Fencesitters & Not Guilty Post Here - THREAD NO. 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi ny,

I really don't see what the big deal is if they did release the photo's. They may have been advised to by their PR person. "Who they definately need to try to give some balance to all the rumors and smears" and show them in a different light as they have been demonised for a while now.


I do see it as a big deal because they need to decide what they want to do. For one side, they said they want the Media to focus on Madeleine but by the other side they release pics of Kate's first communion and wedding picture? :rolleyes: Sorry, but WHO CARES???? How is that going to HELP FIND MADELEINE???? IF (as they said) they want the Media attention on MADELEINE, then what the heck are they doing? That's all the opposite to me. It seems to me that the reason for the release of pics is to look for empathy/support after the amount of criticism they are receiving, again...ALL about THEM. Such an odd behavior coming from "concerned" parents whose daughter still missing. :confused:
 
My issue with the family releasing those photos is that it's going to clutter people's memories with images which are NOT Madeleine, at least not as she looks now. Which, if she has been abducted & they're trying to bring her home safely, makes no sense. While it's not a perfect analogy, think of the human mind/memory as sort of a bulletin board like this. As new threads are added, they bump the first ones down until they're off the page. Releasing photos of other family members is sorting of like adding new threads until the threads with her photos are bumped down/off the first page.

People are going to have things like the McCanns wedding photos & Kate McCann's communion photos in their mind when they should have images of Madeline in their mind. That is, if the abduction theory is true and there's still a possibility of her coming home. To me, that seems to be more about the publicity and manipulating our sympathy. Or it could be an attempt to distract us from their involvement (I'm still not 100% sure that they're involved, just leaning towards it).

Don't get me wrong, I think if they've been falsely accused, they need to defend themselves. I completely agree with and understand hiring a lawyer, I'd do the same in their shoes. I understand the family statements by Aunt Phil, etc. And I understand their making statements to the press initially. But why the continued blitz which is going to take attention away from their daughter? Why the calls to editors & politicians? From the coverage I've read, the calls to politicians & editors haven't been, "let's keep looking for Madeleine" but more along the lines of "we're innocent". Let the lawyers do their jobs and leave it at that. Branson's backing their legal defense, they've got the best lawyers money can buy, let them earn their fees. If my daughter had gone missing, sure I'd be concerned with staying out of prison so I could continue to look for her & be a parent to my remaining children. But I wouldn't really care what the media/public thought of me. That wouldn't be a priority for me. It seems to be pretty high on the priority list for the McCanns. There's always going to be innuendo & gossip in these cases. It's a long battle for the truth to come out. I'd be digging in my heels for the long haul & focusing on finding my kid, not my public rep. But that's just me.

As to the smiles part, I think it may be going a bit off topic of "fencesitters & not guilty", which is the focus of this one so I'll just post a link to another post I've made in another thread if you're interested in reading it:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1684324&postcount=153

I have no doubt the Rev. believes they are grief stricken. And if the accidental death theory is true, they'd probably feel even more grief than if she'd been abducted. People believed Susan Smith was grief stricken too, and Scott Peterson, and Matthew Solomon & Christine Lane. Yet it turns out all 4 of them were ultimately the ones responsible for the death of their loved ones.

Christine Lane & Matthew Solomon aren't as familiar as the other 2, so here's brief NY Times blurbs about those cases:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEEDF153CF930A15751C0A966958260

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE0DF173EF937A35751C0A96F948260

I lived about an hour & half or so away from where the Lane crime took place at the time. So there was a lot of local media coverage. The mother left one mitten on the ground near their home & mailed the other to herself with a ransom note. Went on tv & cried for her daughter back. There was something off about her eyes, same as Scott Peterson & Susan Smith. Same with Matthew Solomon's pleas for the cameras. Now, I haven't gotten this from every missing person's case. Never could figure out the Ramseys one way or the other. Didn't get it at all from the Van Dams or the Klaas family or the Smarts. Honestly, I tried to avoid detailed coverage of this case at first because I find these cases very upsetting.

But I started following it when the parents were charged. Now granted, I saw it after I knew they were suspects, but something seems off about Gerry McCann's eyes quite a bit & Kate McCann to a lesser extent. I know that's purely subjective & speculation. The main things that are keeping me 100% from being convinced it's them are:

1) they've kept up the story for so long. While Peterson kept up his story, Smith, Lane & Solomon all cracked within a month.

2) the timeframe, if they were involved in her death (and if so, I'm leaning towards an accident from her being left on her own). It would be difficult to move/dispose of a body in that limited time. But maybe that's where the man carrying a child in a blanket comes in. But that also fits in with abduction. Providing it was a reliable account.
 
