McCanns going too far?
- Thread starter Moley
- Start date
No, but perhaps they could use it to adopt a new Daughter. Who knows, perhaps if they paid for one they may take better care of it this time.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 58,018
- Location
- Blurton
My mum & dad were also child neglecters.
They used to leave me in a Butlins chalet and let someone listen on me.
We didn't have 0800 1111 in those days though.
jeeze you guys, do you have kids yourself?
yes they made a mistake, but it still takes some "expletive" to take the poor mite, the money would mean absolutely nothing for return of her
Mistake? How is killing and disposing of your 3 year old Daughter a mistake?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 58,018
- Location
- Blurton
I thought it was iBot for a moment then.
jeeze you guys, do you have kids yourself?
yes they made a mistake, but it still takes some "expletive" to take the poor mite, the money would mean absolutely nothing for return of her
I will ask you the question I asked Scorza earlier, what evidence is there she was taken?
Nah, I still maintain they killed her, most probably accidentally or found her already dead, then panicked and decided to construct this abduction story that just snowballed out of their control.
Nah, I still maintain they killed her, most probably accidentally or found her already dead, then panicked and decided to construct this abduction story that just snowballed out of their control.
That is pretty much my sentiments, Kate lost her rag, smacked the child, child fell, banged her head, Gerry helps cover it up, pure conjecture but it would fit.
Based on that level of evidence so would her having been "beamed up" to the mothership by lizards...
No it wouldn't.
Mark Warner (company the McCanns holidayed with) stopped offering the service just after the abduction, I'm not sure about the other companies but they'll probably have either stopped or renamed their equivalent services due to the publicity.
Nah, I still maintain they killed her, most probably accidentally or found her already dead, then panicked and decided to construct this abduction story that just snowballed out of their control.
I would say the only way the parents could have been responsible is if the whole thing was very carefully planned. There's no way they could have disposed of the body that well leaving no hard evidence in the panic that would have taken place after an accident/randomly finding her dead.
Or if they get convicted of neglect.
That'll never happen. I don't believe there are any laws prohibiting what they did in either the UK or Spain. Assuming of course that it's believed they were actually checking every 30mins.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 58,018
- Location
- Blurton
Once again do you know what neglect is?
Neglect
Neglect is the persistent lack of appropriate care of children, including love, stimulation, safety, nourishment, warmth, education and medical attention. It can have a serious effect on a child's physical, mental and emotional development.
The signs of neglect
There are occasions when nearly all parents find it difficult to cope with the many demands of caring for children. But this does not mean that their children are being neglected. Neglect involves ongoing, severe failure to meet a child's needs. Here are some signs of possible neglect:
*
if the child seems underweight and is very small for their age
*
if they are poorly clothed, with inadequate protection from the weather
*
if they are often absent from school for no apparent reason
*
if they are regularly left alone, or in charge of younger brothers or sisters.
There has been and still is confusion over what defines neglect. The NSPCC pointed out bqck in '98 that "There is definitional confusion over neglect, with many competing approaches, none of which appear to have received general acceptance among practitioners."
Indeed, the NSPCC state here that someone can be suffering from neglect simply by being left alone for long periods of time - irrespective of whether it was persistent or not.
Indeed, the NSPCC state here that someone can be suffering from neglect simply by being left alone for long periods of time - irrespective of whether it was persistent or not.
Using this definition, then the fact that the children - and by that, I mean all the children, not just the McCann's children - were neglected, and that all the parents that left kids alone during that holiday whilst they went to the Tapas Bar (I understand that the group of parents went there every night, although I'm not certain whether the children were left alone each time) were equally as guilty of negligence.NSPCC said: