Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 23

[Texana]

Why haven't the McCanns been charged? Because none of the evidence can be tied specifically to one person--so that the defense can obviously be for each McCann that the other must have done it.

As for whether or not they are guilty, obviously, not everyone is going to have that conclusion from the evidence so far. But there is no doubt that the McCanns have lied and there are great discrepancies between their acts and their words.

You could also draw from their words (most notably, the first Great Lie: "Like dining in your garden." You cannot see the apartment from the restaurant, and it's not like dining in your garden unless you are a millionaire and your garden is a city block away. So why is that lie repeated to this day?) that the McCanns are just self-centered people of immensely poor judgment whose actions put their children at risk--not so they could make ends meet and avoid childcare, but so they could go out to dinner and drinks with their friends.

The apartment isn't visible from the restaurant. It's not the same as dining in one's own garden. That's a concrete fact easily proven with a meter stick, not a matter of interpretation, opinion, or "everyone grieves differently" "damned if they do damned if they don't" kind of interpretation.

They lied.

Again, the question is why, not if.

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

snip...They lied.

Again, the question is why, not if.

:clap::clap::clap:
Amen Sister!

 

[april4sky]

Why haven't the McCanns been charged? Because none of the evidence can be tied specifically to one person--so that the defense can obviously be for each McCann that the other must have done it.

This is a new one Texana:waitasec:...But is it a "fact" If so why haven't the PJ....if they do have "evidence" asked the McCanns to return to Portugal for "questioning".....At the very least!!

And do you believe the PJ have evidence that Madeleine is dead??

 

[Texana]

Obviously, I don't know for sure what evidence they have, but I do think they believe she is dead. One key fact--no one has successfully collected the reward, which is a sizeable one.

Why is this a "new one?" It's very common in cases where the family members are under suspicion--the notable case being the JBR one we don't discuss here--One of the strategies when the evidence points to one or both is to try and get one family member or parent to roll over and point to the other family member.

I think that's what was happening when Kate was questioned alone and she refused to (allegedly) answer the questions.

You seemed to be asking for a reason why they would have evidence and yet not bring them to trial, I think that's a credible reason.

But still--no explanation for my question: Why did Gerry McCann lie about the distance from the restaurant to the apartment? It's an obvious falsehood. That's a falsehood, period, and again, not one subject to opinion.

It is either a) as close as a backyard to a residence or b) not.

It was not. So again, the question: Not if, but why.

 

[april4sky]

Obviously, I don't know for sure what evidence they have, but I do think they believe she is dead. One key fact--no one has successfully collected the reward, which is a sizeable one.

Thats the problem Texana none of us knows for sure if they have any evidence!

And the fact that the reward is still unclaimed really doesn't tell us anything. If she was taken and killed I doubt the killer would claim it....I hate to even print that!!!

Why is this a "new one?" It's very common in cases where the family members are under suspicion--the notable case being the JBR one we don't discuss here--One of the strategies when the evidence points to one or both is to try and get one family member or parent to roll over and point to the other family member.

I think that's what was happening when Kate was questioned alone and she refused to (allegedly) answer the questions.

It was news to me in this case!
I agree that this is sometimes used as a strategy but I think they would need more to go on than belief.....And Murratt is still an Arguido too!!

The law regarding Arguidos has recently changed and to ask the McCanns to return for questioning now the PJ have to have some"evidence"...which wasn't the case at the time they were made Arguidos. Whatever the PJ had then it wasn't enough to stop them leaving Portugal...and at that time it could have been as little as them being persons of interest.
This is the reason why I question if the PJ have any evidence now as I think they would have asked them to return for questioning well before now.

I may be wrong but I honestly don't think the PJ have a clue if Madeleine is dead or alive.
And if they have stopped looking for her, and stopped looking on "belief" alone! :furious: Well Madeleine deserves better than that and has been victimised twice IMO.
And yes! I know her parents made the first, and wrong decision to leave the children alone.

You seemed to be asking for a reason why they would have evidence and yet not bring them to trial, I think that's a credible reason.

