes sense to all.

Thanks!

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.

[Texana]

Well said, Calikid. The McCanns talk so much about a "normal life for the twins."

This is so unrealistic and pathetic, really. What child whose sibling was abducted and then disappeared, presumably forever (assuming Maddie is not found alive) has a normal life? Especially a sibling who manages to capture the public's attention and become a major news story across the globe?

[Dr. Creepin]

The police don't smear people, only the press do that, except in this case.

[april4sky]

The police don't smear people, only the press do that, except in this case.
I think you'll find the Aruban police do it too.

[Edwards20]

You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't.

This is just all so sad to me still. The information is so abundant, yet I can't be sure what is reliable and what is not. If anything "leaked" has any truth to it ... God help us. I am just still not ready to think that anyone could do such a thing to a child, and continue to deny it, etc. My heart just won't let me.

Each day, I read and I am torn more and get all confused again. Initially, I was pro-McCann ... now I am on the fence and rock from side to side with each passing moment. Science and forsenics would teach us to look at the evidence, but we are human and humans have feelings and emotions .... mine change daily.

[Pinkhammer]

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.

You nailed it, right on the head! They've taken a chapter or two from OJ, the Ramseys, Robert Blake, and all the others who have gotten away with murder.

[Pinkhammer]

McCanns also care about us because internet reports do not have to pass through the Mitchell-McCann Cleansing Spin Machine before the public can read them.

Like this one, from colomom's Portugese Press Reports thread:

Death would have occurred before dinner

While they await new results from analyses performed on traces, namely of blood and hair, that were collected in the Ocean Club apartment and from the Renault Scenic, the Policia Judiciaria keeps strong suspicions that the body of Madeleine McCann "passed through several locations" before it entered the boot of the car that was hired by her parents.

According to PJ, the girl died inside the apartment before her parents' dinner, at the Tapas restaurant, in a period that is comprehended between 7.00 and 8.30 p.m., as DN could find out from sources that are connected to the investigation.

During that time interval, Maddie's father was seen playing tennis in the resort, so the child and her twin siblings would have been guarded by their mother, given the fact that the resort's babysitter that took care of the children had been dismissed around 5.30 p.m.

There are no records or witnesses that saw Kate and Maddie during that fateful hour and half.

[Barnaby]

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.

Absolutely spot on IMO!

[SleuthMom]

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.

Excellent! :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Shazza]

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.
Well said Calikid, great post, couldnt agree more.:clap: :clap: :clap:

[gord]

Simple. The McCanns' greatest hope is that pressure is brought to bear on the Portuguese courts to declare there isn't enough evidence to try them. But in order to go back to having a normal life afterwards, the public has to believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance in the first place.

I think the PR team for the McCanns is working on two objectives at once. The first one is to negate the impact of the forensic evidence- downplay the importance of the DNA (soiled diapers and sandal sweat), criticize the cadaver and blood dogs (chicken carcasses and smelly trash) and come up with "logical" reasons (death smell on Kate's clothes and Cuddle Cat) for some of the findings.

The second is to try the case in the media. By having family and friends speak up about the first objective as well as leak new witness statements, they create favorable opinions about the McCanns' guilt, or rather, lack of it. You'll notice there's very little actual fence-sitting; people either believe they had something to do with harming Madeleine or they didn't. I also saw something written on a blog about how the McCanns are pushing polar opposites. Stranger abduction vs. premeditated murder, with no gray in between so that public opinion has to settle on abduction. I mean, what kind of loving parent purposely murders their darling 3-year-old child and then chillingly goes out to eat as if nothing happened!

Throw in a few Maddie sightings to create reasonable doubt, and you have the masses screaming that the McCanns are being smeared and arrested for something they didn't do. Count on high-powered people they know to get the charges dropped and they can reclaim their middle-class lifestyle and pretend it was all a bad dream, even if they are one child short. That's why the parents care.

That would all count for nothing , nothing if we got A) A body being found or B) even some cast iron forensic evidence C ) or even god forbid and end to the endless leaks by the Local plod

at the moment the whole thing is just a big mess . A mess for justice a mess for the Mccaans who if they are innocent must be going through hell - imagine if you were villified and accused of murdering your cgild if you DIDNT do it .

The Police need to very soon either charge them and present what they have or make a statement to the contrary - this limbo of arguido for months on end is crazy.

