This will be the Start of Good Things for Madeleine - Kate McCann

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:I think that the general public are tiring of the McCanns - I know that every now and again when the McCs pop up on tv, my family and friends say 'Oh not them again, who are they suing now - they only care about getting more money?'.

Public perception of them these days isn't good.

That is simply your opinion Autumn.

Inyx wrote:

hedge wrote:Not as often as far as I am aware, parental involvement seems to come out a lot sooner, killing ones own child (apparently out of the blue, as opposed to it being as a result of long periods of neglect) is most commonly done when the individual is mentally unwell and this is not something that can be hidden for any great period of time. I don't think there's any documented case where parents have been so public with themselves and their childs apparent disappearance where they turn out to be guilty. Doesn't mean it's impossible but it's getting to near as damnit.

Can't argue with that.

I must say if they did 'it' they're taking a hell of a chance by suing Amaral, going back to Portugal, keeping Madeleine in the news and asking for a review or re-opening of the case.
How likely is that?

jmbd wrote:Some would argue that it is to keep the cash coming in for their personal gain.

jmbd wrote:2 mortgage payments - cue hiss and boos from the audience.

jmbd wrote:Of course there are some people who would prefer the Mccanns to be unemployed now, living off the state with their children in care.

jmbd wrote:Of course there are some people who would prefer the Mccanns to be unemployed now, living off the state with their children in care.

Inyx wrote:

jmbd wrote:Of course there are some people who would prefer the Mccanns to be unemployed now, living off the state with their children in care.

What purpose would that serve?

hedge wrote:

jmbd wrote:2 mortgage payments - cue hiss and boos from the audience.

That's hardly financial gain. Two mortgage payments on the family home while they were in a foreign country for 5 months, no-one could afford to pay 5 months mortgage without an income, it's a bit reaching to call that financial benefit, considering the wording of the fund means essentially they could have spent it all on themselves, bit bizarre to get picky over .001% of it going to ensure Madeleines bedroom remains intact.

Autumn wrote:

hedge wrote:

jmbd wrote:2 mortgage payments - cue hiss and boos from the audience.

That's hardly financial gain. Two mortgage payments on the family home while they were in a foreign country for 5 months, no-one could afford to pay 5 months mortgage without an income, it's a bit reaching to call that financial benefit, considering the wording of the fund means essentially they could have spent it all on themselves, bit bizarre to get picky over .001% of it going to ensure Madeleines bedroom remains intact.

I would have thought, under the circumstances, Gerry would have been given compassonate leave on full pay. Even though they were entitled to do so, I still think they were wrong to use the Fund to pay their mortgage.

Autumn wrote:

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:I think that the general public are tiring of the McCanns - I know that every now and again when the McCs pop up on tv, my family and friends say 'Oh not them again, who are they suing now - they only care about getting more money?'.

Public perception of them these days isn't good.

That is simply your opinion Autumn.

Not just mine.

Autumn wrote:Kate was worried about a delivery from Tesco wasn't she?

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:I think that the general public are tiring of the McCanns - I know that every now and again when the McCs pop up on tv, my family and friends say 'Oh not them again, who are they suing now - they only care about getting more money?'.

Public perception of them these days isn't good.

That is simply your opinion Autumn.

Not just mine.

How can any one of us claim to know the opinion of the general public en masse? - Has Jesus logged on?

Autumn wrote:Kate was worried about a delivery from Tesco wasn't she?

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:I think that the general public are tiring of the McCanns - I know that every now and again when the McCs pop up on tv, my family and friends say 'Oh not them again, who are they suing now - they only care about getting more money?'.

Public perception of them these days isn't good.

That is simply your opinion Autumn.

Not just mine.

How can any one of us claim to know the opinion of the general public en masse? - Has Jesus logged on?

Autumn wrote:For starters, Kate was not in full time employment. As for Gerry, I would be very surprised if he was not entitled to full pay on compassionate grounds. There is some interesting info about the Fund accounts and how money has been allocated on the MCF forum. :)

jmbd wrote:Do you have press conference parties?

Autumn wrote:

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:

bunnie1 wrote:

Autumn wrote:I think that the general public are tiring of the McCanns - I know that every now and again when the McCs pop up on tv, my family and friends say 'Oh not them again, who are they suing now - they only care about getting more money?'.

Public perception of them these days isn't good.

That is simply your opinion Autumn.

Not just mine.

How can any one of us claim to know the opinion of the general public en masse? - Has Jesus logged on?

I don't know about everyone else here but most of my family and friends have lost interest in the case and the McCanns. On a few occasions, f&f have been round at my house when the McCs have been giving a press conference on tv and, all of them showed little interest in them except to comment that they always seem to be suing someone. I think their opinions of the McCanns are probably typical of most people who have lost interest in the case. Then again, I may be wrong.