I don't believe it's credible on belief alone.....Do they believe Murrat guilty too?

But still--no explanation for my question: Why did Gerry McCann lie about the distance from the restaurant to the apartment? It's an obvious falsehood. That's a falsehood, period, and again, not one subject to opinion.

It is either a) as close as a backyard to a residence or b) not.

I can't know for sure but there is a difference between the distance of the pathway and the distance they could see from where they were sitting and I think Gerry gave the distance he could see from the Tapas....As I think most people automatically would!
Has anyone actually asked him to explain the "why" difference...Hopefully somebody will!!
I think you are using different words than he used regarding back yard..I thought he said it was how it felt to them.

 

[Texana]

Gerry said it was as close as dining in your own garden. Unless the British definition of "one's own garden" is a city block away, obviously, what Gerry meant is the vicinity of a person's property. Close enough to hear a child cry or scream or see someone entering or leaving the property, obviously.

That was clearly not the case here.

So it leaves me with two choices: Either Gerry has made a conscious, deliberate reason to keep misstating the difference, or he literally cannot mentally "see" the difference between the reality and what he said--or he refuses to see it--which means his judgment altogether is simply out of touch with reality and common sense.

And no, honestly, most people--I honestly believe--would NOT. We just finished a stay at a resort. There were many places we could see from our hotel room and balcony area that took much longer to reach in person than in actual distance viewed. At no time did we ever refer to distances based on the visual "as the crow flies" kind of time estimate--always in terms of how long it actually took us to get there.

I think you are frustrated with the thought that the Portuguese police have given up on searching for Madeleine. But there are really two conclusions: One, if a single kidnapper took Madeleine and then did away with her, it would be very difficult to find either her or the actual abductor. Secondly, if it was someone working in a pedophilia ring (as hinted by the McCanns) then more than one person knows of the crime, and yes, I believe that means the reward would be a huge temptation to other parties to the crime. That it has not been claimed is a sad indicator that the odds of her surviving are less likely.

If Madeleine is no longer in Portugal, as the McCanns' own detective agency, their actions, and their advocacy of the European Amber Alert indicate they seem to believe, then it doesn't matter what the Portuguese do, really.

Again: Even if Gerry originally thought the restaurant was close to the apartment, the fact is: It's not like dining in your own garden. No one would say that, anymore than my family would have said that about the restaurant we ate in at our resort.

So again, why does he keep saying it?

 

[april4sky]

Gerry said it was as close as dining in your own garden. Unless the British definition of "one's own garden" is a city block away, obviously, what Gerry meant is the vicinity of a person's property. Close enough to hear a child cry or scream or see someone entering or leaving the property, obviously.

That was clearly not the case here.

So it leaves me with two choices: Either Gerry has made a conscious, deliberate reason to keep misstating the difference, or he literally cannot mentally "see" the difference between the reality and what he said--or he refuses to see it--which means his judgment altogether is simply out of touch with reality and common sense.

Well there are blocks! and then there are blocks!:waitasec: both large and small. :waitasec:
There is a pool and pathway between the Tapas and Apartment.
We can only give our opinion on what Gerry said or meant and hope that somebody will ask him to clarify at some point.

I think you are frustrated with the thought that the Portuguese police have given up on searching for Madeleine. But there are really two conclusions: One, if a single kidnapper took Madeleine and then did away with her, it would be very difficult to find either her or the actual abductor. Secondly, if it was someone working in a pedophilia ring (as hinted by the McCanns) then more than one person knows of the crime, and yes, I believe that means the reward would be a huge temptation to other parties to the crime. That it has not been claimed is a sad indicator that the odds of her surviving are less likely.

A lot more that frustrated Texana!
I realise the odds that Madeleine will be found alive are probably not good. But there are cases where it's turned out good before and will again. So until we know for sure Madeleine doesn't deserve to be given up on IMO. I know I would never want to give up if she were my child!!

I also think it would be very difficult for any police force to find Madeleine, especially in a part of the world where she could have been moved very quickly to various countries. Under these circumstances i'm not sure any police force no matter how good would be successful.