At the end of the day if there is something that comes up that shows 100% the Macaans were guilty then the whole team Mccaan thing willl go as quickly as it went . They wikll be wisked back to portugal and will stand trial there - not in the daily mail and daily star

[Jayelles]

That would all count for nothing , nothing if we got A) A body being found or B) even some cast iron forensic evidence C ) or even god forbid and end to the endless leaks by the Local plod

at the moment the whole thing is just a big mess . A mess for justice a mess for the Mccaans who if they are innocent must be going through hell - imagine if you were villified and accused of murdering your cgild if you DIDNT do it .

The Police need to very soon either charge them and present what they have or make a statement to the contrary - this limbo of arguido for months on end is crazy.

At the end of the day if there is something that comes up that shows 100% the Macaans were guilty then the whole team Mccaan thing willl go as quickly as it went . They wikll be wisked back to portugal and will stand trial there - not in the daily mail and daily star

Excellent post.

[hcc2007]

Excellent post.

Actually if my child were missing, being villified would be nothing, nothing at all, compared to losing my child. I don't think I would even notice, I'd be so obsessed with finding my child.

That's what's so weird, and frankly annoying, about this couple. They're wallowing in self-pity when it's MADELEINE who may well have been raped, molested, abused, and/or killed. How can anyone be so insanely selfish that they think of themselves instead of their child?

No one answered my thread/question from a pro-McCann point of view. There are plenty of answers people might've given. A few that come to mind are:

"Feeling sorry for the parents gets more citiziens involved in the search."

"Publicizing that the family is HUMAN is more likely to get an abductor to return a child".

"Certain personalities respond to terrible losses by regressing back to a childlike state, become obsessed with their own safety and well-being."

"Loss of a child always makes a parent feel guilty, even if they did nothing wrong at all. Some people respond to that guilt by becoming hypersensitive to any sort of criticism."

The pro-McCann folks have not, and do not, offer explanations like that. They simply urge sympathy. Over and over. That's fine, of course, and sympathy is great! But the McCanns may have received more sympathy than any other parents in the history of child-abduction. 10,000% more than the average parent of a missing child typically gets.

[hcc2007]

Some children grow up being "the good child" -- stated unkindly they are "goody-goodies". That kind of child is more likely to grow up to be someone who is perfectionistic. They might be the straight-A student, or the one who never gets into trouble, or the one who "tells on" their peers.

People like that don't take criticism well because they've staked out the "goody" role for themselves. The McCanns, being doctors, may have the perfectionistic streak, and being raised Catholic may increase the "goody-goody" factor. So it's just abominable to them, to be considered un-perfect.

Anyway, just trying to come up with answers to my own question, here!

[CaliKid]

That would all count for nothing , nothing if we got A) A body being found or B) even some cast iron forensic evidence C ) or even god forbid and end to the endless leaks by the Local plod

at the moment the whole thing is just a big mess . A mess for justice a mess for the Mccaans who if they are innocent must be going through hell - imagine if you were villified and accused of murdering your cgild if you DIDNT do it .

The Police need to very soon either charge them and present what they have or make a statement to the contrary - this limbo of arguido for months on end is crazy.

At the end of the day if there is something that comes up that shows 100% the Macaans were guilty then the whole team Mccaan thing willl go as quickly as it went . They wikll be wisked back to portugal and will stand trial there - not in the daily mail and daily star

Yes, and so is making Robert Murat twist in the wind too, especially if he's been framed.

[CaliKid]

Actually if my child were missing, being villified would be nothing, nothing at all, compared to losing my child. I don't think I would even notice, I'd be so obsessed with finding my child.

That's what's so weird, and frankly annoying, about this couple. They're wallowing in self-pity when it's MADELEINE who may well have been raped, molested, abused, and/or killed. How can anyone be so insanely selfish that they think of themselves instead of their child?

No one answered my thread/question from a pro-McCann point of view. There are plenty of answers people might've given. A few that come to mind are:

"Feeling sorry for the parents gets more citiziens involved in the search."

"Publicizing that the family is HUMAN is more likely to get an abductor to return a child".

"Certain personalities respond to terrible losses by regressing back to a childlike state, become obsessed with their own safety and well-being."

"Loss of a child always makes a parent feel guilty, even if they did nothing wrong at all. Some people respond to that guilt by becoming hypersensitive to any sort of criticism."

The pro-McCann folks have not, and do not, offer explanations like that. They simply urge sympathy. Over and over. That's fine, of course, and sympathy is great! But the McCanns may have received more sympathy than any other parents in the history of child-abduction. 10,000% more than the average parent of a missing child typically gets.

One thing I don't understand is that the McCanns said the PJ told them not to show any emotion because it could play into a kidnapper's hands, but I don't see how someone could not show anguish over their abducted child. In fact, it's almost inhumane if the PJ asked the McCanns to do this.