The parents are in a tough position. If innocent they need to focus attention on the search for Madeleine but the media and L.E. has shifted focus to the mother more than anything else. If innocent they must feel they need to do something to restore the good name of the mother or at least put some good information about her into the media in order to get people to stop the feeding frenzy of hate against the mother so they can then pay more attention to the search for Madeleine.

If they are guilty they may just be hoping to keep the appearance of innocence to plant reasonable doubt in the minds of any jury or judge that might be hearing the case in the future. In either case (guilt or innocence) I think it was necessary to put out some good PR about the accused mother even it if was not what some members of the public wanted them to do.
 
I do see it as a big deal because they need to decide what they want to do. For one side, they said they want the Media to focus on Madeleine but by the other side they release pics of Kate's first communion and wedding picture? :rolleyes: Sorry, but WHO CARES???? How is that going to HELP FIND MADELEINE???? IF (as they said) they want the Media attention on MADELEINE, then what the heck are they doing? That's all the opposite to me. It seems to me that the reason for the release of pics is to look for empathy/support after the amount of criticism they are receiving, again...ALL about THEM. Such an odd behavior coming from "concerned" parents whose daughter still missing. :confused:

If i've learned nothing else in the last few weeks it's that whatever the McCann's do it won't please some people. They will always be damned if they do and damned if they don't. And personally I think just for the sake of it.
You choose to see it as a big deal if they release photo's...I don't. :)
 
If i've learned nothing else in the last few weeks it's that whatever the McCann's do it won't please some people. They will always be damned if they do and damned if they don't. And personally I think just for the sake of it.
You choose to see it as a big deal if they release photo's...I don't. :)
But why release old photes of Maddie. That certainly will be of no help trying to locate her today or in the future
 
The parents are in a tough position. If innocent they need to focus attention on the search for Madeleine but the media and L.E. has shifted focus to the mother more than anything else. If innocent they must feel they need to do something to restore the good name of the mother or at least put some good information about her into the media in order to get people to stop the feeding frenzy of hate against the mother so they can then pay more attention to the search for Madeleine.

If they are guilty they may just be hoping to keep the appearance of innocence to plant reasonable doubt in the minds of any jury or judge that might be hearing the case in the future. In either case (guilt or innocence) I think it was necessary to put out some good PR about the accused mother even it if was not what some members of the public wanted them to do.

Thank you doc. It is so good to hear the voice of sanity.
 
The Van Dams, particularly Brenda, were subjected to far worse than the McCanns in the old trial by media circus. Yet they put their concerns about image aside to help bring their daughter's killer to justice.
 
The Van Dams, particularly Brenda, were subjected to far worse than the McCanns in the old trial by media circus. Yet they put their concerns about image aside to help bring their daughter's killer to justice.
Right! In addition they did leave their children unattended and therefore in harms way.
 
If i've learned nothing else in the last few weeks it's that whatever the McCann's do it won't please some people. They will always be damned if they do and damned if they don't. And personally I think just for the sake of it.
You choose to see it as a big deal if they release photo's...I don't. :)

Oh okay...well I am interested in this question for you:

In your opinion: In what way releasing a wedding pic and a pic of Mrs. Mc Cann on her first communion can help find Madeleine?
 
Oh okay...well I am interested in this question for you:

In your opinion: In what way releasing a wedding pic and a pic of Mrs. Mc Cann on her first communion can help find Madeleine?


LOL...I have to say when I saw all those new pictures my hinky meter went off.

Can you imagine Dr. Kates testimony if this ever goes to court? Maybe something like this:

Prosecuting attorney: Dr. McCann, could you tell the court how tall your daughter was they last time you saw her.

Kate McCann: My husband and I where the most beautiful bride and Groom, and looky we where holding a baby, this pictures proves we adore children.

Prosecuting Attorney: Dr. McCann, please, how much did little Maddie weigh when she went missing?

Kate McCann: As you can see by this picture, I am a religious person, and I started taking communion when I was 10 years old.

Prosecuting Attorney: Did Your daughter have any developmental delays?

Kate McCann: This precious wedding picture of my husband and I shows our party side. Notice all the wine glasses on the table? Those where the days my friend, I wish they'd never end!!...Oh that's right, they didn't. We still partied with our friends, we just left our babies home alone while we did it.
 
But why release old photes of Maddie. That certainly will be of no help trying to locate her today or in the future


Photos sell newspapers! Whether young or old, people want to see all the beautiful pictures of her. Perhaps her appearance has been altered and one of the pictures may help someone recognize her.
 