I would never have blamed the PJ if they had gone about this in a professional way...But they haven't IMO...Far from it!! I don't think there is any excuse for the "bungles," leaks and smears.
As I said, Madeleine deserves much, much better.

If Madeleine is no longer in Portugal, as the McCanns' own detective agency, their actions, and their advocacy of the European Amber Alert indicate they seem to believe, then it doesn't matter what the Portuguese do, really.

I would agree...except no one knows for sure if she's in Portugal or not.
But if the PJ are not searching for her, as appears to be the case, then they need to make their minds up..If they don't know if she is dead or alive, and they don't have evidence against the McCanns...or Murratt, then they should release any helpful information collected so others can continue to search.

Again: Even if Gerry originally thought the restaurant was close to the apartment, the fact is: It's not like dining in your own garden. No one would say that, anymore than my family would have said that about the restaurant we ate in at our resort.

So again, why does he keep saying it?

As I said above I hope someone will ask him the why!! and soon!

 

[ThoughtFox]

I also think it would be very difficult for any police force to find Madeleine, especially in a part of the world where she could have been moved very quickly to various countries. Under these circumstances i'm not sure any police force no matter how good would be successful.

I would never have blamed the PJ if they had gone about this in a professional way...But they haven't IMO...Far from it!! I don't think there is any excuse for the "bungles," leaks and smears.
As I said, Madeleine deserves much, much better.

But Madeleine could have been across the border with Spain very quickly the night she disappeared. She could have been on a boat out to sea. Why not blame Spain's police force, or Interpol? Aren't they professionals? Metodo has supposedly been "searching" for months, paid by the McCanns. Aren't they bungling something if they haven't found her by now?

I'm just asking those questions hypothetically because there are no real answers. Sometimes a person cannot be found, even with the best efforts of many agencies. We see that all the time in missing person cases.

It's a slippery slope to blame the police for the disappearance itself because the police were not there at her apartment until she was gone. Before that, it was not the responsibility of the police to make sure Maddie was safe.

I don't see that the "leaks" from the police have hurt anything. Most of what we've heard has turned out to be true, and many things have been confirmed by the McCanns or their friends.

 

[april4sky]

But Madeleine could have been across the border with Spain very quickly the night she disappeared. She could have been on a boat out to sea. Why not blame Spain's police force, or Interpol? Aren't they professionals? Metodo has supposedly been "searching" for months, paid by the McCanns. Aren't they bungling something if they haven't found her by now?

I believe I said she could have been quickly moved to various other countries!

I think any police force would be willing, and I believe some have tried to do what they can to help....and I know of no reason to think they weren't professional.
But I can't say the same for the PJ....and they are the ones responsible for running this investigation.

I'm just asking those questions hypothetically because there are no real answers. Sometimes a person cannot be found, even with the best efforts of many agencies. We see that all the time in missing person cases.

It's a slippery slope to blame the police for the disappearance itself because the police were not there at her apartment until she was gone. Before that, it was not the responsibility of the police to make sure Maddie was safe.

I believe I said this too!

And I don't, and never have blamed the police for Madeleines disapearance.
But I do blame them for being very unprofessional and bungling the investigation. As well as all the leaks/smears they are responsible for.

I don't see that the "leaks" from the police have hurt anything. Most of what we've heard has turned out to be true, and many things have been confirmed by the McCanns or their friends.

I can't agree with this!! :waitasec: Or that they were true! :waitasec:

Not only were leaks against their own secrecy laws....They have damaged the MCanns!...Though I realize this may not bother some.

To me the very worst thing the constant drip of leaks did was hurt Madeleine by taking the focus away from her...and the search. IMO

 

[Barnaby]

But Madeleine could have been across the border with Spain very quickly the night she disappeared. She could have been on a boat out to sea. Why not blame Spain's police force, or Interpol? Aren't they professionals? Metodo has supposedly been "searching" for months, paid by the McCanns. Aren't they bungling something if they haven't found her by now?

I'm just asking those questions hypothetically because there are no real answers. Sometimes a person cannot be found, even with the best efforts of many agencies. We see that all the time in missing person cases.

