McCanns going too far?

oldbag · 3 May 2009 at 13:46

We are probably due one of those awful "real life" documentaries on this.

Monkeynut · 3 May 2009 at 13:49

I agree with Evangelion. It sounds almost like she was taken "to order" by someone. Not that speculation is going to do anything more than fuel rumour mills.

oldbag · 3 May 2009 at 13:50

Evangelion said:
I believe Madeleine was kidnapped and is probably dead by now.

Many people take the line that "this case is only received so much publicity because the parents are rich professionals". That view was shattered by the Shannon Matthews case, which proved that the attention of the media and the public is grabbed by events, rather than socio-economic factors.

Continued interest in the McCann story is generated largely and primarily by the fact that Madeleine's disappearance was so mysterious; it's almost a Marie Celeste situation. The child simply vanished without any trace or evidence, while her siblings were left behind, unharmed. Of course, her parents have worked hard to keep their campaign running, which is both commendable and perfectly understandable.

I believe that the McCanns were terribly negligent - perhaps criminally so - and I think they should be prosecuted for it. But I do not believe they are murderers.

If - by some miraculous and as-yet-undiscovered means - they did kill their daughter, they must be criminal masterminds of the highest order, because at this stage the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is a classic example of the perfect crime.

In which case if they did kill their daughter, what could be the motive?

Even if it were accidental death and an attempted cover-up it still seems a bit far fetched to me.

NEOMARXIST · 3 May 2009 at 14:02

If they were a Poor working-class family from a council estate then the daily Mail and all the other right-wing press (which is pretty much most of the media in UK) would have been screaming bloody-murder and the front pages would have been littered with headlines about 'Broken Britain' and all this othe crap that they spout and how the parents should be locked up for neglect for leaving a 3 year-old and two 18month old twins (lAughable) all alone whils't they go out out and Large it up with their mates!! As it happens quite the opposit due to the Mccans being upper-middle class members of society. Makes me sick.
Though my next comment may be controversial and is merely only my opinion, I have said from day one That I believe that Madelaine mccann will never be found as she is not alive. My hunch was that she may have been accidently killed by her parents through accidnetle overdose or something and then disposed of in the ocean. of course this may be totally wrong and the parents may be totally innocent but the whole story of events just sounds like a load of cooked-up, inconsistent and and unbelievably neglectfull series of events. I mean what happens if their had of been a fire in that room?
*prepares for hammering from Daily Mail readers of which i suspect their are a few on these forums judging by some views expressed on this site.

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 14:03

oldbag said:
In which case if they did kill their daughter, what could be the motive?

Exactly. There is no motive. This is the first and most significant obstacle for the "They murdered her!!!" crowd.

Even if it were accidental death and an attempted cover-up it still seems a bit far fetched to me.

I totally agree.

NEOMARXIST · 3 May 2009 at 14:14

Of course they would not have murdered her but it is not beyond the realms of possibility that they accidently killed her through accidentle overdose of sleep sedative for example, of which they would have widely available to them being a GP.
The motive for them covering this up is obvious they would never see their 2 twins ever again if found out and would face a hefty jail sentence and be worried they may be convicted of murder. if a body is never found then you can't get done, dumped in the ocean with some weights and body gone within a day or two. I just don't buy the whole kidnap thing and lack of witnesses but of course 'the Scum' (soryy Sun) and the Daily Mail buy it all and back 'Maddie' of which she was never even called I believe as they are a decent, hard-working members of society.
This is merely my hunch at the time of all this over-hyped, over-covered story and still remains being as there are Zero-witness and Zero-evidence of any kidnap taking place.
* Maybe she was taken up by The Lord as the next prophet as Jesus's little side-kick, Kind of like a little Sister, After-all they were praying hard enough after she went missing.*

Gackt · 3 May 2009 at 14:30

Evangelion said:
Exactly. There is no motive. This is the first and most significant obstacle for the "They murdered her!!!" crowd.

Not that I disagree with you, and I don't really take the "they murdered her" side (as in, they actively and planned her murder) - but does there need to be a motive? I mean, parents have killed their children before, people kill people randomly on the street. What's the motive there?

Deluxe1 · 3 May 2009 at 14:40

Ive still no sympathy for the mccanns,if they just came out and admitted they made a huge mistake by leaving her alone then maybe they would have had my sympathy but i still think to this day they think they did nothing wrong in leaving their kids alone on holiday.

Has anyone seen the oprah interview if so did she ask why they left them alone?

