Madeleine Mccann

Shadow Leader said:
However the simple fact still remains that the parents left their three very young children alone in a foreign country, in today's world where if you take your eyes off a child for a second the worst can happen, regardless of whether it's commonplace or not. Look at Jamie Bolger - he only wandered off for a minute.
quote]

Nothing like using the tiny minority of cases to justify an argument.

There is a significantly greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted.

The purveyors of Tabloid Newspapers must love people like you.

When you have kids of your own, then pass judgement.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clivex said:
What????
user_offline.gif
Click to expand...

Come on Clivex, its easy this one, even you can understand it. When your child has been abducted then come back here and we can accuse you of murdering it. Then tell us what it feels like.
 
I'm trying to recall the name of the 'celeb' (the Corrie actress who left the soap and went on to become reasonably prominent on BBC dramas?) who recently praised a holiday company, saying she went with them because of their excellent childcare arrangements.

If her kids go missing, will she be portrayed as responsible or irresponsible? Will the holiday company be pursued by the mediaand through the courts for negligence?

I ask because this woman is doing what 90%+ of package holidaymakers with kids do. She and her husband are entrusting the care of their kids to a third party. But holiday company childcare usually amounts to games and activities during the day and a periodic check of the bedrooms during the course of an evening. In some cases it might only be one visit per evening. In others they might manage one per hour.

The McCann girl disappeared in a gap of 30 minutes between visits by members of the group. Which is better - to have one of a group of trusted friends check on your child every 30 minutes or an unknown person once per hour or even once per evening?

I know I've sad it before, my own wife and I disagreed on our child's supervision when we went on holiday. I tend to trust people, and maybe that makes me irresponsibly naïve, whereas my wife tends to trust no-one.

The McCanns have to live with their decision for the rest of their lives. To villify them for doing something when the vast majority of parents take fewer precautions seems entirely disproportionate.
 
"There is a significantly greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted."

Even when their parents are with them?

The chances of a child being abducted descend to almost feck all, if their parents are with them.

The rset of your penultimate post doesn't deserve a response, whether Shads has children or not she has a right to her opinion.

Your last post smacks of desperation.
 
Colin Phillips said:
"There is a significantly greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted."

Even when their parents are with them?

The chances of a child being abducted descend to almost feck all, if their parents are with them.

The rset of your penultimate post doesn't deserve a response, whether Shads has children or not she has a right to her opinion.

Your last post smacks of desperation.
Click to expand...

People have a right to an opinion. Doesn't make it right though, especially when it serves only to wildly exaggerate and accuse people of something she has no first hand experience of.

Apportioning blame in these circumstances is a disgusting exercise in claiming the moral high ground. Nobody is perfect, and these people deserve our sympathy not our vitriol.
 
I would never, ever leave my kids alone sleeping, in my eyes it is neglect.
Click to expand...
Im shocked they haven't been charged with anything so far
Click to expand...
Continue with that logic and you'll be saying it's neglect to be asleep yourself while your kids are sleeping.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I ask because this woman is doing what 90%+ of package holidaymakers with kids do. She and her husband are entrusting the care of their kids to a third party. But holiday company childcare usually amounts to games and activities during the day and a periodic check of the bedrooms during the course of an evening. In some cases it might only be one visit per evening. In others they might manage one per hour.
.
Click to expand...

DO, are you sure of that figure? I don't know any of my friends who go on holidau with their kids that use the babysitting service. Very few hotels have them available, those that do (Mark warner for eg) are vastly expensive and mostly for professional people or those who have plenty of cash to spend on goig on holiday. Or do you mean the holiday clubs, Which are supervised by trained childcare workers during the day. There is a high ratio of staff to children and an age limit (I think was 5-6 last time we looked), non of the childrens clubs we looked at provided a night time service, I wouldnt use them anyway, my kids go everywhere with me, its their hols aswell as mine
 
Grey said:
Continue with that logic and you'll be saying it's neglect to be asleep yourself while your kids are sleeping.
Click to expand...

Don't be so ridiculous, theres a hell of a difference between leaving your kids alone in a strange place while you go off on a jolly to sleeping in the same room or next door room to them.
 
leaving your kids alone in a strange place while you go off on a jolly
Click to expand...

There's a hell of a difference between your judgemental description of events and what actually happened. Nobody would do what you're describing.
 
Love Everlasting said:
sleeping in the..... next door room to them.
Click to expand...

A determined kidnapper could quite as easily enter a child's room as the parents sleep in the next door room and take the child.

USA statistics show that average 2,185 children are abducted each day, however nearly all of them are quickly found again. Of those that are abducted the "vast" majority are taken by a family member.

115 children per annum are abducted by "strangers" in the US - a roughly 1 in 750,000 incidence. The chances of dying in an air crash are 1 in 391,581.

So in leaving the children in the apartment, the actual risk would have been minimal, especially given the half hourly checks. I am afraid a lot of people are simply being "wise after the event".
 