It's a slippery slope to blame the police for the disappearance itself because the police were not there at her apartment until she was gone. Before that, it was not the responsibility of the police to make sure Maddie was safe.

I don't see that the "leaks" from the police have hurt anything. Most of what we've heard has turned out to be true, and many things have been confirmed by the McCanns or their friends.

Absolutely Thoughtfox, it was not the responsibility of anyone but the McCanns to ensure that their children were safe & they failed miserably! The absolute cheek of them to blame PJ or anyone else for Madeleine not being found, the blame lies entirely with them!

1. They neglectfully abandoned her that night & every other night. The fact that the poor child told them she & her younger brother were crying & obviously afraid alone in the dark every night, & they ignored this & did it again on May 3rd. to go & get drunk makes me as angry as I have ever been!
What nasty, callous & vile people they are to do subject their own flesh & blood to terror like this!

2. They & their vile friends hampered the investigation from day 1 by telling PJ untruths e.g the shutters were jemmied when they were not, Robert Murat was there, he was not, etc. etc. Not answering PJ's questions, changing description of a suspect - bundleman, not returning for the reconstruction, etc. etc. etc.

Not only should these people be done for neglect & possibly more, they should be done for perverting the course of justice!

PJ may have made mistakes, noone is perfect but by gum the McCanns take the biscuit for their part in this & no leaks to the press from PJ could ever equal the obvious & pathetic manipulation of the Press by them!

Everything that this little child suffered is down to the McCanns noone else is responsible for any of it! They did this, not PJ, not an abductor who if he existed couldn't have taken Madeleine without their assistance in leaving her vulnerable!
They are vile child neglectors & liars at best! How anyone can defend them is beyond me.

No amount of lies on their behalf - " it was like dining in our back garden" will ever exonerate them for their part in this little girl's demise! If they had a shred of decency they would have held their hands up & admitted to their mistake & begged other parents not to do the same but oh no, they are perfect parents who are simply victims!

To compound their callousness they lunched, played tennis, jogged, lounged at the pool & toured Europe in private jets while others searched & have the cheek to say they could have had more help from the public

These people make me so ill, they are beneath contempt!

 

[Tony Bennett]

Barnaby wrote: "...these people should be done for neglect..."

REPLY: Just a brief reminder, here is a summary of the evidence I was going to lead, had I been allowed to proceed with my summons in the Leicestershire and Rutland Magistrates Court against Kate and Gerry McCann for child neglect, within the meaning of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.

The appplication was refused on the sole ground that the Magistrates were not persuaded that they had jurisdiction to entertain the claim. This is despite Article 17 of the Hague Convention on Child Protection which stipulates that child protection legal matters should be prosecuted in the country where the parents are resident, not where a child protection incident has occurred.

The application was made on 14 November 2007 and refused a few days later, after local Magistrates consulted with government law officers (attorneys):

======================

Below is the evidence that will be led in support of the allegation that Mr Gerald McCann and Mrs Kate McCann committed the offence of child neglect from 28 April 2007 to 3 May 2007 at the Mark Warners Holiday Complex between 28 April 2007 and 3 May 2007.

Evidence

Mr and Mrs McCann have both admitted leaving their children on their own every evening whilst on holiday in Praia da Luz. Some of their statements to this effect are set out below. They were eating and drinking with friends in the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club, on 28, 20 and 30 April and 1 and 3 May. This was around 120 yards’ walk away from the apartment where the children were sleeping. On the evening of Wednesday 2 May they were dining with their friends at Chaplins, a restaurant/bar about half a mile away from where the children were sleeping.

It was widely reported that on the evening of Tuesday 1 May, a widow, Mrs Pamela Fenn, 81, who lives in the flat above where the McCanns were staying, heard Madeleine was crying ‘Daddy, daddy’, continuously between 10.30 and 11.45pm.

The crying is said to have stopped when the parents returned to the apartment at 11.45. A letter has been sent to Mrs Fenn asking if she will give evidence in this case, should a summons be issued.