You can't have it both ways. You can't respond every time someone asks how you feel, for example, about being named a suspect, by saying "that takes away from the focus on Madeleine and finding her, we must stay focused on Madeleine" and then bring forth old photographs--without Madeleine even being in the photos--and present them to the public.
 
LOL...I have to say when I saw all those new pictures my hinky meter went off.

Can you imagine Dr. Kates testimony if this ever goes to court? Maybe something like this:

Prosecuting attorney: Dr. McCann, could you tell the court how tall your daughter was they last time you saw her.

Kate McCann: My husband and I where the most beautiful bride and Groom, and looky we where holding a baby, this pictures proves we adore children.

Prosecuting Attorney: Dr. McCann, please, how much did little Maddie weigh when she went missing?

Kate McCann: As you can see by this picture, I am a religious person, and I started taking communion when I was 10 years old.

Prosecuting Attorney: Did Your daughter have any developmental delays?

Kate McCann: This precious wedding picture of my husband and I shows our party side. Notice all the wine glasses on the table? Those where the days my friend, I wish they'd never end!!...Oh that's right, they didn't. We still partied with our friends, we just left our babies home alone while we did it.

LOL!! Exactly, I can't believe that people would actually believe these pics would help to find Madeleine. :rolleyes:
 
You can't have it both ways. You can't respond every time someone asks how you feel, for example, about being named a suspect, by saying "that takes away from the focus on Madeleine and finding her, we must stay focused on Madeleine" and then bring forth old photographs--without Madeleine even being in the photos--and present them to the public.

Thanks for being the voice of reason and common sense! :clap: :clap: :clap:
 
docwho3 said:
The parents are in a tough position. If innocent they need to focus attention on the search for Madeleine but the media and L.E. has shifted focus to the mother more than anything else. If innocent they must feel they need to do something to restore the good name of the mother or at least put some good information about her into the media in order to get people to stop the feeding frenzy of hate against the mother so they can then pay more attention to the search for Madeleine.

If they are guilty they may just be hoping to keep the appearance of innocence to plant reasonable doubt in the minds of any jury or judge that might be hearing the case in the future. In either case (guilt or innocence) I think it was necessary to put out some good PR about the accused mother even it if was not what some members of the public wanted them to do.

Thank you doc. It is so good to hear the voice of sanity.

You are most wlecome. I try. :)
 
I just saw your question on this thread - I live in Penasquitos...not far at all from where the VanDams lived.
 
Oh okay...well I am interested in this question for you:

In your opinion: In what way releasing a wedding pic and a pic of Mrs. Mc Cann on her first communion can help find Madeleine?

it keeps the story in the news - gets headlines - thats all . Maddy is still being spoken about - it is not being buried , whatever it takes if she is an abduction you want a news story every day
 
Oh okay...well I am interested in this question for you:

In your opinion: In what way releasing a wedding pic and a pic of Mrs. Mc Cann on her first communion can help find Madeleine?

SleuthMom I think gord said it well in her reply when she said the photo's will keep Madeleine's story in the press and talked about...whatever it takes.
That makes sense to me!!!!

I have no problem with the parents being looked at by the police. It should happens in every case and rightly so.

What I do have a problem with however is the damage done to the search for Madeleine by the calculated "IMO" rumors, inuendo and smears, often by the PLE breaking their own secrecy law.

Do you really think they are still searching for a "live" Madeleine?
 
End this witch hunt and find Madeleine

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/column...witch-hunt-and-find-madeleine-89520-19801006/

The real crime and the real tragedy is that nobody is looking for Madeleine McCann anymore.
That little girl is out there somewhere, either dead or alive.

A lot of the innuendo and propaganda that the Portuguese cops have slipped to their flunkies in the Portuguese press turns out to have absolutely no basis in the real world. We were informed that the woman who lives above the apartment where the McCanns were staying often heard Madeleine crying and "sounds of violence."
Now the real woman - Pamela Fenn, 81 - says that these claims are "absolute rubbish."

Reports of hair in the hire car, blood on the curtains, the 'smell of death' in the apartment - none of these lurid titbits prove that Madeleine McCann is dead, and still less that her parents murdered her.
Forensic experts in this country say that all the evidence stacked up against the McCanns would never lead to a conviction in a British court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
2,063
Total visitors
2,248

Forum statistics

Threads
589,946
Messages
17,928,025
Members
228,009
Latest member
chrsrb10
Back
Top