I would like to ask an honest question, it is NOT meant to look for contention so please everyone be kind with each other.
Upon reading thread after thread and the different positions each of us have about what happened to Maddie, my perception is that most posters who believe the parents are the ones involved in Maddie's disappearance , even though they feel very strong about it they STILL can analyze, comment and discuss about the possibility of a pedo ring kidnapping Maddie EVEN if most of us do not believe in that possibility but we can still discuss it.
By the other hand, why those who believe they are innocent cannot even discuss the possibility of the parents being involved? I have the impression (by reading the messages posted here) that is non-existence (in their eyes) that this possibility can be real.
Sleuthmom, I'll take a stab at this. I'm a true fence-sitter. I don't have an opinion about whether the parents are involved. I think it is one possibility among many. I happen to think it is a more likely possibility than an elaborate, well-financed pedophile ring, but I don't rule that possibility out either. My personal favorite -- although even this is just a possibility and not a probability -- is a lone pedophile who lives in the region or was staying at the resort. But, I haven't ruled any of these possible scenarios out.
All that said, I have a strong aversion to opinions about the parents' possible guilt in public forums (or in the press)
when that opinion is based on what I consider to be highly suspect grounds, such as what the McCanns are wearing, their body language, their upper-middle class lifestyle, their lack of tears, etc. I think opinions based on these sorts of observations are pure speculation and say more about the person holding the opinion than about the McCanns.
I can understand discussion of the McCann's possible guilt based on real evidence -- either direct or circumstantial. Things like timelines of events, physical evidence at the scene, etc. Although, I take even this sort of discussion with a grain of salt because I suspect a lot of this information is incorrect because its coming from unnamed sources whose reliability I can't assess. (This is true generally, btw, not just with regard to discussions of the McCann's guilt. I have the same scepticism when people talk about other possible suspects or evidence that exculpates the McCanns. There is just no reliable information about the actual facts at this stage.) I find most of these discussions premature because we don't really know what the evidence is.
Now, here is at bottom why I find offensive speculation about the McCann's guilt, particularly purely subjective speculation based on intangible things like word choices, facial expressions, lack of remorse, financial status, appearance, etc.
They
might be innocent. And
if they are, by voicing suspicions without access to any real evidence, we would be compounding the horrible harm that has already been inflicted on innocent people. To conclude that the McCanns are guilty based on the scant information available now is unfair to the McCanns, who
may be wholly innocent and going through the worst nightmare imaginable.
I hope this answered your question without being contentious.