It should be noted that on a Spanish T.V. programme transmitted in October, several waiters at the Ocean Club Tapas bar gave evidence, which included the following:

a) the McCanns did not regularly check on the children whilst they were eating/drinking in the evening
b) the McCanns left their children on their own every night
c) the McCanns dined at Chaplins restaurant/bar on the night of 2 May 2007.

Efforts are being made to secure their evidence.

Evidence from Mrs Kate McCann herself


An article was published by the ‘Sunday Mirror’ on Sunday 5 August which was based entirely on an interview between the journalist, Lori Campbell, and Kate McCann.

The following are extracts from this report:

She says they felt so safe at the ‘family-friendly resort they didn’t think twice about leaving Madeleine and the twins - and she reveals how they’d left them alone every evening as they ate dinner in the week until Madeleine was taken on a Thursday night”. But she admits it is a decision which torments her every waking moment. “We’ve doubted what we did”, says Kate “It’s hard to answer the question: ‘Were we wrong to leave them?’”. If I’d had to think for one second, ‘Should we have dinner and leave them?’, I wouldn’t have done it”.

A similar report, also based entirely on Lori Campbell’s interview with Kate McCann, and published in the ‘Independent on Sunday’ said the following

“The night she went missing there was about 20 seconds of disbelief where I thought 'that can't be right'. I was checking for her. Then there was panic and fear. That was the first thing that hit. I was screaming her name. I ran to the group. Everyone was the same. It was just total fear. I never thought for one second that she'd walked out. I knew someone had been in the apartment because of the way it had been left.

“But I knew she wouldn't do that anyway. There wasn't a shadow of a doubt in my mind she'd been taken. That's why the fear set in. Then you go through the guilt phase. Straight away, because we didn't know what had happened. We were just so desperately sorry. Every hour now, I still question, 'why did I think that was safe?'

“I can't describe how much I love Madeleine. If I'd had to think for one second, 'should we have dinner and leave them?' I wouldn't have done it. It didn't happen like that. I didn't have to think for a second, that's how safe I felt.

“Maybe it was because it was family-friendly, because it felt so safe. That week we had left them alone while we had dinner. There is no way on this planet I would take a risk, no matter how small, with my children. I do say to myself 'why did I think it was safe?' But it did feel safe and so right. I love her and I'm a totally responsible parent and that's the only thing that keeps me going. I have no doubt about that”.

“You don't expect a predator to break in and take your daughter out the bed. It could have happened under other circumstances and there would still be the regret. It wasn't like a decision we made. It was a matter of 'let's get the kids to sleep, then we'll have dinner.' It wasn't a 'shall I, shan't I?' thing. I feel desperately sorry to her that we weren't there.”

Evidence from Gerald McCann himself


In September Gerald McCann made the following comments in his daily blog, about a story in a British national newspaper stating that he “faced prosecution for neglecting our children by dining 50 yards away and checking on them regularly”. See verbatim extract from the blog below:

“There is a very upsetting story on the front page of a British National Newspaper today. The headline suggests that Kate and I face prosecution for neglecting our children by dining 50 yards away and checking on them regularly. We know that there has been criticism in some quarters of our actions but at the time, we felt our actions were responsible. We were essentially performing our own baby listening service although we have talked of the guilt we felt at now [should be ‘not’ - A.B.] being there at the moment Madeleine was taken.

“We have been advised that legally our behaviour was well within the bounds of responsible parenting and subsequently been assured that no action will be taken. These types of criticism, particularly at this stage, as well as being hurtful, are extremely unhelpful in the search for Madeleine. From the moment we discovered Madeleine missing, Kate and I have done everything in our power to try and help get her back.

“Our opinion now is completely clouded by what has happened to us and of course has sent shock waves through thousands of families. The real issue is that we should not have a constant fear of abduction of our children from their bedrooms, gardens or streets for that matter. What Kate and I did was at worst naïve and no one should forget that the real criminal is the predator who has taken a completely innocent child in such a premeditated fashion. It is this act that has wreaked havoc on our family and affected millions of other people”.

