Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 8,732
- Location
- sawley/ long eaton
when you have kids you plan the holiday around them not take them and then leave them in a room on there own while you have fun else where.
Madeleine McCann's parents
- Thread starter Ixon
- Start date
Nothing has to be absolved, what they did was wrong and it will never change.
Wrongs can't become rights with redemption.
The reason they are still talked about is because they're still getting media attention due to more publicity campaigns.
It will be the end of it when what happened comes out, or they stop the media campaigns.
They should be locked away like any other negligent parent(s') whose actions invariably allow/cause/lead to the harm, death or abduction of their children.
But as your post shows, we'll continue to see people like you and the media give them the sympathy hug, poor them. Forget the kid. The parents have suffered enough.
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 3,783
They should be locked away like any other negligent parent(s') whose actions invariably allow/cause/lead to the harm, death or abduction of their children.
But as your post shows, we'll continue to see people like you and the media give them the sympathy hug, poor them. Forget the kid. The parents have suffered enough.
Including abortion?
(ohhhhh. I jest, I won't derail.)
I don't understand how you can make such a disconnect about what happened to the child and what the parents did.
Yes, the parents were negligent (and to be honest, I think the whole thing is very murky), but their neglience cannot be said to 100% have caused the childs disappearance.
Maybe (louis ck video in there somewhere!) someone had their eye on the child and was going to take it anyway, with force or without, then or another time. Maybe it was a genuinely planned occurance (which judging by the complete lack information suggests that whatever happened happened with efficiency), in which case at some point it would have happened in a situation where the parents were not negligent.
And whilst I believe there should be a deterrence towards acts of stupidity (eg what they did), I genuinely fail to see how putting them through the judicial system is going to help anything? They are living (unless they were guilty of something more, which is pure speculation) with one of their flesh and blood missing, with a whole possible scope of horrors in in their imagination. How could jail possibly be worse, or be of any benefit other than to satisfy some obscure need for petty revenge?
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 2,777
- Location
- Derby
MY nutty theory:
The kidnappers have been in touch with them all along and she's alive. That's why the parents won't go away.
Maybe they're trying to raise a massive ransom.
I don't really think that, it's just me thinking.
The kidnappers have been in touch with them all along and she's alive. That's why the parents won't go away.
Maybe they're trying to raise a massive ransom.
I don't really think that, it's just me thinking.
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 3,783
Arguing about 100% responsible is pure semantics and ignores the gist of my post.
You bought it up, so the semantic argument is yours, no one else's.....and the gist of your post is that the wilful negligence of the McCann's should be set aside as they have suffered because they lost a child. I disagree, despite the impact on their lives being horrendous, they still endangered the welfare of their children, and regardless of the consequences and other parties involvement, that should never be set aside in my opinion.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Regardless of whether they "did it" or not, I wish they'd stay out of the media. I'm fed up of having to turn the radio of when they're on it yet again.
A lot of people have all but said so. The fact they the actual words haven't appears does not mean that we can't understand the obvious point that they are making. And of course there are those in the thread who have said that the parents got rid of the girl. They just think she was already dead, not abducted.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,705
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
So why haven't the parents of April Jones who got murdered last year been put away or the countless of other parents who lost their children to murderers/abductees/paedos's?
Oh I know why - it isn't negligence or at least negligence where they thought harm would come to their children.
I'm not sticking up for the McCanns but posters need to stop posting this crap about other parents would have been imprisoned for what happened.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 7,438
Madeline McCann - World Hide 'n Seek Champion 2007 - 20XX.
I'm sorry, don't hit!
I'm sorry, don't hit!
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 3,783
You brought up the 100% responsible bit in taking my original point out of context. I was referring to the fact that no one can be 100% certain that their negligence caused the resulting loss of a child. There could have been a genuine intention upon the child in which case it probably would have happened anyway.
As for the negligence being set aside, again I didn't say that, I merely disagreed with another poster that they should be locked up. They carry the cross of their actions always, and I certainly don't think people should be made to shut up about it, I just disagree with the opinion that punishing them would be in best interests.
What exactly would it solve?
You said it, not I...
And no one said they were responsible for the abduction..but they were still responsible for their own actions...see, nothing out if context. Simply no-one said what you are accusing them of.
Abduction requires opportunity, so whether the child was targeted or not, their negligent attitude toward the welfare of their children contributed to the abduction.
So, if the consequences of a negligent action lead to, or potentially contribute to a loss for the negligent party, they should be absolved of any legal consequence for their action or inaction as the case may be?
There is a distinct difference in allowing your 5 year old child to play with their (some of whom were older) friends just outside your home and leaving a 3 year old alone in charge of two babies while you are down the pub in a foreign environment, I would say that letting a 5 year old out of your garden at 7.30pm is somewhat foolhardy anyway, but the two are not comparable as the circumstances are different.
And negligence doesn't necessarily mean that they would have thought harm would come to anyone, but I find it hard to understand any parent who honestly thinks leaving a 3 year old child alone with two babies while you go out drinking with friends is acceptable parenting, particularly as a babysitting service was available to them.
What it isn't is Child Neglect, as that normally requires an ongoing failure to ensure the welfare of your child...however they were negligent and parents/guardians have been held to account for such in the past, Gareth and Amanda Edwards for example.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,705
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,377
To echo Penn Jillette on atheism, ask her if God told her to kill her child would she do it?