Last edited:
Love Everlasting said:
DO, are you sure of that figure? I don't know any of my friends who go on holidau with their kids that use the babysitting service. Very few hotels have them available, those that do (Mark warner for eg) are vastly expensive and mostly for professional people or those who have plenty of cash to spend on goig on holiday. Or do you mean the holiday clubs, Which are supervised by trained childcare workers during the day. There is a high ratio of staff to children and an age limit (I think was 5-6 last time we looked), non of the childrens clubs we looked at provided a night time service, I wouldnt use them anyway, my kids go everywhere with me, its their hols aswell as mine
Click to expand...

The figure was my own impression based on my own experience and referred to a combination of kids' clubs and babysitting services. When we took our little one with us it seemed every kid in the hotel was in the kids' club during the day while parents lounged about. Maybe the babysitting service wasn't so much in demand but it was still quite popular. The reps used to tell us how often they reckoned checks could take place. The more popular the service the less often the visits. Ours told us they couldn't visit ours more than once per evening because of demand, which was no use to us.
 
numbersix said:
Nothing like using the tiny minority of cases to justify an argument.

There is a significantly greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted.

The purveyors of Tabloid Newspapers must love people like you.

When you have kids of your own, then pass judgement.
Click to expand...

I appreciate there is a greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted - that has nothing to do with what I said! I am pointing out to you that there is a chance, no matter how slim, that someone could take any kids - especially when there is no adult around to stop them - or that, as said, there could be a fire, or a kid wakes up and cries, or harms itself, or anything.

Anyway, since you're so eager to discredit me with statements of probability, why do you then go ahead and use the argument with the even tinier chance that kids could be snatched from their beds whilst the parents are there?! Make your mind up!

Your comments about not having children so not being allowed to voice an opinion are insulting and not really worth commenting on; they just make you sound rather silly.

I don't remember condemning the McCanns, or blaming them for their daughter's disappearance either - I said that they aren't entirely blameless as they are being painted out to be. But, as usual, why let the facts get in thge way of a good slagging?
 
Shadow Leader said:
I appreciate there is a greater chance of a child being run over by a car than being abducted - that has nothing to do with what I said! I am pointing out to you that there is a chance, no matter how slim, that someone could take any kids - especially when there is no adult around to stop them - or that, as said, there could be a fire, or a kid wakes up and cries, or harms itself, or anything.

Anyway, since you're so eager to discredit me with statements of probability, why do you then go ahead and use the argument with the even tinier chance that kids could be snatched from their beds whilst the parents are there?! Make your mind up!

Your comments about not having children so not being allowed to voice an opinion are insulting and not really worth commenting on; they just make you sound rather silly.

I don't remember condemning the McCanns, or blaming them for their daughter's disappearance either - I said that they aren't entirely blameless as they are being painted out to be. But, as usual, why let the facts get in thge way of a good slagging?
Click to expand...

Problem with your contribution to this thread, as with a lot of others, is the tone and general inference of cuplability on the part of grieving parents - whether it be cuplability in the death itself or merely the disappearance. I don't readily recall you making any comments expressing sympathy, at least that would have exhibited some humanity on your part. Which is why I have concluded your comments are based on you not having children - because I presume if you did you would understand a) the terrible trauma afflicting this family and understand that you cannot be on a 24/7 vigil watching over your kids in case the extremely unlikely occurance of a kidnapping should take place.
 
One of the joys of holidaying in continental Europe for us was the acceptance, and often encouragement, of taking children to a restaurant. Whether we went with other families or not I reckon we got better treatment than than other customers. The kids would be spoilt rotten, and we often ended up mixing in with the owner's family.

It was generally easy to get special portions or even things that were not on the menu. Many times the kids were given sampler plates so that they could experiment with eating new things. The atmosphere was generally such that we and more importantly ,the kids, felt at ease and therefore their behaviour was good and they were not a nuisance to other customers.
 
Numbersix, what the hell is your problem?

How dare you make assumptions that I display no humanity and that is due to being childless?

I have said all along that whilst having sympathies for the parents, I cannot absolve them of all blame absolutely.

I have also never blamed them - merely pointed out that they are not the sainted innocents that people such as you make them out to be. I'm sorry but kids are not 'just for Christmas' - you cannot leave them alone and go out on the piss when you want to. Otherwise you shouldn't have them in the first place.

As an aside, how many people thought that no-one would be capable of the likes of someone like Fred West?? Much as you'd like to think we live in a chocolate box world whereby all parents revere their kids, it isn't always like that.
 
There's a case on going in Cardiff, at this moment in time....where a 3yr old child was seen to be running back and forth the main road where she lives.........

The driver as been charged with dangerous driving, the child having died after being hit...

But surely its the parents of this child who need to be charged for neglect of this child, which was the main contribution of/to this accident??????????
 