It is submitted that, evidentially, the following matters are relevant to the offence of child neglect in these circumstances:

1. The claim that by Gerald McCann that he was dining ’50 yards away’. This will be disproved by evidence that the Tapas bar where the McCanns were dining o nfive days out of the six was 120 yards away.

2. The claim that the McCanns were ‘checking on their children regularly’ is contradicted by other evidence, and given the circumstances i.e. that they admit to being away from the children all evening and for several evenings in a row, then it is submitted that, against that evidential background, the McCanns will need to prove to the court that there were indeed checking every half-hour as claimed.

3. Even if they can satisfy the court on point (2) above, it is clear that even this checking was not sufficient to prevent their child Madeleine, on their own evidence, from being abducted. There are few greater dangers to a child than being abducted. On their own evidence, it is asserted that the McCanns were sufficiently neglectful to allow this to happen.

4. Gerald McCann does not mention on his blog that he left the patio door open, so that an abductor could enter. He has made public admissions that the patio door was left open. He has stated that the abductor entered through the patio door and then climbed out of the window, carrying Madeleine.

5. Gerald McCann stated in his blog that “We have been advised that legally our behaviour was well within the bounds of responsible parenting”. Given previous interpretationsof the law on child neglect, this advice is questionable and I submit that this needs to be tested in a court of law.

6. Gerald McCann wrote: “We have subsequently been assured that no action will be taken”. By this he presumably means that Leicesteshire Social Services Department and Leicestershire Constabulary have between them concluded that there is no evidence of child neglect. In these circumstances any British citizen has the right to lay information before a court that that an offence may have been committed, notwithstandig any decision by Leicestershire Police and/or the Crown Prosecution Service that they should not prosecute the McCanns..

7. Gerald McCann wrote: “What Kate and I did was at worst naïve…” It is submitted that this view is contradicted by decisions of the courts on the meaning of child neglect at law, with which I deal in the section below [contiuned but snipped - T.B.].

 

[Barnaby]

Such a pity they refused to entertain your summons, Tony!

 

[Pinkhammer]

Tony, Barbaby--No doubt about it--the McCanns were (are?) negligent parents.

Does anyone know if Gerry and Kate took the twins on holiday this year? Did they take a Nanny along, or are they still up to their old tricks?

 

[Texana]

Excellent summary of points, Tony. If we are to believe the words of the other diners at the restaurant, as quoted in the media, why don't we believe the waiters, as quoted on Spanish television?

It's either all up for discussion or none of it, and obviously, all is better than none if a little girl is missing.

Gerry will never answer questions as to why he continually misstates the difference between the actual distance and his own version, as he says, the whole issue is "boring, actually."

 

[ThoughtFox]

Thank you, Tony! There it is in black and white - the truth.

I think any police force would be willing, and I believe some have tried to do what they can to help....and I know of no reason to think they weren't professional.
But I can't say the same for the PJ....and they are the ones responsible for running this investigation.

But again I ask you, if you believe Madeleine was taken to another country, how are the PJ responsible for what happened after that?

It seems to me you just don't believe the PJ had a right to question the McCanns about anything they did that night. But Gerry and Kate gave public interviews and made statements about what they did and did not do, so the PJ had a right to question them.

Trust me - in the U.S. the parents would be suspects, no matter how sympathetic people might be to them. That's for the police to decide and not us.

 

[Texana]

Thank you, Tony! There it is in black and white - the truth.


But again I ask you, if you believe Madeleine was taken to another country, how are the PJ responsible for what happened after that?

It seems to me you just don't believe the PJ had a right to question the McCanns about anything they did that night. But Gerry and Kate gave public interviews and made statements about what they did and did not do, so the PJ had a right to question them.

Trust me - in the U.S. the parents would be suspects, no matter how sympathetic people might be to them. That's for the police to decide and not us.

Exactly. The Portuguese LE has not only the right but the obligation to question Gerry and Kate very closely. Not just in light of the parents as possible suspects, but because if they are telling the truth, then Kate and Gerry are the only ones who know the most valuable facts about what happened that night.

And Thoughtfox hit the nail on the head: If Madeleine was taken out of the country, as the McCanns themselves purport to believe, based on their advocacy of a European Amber Alert, then the Portuguese police have very little responsibility in the matter.

They weren't the ones who left Maddie and the twins unattended, providing the opportunity for an abduction.

They weren't the ones who took Madeleine.

They don't control the country (ies) where she might be, and have no power to search for her other than within Portugal. The McCanns' response to the private individual who had the reservoir searched was very negative.

And let's chase that rabbit down the trail for a minute: Why were the McCanns so negative about searching the reservoir? Are they only interested in following up on live sightings of Madeleine? As understandable as that might be, it's not realistic to not look for Madeleine alive or not, so why were they so publicly against searching for her there?

 

[april4sky]

But again I ask you, if you believe Madeleine was taken to another country, how are the PJ responsible for what happened after that?

Did I say they are responsible for what happens outside Portugal? :waitasec:
The PJ are to blame for what they do in it!
And they are responsible for botching this investigation....in Portugal. IMO
Not forgetting all the leaks/smears they are responsible for.

It seems to me you just don't believe the PJ had a right to question the McCanns about anything they did that night. But Gerry and Kate gave public interviews and made statements about what they did and did not do, so the PJ had a right to question them.

Not true thoughtfox.
I have never had a problem with the PJ questioning the McCanns, and I have said so before.
It's normal, and rightly so to question family and friends.

Trust me - in the U.S. the parents would be suspects, no matter how sympathetic people might be to them. That's for the police to decide and not us.

I trust you! and I fully understand....and I would never have a problem with it.

I just think Madeleine deserves a competent, professional investigation...regardless of how or why she went missing....and I don't believe she is getting one from the PJ. :furious:

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

:furious:

Did I say they are responsible for what happens outside Portugal? :waitasec:
The PJ are to blame for what they do in it!
And they are responsible for botching this investigation....in Portugal. IMO
Not forgetting all the leaks/smears they are responsible for. Not true thoughtfox.
I have never had a problem with the PJ questioning the McCanns, and I have said so before.
It's normal, and rightly so to question family and friends.
I trust you! and I fully understand....and I would never have a problem with it.

I just think Madeleine deserves a competent, professional investigation...regardless of how or why she went missing....and I don't believe she is getting one from the PJ. :furious:

The PJ are to blame? Oh honey, give me a break. How much money do you think a tiny little police force in a tiny little country has?? They don't have unlimited resources like Brian Kennedy or "the fund". They are on a tight budget like every other LE in the world. IMO financially, they should have shelved the case months ago to try to recover from such a huge expense, but they haven't...(thankfully for Madeleines sake) why?

The PJ has went above and beyond the call of duty. The McCanns now have the high profile, high polutin detective agency... remember the M3?? Brian Kennedy and the fund shell out major bucks each month voluntarily for the M3 who told us back in December, "We know who has her, where she is at and she'll be home in time for Christmas". Is that the competent professional investigation you are talking about? It was a blatant lie.

If someone told you that about your missing child, and didn't even come close to following through would you continue to employ them? Wouldn't you be crushed, hurt and grieve even more? The PJ has never come up with these WILD stories, but somehow the McCanns trust the M3 and continue to allow their benefactor, (Who they could confer with about change, but don't) and the fund to pay the M3. If the McCanns thought it was possible to find Madeleine, they would hire a top notch PI who specializes in PEOPLE...not one that specialises in MONEY. :furious:

 

[april4sky]

The PJ are to blame? Oh honey, give me a break.

The great thing about Websleuths is that this isn't just an anti McCann thread and we are all entitled to have and voice different opinions.
So no worries IW.

 

[Rino]

The great thing about Websleuths is that this isn't just an anti McCann thread and we are all entitled to have and voice different opinions.
So no worries IW.

I think you twist a little bit in your defense of them.

Pro Maddie does not equal anti-McCain. They have not been found innocent and no one else has be found guilty. Till then imo only Maddie matters.