Django x2 · 3 May 2009 at 14:47

Mr M was bashing it out with someone else behind Mrs M's back (the maid or someone). Maddy walked in and saw it and was going to ask mummy why daddy was putting his snake in another womans forest. Mr M realised so "sorted her out" and Mrs M was never in on it in the 1st place. There's your motive.

I've seen a fair bit of grief and I know everyone deals with it differently, but never have I seen a face so casual on a man whose daughter has disappeared than that of Mr M. He really bugs me if i'm honest.

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 15:11

NEOMARXIST said:
If they were a Poor working-class family from a council estate then the daily Mail and all the other right-wing press (which is pretty much most of the media in UK) would have been screaming bloody-murder and the front pages would have been littered with headlines about 'Broken Britain' and all this othe crap that they spout and how the parents should be locked up for neglect for leaving a 3 year-old and two 18month old twins (lAughable) all alone whils't they go out out and Large it up with their mates!! As it happens quite the opposit due to the Mccans being upper-middle class members of society. Makes me sick.

Firstly, you're not comparing like with like. Losing your kid from the family home is not the same as losing your kid from a holiday resort. Secondly, when Sharon Matthews (a council housing degenerate) reported her daughter missing, there was no outcry about "broken Britain"; on the contrary, the press led a highly sympathetic nationwide hunt for her child.

Though my next comment may be controversial and is merely only my opinion, I have said from day one That I believe that Madelaine mccann will never be found as she is not alive. My hunch was that she may have been accidently killed by her parents through accidnetle overdose or something and then disposed of in the ocean. of course this may be totally wrong and the parents may be totally innocent but the whole story of events just sounds like a load of cooked-up, inconsistent and and unbelievably neglectfull series of events. I mean what happens if their had of been a fire in that room?
*prepares for hammering from Daily Mail readers of which i suspect their are a few on these forums judging by some views expressed on this site.

OK, so let's hear your theory about the way Madeleine's disappearance was masterminded. You can start with a timeline of events.

Gackt said:
Not that I disagree with you, and I don't really take the "they murdered her" side (as in, they actively and planned her murder) - but does there need to be a motive? I mean, parents have killed their children before, people kill people randomly on the street. What's the motive there?

No, there doesn't need to be a motive. But the murder hypothesis becomes more plausible with a viable motive. I believe it is the lack of motive which has led some to the "accident" hypothesis.

Both, IHMO, are false.

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 15:19

Deluxe1 said:
Ive still no sympathy for the mccanns,if they just came out and admitted they made a huge mistake by leaving her alone then maybe they would have had my sympathy but i still think to this day they think they did nothing wrong in leaving their kids alone on holiday.

They have admitted that they made a huge mistake by leaving her alone:

"No-one will ever feel as guilty as we do over the fact that we weren't with Madeleine at the time when she was abducted," Mr McCann said. "Whether we were in the bedroom next door we would still feel as guilty."

Lucero said:
Mr M was bashing it out with someone else behind Mrs M's back (the maid or someone). Maddy walked in and saw it and was going to ask mummy why daddy was putting his snake in another womans forest. Mr M realised so "sorted her out" and Mrs M was never in on it in the 1st place. There's your motive.

And all of this happened... when, exactly? Madeleine was confirmed alive (and sighted by a witness) shortly before the meal at the tappas bar.

deko · 3 May 2009 at 15:28

Fair enough its a horrible thing to lose a child, but why does this still get such high priority over the hundreds of children going missing every year?

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 15:36

It doesn't get higher priority. Even the police have stopped working on it. The only people still investigating Madeleine's disappearance are the private detectives and investigators currently being hired by her parents.

Yes, it gets more publicity (which is not the same as priority), which is because (a) her parents are working hard to keep it in the public eye, and (b) it is a mysterious case of the sort to which people will naturally be drawn.

Yes, hundreds of kids go missing every year. Most of them turn up again.

NEOMARXIST · 3 May 2009 at 16:01

Evangelion said:
Firstly, you're not comparing like with like. Losing your kid from the family home is not the same as losing your kid from a holiday resort.
What you on about mate I ain't comparing it to any other case, merely stating if the same had have happened to a family at a holiday resort who happened to be from a council estate the media would have focussed a lot more on the child neglect aspect and the fact that the parents were more worried about going out on the P*ss with their mates than looking after their children

OK, so let's hear your theory about the way Madeleine's disappearance was masterminded. You can start with a timeline of events.
Not rocket science mate, accidently killed, panicked, dumped in the sea and then the left at room and not there when got back from meal thus must have been kidnapped hypothesis cooked up.
The Portugese police ain't totally stupid they suspected the McCanns for a reason though went about investigation poorly as unprepared in this area etc

No, there doesn't need to be a motive. But the murder hypothesis becomes more plausible with a viable motive. I believe it is the lack of motive which has led some to the "accident" hypothesis.