I hate driving near school 3 year olds running along in front of young mums nagging away, if the child tripped and fell into the road in front of your lorry what chance would you have of stopping in time,
 
Last edited:
Yes Merlin but the feral scum don't interest the media.
I know the story you mean and there are thousands of cases of true neglect but the truth doesn't sell papers.
 
Andy said:
I hate driving near school 3 year olds running along in front of young mums nagging away, if the child tripped and fell into the road in front of your lorry what chance would you have of stopping in time,
Click to expand...

I'd lay 11/8 at a push. Any takers?
 
<h1>madeleine mccann: Kate mccann refused to answer 48 questions from portuguese police
Click to expand...
after kate mccann was told that she would be made an arguido, she was asked 48 questions about her daughter's disappearance – all of which she refused to answer.



by caroline gammell in portimao
last updated: 10:26am bst 05 aug 2008


a transcript of her interview on september 7 last year was included in the extensive police files released to the public on monday.
Mrs mccann, 40, was questioned in detail over an 11 hour period about the night madeleine went missing.
She was interviewed by policia judiciaria (pj) inspectors paulo ferreira, joao carlos and ricardo paiva at portimao police station.
She was asked about madeleine's relationship with her younger twin siblings, her method of parenting, and if she medicated her children.
The gp was then questioned about the blood apparently found in the car and why she had not been able to explain its presence more clearly.
Mrs mccann was also asked why she had said she had "let madeleine down" after she vanished and why she left the twins to raise the alarm.
The mother-of-three took her daughter's favourite stuffed toy cuddle cat along as mascot, a talisman she carried throughout the first months of madeleine's disappearance.
here are the questions she was asked:
1- on may 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2- did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)

3- (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) can you describe its contents?

4- why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?

5- how long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter madeleine’s disappearance?

6- why did you say from the start that madeleine had been abducted?

7- assuming madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8- why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9- when you raised the alarm at the ‘tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?

10- what happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘tapas’?

11- why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12- who contacted the authorities?

13- who took place in the searches?

14- did anyone outside of the group learn of madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?

15- did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?

16- what does “we let her down” mean?

17- did jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?

18- how were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19- during the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for maddie, how and in what way?

20- why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21- who did you phone after the occurrence?

22- did you call sky news?

23- did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24- did you ask for a priest?

25- by what means did you divulge madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26- is it true that during the searches you remained seated on maddie’s bed without moving?

27- what was your behaviour that night?

28- did you manage to sleep?

29- before travelling to portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30- what was madeleine’s behaviour like?

31- did maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32- what was madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33- what was madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34- as for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35- what is your medical specialty?

36- have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37- did you work every day?

38- at a certain point you stopped working, why?

39- are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40- is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?

41- is it true that in england you even considered handing over madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42- in england, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43- in the case files you were forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

44- when the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45- when the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46- when human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47- when confronted with the results of maddie’s dna, whose analysis was carried out in a british laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48- did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?
Click to expand...
</h1>


e
xclusive by stewart maclean 31/10/2007
robert murat (getty images)

madeleine mccann suspect robert murat is to be grilled again by police.
Officers want to clear up inconsistencies linked to his interviews after he was arrested in may.
A police source said: "he has not been ruled out."
the 33-year-old expat insisted yesterday he was "absolutely not worried" about being quizzed again over the disappearance of madeleine.
The brit's fresh interrogation emerged as portuguese police admitted for the first time that all dna evidence in the case was contaminated and a former nanny told how she caught a man hiding outside madeleine's holiday flat.
Murat's friend tuck price said: "it would be great if he was re-interviewed because he wants this cleared up. It can't happen soon enough.
"he hasn't heard anything, there's been no contact from police for months. But he's absolutely not worried."
the 33-year-old expat was first arrested as a suspect 11 days after madeleine, four, vanished from the flat in praia da luz on may 3.
New chief investigator paulo rebelo, who thinks madeleine was abducted, is believed to have discovered inconsistencies linked to murat's original interviews.
He ordered a fresh grilling as part of a complete review of the madeleine probe.
A police source said: "murat hasn't been ruled out.
"rebelo isn't satisfied with evidence gathering at the start of the investigation. Obviously, much of that was focused on murat."
divorced dad murat lives with his mum close to where madeleine vanished.
He denies involvement. his lawyer francisco pagarete said: "he's happy to co-operate with any further questions police may have."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The release of all in the information is very embarrassing for the police and highlights what most people thought. Imagine, 4 days after recieving an email from the DNA experts in the UK which stated there was no evidence or anything remotely reliable linking the DNA evidence to the McCanns, the police still went ahead and made them arguidos based on this.
 
Included in the evidence was the bill from the meal that night, and it shows that just two bottles of wine were purchased between the whole table, and not the drunken rumours suggested by many.
 
I didnt read them, jsut saw the headlines on my dash into the shop near work - but there were quite a few headlines saying that she had been seen 5 days ago??
 
Back
Top