[Shazza]

I think the McCanns care what we think because the truth hurts, and I believe the truth has been mentioned in this forum.
Blaming the P LE for leaks or any other LE involved is just a tactic to shift the blame and put everyone off track. We are all human and therefore can and will make mistakes, but the prejudice you see on this forum if you dont agree with some posts is not helping to find a georgeous little girl called Madelaine

[Texana]

One thing I don't understand is that the McCanns said the PJ told them not to show any emotion because it could play into a kidnapper's hands, but I don't see how someone could not show anguish over their abducted child. In fact, it's almost inhumane if the PJ asked the McCanns to do this.

I totally agree. Besides, it's very odd considering that no parent of any abducted child in the U.S. (and aren't we the capital for abducted children?) has ever taken this approach.

As well, the McCanns consulted U.S. experts in child abductions.

So I think this may have been a one sentence remark from one expert who mentioned it as a possibility against perhaps dramatic pleas for return--sort of a profiler opinion--but not necessarily a hard and fast, fact-proven directive.

[CaliKid]

I totally agree. Besides, it's very odd considering that no parent of any abducted child in the U.S. (and aren't we the capital for abducted children?) has ever taken this approach.

As well, the McCanns consulted U.S. experts in child abductions.

So I think this may have been a one sentence remark from one expert who mentioned it as a possibility against perhaps dramatic pleas for return--sort of a profiler opinion--but not necessarily a hard and fast, fact-proven directive.

Or an outright lie and lame excuse directed at people like us who question why the McCanns seem so cold and uncaring.

[philamena]

...... I don't see how someone could not show anguish over their abducted child. In fact, it's almost inhumane if the PJ asked the McCanns to do this.

I agree.

[IrishMist]

It was a profiler opinion:

"In fact, criminal profilers had advised them to display no overt emotion in case Madeleine’s abductor “got off" on the sight of her parents in obvious distress. Off camera, they were deeply distressed and received help from counsellors."

Link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2422967.ece)

I know in court cases, people are told to not show emotion, and I've felt that's pretty difficult at times. I can see how a profiler would recommend that.

[CaliKid]

It was a profiler opinion:

"In fact, criminal profilers had advised them to display no overt emotion in case Madeleine’s abductor “got off" on the sight of her parents in obvious distress. Off camera, they were deeply distressed and received help from counsellors."

Link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2422967.ece)

I know in court cases, people are told to not show emotion, and I've felt that's pretty difficult at times. I can see how a profiler would recommend that.

Well, that's what the McCanns say. Whether they're telling the truth is another matter.

Frankly, I've never heard of this before. Police departments usually advise that using emotion is helpful in getting kidnapped children back because the parents try to get the abductors to feel sorry for them.

I've also heard that the PJ made this "recommendation" to the parents after they began to suspect them. Knowing very few parents would be able to keep their feelings in check, they believed if the McCanns did, it was another indicator that they had a hand in harming Madeleine. Rather ingenious.

[Jayelles]

Sara Payne showed little emotion and remained strong in front of the cameras when her daughter Sarah was abducted and murdered by a paedophile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/in_depth/uk/2000/newsmakers/1723382.stm

Sara, at least in front of the cameras, was never hysterical, never ranting, but resolute and controlled. But when, three weeks after Sarah's disappearance, police delivered the dreaded news that a body had been found and they believed it was Sarah's, her mother could not accept the news.

I remember Sara Payne's calmness so well. I was amazed that she could remain so calm and strong when her little girl was missing.

This is one of the things which the Eyes for Lies website comments on - that the McCanns are driven by their belief that Maddie is still alive and this is what keeps them strong.

[Texana]

Or the belief that in doing so, they would help other children and keep a promise made to make Madeleine's life worthwhile and meaningful...The need for atonement can be a very strong driving factor as well.

[Barnaby]

Sara Payne showed little emotion and remained strong in front of the cameras when her daughter Sarah was abducted and murdered by a paedophile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/in_depth/uk/2000/newsmakers/1723382.stm



I remember Sara Payne's calmness so well. I was amazed that she could remain so calm and strong when her little girl was missing.

This is one of the things which the Eyes for Lies website comments on - that the McCanns are driven by their belief that Maddie is still alive and this is what keeps them strong.

So why do they keep speaking of her in the past tense?

I don't buy that, if she is alive then the possibility that she is being sexually abused is high on the list, that alone would have me DEMENTED! I could not stay strong with that constant fear in my head! My God it is their little 4 year old & they know what these monsters keep children for!