Both, IHMO, are false.

To be honest I couldn't give two Hoots about Madelaine Mccann, 100'000's people are currently missing in the UK, Like I said if the parent didn't fit the Middle-class ideals as laid out in the right-wing Home-county living press such as the Daily Mail then A- it wouldn't be in the media and B- the parents would have probably been charged over gross child neglect by now.
*By the way who do you think you are to label evryone who lives in a council house a "degenerate" you narrow minded, Snob. get off your high horse!!

Azagoth · 3 May 2009 at 16:07

NEOMARXIST said:
*By the way who do you think you are to label evryone who lives in a council house a "degenerate" you narrow minded, Snob. get off your high horse!!

Excuse me, but where did he say that? The guy merely pointed out that that Sharon Matthews is a degenerate and never even mentioned anyone else who lives in a council house.

Monkey Puzzle · 3 May 2009 at 16:19

NEOMARXIST said:
*By the way who do you think you are to label evryone who lives in a council house a "degenerate" you narrow minded, Snob. get off your high horse!!

I think the degenerate slur was based on her kidnapping and drugging her own kid, and acting like a real life character from Shameless rather than because she lived in a council house.

RetiredGreyFox · 3 May 2009 at 16:21

Evangelion said:
I believe that the McCanns were terribly negligent - perhaps criminally so - and I think they should be prosecuted for it. But I do not believe they are murderers.

It isn't often I disagree with you but if you go abroad (perhaps not this last 2 years) you would find 1000s of families doing exactly the same as the McCanns did by going to the restaurant/bar while leaving the kids asleep in the chalet.
Obviously doesn't make it right but was definitely a 'normal' thing to do for families of all classes.
Perhaps now there should be laws about it.

FAO Gackt -
Like the sig but it should be in context

I'm going to a Post Mortem soon and a Masectomy operation.

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 16:26

NEOMARXIST said:
To be honest I couldn't give two Hoots about Madelaine Mccann, 100'000's people are currently missing in the UK, Like I said if the parent didn't fit the Middle-class ideals as laid out in the right-wing Home-county living press such as the Daily Mail then A- it wouldn't be in the media and B- the parents would have probably been charged over gross child neglect by now.

But this is completely false, as the Shannon Matthews case proves. Shannon Matthews and her mum (and their vast extended family) were in the news for weeks, if not months. Sharon Matthews was only charged because she was found to be complicit in the plot to conceal her child. It had nothing to do with the fact that she wasn't middle class.

Are you honestly trying to claim that the Portuguese police didn't charge the McCanns with criminal negligence because they're middle class? I wasn't aware that the Portuguese even cared about the English class system. Care to enlighten us all?

*By the way who do you think you are to label evryone who lives in a council house a "degenerate" you narrow minded, Snob. get off your high horse!!

I didn't say that everyone who lives in a council house is a "degenerate". I said that Sharon Matthews was a council house degenerate - and she is. Obviously there are plenty of people who live in council houses but are not degenerates.

Get that chip off your shoulder.

starfighter · 3 May 2009 at 16:27

dmpoole said:
It isn't often I disagree with you but if you go abroad (perhaps not this last 2 years) you would find 1000s of families doing exactly the same as the McCanns did by going to the restaurant/bar while leaving the kids asleep in the chalet.
Obviously doesn't make it right but was definitely a 'normal' thing to do for families of all classes.
Perhaps now there should be laws about it.

FAO Gackt -
Like the sig but it should be in context
I'm going to a Post Mortem soon and a Masectomy operation.

It is not normal at all.

I am yet to have kids but I know for a fact my brother and I were never left alone.

Leaving your kids while you go out for a meal. lol wtf normal my ass.

And unlocked just beggars belief.

Losing a child is obviously very traumatic and I doubt they need punishment, having that on your mind for the rest of your life is enough.

Sankari · 3 May 2009 at 16:28

dmpoole said:
It isn't often I disagree with you but if you go abroad (perhaps not this last 2 years) you would find 1000s of families doing exactly the same as the McCanns did by going to the restaurant/bar while leaving the kids asleep in the chalet.
Obviously doesn't make it right but was definitely a 'normal' thing to do for families of all classes.
Perhaps now there should be laws about it.

But would they leave the chalet unlocked, and would they check so inefficiently? That's where the neglect comes in, surely.